20090535 Ver 1_401 Application_20090509

Ph W I <
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
May 8, 2009
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
NCDENR - DWQ
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
401 Oversight/Express Permitting
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
RE: Pre-Construction Notification Form
City of Southport Wastewater Transmission Facilities
WKD Project Number 60120.00.WL
Dear Ms. Karoly:
The City of Southport plans to install a 16-inch sewer force main and a 1,339 GPM pump station to
convey the City's wastewater away from the City's existing wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) to the
Brunswick County system for treatment and disposal. The benefit of this project is the removal of the
City's WWTP discharge from the ICWW which will improve water quality.
As we have discussed, the sewer force main will generally be installed within the existing NCDOT
right-of-way along NC211. NC DOT has two projects in the same corridor, TIP R 3324 and
TIP R 5021. The action identification number for the NC DOT is 20073647. All streams within the
project area and the Bay Forest wetland will use directional drill installation of the force main.
The following items have been included. r...t-,z., rQ j ry
- 5 copies of the signed PCN form. l %s
- A check for $240.00. L Dp
- 5 set of the construction plans. MAY 1 1 2009
- 5 copies of the wetland and stream impact spreadsheets.
- 5 copies of the project area USGS Topographic Quadrangle. DENR-WATER QUALITY
- 5 copies of the letter from NCEEP regarding wetland mitigation. WETLANDS ANDSTORrfiMATFRBRANCH
- 5 copies of the NCDWQ Stormwater Permit.
- 5 copies of the NCDENR Sedimentation and Erosion Control.
- 5 copies of the NCDOT Natural Resource Technical report for TIP R-5021.
- 5 copies of the NCDOT Natural Resource Technical report for TIP R-3324.
The City of Southport is attempting to obtain American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding for this
project, so your assistance with review of this project will be greatly appreciated. The City must have
i09 r 0m ket Street
V01imngton, NC 28401
lel: 9 10.762.4200
910.762.4201
vh v:,w.wkdickson.com
Transportation . Water Resources . Urban Development . Geomatics
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
May 8, 2009
Page 2
all permits in hand by June 3, 2009, to be eligible for the funding. If you have any questions, please
do not hesitate to contact me at 910-762-4200.
Sincerely,
W. K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
T. Carter Hubard, P.E.
Project Manager
Enclosures
cc: Alan Thornton
o?aF w,arE9Qc
6
I 1 > ? ?
It`jl O T
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit E] Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: NW12 or General Permit (GP) number: GC3699
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes ® No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply).
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes ® No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes ® No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ® Yes ? No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: City of Southport Wastwater Transmission Facilities
2b. County: Brunswick
2c. Nearest municipality / town: City of Southport
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: The project is located in the ROW of NCDOT TIP R-3324 and TIP R-5021
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: City of Southport
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): N/A
3d. Street address: 201 E. Moore St.
P

3e.
City, state, zip:
Southport, NC 28461 MAY I 1
2
!
EI

3f.
Telephone no.: -
009
[phone]
3g. Fax no.: [phone] WETWOSANDSTORMWATERBRANal
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: T. Carter Hubard
5b. Business name
(if applicable): WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
5c. Street address: 909 Market Street
5d. City, state, zip: Wilmington, NC 28401
5e. Telephone no.: [phone]
5f. Fax no.: [phone]
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):

1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: see attachment Longitude: - see
attachment
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: N/A acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to

proposed project: see attachment
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: see attachment
2c. River basin: Cape Fear
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The existing site conditions are primarily maintained NCDOT right-of-way. General land use within the vicinity of the
project area includes residential, commercial, institutional, transportation, utilities, industrial and commercial complexes
,
forest management, and water bodies. Most of the undeveloped land within the project area is undeveloped forestland
along the NCDOT right-of-way.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
1.83 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
There are approximately 550 LF of streams within the NCDOT right-of-way. At all stream crossings the force main will be
installed with directional drill and be generally perpindicular to flow.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to allow for the decommisioning of the City's WWTP and discharge into Cottage Creek and
the surrounding shellfish waters.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
This project proposes to construct a 1,339 GPM pump station and 19,875 Lf of 16-inch sanitary sewer force main. The
force main will be installed by open cut and trenching using an excavator. At the stream crossings and the Bay Forest the
force main will be installed using directional drill.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past? ®Yes ? No ? Unknown
Comments: Action Id#20073647
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
®Preliminary ? Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: NCDOT
Name (if known): NCDOT (see action ID) Other: PBS&J
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
NA
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past? ?Yes ®No El Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions
.
N/A
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
N/A
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ? Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ®P ? T Permanent ® Yes
? No ® Corps
? DWQ 0.88
W2 ? P ®T Temporary ? Yes ® Corps 0
52
® No ? DWQ .
W3 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts 1.4
2h. Comments: see attached speadsheet for breakdown of impacts
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number -
Permanent (P) or (PER) or
i (Corps - 404, 10 stream length

Temporary (T) ntermittent
(INT)? DWQ - non-404, width (linear
f
t
other) (feet) ee
)
S1 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S2 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ?P?T T El Corps
? N ?
DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ?DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments: Force main is to be directional drilled perpidicular to the streams.
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. C. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: N/A
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.

Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland

number (acres)
of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below . If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b.
Buffer impact 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. gg.
number -
Permanent (P) or Reason
for
Stream
name Buffer
mitigation Zone 1 impact
(square feet) Zone 2 impact
(square feet)
Tem orar T impact required?
B1 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The proposed project is located within the NCDOT right-of-way where future widening of NC 211 is planned. The project
construction corridor is limited to the narrowest constructible width. Impacts to streams and bay forest wetlands will be avoided
by the use of directional drill installation.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Construction impacts to wetlands will be minimized by use of directional drilling, temporary excavation and restoration to
natural elevation, and use of anti-seep collars. The use of erosion control methods will limit runoff from the project.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ® Yes ? No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ® Corps

2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?

pro ? Mitigation bank

®Payment to in-lieu fee program

? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ® Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: 1 acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments: see attached May 6, 2009 EEP letter
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: N/A ? Yes ? No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 0.62%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: A notice of intent for coverage under the
the General Stormwater Management Permit No. SWQ040000 for linear utilities and associated built-upon area was
approved on April 17, 2009.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
? Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ® DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? N/A
? Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
apply (check all that apply): ? USMP
? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ? No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
® Coastal counties
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply F-1 HQW
? ORW
(check all that apply): ? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ® Yes ? No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ® Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ® Yes ? No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the Y
® es ? No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ? Yes ? No
Comments: N/A
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s): N/A
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
This project does not does not add any additional treatment capacity to the City. Development in the area is regulated by
City Ordinance, County Ordinance, and State regulations.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
The City's wastewater will be transmitted to Brunswick County's West Regional Water Reclamation Facility for treatment
and land disposal.
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ? Yes No
®
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ® Yes ? No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. E:1 Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program data source was used to evaluate the project site for protected species.
See attached NCDOT Natuaral Resources reports for TIP R-5021 and R-3324.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
We used the interactive mapping site for essential fish habitat found online at:
http://ocean.floridamarine.org/efh_coral/ims/viewer.htm
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program data source was used to evaluate the project site for protected species.
See attached NCDOT Natuaral Resources reports for TIP R-5021 and R-3324.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ®Yes 10 No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: The project will not change the existin
to
o
ra
h
f th
g
p
g
p
y o
e
floodplain.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 2097
Alan Thornton, City Manager

Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 11 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
N
L)
U
R
Q
r=
d

c
C O
a
E

U

u
'O
m
N
p
cf
O
O
M
a
W
p
co
p
cD
« .
Cl)
LO
0)
m

?
co
N
N
n
co
(n
O

ea0 r
--
n
co v
co
1- j
n o
n V
n M
n C)
n
(o
O 7
(D 0
(D co
M n
M
o O O O p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.a co 00 00 co 00 00 co co co co 00 co co 00
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
M V M 00 N N N (n N 00 O n
y m N co N m ? W m W LO LO O n
p O O m 0 00 n n (D Vo Ln O m
(D (O (D In (n (O (n In (n In 0 to (n V
CD m m m m m m m m 0) 0) m m m
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
a co co Cl) Cl) co M M M M M M M M M

C '1
e7 O .0 u
W
C v
3
L
M
O
o
N
W
p
> O O ? N 7 O
C C
d
C O O O O O O
C c
u Cln y
G
o?i
3
w
D
CE
n
o
M
m
(D
o
co
m
u
17 n N M

0
V
3 0 00
Cl)
L d 0
d

0 3
w

a y V
0 M
0 M U7 O V N (D () N M m O
0 0 O O N O V O O V
>- E
Q .. 0 0 0 CD CD 0 0 O O O O o CD -
(D n v m m 0 LL'7 m U7 M O M n (n
p `-' (n r- N M N O V In CO O (D co V
A u y n «') m N O V7 n O M V W (n
L R ?.-
Q
r M .- n n N 00 co )n
m
O
v E L C, C,
N O
0 O
0 O
0 O
0 Lo
co O
IT Cn
cc (D
n N 00
(o
0
0
m
C R y N N m O O co
O
O
U
e0 i ?_ 4 N co M M M M co
Qz? E
-
Fz
c o
° L0 c 0
?
L
a°
o
C
0
C
0
C
0
C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
G L? ? d C C C C C C C C C C
a C
3 w
7
u O O a)
cd
a O
c N

a

a N

° to

a
° v
A r T o` °
'1
1]
LL
2]

ti

L N

N
o
C
.? y

N LL

(n L
7
C 7
O
0)

2 7
O
a) l.L

V 2

L

0 2

.C 2

L
L
3
p
LL
? O
ti -0
o p
E2 O
m
0 O
m -0
o 0
a 'O
o 0
IS V)
a

O
C
C
C
C
° E ? -
d 9 0 0 0 0 co (U) ? 2 LL 2 o 0

d _
D
_ m ) m 0 u
i
E"' i C
m C
m C
m C
m y
C 0
N O (L)
C N
O (1)
C
C (1)
C a)
C a)
C
C
?- d _
d _
D _
d a 0
? co LL m a .
m a co m
Q) .
y a) (
0
- C C C
. C C
v C C C C a) d a) (Q co (p a) ? 0)
[L CL d: I d: T m 3: 3:
C C C C C i>f C
O u o
O a) m
o a) a) m
o m
o Q) m
o a)
c (o
o a)
c m
o m
0
y G m co co a C, a
F E E E E E
` E E E E E E E t E E
a) a) a) a
) a) a) N 4) 0 0 a) 0 a) w
F- ? ? a a ? r a F- a ? a F- i--
a Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q G

o Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
w
z v v v v ? v v v v ? v v v v
v
?
-m E N M a7 O n N m 0 N M V
z c x 4t 4t
3

C U U
a
C
- c E
?
N
v
(n
cO
n
m
m
o
?
o
o
3 E z'
v m
o LL
d C
L O
N
O N
?) E
° c
E
U H
N
V
ld
CL
E
E
N
a
a a

c
`O c

c c c
0 0 0
aCi U U U
CL N N N
E a
0

0 0 0
m m m

2 2 2
U) w w
0

d co O N
C M Lo O
co Lo m
O O O
O

a
z z z z

d
O
rn
O
rn rn .

m Cl) Cl)
a Cl) M Cl)

O U ? 0 0 0

L
„ a
L E M,
O v L O O 0 0

cc m
d d O d
L E O'w

v i O O O O
a c W
a
Ea
?
w o cn o ii
"
O
w r N ?
-
cc a
63
m
E
> N CC
Q d E
-

W
O

O d f0 t0 (0
? ? C C C
c a c
C 6 N N N
d ? a d a

O U
? G Q Q Q

> E
Z
Z Q
Z

L
<
<
0 0 0
o
z U U U
Y

N Y
U m

E U
c
U
z 3 ? c
co

c
70 E
6 c° m 0
0
E o
7
co M
N
m
L • N M
!A 0 C

!' J
O
p_ I
O
-C
O O
j 2 N
0 U O
E fD
?' m Y
0 ?- ?:
Alan Thornton
City of Southport
201 East Moore Street
Southport, NC 28461 Expiration of Acceptance: February 6, 2010
Project: City of Southport Wastewater Transmission Facilities County: Brunswick
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept
payment for impacts associated with the above referenced project. Please note that this decision does not assure that the payment will
be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these
agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local
government permits, regulations or authorizations associated with theRroposed activity including SL 2008-152: An Act to Promote
Compensatory Mitigation by Private Mitigation Banks.
This acceptance is valid for nine months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the In
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are summarized in the following
table.
River
Basin CU
Location Stream (feet) Wetlands (acres) Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.) Buffer 11
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold Cool Warm Riparian Non-Riparian Coastal Marsh
Impact Cape Fear 03030005 0 0 0 0 1.0 0 0 0
Credits Cape Fear 03030005 0 0 0 0 1.0 0 0 0
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. If the regulatory agencies require
mitigation credits greater than indicated above, and the applicant wants NCEEP to be responsible for the additional mitigation, the
applicant will need to submit a mitigation request to NCEEP for approval prior to permit issuance. The mitigation will be performed
in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the N,C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dated November 4, 1998.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Valerie Mitchener a' [phone] or Kelly Williams at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Willi D. Gilmore, PE
Director
cc: Cyndi Karoly, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit
Kim Garvey, USACE-Wilmington
Carter Hubard, agent
File
RestoY E .. Protect Our State
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net
^= APR 21 2009
CCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural ResourcesRXCEIVED
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director
Secretary
April 17, 2009
Alan Thornton, City Manager
City of Southport
201 E. Moore Street
Southport, NC 28461
Subject: Stormwater Permit No. SW 090403
Wastewater Transmission Facilities
General Permit-Linear Utility Line Project
Brunswick County
Dear Mr. Thornton:
In accordance with your application to be covered under the State Stormwater General
Permit Number for a Linear Utility Line project, received on April 2, 2009, we are
forwarding herewith the subject Certificate of Coverage Number SW8 090403 for the
construction of a linear utility line project with associated incidental built-upon area. The
General Permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General
Statute 143-215.1 and Title 15A NCAC 2H .1000, the stormwater management rules.
Please take notice that this Certificate of Coverage is not transferable except by action
of the Division of Water Quality (DWQ). The DWQ may require modification or
revocation and reissuance of the Certificate of Coverage.
This permit does not affect the legal requirement to obtain other permits which may be
required by the Division of Water Quality, the Division of Land Resources, Coastal Area
Management Act, or any other federal., state, or local agency, law, rule, or ordinance.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, orneed additional information on this
matter, please contact either Linda Lewis or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Georgette Scott
Stormwater Supervisor
Division of Water Quality
GDS/ari: S:\WQS\STORMWATER\PERMIT\090403.apr09
cc: T. Carter H.ubard, P.E., W.K. Dickson
Brunswick County Building Inspections
Brunswick County Engineering
Linda Lewis
Wilmington Regional Office Stormwater File
Central Files
Wilmington Regional office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Naturall?
An Equal Opportunity l Affirmative Action Employer
State Stormwater Management Systems
COC No. SW8 090403
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT GENERAL PERMIT NO. SWG040000
CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE NO. SW8 090403
LINEAR UTILITY LINE PROJECT AND
ASSOCIATED INCIDENTAL BUILT-UPON AREA
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1,
as amended, other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by
the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, and 15A NCAC
2H.1000, the Stormwater rules,
Alan Thornton, City of Southport
is hereby authorized to construct 2,443 square feet of built-upon area incidental
to the proposed Blake Property Pump Station utility line installation located at
Wastewater Transmission Facilities
Sandy Lane off NC 211
Southport
Brunswick County
and to discharge stormwater to receiving waters designated as UT CP&L
Discharge Canal, class SB waters in the Cape Fear River Basin, in accordance
with the provisions of the General Permit for a Linear Utility Line,
No.SWG040000, and the approved stormwater management plans and
specifications, and other supporting data as attached and on file with and
approved by the Division of Water Quality and considered a part of this permit for
the subject project.
This Certificate of Coverage shall become effective April 16, 2009.
Signed this the 17th day of April 2009.
NO NTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
U G??
-------------- - ----------------------------
for Coleen . Sullins Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 2 of 2
N. C. DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
SURFACE WATER PROTECTION SECTION
STATE STORMWATER NOTICE OF INTENT (NOI)
SWG040000 - GENERAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A LINEAR UTILITY
LINE AND ASSOCIATED INCIDENTAL BUILT-UPON AREA

'Opd
afSos, -0- 3ef147
FOR AGENCY USE ONLY
Date Received
Year Month Day
C)2
Certificate of Coverage
s1willolc1l 44013
O
Check # Amount

Permit Assigned to
L.L?ewrS
-5 -v
State Stormwater Management Application Notice of Intent for coverage under the General Stormwater
Management Permit No. SWG040000 to construct a utility line and incidental built-upon lea associated with a
linear utility project including water, sewer, gas, telephone, and electric. vftk?
Incidental built-upon area associated with the utility project includes small, single pump static Pacoep
which minimize their built-upon area, concrete pads, manhole covers, etc.
(Please print or type)
1. Mailing address of owner/developer: (The address to which all permit correspondence will be mailed)
Owner/Developer Name City of Southport
Street Address 201 E. Moore Street
City Southport State NC ZIP Code 28461
Telephone No. X910) 457-7988 Fax ( ) __
Proposed Project Information:
Project Name Wastewater Transmission Facilities
Contact Person Alan Thorton, City Manager
Street Address 201 E. Moore Street
City Southport State NC ZIP Code 28461
County Brunswick
Telephone No. ( 910 ) 457-7988 Fax 1 )
3. Physical Location Information:
Please provide the street address of the project and describe how to get to the project, using street names, state road
numbers, and the distance and direction from the nearest major intersection: The project will go from approximately
2,800 LF east of the intersection of NC 133 and NC 211 to approximately 17,000 LF west of the intersection along
4. What is the name of the receiving stream? Beaverdam Swamp, Jump & Run, Dutchmarr and Cottage Creeks
S. River Basin Cape Fear Receiving Stream Classification C;Sw /
Sc _Sw / Sc;Sw. HOW / Sc;Sw
6. This Certificate of Coverage is being submitted as a result of:
® New or proposed project
? Modification to an existing project
Existing COC or Permit Number: .
7. What is the total project area above mean high water? 350,000 ft2
8. What type of utility project will be constructed?
? Water Line ® Sewer Line ? Gas Line ? Telephone ? Electric ? Other
SWM-1 16-040108 Page I of 2
How much built-upon area is proposed? 2,443 square feet (Please include all manhole
covers, pump stations, concrete pads, and gravel access roads.)
10. Is the project within 575' of the Mean High Water line of class ORW waters?
C] YES (Please show the 575' AEC line on plans) ® NO
11. Are there any wetlands on the site? ® YES (please delineate on the plans) ? NO
Name and affiliation of person making this determination: _Georae Lankford, W. K Dickson & Co Inc
12. Please list all Best Management Practices employed at this site:

13. Certification:
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6 b (i) provides that:
Any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation, or certification in any application, record,
report, plan, or other document filed or required to be maintained under this Article or a rule implementing this
Article; or who knowingly makes a false statement of material fact in a rulemaking proceeding or contested case
under this Article; or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any recording or monitoring
device or method required to be operated or maintained under this Article or rules of the Commission implementing
this Article shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor which may include a fine not to exceed $10,000. (18 U.S.C.
Section 1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment of not more than 5 years,
or both, for a similar offense.)
I hereby request coverage under the referenced General Permit. I understand that coverage under this permit will
constitute the permit requirement for the project and is enforceable in the same manner as an individual permit.
I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application and that to the best of my knowledge and
belief such information is true, complete, and accurate.
Printed name of person signing: Alan Thorton
Title: City Manager
. 1 1 ?--? _ 3J3t'aq
(Signature of Applicant) (Date signed)
A check or money order must accompany this Notice of Intent for $505.00, made payable to: NCDENR. Your
application will be returned unprocessed unless all of the following items are submitted:
® This completed form
® Two sets of site and grading plans
® A check for $505.00
® A USGS map with the project clearly located on it.
Mail the entire package to: NCDENR Division of Water Quality
Surface Water Protection Section- Stormwater
at the Appropriate Contact Address (see the following page)
Note:
The submission of this document does not guarantee the issuance of a Certificate of Coverage under the General
Permit.
SWU-1 1 6-0401 08 Page 2 of 2
olcKSON
APR 2 7 2981
ECEIVED
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
Land Quality Section
James D. Simons, PG, PE Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
Director and State Geologist Dee Freeman, Secretary
April 23, 2009
LETTER OF APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS AND PERFORMANCE
RESERVATIONS
City of Southport
ATTN: Alan Thornton, City Manager
201 East Moore Street
Southport, NC 28465
RE: Project Name: City of Southport Transmission Facilities
Project ID: BRUNS-2009-085 Acres Approved: 9
County: Brunswick, Hwy 211, Southport
River Basin: Lumber Stream Classification: Other
Submitted By: James Michel, E.I., WK Dickson
Date Received by LQS: April 3, 2009
Plan Type: New
Dear Mr. Thornton:
This office has reviewed the subject erosion and sedimentation control plan and hereby issues this
Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations. A list of the modifications
and reservations is attached. This plan approval shall expire three (3) years following the date of
approval, if no land-disturbing activity has been undertaken, as is required by Title 15A NCAC 4B
.0129. Should the plan not perform adequately, a revised plan will be required (G.S. 113A-54.1)(b).
Please be advised that Title 15A NCAC 4B .0118(a) requires that a copy of the approved erosion
control plan be on file at the job site. Also, you should consider this letter to give the Notice
required by G. S, 113A-61.1(a) of our right of periodic inspection to insure compliance with the
approved plan.
North Carolina's Sedimentation Pollution Control Program is performance-oriented, requiring
protection of existing natural resources and adjoining properties. If, following the commencement
of this project, it is determined that the erosion and sedimentation control plan is inadequate to meet
the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (North Carolina General
Statute 113A-51 thru 66), this office may require revisions to the plan and implementation of the
revisions to insure compliance with the Act,
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405 Phone:[phone]! Fax [phone]
Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
City of Southport
April 23, 2009
Page 2 of 3
Acceptance and approval of this plan is conditioned upon your compliance with Federal and State
water quality laws, regulations, and rules. In addition, local city or county ordinances or rules may
also apply to this land-disturbing activity. This approval does not supersede any other permit or
approval.
Please be aware that your project will be covered by the enclosed NPDES General Stormwater
Permit NCGO10000 (Construction Activities). You should first become familiar with all of the
requirements for compliance with the enclosed general permit.
Please note that this approval is based in part on the accuracy of the information provided in the
Financial Responsibility Form, which you have provided. You are requested to file an amended
form if there is any change in the information included on the form. In addition, it would be helpful
if you notify this office of the proposed starting date for this project. Please notify us if you plan to
have a preconstruction conference.
Your cooperation is appreciated.
Sincerely,
E??
Daniel Sams, PE
Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
Enclosures: Certificate of Approval
Modifications and Performance Reservations
NPDES Permit
cc: James Michel, E.I., WK Dickson
Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
City of Southport
April 23, 2009
Page 3 of 3
MODIFICATIONS AND PERFORMANCE RESERVATIONS
Project Name: City of Southport Transmission Facilities
Project ID: BRUNS-2009-085
County: Brunswick
This plan approval shall expire three (3) years following the date of approval, if no land disturbing activity has been
undertaken, as is required by Title 15A NCAC 413.0029.
2. The developer is responsible for the control of sediment on-site. If the approved erosion and sedimentation control
measures prove insufficient, the developer must take those additional steps necessary to stop sediment from leaving
this site. Each sediment storage device must be inspected after each storm event. Maintenance and/or clean out is
necessary anytime the device is at 50% capacity.
Any and all existing ditches on this project site are assumed to be left undisturbed by the proposed development
unless otherwise noted. The removal of vegetation within any existing ditch or channel is prohibited unless the
ditch or channel is to be regarded with side slopes of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or less steep. Bank slopes may be
mowed, but stripping of vegetation is considered new earth work and is subject to the same erosion control
requirements as new ditches.
The developer is responsible for obtaining any and all permits and approvals necessary for the development of this
project prior to the commencement of this land disturbing activity. This could .include agencies such as the
Division of Water Quality's stormwater regulations, their enforcement requirements within Section 401 of the
Clean Water Act, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' jurisdiction of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the
Division of Coastal Management's CAMA requirements, the Division of Solid Waste Management's landfill
regulations, the Environmental Protection Agency and/or The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction of the
Clean Water Act, local County or Municipalities' ordinances, or others that may be required. This approval cannot
supersede any other permit or approval; however, in the case of a Cease and Desist Order from the Corps of
Engineers, that Order would only apply to wetland areas. All highland would still have to be in compliance with
the N.C. Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
If any area on site falls within the jurisdiction of Section 401 or 404 of the Clean Water Act, the developer is
responsible for compliance with the requirements of the Division of Water Quality, the Corps of Engineers and the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) respectively. Any erosion control measures that fall within jurisdictional
wetland areas must be approved by the aforementioned agencies prior to installation. The Land Quality Section
must be notified of a relocation of the measures in question to the transition point between the wetlands and the
uplands to assure that the migration of sediment will not occur. If that relocation presents a problem or contradicts
any requirements of either DWQ, the Corps, or the EPA, it is the responsibility of the developer to inform the Land
Quality Section regional office so that an adequate contingency plan can be made to assure sufficient erosion
control remains on site. Failure to do so will be considered a violation of this approval.
6. Any borrow material brought onto this site must be from a legally operated mine or other approved source. Any
soil waste that leaves this site can be transported to a permitted mine or separately permitted construction sites
without additional permits. Disposal at any other location would have to be included as a permit revision for this
approval.
7. This permit allows for a land disturbance, as called for on the application plan, not to exceed nine (9) acres.
Exceeding that acreage will be a violation of this permit and would require a revised plan and additional application
fee. As proposed, the land disturbance width of the utility line should not exceed fifteen (15) feet.
8. The North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act mandates a shortened time frame in which to re-establish
vegetative groundcover. Slopes (including cuts, fills, and ditch banks) left exposed will, within 21 calendar days
after completion of any phase of grading, be planted or otherwise provided with groundcover sufficient to
perrnanently restrain erosion.
-vt
f,/ I
_Z. 7

I
u fM1l tw : a i
I ?, 1 1„
r ?

w

LLI
It? ? Irx
i
CO 9L
I
d

- ------------

.
{?

r
' W
s

co
r}^ ?.

NC 87
,
4
,?«,.w . S • i? 4j +'A 1 ? .? ? ? •Er. ? I ,} ii J,., +r?6! ,? ,'d ? .. ??
ti - A ,? Y1 P ti j O CC N ti _
r ..
1 ;
?' ! , ? ' JP
40
W
?-•,? s t7
Ott
IJ-
W?JWi w I 0 ??.J/i S
•
W 6 (?
au 0
_ V
cc =Q
Z CC
' a~ Z$2o 1 ac C6 C4
Q
V e Cr N
•nn
A ,
r IL ;f
'I >i :
m
o Y W W .. e f fr t`? y s ?? lkGti - f
V r C "•Y••, •,.. ,?• • .. M' ',(t •?, i 1 sic air _ t
N11?
tma M*
11 4 ' ? ? r. -114 Vol-
. i ,' , ?, '' ? r• ?-' '?" .:; - •? , i •, -
{
r
2 y _ , ?' b ,, " `'.. •' ? mow... ? ' - _
r"' 1 t k
ax -
1- ?* i I.ye
1 o F ? I q • •W ilk ? t
1
31
Q W ,
y «
r
Op G?
I
4
W 3W W W O r
r 1
W V O a } }....? . - : .
bra E I `_
a
.
y 4
s
_ t
A
.,,,yam ....
i
f ' g
4
W +. T •?..
f V ,
f
t f 0:19 O 1 t ?a
f .i
. 3 M•ey,
x '
W y _..,,. .f _
Z r .. _ i. •' '' 47-
0 .fir. .. 1
OCO
1 '
.? .-. ?„ ? '? .- 1 j X..:..\ .' };? i i •S Al ` a? •1 i•.
.
t
,,..- ,-_,., _ ...- .•' a f.
v..• x, - I w d ± ?r• ..... ..?, M.r.ar.-. _}?r.1ti-..-?,W _ -. • E If
n'
1 . f
l1
6MF'odol sosn L -6i3\BMp\3inoN NOISSIMWa-OLIO9 ONVl\OOro\-WDGOZt09\WdoS\vlado.d\:l
lrNpNp xY Nlw Q3:Qlrx 'rulxtwl ciN n ?ru '?vi 'QMM1'A 3B OL 03x306eq] 3• TIYNS 'Ir35 OMr 3.O/rN06
\I
W
J
Z
0 cc
?a
0
0
CO) v
V v
(A 0
?0
< W
ZH
J J
?V0-
LL
Z Z
ac O
t
?Z?
ca I.. z
LL.
0 D CC
?U~
_H OC
?V<
? W
ZF
m3
?LVO
(n co
Dzw
?
z
yooZ) }
Zo
OV
U
?a

Ngs
I I o
wz"
o °
°aa
9 u° v
o °m
0 U
Y
YzI?S?pgpl?g
's Ow
d NI NU 31011N N '1N311ftlp0 SHl Ol SNJLLSDO N] Sf1011d NI N :1N3M?00?
Si4l D 51N3GNq, 3Nl f0 EA m NOO?MOW3b '03?Y3S3tl SHOW llY 7f11 `W i N)SMJq ?1'M? 1NIMIAd00
? A
I
NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
DRAFT
Highway 211 Widening
Brunswick County, North Carolina
TIP Number: R-5021
WBS Element: 41582.1.1
I* At
?0
?. ?OFTRAN54"
THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Natural Environment Unit
January 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
2.0 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS .............................................................. .........1
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................ .........2
3.1. Soils ............................................................................................................. ..........2
3.2. Water Resources ...................................................................................................3
4.0 BIOTI C RESOURCES ............................................................................................. ..........4
4.1. Terrestrial Communities ............................................................................... ..........4
4.1.1. Maintained/disturbed land ................................................................ ..........5
4.1.2. Pocosin wetlands ............................................................................. ..........5
4.1.3. Mesic Pine Flatwoods ....................................................................... ..........6
4.1.4. Xeric Sandhill Scrub ......................................................................... ..........6
4.1.5. Mixed successional forest ................................................................ ..........6
4.1.6. Pine plantation .................................................................................. ..........6
4.1.7. Scrub-shrub ...................................................................................... ..........7
4.1.8. Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype) ............ ..........7
4.1.9. Wet Pine Flatwoods ......................................................................... ..........7
4.2. Terrestrial Wildlife ........................................................................................ ..........8
4.3. Aquatic Communities ...............................:................................................... ..........9
4.4. Invasive Species .......................................................................................... ..........9
5.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS ..................................................................................... ..........9
5.1. Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S .............................................................. ..........9
5.2. Clean Water Act Permits .............................................................................. ..........11
5.3. Construction Moratoria ................................................................................. ..........11
5.4. N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules ...................................................................... ..........12
5.5. Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters ................................. ..........12
5.6. Wetland and Stream Mitigation .................................................................... ..........12
5.6.1. Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts ............................................ ..........12
5.6.2. Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts ................................................. ..........12
5.7. Endangered Species Act Protected Species ................................................ ..........12
5.8. Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act ............................................... ..........18
5.9. Coastal Zone Issues .................................................................................... ..........19
5.9.1. Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern ..... ..........19
5.9.2. Essential Fish Habitat ....................................................................... ..........19
6.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ ..........20
APPENDIX A: FIGURES
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Project Study Area Map
Figure 3: Jurisdictional Area Index
Figure 3A-3F: Jurisdictional Areas
Figure 4A4F: Terrestrial Communities
APPENDIX B: SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF SPECIES IDENTIFIED IN REPORT
APPENDIX C: WETLAND AND STREAM FORMS
Completed USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets
Completed NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms
Completed USACE Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms
Completed NCDEM Wetland Rating Worksheets
Completed NC WAM Data Forms
Completed Jurisdictional Determination (JD) Forms
APPENDIX D: QUALIFICATIONS OF CONTRIBUTORS
APPENDIX E: NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Soils in the project study area ......................................................................................2
Table 2. Water resources in the project study area ....................................................................3
Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the project study area ............................3
Table 4. Coverage of terrestrial communities in the project study area .......................................8
Table 5. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the project study area ................... 10
Table 6. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the project study area. .... ......................... 10
Table 1. Soils in the project study area .......................................................................................2
Table 2. Water resources in the project study area .. .................................................................3
Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the project study area ............................3
Table 4. Coverage of terrestrial communities in the project study area .......................................8
Table 5. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the project study area ................... 10
Table 6. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the project study area ..............................10
Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
DRAFT
NC 211 WIDENING
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen NC 211 near
Southport, Brunswick County from two lanes to four lanes with a 30 foot median (TIP R-5021)
(Figure 1). The project study area consists of the existing NCDOT right-of-way traversing
approximately 6.6 miles between Midway Road (SR-1500) and NC 87 and extends to include all
areas within 50 feet of the existing NCDOT right-of-way and all included interchanges
(Figure 2). The project study area comprises 551.5 acres.
2.0 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS
All work was conducted as per the NCDOT Natural Environment Unit standard operating
procedures dated January 1, 2007. Field work was conducted between July 2 and October 8,
2008. Jurisdictional areas identified in the project study area were field verified by Brad Shaver
of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on October 28, 2008. Notice of jurisdictional
determination was received on January 28, 2009. Documentation of this jurisdictional
determination is provided in Appendix E. The principal personnel contributing to this document
were:
Principal Investigator: David O'Loughlin
Education: M.S. Forestry, 2007
Experience: Senior Scientist, PBS&J, 2008-present
Senior Scientist, EcoScience, 2004-2008
Project Scientist, EcoScience, 2002-2004
Responsibilities: Project management, wetland and stream delineations, agency
coordination, document preparation.
Investigator: Matthew Thomas
Education: B.S. Environmental Science, 2000
Experience: Project Scientist, PBS&J, 2008-present
Project Scientist, EcoScience, 2004-2008
Environmental Scientist, AEC&E, 2002-2004
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS, agency coordination, stream
assessment.
Investigator: Justin Wright
Education: B.S. Environmental Science, Watershed Hydrology, 2005
Experience: Project Scientist, PBS&J, 2008-present
Project Scientist, EcoScience, 2005-2008
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS, agency coordination, document
preparation.
1 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
Additional personnel who contributed to the field work and/or documentation for this project
were Elizabeth Scherrer, Adam Efird, and Michael Gloden. Appendix D lists the qualifications of
these contributors.
3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
The project study area is located in the Carolina Flatwoods ecoregion of the Middle Atlantic
Coastal Plain physiographic province of Brunswick County, North Carolina. The ecoregion is
characterized by broad, flat, upland surfaces with large areas of poorly drained soils. Carolina
bays and pocosins are abundant within this ecoregion. The Carolina Flatwoods hosts a number
of endemic and rare species and, in general, supports a high overall biodiversity. Streams
generally have a low-gradient with sandy and silty substrates.
Within the project study area, the high point of approximately 50 feet NAVD (North American
Vertical Datum) occurs south of NC 211 on the western side of Midway Road (Lockwoods Folly
and Southport, NC 7.5 minute quadrangles). The low point of approximately 21 feet NAVD
occurs near Dutchman Creek west of Dosher Cut Off (Southport, NC 7.5-minute quadrangle)
(Figure 2).
3.1. Soils
Based on soil mapping for Brunswick County, the project study area includes 14 soil series
(Table 1).
Table 1. Soils in the project study area
Soil'Series Mar)bina Unit Drainaae Glaser
Hvrlrir Static
Murville muck fine sand Mu Very Poorly Drained 80% H dric
Foreston loam fine sand Fo Moderate) Well Drained 5% H dric
Leon fine sand Lo Poorly Drained 80% H dric
Pante o muck loam Pn Very Poorly Drained 10% H dric
Norfolk loamy fine sand NoB Well Drained 1-3% H dric
Woodington fine sandy
loam Wo Poorly Drained 10% Hydric
Lynchburg fine sand loam L Somewhat Poorly Drained 2% H dric
Grifton fine sand loam Gt Poorly Drained 80% H dric
Mandarin fine sand Ma Somewhat Poorly Drained 2% H dric
Bra fine sand loam BrB Well Drained Not Listed
Newhan fine sand NeE Excessive) Drained 5% H dric
Torhunta mucky fine sandy
loam To Very Poorly Drained 10% Hydric

Pactolus fine sand
PaA Moderately Well Drained/

Somewhat Poorly Drained
1-3% Hydric
Muckalee loam Mk Poorl Drained 80% H dric
2 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
3.2. Water Resources
The project study area is located within the Carolina Flatwoods of the Middle Atlantic Coastal
Plain in USGS Hydrologic Units (HU) 3040207 and 3030005 of the Lumber and Cape Fear
River Basins respectively. The Lumber River Basin extends over a 3,336 square mile drainage
area and contains 2,232.5 miles of freshwater streams. Sixty percent of the land in the Lumber
basin is forested, while approximately 25 percent is cultivated cropland. The Cape Fear River
Basin extends over a 9,149 square mile drainage area and contains 6,386 miles of freshwater
streams. Sixty percent of the land in the Cape Fear basin is forested, while approximately 16
percent is cultivated cropland.
Seven stream reaches were identified within the project study area (Figure 3). The
characteristics of these streams are listed in Tables 2 and 3.
Table 2. Water resources in the project study area
Stem°`Narne Ma}i'I? D}4 ex
Numb"er k: Bust Usage
Cfassific7ation
UT to River Swamp SA 15-25-1-6 C; Sw
UT to Beaverdam Creek SB 18-88-9-1-(0.5) SC;Sw,HQW
UT to Beaverdam Creek SC 18-88-9-1-(0.5) SC;Sw,HQW
Beaverdam Creek Beaverdam Creek 18-88-9-1-(0.5) SC;Sw,HQW
UT to Jump and Run Creek SD - 18-88-9-3-2 SC; Sw
Price Creek Price Creek 18-88-3 SC; Sw
UT to Price Creek SE 18-88-3 Sc, Sw
Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the project study area

Mapf_iFl

SA Batk
r:
H ighi
..
ft
1-2 j3anlEfuH

?dh

?ft
4-6
Water Depth,
Y _

(?n
12-24 ?
`C?tane9
?,a``

Substrate
Sand,Silt
f
eloci
ty

Slow

Cant
is y-

Clear
SB 1-2 4-5 - 12 Silt Slow Clear
SC 1-2 2-4 12 Silt Slow Clear
Beaverdam Creek 1 10-20 12-36 Silt Slow Clear
SD 1-2 4-8 12 Sand,Silt Slow Clear
Price Creek 2-4 4-10 12 Sand,Silt Slow Clear
SE 2-4 6-8 12 Sand,Silt Slow Clear
No special designations, such as anadromous fish waters or fish nursery areas, are in effect for
any of the project study area water resources. The closest Primary Nursery Area for fish is
located approximately 1,000 feet downstream of the project study area on Dutchman Creek.
Dutchman Creek and waters associated with Beaverdam Creek and its tributaries are listed as
HQW (Open Waters E and F, and Wetlands WT and WU; see Section 5.1). Dutchman Creek is
located between the western and eastern sections of the project study area. No other streams
designated as High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), or water
3 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
supply watersheds (WS-I or WS-II), or streams listed on the 2006 Final NC 303(d) list of
impaired waters, are located within the project study area or within one mile downstream.
Eight ponds are located entirely or partly within the project study area (Figure 3). None of these
ponds are directly connected to jurisdictional stream features. Pond 1 (1.4 acres), between
Midway Road and Saint James and south of NC 211, appears to be a borrow pit used in
roadway construction. It may have a planned future use as an amenity pond or a stormwater
pond. Ponds 2 and 3 (0.15 and 0.17 acre, respectively) are partially within the project study
area. They are amenity ponds located at the entrance to the Saint James development. Pond
4 (0.38 acre) is a stormwater or borrow pond adjacent to a building across NC 211 from the
Saint James entrance. Pond 5 (0.08 acre) and Pond 6 (0.04 acre) are stormwater and/or
borrow ponds near a commercial complex north of NC 211 at Executive Park Boulevard. Pond
7 (0.14 acre) and Pond 8 (0.10 acre) appear to be amenity ponds on either side of Arbor Creek
Drive, just south of NC 211 from Ponds 5 and 6.
In addition to the eight ponds, a number of other surface waters occur within the project study
area. These consist of linear features that have no flow characteristics, such as swamp waters
or ditches.
Open Water OWB is primarily a roadside ditch parallel to NC 211 that also drains portions of
Wetland WB (see Section 5.1). OWB then drains into Open. Water OWA, which eventually
drains north to stream SA and River Swamp. Open Water OWC forms the headwaters of River
Swamp, and drains northward from Wetland WD. Open Water OWD drains into Wetland WT
which drains into Beaverdam Creek (Beaverdam Swamp on the Southport, NC USGS
quadrangle; N.C. Division of Water Quality [NCDWQ] Index 18-88-9-1-(0.5)). Open Water OWE
is a linear drainage ditch within Wetland WZ. Open Water OWF is the output canal for the
Progress Energy nuclear power plant.
4.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
4.1. Terrestrial Communities
The project study area includes eight plant communities (Figure 4A-4F): 1) maintained/disturbed
land, 2) pocosin wetlands, 3) Xeric Sandhill Scrub, 4) Mesic Pine Flatwoods, 5) pine plantation,
6) mixed successional forest, 7) scrub-shrub, and 8) Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods
(Blackwater subtype). Community names are capitalized if they are used to represent
communities described by Schafale and Weakley. The majority of the project study area is
comprised of disturbed land, including continually maintained areas as well as early-
successional plant community types such as pine plantations, scrub-shrub, and mixed
successional forests. Much of the project study area has been impacted in the past by
croplands, pasture, and timber production. In more recent times, residential and commercial
uses have increased. Historical communities such as pocosin wetlands and Coastal Plain
Bottomland Hardwoods occupy areas less suited to intensive human development.
4 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
In addition to the eight plant communities described below, the project study area includes 93.5
acres of impervious surfaces including roadway surfaces, parking lots, and roofs. An additional
6.4 acres of the project study area is comprised of streams and open water.
Individual plant communities are described below in the order of their predominance within the
project study area.
4.1.1. Maintained/disturbed land
Approximately 166.6 acres (30.2 percent) of the project study area is comprised of
maintained/disturbed land. This community is concentrated along `NC 211, NC 87, and Midway
Road, and includes roadway and utility rights-of-way, maintained residential and commercial
lots, driveways, recent clearcuts, and other intensively disturbed and/or maintained areas.
Roadside margins and utility rights-of-way consist primarily of regularly maintained grasses and
opportunistic herb species including fescue, pennywort, eastern daisy fleabane, ragweed,
goldenrod, Japanese stilt grass, lespedeza, common mullein, beggartick, wild onion,
broomsedge, clover species, and dog fennel. Several woody species are sparsely represented
within the sapling and shrub layers including blackberry, multiflora rose, groundsel, Chinese
privet, sassafras, smooth sumac, winged sumac, tulip poplar, sweetgum, eastern red cedar, red
bud, flowering dogwood, winged elm, pine species, oak species, red maple, and mimosa. Vines
include greenbrier, Japanese honeysuckle, kudzu, muscadine grape, and poison ivy.
Residential and commercial development areas contain buildings, impervious surfaces such as
parking lots and driveways, and maintained lawns. Vegetation in the residential and commercial
development areas is predominantly herbaceous, with a few ornamental shrubs and hedges
and a few relict canopy trees (primarily pine), which reflect historic plant assemblages.
4.1.2. Pocosin wetlands
Approximately 146.8 acres (26.7 percent) of the project study area is encompassed by pocosin
wetlands. Schafale and Weakley describe High Pocosin and Low Pocosin as occupying the
central to intermediate parts of domed peatlands on poorly drained interstream flats and peat-
filled Carolina bays and swales. For the purposes of this report, the two pocosin types are
combined into one category. Inclusions of pocosin are linear and subject to some degree of
disturbance due to their proximity to NC 211. Therefore, the peat depth and drainage
characteristics that otherwise might distinguish these two community types are minimized at the
project study area. Pocosin wetlands occupy long stretches along the central portion of the
project study area, where NC 133 cuts through several Carolina bays. The canopy of this
community is variable and somewhat scattered, with a few stunted to robust individuals of pond
pine, loblolly bay and some longleaf pine. In some areas, a distinct subcanopy of sweetbay and
red bay is distinguishable from the shrub layer. Shrubs are dense and include red bay,
fetterbush, titi, honeycup, gallberry, highbush blueberry, and inkberry. Laurel-leaf greenbrier is
found throughout. Vines also include Carolina jessamine. A few herbs were noted in rare
openings: Virginia chainfern, sphagnum moss, and various sedges.
5 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
4.1.3. Mesic Pine Flatwoods
Approximately 41.7 acres (7.5 percent) of the project study area is comprised of Mesic Pine
Flatwoods. Schafale and Weakley describe this plant community as neither excessively drained
nor with a significant seasonal high water table. They generally occur on flat or nearly flat
Coastal Plain soils, usually loamy or fine-textured soils, but sometimes on sands. This
community is often found in lower-elevation areas adjacent to Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods. The canopy consists of loblolly, longleaf, with some slash and pond pine. The
subcanopy contains saplings of the canopy species, oaks, and loblolly bay. The shrub layer is
dominated by fetterbush, staggerbush, sweetbay, titi, gallberry, dwarf huckleberry, and sand
myrtle. Scattered individuals of dahoon and myrtle dahoon are present. Laurel-leaf greenbrier
was frequent. The herb layer included beaksedge, sphagnum moss, and cinnamon fern.
4.1.4. Xeric Sandhill Scrub
Approximately 26.3 acres (4.7 percent) of the project study area is encompassed by Xeric
Sandhill Scrub. This community is concentrated along sand rims of Carolina bays bisected by
NC 133, along with a few other inclusions of dry, sandy scrubland. Schafale and Weakley
describe this plant community as occurring on Carolina bay rims and coarse, deep sands and
sandy uplands. This community is exceedingly dry with an open canopy of longleaf pine. The
community is made up of a frequently dense subcanopy and shrub layer consisting of live oak,
turkey oak, persimmon, dwarf huckleberry, and sand live oak. The fragmented herb layer is
dominated by wiregrass and deer moss.
4.1.5. Mixed successional forest
Mixed successional forest comprises approximately 23.7 acres (4.2 percent) of the project study
area. This designation is used to describe fragmented communities that contain mature canopy
trees as well as variously developed shrub, subcanopy, and herb layers. This community
generally occurs in upland landscapes near maintained/disturbed land, and is usually too small
and immature to form coherent natural plant communities. Trees include a mixture of species
characteristic of surrounding communities, such as red maple, sweetgum, tulip poplar, live oak,
water oak, winged elm, slash pine, and blackgum. Shrubs and subcanopy species might
include red bay, wax myrtle, groundsel, eastern red cedar, flowering dogwood, or blackberry.
Herbs are usually present only on exposed edges, and may include goldenrod, broomsedge,
dog fennel, lespedeza, clovers, and other opportunistic species.
4.1.6. Pine plantation
Approximately 20.9 acres (3.7 percent) of the project study area is occupied by pine plantations.
This community is generally concentrated in upland areas of the project study area, in the less-
developed central and western portions. The dominant species is planted loblolly pine, with a
few encroaching hardwoods such as red maple and sweetgum. Shrubs might include wax
myrtle, red bay, or groundsel. The herb layer is sparse to significant, depending on exposure.
Herbs may include wiregrass, broomsedge, dog fennel, and lespedeza, with vines including
Carolina jessamine, poison ivy, and greenbrier.
6 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
4.1.7. Scrub-shrub
Approximately 14.4 acres (2.6 percent) of the project study area consists of scrub-shrub land.
This land is either too barren to support forested communities, or has been repeatedly cut so
that tree succession is arrested. Small inclusions of this community occur throughout the
project study area. Shrubs in these areas may include stunted individuals of canopy species
such as pines, sweetgum or red maple, but usually consist of eastern red cedar, wax myrtle,
groundsel, and other hardy species. Wetter areas include pond pine, titi, and button bush. The
scattered herb layer includes wiregrass, bracken fern, common mullein, goldenrod, ragweed,
woolgrass, false foxglove, flat-top goldentop, and deer moss.
4.1.8. Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype)
Approximately 6.8 acres (1.2 percent) of the project study area is encompassed by Coastal
Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype). Schafale and Weakley describe this plant
community as occurring on relatively high parts of the floodplain of blackwater rivers. This
community occupies the floodplains of River Swamp and Beaverdam Creek, at the western end
and center of the project study area, respectively. The waters of Dutchman Creek, to the east,
are apparently too incised to form an active floodplain with hydric soils. These forests, although
fragmented, are relatively mature, with canopy species including red maple, water oak, willow
oak, loblolly pine, sweetgum, loblolly bay, and blackgum. Subcanopy species included canopy
species as well as sweetbay, and red bay. The shrub layer is well developed but not dense and
contains highbush blueberry, gallberry, fetterbush, titi, wax myrtle, and multiflora rose. The herb
layer holds scattered individuals of giant cane, netted chainfern, bracken fern, dwarf
huckleberry, and cinnamon fern. Vines include climbing hempvine, Virginia creeper, muscadine
grape, laurel-leaf greenbrier, and greenbrier.
4.1.9. Wet Pine Flatwoods
Approximately 4.4 acres (1.0 percent) of the project study area is comprised of Wet Pine
Flatwoods. Schafale and Weakley separate Mesic Pine Flatwoods from Wet Pine Flatwoods at
the Terrestrial-Palustrine boundary. As such they generally occur on flat or nearly flat Coastal
Plain soils like the Mesic Pine Flatwoods described above but on sites that are seasonally wet
to usually wet. This community is often associated with pocosins or Xeric Sandhill Scrub and
sometimes grades into Mesic Pine Flatwoods or the rarer Pine Savanna community. The
canopy consists of loblolly, longleaf, and more pond pine than the Mesic Pine Flatwoods. The
subcanopy contains saplings of the canopy species and loblolly bay with fewer oaks than its
mesic counterpart. As with the Mesic Pine Flatwoods, the shrub layer is dominated by
fetterbush, staggerbush, sweetbay, titi, gallberry, dwarf huckleberry, and sand myrtle. Scattered
individuals of dahoon and myrtle dahoon are again present along with laurel-leaf greenbrier.
The herb layer included meadowbeauty , blazing star, and Carolina redroot along with the Mesic
Pine Flatwood species.
7 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
Table 4. Coveraoe of terrestrial communities in the project study area.
Comii uni - - - - - - - --
Maintained/disturbed land -- Coverage {acres - -
166.6
Pocosin wetlands 146.8
Xeric Sandhill Scrub 26.3
Wet Pine Flatwoods 4.4
Mesic Pine Flatwoods 41.7
Pine plantation 20.9
Mixed successional forest 23.7
Scrub-shrub 14.4
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype) 6.8
Impervious Surface 93.5
Open Water 6.0
Streams 0.4
Total 551.5
4.2. Terrestrial Wildlife
Terrestrial communities in the project study area are predominantly disturbed. However, more
natural ecosystems encroach onto the study corridor. A diversity of hydrologic regimes and
plant communities can be expected to support a correspondingly diverse suite of fauna. Wildlife
directly observed or determined to be present through evidence (tracks, scat) during field
investigations are indicated with an asterisk (*).
Woodland communities and sapling/shrub layers in particular provide excellent habitat for
insects and insectivorous wildlife species. Insectivorous amphibians such as the gray treefrog,
Carolina anole, marbled salamander, and southern leopard frog thrive in this community.
Largely insectivorous birds that are likely to be supported by this community include downy
woodpecker, red-bellied woodpecker, American woodcock, white-eyed vireo*, Carolina
chickadee*, Carolina wren*, golden-crowned kinglet*, pine warbler, and common yellowthroat*.
The sparse to dense understories of wooded communities favor small mammal species like the
granivorous gray squirrel, omnivorous raccoon, and herbivores like marsh rabbit and cotton
mouse, providing excellent cover from predators along with large amounts of foraging
resources. Large mammals favoring the refuge of dense cover include the herbivorous white-
tailed deer as well as the omnivorous coyote. A robust reptile community that survives on
insects, the amphibians that feed on the insects, or small mammals would include predators
such as dwarf salamander, copperhead, eastern kingsnake, eastern ribbon snake*, and rat
snake as well as omnivores such as eastern box turtle*. Pine dominated woodlands in the
Coastal Plain with well-developed to dense understories regularly support omnivores such as
tufted titmouse*, northern cardinal, and eastern towhee*.
Pocosins and wooded wetlands usually have canopy gaps with standing water that support
water birds such as puddle ducks.- mallard, green-winged teal, wood duck, and American
wigeon, particularly during fall and winter. Other birds such as swamp sparrow, green heron,
8 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
American bittern, and least bittern should occur here as well. Mammals favoring pocosin cover
would include marsh rabbit, cotton mouse, white-tailed deer, and black bear.
More open and disturbed plant communities harbor a largely distinct community of fauna.
Largely granivorous and fructivorous bird species including red-winged blackbird, mourning
dove, northern cardinal, brown-headed cowbird, and American goldfinch are expected to take
advantage of the forage provided by grasses, herbs, and fruit-bearing shrubs. Insectivorous
birds such as prairie warbler* and brown-headed nuthatch, as well as omnivores like the
American crow* would be represented. Reptiles in disturbed areas might include eastern box
turtle*, northern black racer, eastern glass lizard*, southern toad, and Carolina anole*.
4.3. Aquatic Communities
Streams of various sizes occur within the project study area and provide adequate habitat for a
variety of aquatic wildlife. The stream banks and over-stream air space also act as travel
corridors for non-aquatic species. Aquatic/aquatic dependent wildlife expected to occur within
the project study area include muskrat, mink, belted kingfisher, great blue heron, mallard,
southern dusky salamander, eastern newt, snapping turtle, painted turtle, cottonmouth, bullfrog,
green frog, and pickerel frog.
The larger streams are expected to support a more diverse fishery than smaller tributaries. Fish
that may occur within large streams within the project study area include redbreast sunfish,
gizzard shad, channel catfish, longnose gar, and creek chub. The smaller tributaries are
expected to support a different suite of species including banded pigmy sunfish, common carp,
coastal shiner, redbreast sunfish, tesselated darter, and bowfin. Ponds within the project study
area may support a combination of stocked and native fish including largemouth bass, margined
madtom, goldfish, yellow bullhead, grass carp, pumpkinseed, redear sunfish, and bluegill.
4.4. Invasive Species
Eight species from the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North Carolina were found to occur
in the project study area. The species identified were Chinese privet (Threat level 1), Asiatic
dayflower (Threat level 3), Japanese stilt grass (Threat level 1), Japanese honeysuckle (Threat
Level 2), lespedeza (Threat Level 1), kudzu (Threat Level 1), mimosa (Threat Level 2), and
multiflora rose (Threat level 1). NCDOT will follow the Department's Best Management
Practices for the management of invasive plant species.
5.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
5.1. Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Four jurisdictional streams were identified in the project study area (Table 5). The location of
these streams is shown on Figure 3. USACE and NCDWQ stream delineation 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 project study
area have been designated as warm water streams for the purposes of stream mitigation.
9 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
Table 5. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the proiect studv area.

Map;lD

_
Iff-tf
lassi cation o b? ato

Mih .tide. Required
vB er
SA 1241 intermittent Unknown Not Subject
SB 515 intermittent Unknown Not Subject
SC 111 intermittent Unknown Not Subject
Beaverdam Creek 115 intermittent Unknown Not Subject
SD 672 intermittent Unknown Not Subject
Price Creek 534 intermittent Unknown Not Subject
SE 270 perennial Unknown Not Subject
Thirty jurisdictional wetlands were identified within the project study area (Figure 3). Wetland
classification and quality rating data are presented in Table 6. All wetlands in the project study
area are within the Cape Fear and Lumber River basins (USGS Hydrologic Units 3040207 and
3030005 respectively). USACE wetland delineation forms and NCDWQ wetland rating forms for
each site are included in Appendix C. Descriptions of the natural communities at each wetland
site are presented in Section 4.1. Wetland sites WA, WE, EF, WG, WU, and parts of WH and
WT are included in the Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater Subtype) terrestrial
community. Wetland sites WD, WI, WK, WL, WS, WAA and parts of WB, WH, WJ, WN, WO,
WQ, WT, WX, WY, and WZ are included in the Pocosin terrestrial community type. Scrub-shrub
areas include wetland sites WAC, WAD, and parts of WB and WX. Maintained/disturbed land
includes wetland sites such as ditches, roadway and utility right-of-ways, and cleared swales,
including wetland sites WP, WR, WW, WAB, and parts of WB, WJ, WN, WO, WO, WV, WX,
WY, and WZ. Pine plantation wetlands are included in wetland sites WH and WV. Wetland site
WC is the only wetland included in the Mesic Pine Flatwoods terrestrial community, as most of
these areas are located in uplands. Some areas of the Xeric Sandhill Scrub terrestrial
community overlap into wetland areas, including wetland site WM and parts of WN, WO, and
WX.
Table 6. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the nrniart OiAxt araa
r ID: Cowardin
Ma
p Classification Hydrologic

( Classification DW_ Q Wetland

Rating
r ;
Area (ac.)'
WA PF01/4C Riverine NA* 33
WB PF01/413 / PSS313 Non-riverine 35 14.06
WC PF01/4E Non-riverine 35 2.12
WD PSS313 / PF04B Non-riverine 35 14.17
WE PF01/4F Non-riverine 35 0.06
WF PF01/413 / PSS313 Non-riverine 35 1.42
WG PF01/413 / PSS313 Non-riverine 35 1.51
WH PF01/4E Non-riverine 35 8.11
WI PF01/413 Non-riverine 35 2.38
WJ PFO1/4E Non-riverine 35 0.40
WK PF04A / PSS3A Non-riverine 35 0.05
WL PF04A / PSS3A Non-riverine 35 8.85
10 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
Map 10

P Cowardin

Classification
_ Hydrologic

Classification
___ DWQ Wetland

Ratin
L
g
Area (ac.)
. , , ea ae.
I I I I .
WM PSS3A _
Non-riverine -
35 2.30
WN PF04C / PSS3C Non-riverine 35 32.06
WO PF04C / PSS3C Non-riverine 35 30.66
WP PSS1/7F Non-riverine NA* 0.03
WQ PSS1/7F Riverine NA* 0.19
WR PSS1/7F Non-riverine NA* 0.12
WS PSS3F / PFO4F Non-riverine NA* 0.05
WT PSS3F / PFO4F Riverine 89 1.78
WU PSS3F / PFO4F Riverine 89 1.2
WV PSS7A Non-riverine NA* 2.54
WW PSS1/7F Non-riverine NA* 0.03
WX PF04B Non-riverine 35 17.65
WY PF04B Non-riverine 35 7.88
WZ PF04A / PSS7A Non-riverine 35 21.49
WAA PF04B Riverine NA* 9.28
WAB PSS1/7C Riverine NA* 0.77
WAC PF04A / PSS7A Non-riverine 35 0.10
WAD PF04A / PSS7A Non-riverine 35 0.40
-rreviously delineated wetlands were not rated by EcoScience
5.2. Clean Water Act Permits
The proposed project is likely to result in jurisdictional area impacts. Depending on the success
of avoidance and minimization efforts, the project may be eligible for a Nationwide Permit 14, for
linear transportation projects. Other permits that may apply include a NW P No. 33 for temporary
construction activities such as stream dewatering, work bridges, or temporary causeways.
However, if wetland impacts exceed '/2 acre at any crossing of a jurisdictional area, an Individual
Permit will likely be required. 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 WQC #3704 and #3688 may be
required prior to the issuance of Nationwide Permits 14 and 33, respectively. A Section 401
Individual Water Quality Certification would be required in the event that an Individual Permit is
required by the USACE.
5.3. Construction Moratoria
No special designations, such as anadromous fish waters or fish nursery areas, are in effect for
any of the project study area water resources. Therefore, no construction moratoria apply to the
project study area or construction activities therein.
11 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
5.4. N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
All waters in the project study area are within the Cape Fear and Lumber River basins.
Therefore, no river basin buffer rules apply to the project.
5.5. Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters
No surface waters which have been designated as Navigable Waters under Section 10 of the
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 occur within the project study area.
5.6. Wetland and Stream Mitigation
5.6.1. Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts
Beaverdam Creek and its tributaries are listed as HQW. Therefore, Design Standards for
Sensitive Watersheds will be implemented during project construction. The NCDOT will attempt
to avoid and minimize impacts to streams and wetlands to the greatest extent practicable in
finalizing project design.
5.6.2. Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts
The NCDOT will investigate potential on-site stream and wetland mitigation opportunities once a
final design footprint has been prepared. 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 offsite mitigation
to satisfy the federal Clean Water Act compensatory mitigation requirements for this project.
5.7. Endangered Species Act Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered, Threatened, or officially Proposed for
such listing are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The term "Endangered Species" is defined as "any species which is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range;" and the term
"Threatened Species" is defined as "any species which is likely to become an Endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range" (16
U.S.C. 1532).
Fourteen federally protected species are listed for Brunswick County as of January 16, 2009
(Table 5) (USFWS 2008). Of the listed species, nine are designated as Endangered and five
are designated as Threatened. Table 7 presents the federally protected species listed for
Brunswick County and specifies their status as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Threatened
due to Similarity of Appearance (T S/A).
12 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
Table 7. Federally Protected Species listed for Brunswick County.
Common Name Scientific Name Status
American alligator Alligator mississipiensis T(S/A)
Eastern cougar Puma concolor couguar E
Green sea turtle Chelonia mydas T
Kemp's ridley sea turtle Lepidochelys kempii E
Leatherback sea turtle Dermocheylys coriacea E
Loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta T
West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus E
Piping plover Charadrius melodus T
Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis E
Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum E
Wood stork Mycteria americana E
Cooley's meadowrue Thalictrum cooleyi E
Rough-leaved loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia E
Seabeach amaranth Amaranthus pumilus T
1(6/A) = I hreatened due to similarity of appearance. A species that is threatened due to similarity of appearance with other rare
species and is listed for its protection.
T = Threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range."
E = Endagered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
Habitat potential for pelagic or maritime species does not exist anywhere within the project
study area. Therefore, habitat potential for green sea turtle, Kemp's ridley sea turtle, leatherback
sea turtle, loggerhead sea turtle, West Indian manatee, piping plover, and seabeach amaranth
is not expected to occur on-site. Habitat evaluations and/or surveys for these species will not
be required prior to construction. Biological conclusions for these species are "NO EFFECT".
American alligator
Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
Family: Alligatoridae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967
Date Delisted: June 04, 1987
The American alligator is listed as Threatened due to the Similarity in Appearance (T[S/A]) to
other federally-listed crocodilians; however, there are no other crocodilians within North
Carolina. American alligators can be found in a variety of freshwater to estuarine aquatic
habitats including swamp forests, marshes, large streams and canals, and ponds and lakes.
T(S/A) species are not subject to Section 7 consultation and a biological conclusion for this
species is not required. Potential habitat for American alligator exists within the study
corridor. American alligator was observed in Dutchman Creek and approximately 0.8 mile
southeast of the project study area in several Wal-Mart stormwater ponds within the project
study area. Construction activities may temporarily displace any American alligators in the
13 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
vicinity; however, no long-term impact to American alligator is anticipated as a result of this
project.
Eastern cougar
Endangered
Family: Felidae
Date Listed: 6/4/73
The eastern cougar is described as a large, unspotted, long-tailed cat. Its body and legs are a
uniform fulvous or tawny hue. Its belly is pale reddish or reddish white. The inside of this cat's
ears are light-colored, with blackish color behind the ears. Sometimes the cougar's face has a
uniformly lighter tint than the general hue of the body. Cougars feed primarily on deer, but their
diet may also include small mammals, wild turkeys, and occasionally domestic livestock, when
available.
No preference for specific habitat types has been noted. The primary need is apparently for a
large wilderness area with an adequate food supply. Male cougars of other subspecies have
been observed to occupy a range of 25 or more square miles, and females from 5 to 20 square
miles. The eastern cougar has been hunted and trapped relentlessly as a pest. Much of its
habitat has been eliminated through extensive deforestation.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
Suitable habitat for eastern cougar does occur within the project study area in the form
of wooded pocosin and bottomland hardwood forest encompassing portions of the
center of the project study area and constituting an edge of a large, relatively
undisturbed wilderness area already experiencing development pressure. However,
NCNHP records document no occurrences of this species within 2.0 miles of the project
study area and no individuals were observed during field investigations.
Red-cockaded woodpecker
Endangered
Family: Picidae
Date Listed: October 13, 1970
Primary nest sites for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers (RCWs) include open pine stands greater
than 60 years of age with little or no mid-story development. Foraging habitat is comprised of
open pine or pine/mixed hardwood stands 30 years of age or older.
This small woodpecker (7 to 8.5 inches long) has a black head, prominent white cheek patches,
and a black-and-white barred back. Males often have red markings (cockades) behind the eye,
but the cockades may be absent or difficult to see. Primary habitat consists of mature to over-
mature southern pine forests dominated by loblolly, long-leaf, slash, and pond pines. Nest
cavities are constructed in the heartwood of living pines, generally older than 70 years that have
been infected with red-heart disease. Nest cavity trees tend to occur in clusters, which are
referred to as colonies. The woodpecker drills holes into the bark around the cavity entrance,
14 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
resulting in a shiny, resinous buildup around the entrance that allows for easy detection of active
nest trees. Pine flatwoods or pine-dominated savannas which have been maintained by
frequent natural or prescribed fires serve as ideal nesting and foraging sites for this
woodpecker. Development of a thick understory may result in abandonment of cavity trees.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
On June 25-27, 2008, EcoScience biologists surveyed the project study area for red-cockaded
woodpecker habitat. Based on aerial photographs and NC-GAP data, it was estimated that
approximately 187 acres of the project study area contained pine trees in sufficient density to
support foraging or nesting habitat for the birds. Detailed ground surveys in these areas
revealed that no trees of sufficient age for red-cockaded woodpecker nesting occur within the
project study area. The oldest trees found were approximately 50 years old, occurring near the
St. James housing development. Adequate foraging habitat was found to comprise
approximately 50 acres in nine separate patches along the alignment. These habitat elements
consist of open stands of pine trees, chiefly loblolly pine, that have been maintained by burning
or clearing. A review of NCNHP records, updated August 2008, indicates several occurrences
within 1.0 mile of the study area. The NCNHP lists several occurrences of red-cockaded
woodpecker within 2.0 miles of the project study area. One occurrence is located approximately
0.2 mile north of the Long Beach Road intersection with NC 211. Another is approximately 0.4
mile south of NC 211 near Jump and Run Creek. One occurrence is 0.8 miles west of the
project study area near Mill Pond, and two more are 0.6 and 2.0 miles south of the western end
of the project study area near Ash Swamp. However, all of these records except the Jump and
Run Creek record are historic, meaning that the last observation was over 20 years ago. No
red-cockaded woodpeckers were observed during field studies and surveys within suitable
habitat areas. If impacts to suitable foraging habitat within the project study area are minimized,
the project is unlikely to have adverse effects on the red-cockaded woodpecker.
Shortnose sturgeon
Endangered
Family: Acipenseridae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967
The shortnose sturgeon is a bottom-feeding fish that occurs in Atlantic seaboard rivers from the
St. Johns River, Florida to eastern Canada. The sturgeon is anadromous, spending most of the
year in brackish estuarine environments and moving into freshwater only when spawning.
The Lower Cape Fear River drainage area may contain North Carolina's only self-sustaining
population of shortnose sturgeon. Several shortnose sturgeons have been documented in the
Cape Fear River and Brunswick River (NCNHP records). Moser and Ross recommended that
dredging and blasting activities be performed between August and November to reduce
potential impacts to shortnose sturgeon spawning migrations.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Typical habitat of the shortnose sturgeon is estuaries and lower sections of large rivers.
Streams occur within the project study area; however, the reaches of these streams are
of insufficient depth for this species. Therefore, no habitat for shortnose sturgeon exists
15 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
within the project study area. In addition, NCNHP records document no occurrences of
shortnose sturgeon within 2.0 miles of the project study area. Based on available
information, this project will not impact shortnose sturgeon.
Wood stork
Endangered
Family: Ciconiidae
Date Listed: February 28, 1984
Wood storks are strong winged birds that fly with their necks stretched straight ahead and their
long legs trailing behind. Adult wood storks are predominantly white with black flight feathers,
dark legs and bill, and dark unfeathered heads. Immature wood storks are similar in color;
however, they may have a yellow bill. Adult birds are tall, measuring approximately 50 inches,
with a wingspan of 60 to 65 inches. Typical foraging habitat includes shallow salt or brackish
water, shallow water of bays, tidal creeks, ponds, or other bodies of water. Wood storks usually
feed in 6 to 10 inches of water. Wood storks typically feed on fish, but also prey on amphibians,
crustaceans, and reptiles. Wood storks do not breed in North Carolina, but a few disperse to
southeastern North Carolina following the breeding season. A small flock has been regularly
present in Sunset Beach, Brunswick County in mid- to late summer (NCNHP records).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Wood storks nest in bald cypress or hardwood trees surrounded by relatively open
expanses of water. Colonial nesting sites remain inundated at from 3 to 5 feet for the
entire nesting cycle which lasts between 110 and 160 days. The only areas within the
project study area that would satisfy the inundation and vegetation requirements would
be the Beaverdam Creek which does not provide the number of trees surrounded by
water required by a colony. Storks feed primarily (often almost exclusively) on small fish
between 1 and 8 inches in length. Typical foraging habitat for wood stork is a shallow
wetland area where fish become concentrated either through local reproduction or the
area drying and stranding the fish. Within the project study area, areas likely to contain
fish do not provide the open water preferred by the large birds, are permanently
inundated at too high a level, and do not provide the density of fish required by the wood
stork. Therefore, no habitat for wood stork exists within the project study area. In
addition, NCNHP records document no occurrences of wood stork within 2.0 miles of the
projectstudy area. Based on available information, this project will not impact wood
stork.
Rough-leaved loosestrife
Endangered
Family: Primulaceae
Date Listed: June 12, 1987
The rough-leaved loosestrife is a rhizomatous perennial herb that often reaches the height of 2
feet. Plants are dormant in the winter, with the first leaves appearing in late March or early
April. The triangular leaves typically occur in whorls of 3 or 4. Leaves are typically sessile,
entire, 0.3 to 0.4 inch wide, broadest at the base, and have three prominent principal veins.
16 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
These leaf characteristics help differentiate this species from Loomis' loosestrife, which may
occur in the same areas as rough-leaved loosestrife. Individuals of rough-leaved loosestrife,
especially young plants, have been observed by EcoScience biologists to have paired, opposite
leaves rather than whorls of 3 or 4; this pattern has also been observed on new growth
resprouting from the upper leaf axils in individuals that have been browsed or mowed. Five-
lobed, yellow flowers, approximately 0.6 inch across, are produced on a loose terminal raceme
1 to 4 inches long. Rough-leaved loosestrife is reported to flower from late May to June;
however, EcoScience biologists have observed scattered individuals flowering through mid-July
in New Hanover County. Seeds are formed by August, but the small, rounded capsules do not
dehisce until October. Populations also reproduce asexually from rhizomes, with rhizomes
producing several shoots. Rough-leaved loosestrife is endemic to Coastal Plain and Sandhill
regions of the Carolinas, and was previously known to be extant in 11 counties in North Carolina
and one county in South Carolina. Typical habitat of rough-leaved loosestrife consists of the
wet ecotone between longleaf pine savannas and wet, shrubby areas where lack of canopy
vegetation allows abundant sunlight into the herb layer. This species is fire maintained;
suppression of naturally occurring fires has contributed to the loss of habitat in our state. In the
absence of fire, rough-leaved loosestrife may persist for several years in an area with dense
shrub encroachment; however, reproduction is reported to be suppressed under these
conditions, leading to eventual local extirpation. Kral indicates that rough-leaved loosestrife is
typically found growing in black sandy peats or sands with a high organic content. Because
rough-leaved loosestrife is an obligate wetland species, drainage of habitat also has an adverse
effect on the plant.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
On June 25-27, 2008, EcoScience biologists surveyed the project study area for rough-
leaved loosestrife. The estimated habitat for rough-leaved loosestrife occupies
approximately 125 acres along NC 211 highway edges and in adjacent fields and
ditches. Searches were confined to exposed wetland areas, which provide possible
habitat for this plant. Wet ditches and other open wet areas were found to be more
common in the Lumber River portion of the project study area (west of Ripley Drive).
Surveys were conducted using systematic linear, overlapping transects within suitable
habitat. However, no occurrences of rough-leaved loosestrife were found in suitable
habitat areas. The NCNHP lists no occurrences of rough-leaved loosestrife within 2.0
miles of the project study area, however systematic plant-by-plant surveys conducted in
June 2005 within approximately 2.0 miles north of the project study area resulted in the
discovery of 10 populations of this species primarily within the Progress Energy utility
powerline corridor that crosses NC 87. The biological conclusion is No Effect.
Cooley's meadowrue
Endangered
Family: Ranunculaceae
Date Listed: February 7, 1989
Cooley's meadowrue is a rhizomatous, perennial herb with a smooth stem; the 3-foot high plant
is normally erect in full sun but lax in the shade. Leaves are ternately divided; the leaflets, less
17 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
than 1 inch long, are narrow, with untoothed margins. The small, petal-less, unisexual flowers
appear on an open panicle in June and the fruits, small ellipsoidal achenes, mature in August
and September. Moist bogs and savannas are the preferred habitat of Cooley's meadowrue.
This species is endemic to the southeastern Coastal Plain of North Carolina (11 locations) and
one location in Florida. Typical soil substrates are fine sandy loams that are at least seasonally
saturated (but not inundated) and only slightly acid (pH 5.8-6.6). Some form of disturbance is
usually needed to sustain the open quality of the meadowrue's habitat. Consequently, Cooley's
meadowrue is sometimes found along utility corridors, roadside margins, or other maintained
areas. Cooley's meadowrue is threatened by fire suppression and land-disturbing practices
such as silviculture or agriculture.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
On June 25-27, 2008, EcoScience biologists surveyed the project study area for
Cooley's meadowrue. The estimated habitat for Cooley's meadowrue occupies
approximately 10.1 acres in the floodplains of Beaverdam Swamp and Dutchman Creek.
Soils in these areas (Newhan and Muckalee series) are mildly acidic to neutral and
provide suitable moisture and exposure for the survival of this plant. Surveys were
conducted using systematic linear, overlapping transects within suitable habitat.
However, no occurrences of Cooley's meadowrue were found in suitable habitat areas.
The NCNHP lists no occurrences of Cooley's meadowrue within 2.0 miles of the project
study area. The biological conclusion is No Effect.
5.8. Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
As of August 8, 2007, the USFWS removed the bald eagle in the lower 48 states from the
federal list of Endangered and Threatened wildlife. The species is now protected under the
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA). The bald eagle is a large raptor with a
wingspan greater than 6 feet. Adult bald eagles are dark brown with a white head and tail.
Immature eagles are brown with whitish mottling on the tail, belly, and wing linings. Bald eagles
typically feed on fish but may also take birds and small mammals. In the Carolinas, nesting
season extends from December through May. Bald eagles typically nest in tall, living trees in a
conspicuous location near open water. Eagles forage over large bodies of water and utilize
adjacent trees for perching. The BGPA incorporated "disturb" into the statutory definition of
"take." This definitions increases protection to include "to agitate or bother a bald or golden
eagle to the degree that interferes with or interrupts normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering
habits, causing injury, death, or nest abandonment".
Current national management guidelines by the USFWS outline how far disturbance activities
should be located from eagle nests. Visibility of the activity from the eagle nest is also
considered in USFWS recommendations because, in general, eagles are more prone to
disturbance when an activity occurs in full view. For activities related to the construction of
roads, powerlines, and other linear utilities, the USFWS recommends avoiding eagles nests by
a distance of 660 feet (activity visible from nest) or 330 feet (activity not visible from nest). In
general, activities should be kept as far away from nest trees as possible, disturbances should
18 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
be conducted when eagles are not nesting, and activity between the nest and nearby foraging
areas should be minimized. Landscape buffers are also recommended.
The project study area contains no suitable nesting or foraging habitat for bald eagle. NCNHP
records (reviewed August 30, 2008) document no occurrence of bald eagle within 660 feet of
the project study area. No bald eagles or bald eagle nests were observed during field
investigations. Based on field observations and NCNHP documentation, this project will have
no effect on bald eagle.
5.9. Coastal Zone Issues
5.9.1. Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern
All waters in the project study area are considered Inland Waters by the North Carolina Division
of Marine Fisheries. No project study area waters are considered navigable; therefore, no
Areas of Environmental Concern occur within or near the project study area.
5.9.2. Essential Fish Habitat
According to the National Marine Fisheries Service, palustrine emergent and forested wetlands
are considered Essential Fish Habitat. These areas play important roles as habitat for prey of
managed species, and for the water quality functions they provide for downstream habitat.
The proposed project involves adjustments to existing roadway facilities, and therefore is not
likely to impact Essential Fish `Habitat areas in the project study area.
19 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
6.0 REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS -79/31. Fish and Wildlife Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical
Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Franklin, M.A. and J.T. Finnegan. 2006. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant
Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks
and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
Gilbert, C.R. 1989. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of
Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (Mid-Atlantic Bight)--Atlantic and Shortnose Sturgeons.
Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82(11.122). U.S. Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers TR EL-82-4. 28 pp.
Godfrey, R. K., and J.W. Wooten. 1981. Aquatic and Wetland Plants of the southeastern
United States: Dicotyledons. University of Georgia Press, Athens, GA. pp 501
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F.
McPherson, J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and
South Carolina (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and
photographs). United States Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
Hall, S.P., M.P. Schafale, and J.T. Finnegan. 1999. Conservation assessment of the southeast
coastal plain of North Carolina, using site oriented and landscape-oriented analysis.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, Raleigh,
NC.
Hamel, P.B. 1992. Land Manager's Guide to the Birds of the South. The Nature Conservancy,
Southeastern Region, Chapel Hill, NC.
Henry, V.G. 1989. Guidelines for Preparation of Biological Assessments and Evaluations for
the Red-cockaded Woodpecker. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service, Southeast Region, Atlanta, GA. 13 pp.
Kartesz, J. 1998. A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Puerto
Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Biota of North America Program.
Kral, R. 1983. A Report on Some Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Forest-related Vascular
Plants of the South. U.S. Forest Service Technical Publication R8-TP2. Pp. 869-872.
20 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
LeGrand, H.E., S.E. McRae, S.P. Hall, and J.T. Finnegan. 2006. Natural Heritage Program List
of the Rare Animal Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Division of Parks and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Raleigh.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of
the Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
Moser, M.L. and S.W. Ross. 1993. Distribution and Movements of Shortnose Sturgeon
(Acipenser brevirostrum) and other Anadromous Fishes of the Lower Cape Fear River,
North Carolina. Final Report to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District.
153 pp.
National Marine Fisheries Service. 2004. Essential Fish Habitat: A Marine Fish Habitat
Conservation Mandate for Federal Agencies. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration, St. Petersburg, FL.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2006. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO)
Database. Available: http://soils.usda.gov/survey/geography/ssurgo. U.S. Department
of Agriculture. [June 2008]
N.C. Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM). 1995. Guidance for Rating the Values
of Wetlands in North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Raleigh, NC.
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF). 2005a. North Carolina Coastal Habitat Protection
Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF). 2005b. Rule: Descriptive Boundaries for Coastal-
Joint-Inland Waters. North Carolina Fisheries Rules for Coastal Waters 2005. North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
N.C. Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2005. Basinwide Assessment Report; Cape Fear
River Basin. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality, Water Quality Section, Environmental Sciences Branch, Raleigh, NC.
N.C. Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2003. Basinwide Assessment Report; Lumber River
Basin. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality, Water Quality Section, Environmental Sciences Branch, Raleigh, NC.
N.C. Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2005. Identification Methods for the Origins of
Intermittent and Perennial Streams Version 3.1. N.C. Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Environmental
Sciences Branch, Raleigh, NC. 32 pp.
21 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
N.C. Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2006. Water Quality Assessment and Impaired
Waters List. Available:http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/documents/303d Report.pdf. North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
[June 2008].
N.C. Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2008a. Water Quality Assessment and Impaired
Waters List. Available:
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdI/documents/B.Draft2008303dList.pdf. North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh. [June 2008].
N.C. Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2008b. List of Active Permits (online). Available:
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES/documents/BIMS 050108.x1s North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh. [June 2008].
N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) 2005 Biennial Protection Plan: List of Significant
Natural Heritage Areas. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Parks and Recreation, Raleigh, NC.
Ogden, J.C. 1990. Habitat management guidelines for the wood stork in the southeast region.
Prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Atlanta, Georgia.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, R.P. Teulings, and R. Davis. 2006. Birds of the Carolinas. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
Reed, P.J. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Southeast (Region 2).
Biological Report 88 (26.2). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Publication. Washington,
DC.
Ross, S.W. 1997. Shortnose Sturgeon: Acipenser brevirostrum Lesuer. In Endangered,
Threatened, and Rare Fauna of North Carolina, Part IV. A Reevaluation of the
Freshwater Fishes. Edited by E.F. Menhenick and A.L. Braswell. 106 pp.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of The Natural Communities of North
Carolina: Third Approximation. N.C. Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh,
NC. 325 pp.
Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1986. Soil Survey of Brunswick County, North Carolina.
U.S. Department of Agriculture.
22 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. 1998. Final Habitat Plan For The South Atlantic
Region: Essential Fish Habitat Requirements For Fishery Management Plans Of The
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Charleston, SC.
Thompson, R.L. and W.W. Baker. 1971. A survey of red-cockaded woodpeckers nesting
habitat requirements (pp. 170-186). In R.L. Thompson ed., The Ecology and
Management of the Red-cockaded Woodpecker. Tall Timbers Research Station,
Tallahassee, FL.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
2007. Jurisdictional Determination Form Instruction Guidebook. 60 pp.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
2007. Memorandum for the Field: Coordination on JDs under CWA Section 404 in Light
of SWANCC and Rapanos Supreme Court decisions. 7 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1985. Red-cockaded Woodpecker Recovery Plan.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Southeast Region, Atlanta, Georgia. 88 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Cooley's Meadowrue Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. Atlanta, GA. 29 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1995. Recovery Plan for Rough-Leaved Loosestrife
(Lysimachia asperulaefolia) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlanta, GA. 42 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. Revised recovery plan for the U.S. breeding
population of the wood stork. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Atlanta, Georgia. 41 p.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2003. Red-cockaded Woodpecker Recovery Plan.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Southeast Region, Atlanta, Georgia.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007a. Protection of Eagles and Authorizations Under
the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act for Take of Eagles; Final Rule and Proposed
Rule.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007b. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines
(online). Available http://www.wetlandstudies.com/docUpload/NationalBaIdEagle
ManagementGuidelines.pdf. [June 2008]. U.S. Department of the Interior.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2008. Brunswick County Endangered Species,
Threatened Species, and Federal Species of Concern (online). Available: http:Hnc-
es.fws.gov/es/cntylist/BRUNSWICK.html [January 31, 20081. United States Fish and
Wildlife Service.
23 January 2009
Natural Resources Technical Report
TIP R-5021, Brunswick County, NC
Weakley, A. S. 2003. Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas and Virginia. Working Draft of
November 2003. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 575 pp.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia,
and Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
Wetland Functional Assessment Team (WFAT). 2008. N.C. Wetland Assessment Method (NC
WAM) User Manual: Final Version 1. 123 pp.
24 January 2009
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
APPENDIX B
Scientific Names of Species Identified in Report
PLANTS
Common Name Scientific Name
Asiatic dayflower Murdannia keisak
bald cypress Taxodium distichum
beaksedge Rhynchospora sp.
beggartick Bidens sp.
blackberry Rubus argutus
blackgum Nyssa sylvatica
blazing star Liatris sp.
bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum
broomsedge Andropogon sp.
button bush Cephalanthus occidentalis
Carolina jessamine Gelsemium sempervirens
Carolina redroot Lachnanthes caroliana
Chinese privet Ligustrum sinense
cinnamon fern Osmunda cinnamomea
clover species Trifolium spp.
common mullein Verbascum thapsus
Cooley's meadowrue Thalictrum cooleyi
climbing hempvine Mikania scandens
dahoon flex cassioe
deer moss Cladina evansii
dog fennel Eupatorium capillifolium
dwarf huckleberry Gaylussacia dumosa
eastern daisy fleabane Erigeron annuus
eastern red cedar Juniperus virginiana
false foxglove Agalinis setacea
fescue Festuca sp.
fetterbush Leucothoe racemosa
flat-top goldentop Euthamia graminifolia
flowering dogwood Corpus florida
gallberry Ilex coriacea
giant cane Arundinaria gigantea
goldenrod Solidago sp.
greenbrier Smilax rotundifolia
groundsel Baccharis halimifolia
highbush blueberry Vaccinium corymbosum
honeycup Zenobia pulverulenta
inkberry flex glabra
Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica
Japanese stilt grass Microstegium vimineum
kudzu Pueraria montana
laurel-leaf greenbrier Smilax laurifolia
lespedeza Lespedeza cuneata
live oak Quercus virginiana
loblolly pine Pinus taeda
loblolly bay Gordonia lasianthus
longleaf pine Pinus palustris
Loomis' loosestrife Lysimachia loomisii
meadowbeauty Rhexia mariana
mimosa Albizia julibrissin
multiflora rose Rosa multiflora
muscadine grape Vitis rotundifolia
myrtle dahoon flex myrtifolia
netted chainfern Woodwardia areolata
oak species Quercus spp.
pennywort Hydrocotyle americana
persimmon Diospyrus virginiana
pine species Pinus spp.
poison ivy Toxicodendron radicans
pond pine Pinus serotina
ragweed Ambrosia artemisiifolia
red bay Persea palustris
red bud Cercis canadensis
red maple Acer rubrum
rough-leaved loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia
sand live oak Quercus geminata
sand myrtle Leiophyllum buxifolium
sassafras Sassafras albidum
seabeach amaranth Amaranthus pumilus
slash pine Pinus elliottii
smooth sumac Rhus glabra
sphagnum moss Sphagnum spp.
staggerbush Lyonia lucida
sweetbay Magnolia virginiana
sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua
titi Cyrilla racemif/ora
tulip poplar Liriodendron tulipifera
turkey oak Quercus laevis
Virginia chainfern Woodwardia virginiana
Virginia creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia
wax myrtle Myrica cerifera
wild onion Allium canadense
willow oak Quercus phellos
winged elm Ulmus alata
winged sumac Rhus copallinum
wiregrass Aristida stricta
woolgrass Scirpus cyperinus
ANIMALS
Common Name Scientific Name
American alligator Alligator mississipiensis
American bittern Botaurus lentiginosus
American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos
American goldfinch Carduelis tristis
American wigeon Anas americana
American woodcock Scolopax minor
banded pigmy sunfish Elassoma zonatum
belted kingfisher Ceryle alcyon
blueback herring Alosa aestavalis
bluegill Lepomis macrochirus
bowfin Amia calva
brown-headed cowbird Molothrus ater
brown-headed nuthatch Sitta pusilla
bullfrog Rana catesbeiana
Carolina anole Anolis carolinensis
Carolina chickadee Poecile carolinensis
Carolina wren Thryothorus ludovicianus
channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus
coastal shiner Notropis petersoni
common carp Cyprinus carpio
common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas
cottonmouth Agkistrodon piscivorus
cotton mouse Peromyscus gossypinus
coyote Canis latrans
creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus
downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens
dwarf salamander Eurycea quadridigitata
eastern box turtle Terrapene carolina
eastern cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus
eastern cougar Puma concolor couguar
eastern glass lizard Ophisaums ventralis
eastern kingsnake Lampropeltis getulus
eastern newt Notophthalmus viridescens
eastern ribbon snake Thamnophis sauritus
eastern towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus
Florida cooter Chrysemys floridana
gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum
goldfish Carassius auratus
grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella
gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis
gray treefrog Hyla versicolor
great blue heron Ardea herodias
green frog Rana clamitans
green heron Butorides striatus
green sea turtle Chelonia mydas
green treefrog Hyla cinerea
green-winged teal Anas crecca
Kemp's ridley sea turtle Lepidochelys kempii
largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides
least bittern Ixobrychus exilis
leatherback sea turtle Dermocheylys coriacea
loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta
longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus
mallard Anas platyrhynchos
marbled salamander
margined madtom
marsh rabbit
mink
mourning dove
muskrat
northern black racer
northern cardinal
painted turtle
pickerel frog
pine warbler
piping plover
prairie warbler
pumpkinseed
raccoon
rat snake
red-bellied woodpecker
redbreast sunfish
red-cockaded woodpecker
redbreast sunfish
redear sunfish
red-winged blackbird
ribbon snake
shortnose sturgeon
snapping turtle
southern dusky salamander
southern leopard frog
southern toad
swamp sparrow
tesselated darter
tufted titmouse
Virginia opossum
West Indian manatee
white-eyed vireo
white-tailed deer
wood duck
wood stork
yellow bullhead
yellow-throated vireo
Ambystoma opacum
Noturus insignis
Sylvilagus palustris
Mustela visors
Zenaida macroura
Ondatra zibethicus
Coluber constrictor
Cardinalis cardinalis
Chrysemys picta
Rana palustris
Dendroica pinus
Charadrius melodus
Dendroica discolor
Lepomis gibbosus
Procyon lotor
Elaphe obsoleta
Melanerpes erythrocephalus
Lepomis auritus
Picoides borealis
Lepomis auritus
Lepomis microlophus_
Agelaius phoeniceus
Thamnophis sauritus
Acipenser brevirostrum
Chelydra serpentina
Desmognathus auriculatus
Rana utricularia
Bufo terrestris
Melospiza georgiana
Etheostoma olmstedi
Baeolophus bicolor
Didelphis virginiana
Trichechus manatus
Vireo griseus
Odocoileus virginianus
Aix sponsa
Mycteria americans
Ameiurus natalis
Vireo flavifrons
APPENDIX C
WETLAND AND STREAM FORMS
APPENDIX D:
QUALIFICATIONS OF CONTRIBUTORS
Investigator: Michael Gloden
Education: B.S. Natural Resources, Ecosystem Assessment, 2002
Experience: Project Scientist, PBS&J, 2008-present
Project Scientist, EcoScience, 2005-2008
Project Scientist, Eastern Research Group, Inc. 2002-2004
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, document preparation, stream assessment.
Investigator: Elizabeth Scherrer
Education: M.S. Forestry, 2000
A.S. Science, 1997
Experience: Senior Scientist, PBS&J, 2008-present
Senior Scientist, EcoScience, 2003-2008
Project Scientist, EcoScience, 2000-2003
Intern, Tall Timbers Research Station, Summer 1998
Responsibilities: Protected species surveys, document preparation
Investigator: Adam Efird
Education: B_S. Biology, Environmental Science (minor) 2006
Experience: Project Scientist, PBS&J, 2008-Present
Senior Biological Technician, NCSU Zoology Department, 2006-2007
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS, protected species surveys.
Investigator: Scott Davis
Education: B.S. Environmental Science 1997
Experience. Senior Scientist, EcoScience, 2008
Project Scientist, EcoScience, 2004-2008
Senior Biological Technician, NCSU Zoology Department, 2006-2007
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS, protected species surveys.
APPENDIX E
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION

211 Wi-^aGOw
a
1
B R U N S W 1 `' C t" -
VOR
Ash amnx
?26' ? ePPIY 'li r Bn linR l+orda
5fsll G? th 9:. ?`
f J 1 9 ?leaxs e??
J
'l?`j{ -? jeA Y S "wt
lr F g a?Li yt d :? q z 3 f' , -• rInl t? t
41,
h I 's"` ,.3. .?^ r r Imo'. 7k,?t,r,.Y1 ,r+'f. ". ?,c X" t c
`? A t'?f ?'4ti• . s j y? s .?+. l +1 1 w.:+ s??', ^4..r
'?j a, ?5 = ?f '- ?i ,,nrsli? ' k t, a• - ?,L+*ti°1 ? a t ?: ' rp'? f
re d
r_wY C _y? PROJECT`
STUDY ' its
i-Vv 11",
k,?? AREA_ ti ?r t a _ h
1
-'X ??"?'-:'?i•l y r, )-" kf+•s?r sY _ ?.`?' - y [?,'+..1 rs +rf
it SU
fyL?1?n? ? L ? ?) ??s ?ti ? ? •tX -p \„?! es ?'R ^' J ii ?. .t. tom..! s _
.`..q??- -1 ..•???
rl?s ,ate 1'q r. t?.u + •.C!'- . .':j`{? 'y ,}.rs - ,``Ifs
7! tal
.t'. r ILL ..[+?? _y +{ ?? #a ` +
.1W
1 r'? f t/ ?sl??,
=rt - - +
- i I j Mial ' r; wf 4p'
I I ) -
2 0 2
?-`
MMMONEW MILES
I I ,i SCALE: 1" =24 MILES
- Source: DeLonns" 2003 NC ATMs end Gameer, .6364

Prepared By: Prepared For: VICINITY MAP D- By: TAL FIGURE
T' Ckd BY:
DKO
LmScielsce R-5021 Dale:

A dilsisort of PWI
1 ? OCT 2008,

BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Pro'«i 06
06-296.07
•
NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
NC Highway 133 / NC Highway 211 Connector (R-3324)
Southport
Brunswick County,
North Carolina
State Project No. 8.1231601
Federal Aid No. STP-133(3)
Prepared for:
OF tAORTH C,q
co
? ZI
mp O
99 Q?4.
?FNT SQo
OF TRAM
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
April 2006
NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
NC Highway 133 / NC Highway 211 Connector (R-3324)
Southport
Brunswick County,
North Carolina
State Project No. 8.1231601
Federal Aid No. STP-133(3)
Prepared for:
o f NOprh
m Z
q
P
OF rRAN5P0?
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:

ECOSCIENCE CORPORATION
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27604
Tel [phone] Fax [phone]
April 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. ............................. 1
1.1 Project Description ................................................................... ............................. 1
1.2 Purpose .................................................................................... .............................1
1.3 Methods ................................................................................... .............................1
1.4 Qualifications ............................................................................ .............................2
1.5 Definitions ................................................................................ ............................. 4
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES .................................................................... .............................4
2.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use ............................... .............................4
2.2 Water Resources ...................................................................... ............................. 5
2.3 Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources .................................. ............................. 9
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES ......................................................................... .............................10
3.1 Terrestrial Communities ........................................................... ............................. 10
3.2 Aquatic Communities ................................................................ ............................. 18
3.3 Rare and Unique Natural Areas ................................................ ............................. 19
3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts .............................................. ............................. 19
3.4.1 Anticipated Plant Community Impacts ........................... ............................. 19
3.4.2 Anticipated Impacts to Wildlife ....................................... ............................ 19
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS .................................................................. ............................ 21
4.1 Waters of the United States ....................................................... ............................ 21
4.1.1 Stream Characteristics ................................................... ............................23
4.1.2 Wetland and Pond Characteristics ................................. ............................ 23
4.1.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts .................................... ............................ 26
4.2 Permit Issues ............................................................................. ............................26
4.2.1 Permits .......................................................................... ............................ 26
4.2.2 Mitigation ....................................................................... ............................ 26
4.3 Protected Species ..................................................................... ............................ 28
5.0 SUMMARY ...................................................................................... ............................37
6.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................... ............................ 39
APPENDIX A: FIGURES
APPENDIX B: STREAM CHARACTERISTICS
APPENDIX C: WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS
APPENDIX D: COMPLETED STREAM AND WETLAND DATA FORMS
APPENDIX E: COMPLETED NC WAM DATA FORMS
04-203.08 ii NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Soil Series Characteristics .......................................................................... ................. 6
Table 2: Communities within the Project Study Area ................................................. ...............18
Table 3. Plant Communities Within Cut/Fill lines of Alternatives ............................... ............... 20
Table 4. Stream and Wetland Impacts Within Cut/Fill lines of Alternatives ................ ............... 22
Table 5. Jurisdictional Stream Characteristics .......................................................... ............... 24
Table 6. Jurisdictional Wetland and Pond Characteristics ......................................... ............... 25
Table 7. Federally Protected Species listed for Brunswick County ............................. ............... 28
Table 8. Federal Species of Concern for Brunswick County ..................................... ............... 35
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Study Area ...................................................................................... Appendix A
Figure 2. Project Study Area Topography .................................................................. Appendix A
Figure 3. Project Study Area Soils ............................................................................. Appendix A
Figure 4. Jurisdictional Areas Figures 4-1 through 4-19 Index .................................. Appendix A
Figure 4A. Wetland Types ........................................................................................ Appendix A
Figures 4-1 through 4-19. Jurisdictional Areas ........................................................... Appendix A
Figures 5. Alternatives ............................................................................................... Appendix A
Figures 6. Plant Communities .................................................................................... Appendix A
04-203.08 iii NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324

NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
NC Highway 133 / NC Highway 211 Connector (R-3324)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to construct a connector
between NC Highway 211 (NC 211) and NC Highway 133 (NC 133) on new location north of
Southport, North Carolina in Brunswick County (Figure 1; all figures are located in Appendix A).
The project study area (PSA) is approximately 1700 acres in size and is primarily located west
of NC 133 and north of NC 211. The PSA was delineated by NCDOT and includes the corridor
limits for all anticipated alternatives.
Sixteen alternatives are proposed (Figure 5). The designation for each alternative is based on a
corridor number and included segment numbers. Four alternatives (2AC, 213C, 2AD, and 213D)
enter the PSA from Bethel Road, traveling west through the floodplain of Dutchman Creek
before heading southwest toward the intersection of NC 211 and NC 133, the southern terminus
of the project in the PSA. Alternates 2AC and 2BC take a more westerly route through the PSA
than Alternates 2AD and 2BD, missing most of the planned Dutchman Village development
(Figure 5). Twelve alternatives (3ACE, 3ACF, 313CE, 3BCF, 3ADE, 3ADF, 3BDE, 3BDF, 5AE,
5AF, 5BE, and 5BF) begin further north. Eight of these alternatives (3ACE, 3ACF, 3BCE, 3BCF,
3ADE, 3ADF, 3BDE, and 3BDF) share alignment segments with the alternatives entering from
Bethel Road with 3ACE, 3ACF, 313CE, and 3BCF taking the more westerly route that misses
most of Dutchman Village. Alternatives 3ADE, 3ADF, 3BDE, and 3BDF share the more easterly
route. Alternatives 5AE, 5AF, 5BE, and 56F diverge from the previously mentioned alternatives
by taking the most western path through the PSA before converging with the other alternatives
taking the route labeled either "A" or "B" (Figure 5) at the southern terminus of the project.
This report describes natural features within the PSA including soils, water resources, plant
communities, wildlife, Section 404 jurisdictional areas, and protected species issues. In
addition, this report provides a preliminary evaluation of permit needs.
1.2 Purpose
Goals of this investigation are as follows.
• Evaluate natural resources within the approximately 1700-acre PSA.
• Delineate with enumerated flagging Section 404 jurisdictional systems and locate
delineation flags with Global Positioning System (GPS) technology.
• Obtain resource agency verification of the jurisdictional area delineation.
• Survey the PSA for protected species.
1.3 Methods
Materials and research data in support of this investigation were derived prior to field
investigations from a number of sources including United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) county soil survey (USDA 1986), United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic
04-203.08 1 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
4

mapping (Southport, North Carolina 7.5-minute quadrangle [1990]), United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping (Southport, North
Carolina 7.5-minute quadrangle [1990]), North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)
documents, and recent aerial photography.
Vascular plant names follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968), with adjustments for
updated nomenclature (Kartesz 1998). Terrestrial and aquatic wildlife distribution and habitat
use were determined through field observations, evaluation of habitat types, and available
supportive documentation (Martof et al. 1980, Potter et al. 1980, Webster et al. 1985, Menhinick
1991, Hamel 1992, Rohde et al. 1994, and Palmer and Braswell 1995).
Jurisdictional areas were delineated using the three-parameter approach set forth in the Corps
of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Jurisdictional
areas were characterized according to a classification scheme established by Cowardin et al.
(1979). United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management (NCDEM) data forms were utilized to document evidence of
jurisdictional status and jurisdictional area characteristics. The completed data forms are
available in Appendix D.
A list of federally protected species in Brunswick County was obtained from the USFWS
(USFWS 2006). In addition, files maintained by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) were reviewed on July 28, 2005 for documented occurrences of state or federally
listed species and documented locations of significant natural areas.
Field surreys within the PSA were completed between June 2005 and November 2005. The
PSA was walked and visually inspected for significant environmental features. Jurisdictional
area boundaries were delineated with sequentially numbered flagging tape. The boundaries
were subsequently mapped using Trimble XRS Differential GPS technology with reported sub-
meter accuracy. The data were corrected using GPS Pathfinder Office software and exported
to MicroStation format.
1.4 Qualifications
Field surveys for this project were conducted by EcoScience Corporation (ESC) biologists Brad
Allen, Scott Davis, David O'Loughlin, Heather Saunders, Elizabeth Scherrer, Sandy Smith, Josh
Steiger, Craig Terwilliger, Matt Thomas, and Justin Wright.
Mr. Allen is a Project Scientist with two years of experience in the environmental field. He holds
a bachelor's degree in environmental science from the University of Florida and a master's
degree in environmental engineering from the State University of New York College of
Environmental Science and Forestry. Mr. Allen's graduate research focused on the
improvement of stochastic techniques for predicting low stream flows. Professional expertise
includes statistical analysis, computer modeling, jurisdictional area delineation, habitat
assessment, and environmental document preparation.
Mr. Davis is a Project Scientist with one year of experience in the environmental field. He holds
a bachelor's degree in environmental science with a concentration in ecology from North
04-203.08 2 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
a
s
Carolina State University. He is proficient in the identification of eastern woody tree and shrub
species and in the identification of southeastern wetland flora. Professional expertise includes
jurisdictional area delineations, benthic macroinvertebrate sampling, community mapping, and
environmental document preparation.
Mr. O'Loughlin is a Senior Scientist with three years of experience in the environmental field
working toward a M.S. in forestry from North Carolina State University, with minors in botany
and statistics. He has taken pertinent courses including dendrology, botany, ecology, and
wetland soils. His professional expertise includes natural resources assessment, protected
species surveys, computer modeling, jurisdictional area delineations, and environmental
document preparation.
Ms. Saunders is a Project Scientist with two years of experience in the environmental field. She
holds a bachelor of science in natural resources, ecosystem assessment from North Carolina
State University. She has conducted field research for forest health assessments, habitat
suitability indices for various wildlife species, and watershed and wetland delineation. She is
proficient in the identification of eastern woody tree and shrub species and southeastern
wetland flora. Professional expertise includes jurisdictional area delineation, habitat
assessment, and environmental document preparation.
Ms. Scherrer is a Senior Scientist with seven years of experience in the environmental field.
She has an M.S. in forestry from North Carolina State University, with minors in botany and
ecology. Her research involved the restoration of farmed wetlands on the North Carolina
Coastal Plain, with emphasis on the influence of microtopography on hydrology and plant
communities. At Tall Timbers Research Station in Tallahassee, Florida, she designed and
implemented a study of red-cockaded woodpecker habitats in the Apalachicola National Forest.
Professional expertise includes wetland and jurisdictional area delineations, stream
characterization, plant and wildlife identification and community mapping, plant community
ecology, protected species surveys, and environmental document preparation.
Mr. Smith is a Senior Scientist with 16 years of experience in the environmental field. Mr. Smith
has a bachelor's degree in biology from Davidson College and a master's degree in
marine/coastal biology from the University of North Carolina at Wilmington. He has conducted
field research and species inventories involving seabirds, shorebirds, colonial waterbirds,
songbirds, small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, freshwater and estuarine fish, and benthic
invertebrates. Professional expertise includes jurisdictional area delineations, stream and
riparian buffer determinations, plant and wildlife identification, community mapping, protected
species surveys, environmental permitting, and environmental document preparation.
Mr. Steiger is a summer intern with EcoScience Corporation. He is a rising senior at North
Carolina State University and is working toward a bachelor of science degree in natural
resources, ecosystem assessment, as well as a minor in both forest management and parks
and recreation. His field experience extends to stream and wetland delineation, plant
identification and environmental document preparation. He has also taken pertinent courses
including dendrology, botany, chemistry, and ecology.
04-203.08 3 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324

Mr. Terwilliger is a Project Scientist with two years of experience in the environmental field. Mr.
Terwilliger has a bachelor of science in natural resources, ecosystem assessment from North
Carolina State University and a bachelor of arts in English from the University Of Connecticut.
He is proficient in the identification of eastern woody tree and shrub species. Professional
expertise includes jurisdictional area delineation, habitat assessment, and environmental
document preparation.
Mr. Thomas is a Project Scientist with two years of experience in the environmental field. Mr.
Thomas holds a bachelor's degree in environmental science with a concentration in ecology
from North Carolina State University. Professional expertise includes jurisdictional area
delineation, plant and wildlife identification, groundwater modeling, stream assessment,
community mapping, and environmental document preparation.
Mr. Wright is a Project Scientist with a bachelor's degree in environmental science, watershed
hydrology. Professional expertise includes jurisdictional area delineation, habitat assessment,
and environmental document preparation.
1.5 Definitions
Definitions for terms used in this report are as follows. The Project Study Area (PSA)
describes an area delineated by NCDOT to include all anticipated alternative corridors. The
PSA totals approximately 1700 acres (Figure 2). The Project Vicinity describes an area
bxtending 0.5 mile on all sides of the PSA, and the Project Region is equivalent to an area
represented by a 7.5-minute USGS topographic quadrangle map with the PSA occupying the
central position.
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
2.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use
The PSA is located in the Carolina Flatwoods ecoregion of the Coastal Plain physiographic
province of North Carolina, which is characterized by broad, flat, upland surfaces with large
areas of poorly drained soils. Carolina bays and pocosins are abundant within this ecoregion
(Griffith et al. 2002). The Carolina Flatwoods hosts a number of endemic and rare species and,
in general, supports a high overall biodiversity (Hall et al. 1999). Hydrologic features include
low-gradient streams with sandy and silty substrates. Elevations range from a low of
approximately 5 feet above sea level to a high of 40 feet above sea level (Southport, North
Carolina 7.5-minute quadrangle [1990], Figure 2). Land use within the project region is primarily
forestland, with pockets of pasture/cropland and urban/residential development. Development
is concentrated in Southport, on Oak Island, and along highways. The PSA contains lightly to
heavily disturbed forests, some remaining pasture, maintained right-of-ways and power line
corridors, as well as commercial and residential development. A new housing development is
under construction in the PSA north of NC 211 and south of Dutchman Creek (Figure 1) on
former agricultural fields and Dutchman Creek floodplain (Figures 4-3, 4-7, and 4-8).
04-203.08
4 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
A
Based on soil mapping for Brunswick County (USDA 1986), the PSA contains 15 soil series:
Baymeade fine sand, Foreston loamy fine sand, Goldsboro fine sandy loam, Kureb fine sand,
Lafitte muck, Leon fine sand, Lynchburg fine sandy loam, Mandarin fine sand, Muckalee loam,
Murville mucky fine sand, Newhan fine sand, Norfolk loamy fine sand, Onslow fine sandy loam,
Tomahawk loamy fine sand, and Torhunta mucky fine sandy loam (Figure 3). The Baymeade,
Lafitte, Leon, Muckalee, Murville, and Torhunta soil series are considered to be hydric in
Brunswick County. The Foreston, Kureb, Lynchburg, Mandarin, Norfolk, Onslow, and
Tomahawk soil series are considered to be non-hydric with hydric inclusions (USDA 1993).
Characteristics of the soil series are described in Table 1.
Approximately 75 percent of the PSA is composed of the Leon-Murville-Mandarin catena. The
poorly drained Leon soils are on broad interstream areas generally between the Mandarin and
Murville soils. Typically, the Leon soils are fine sand with a weakly cemented subsoil near the
surface. The somewhat poorly drained Mandarin soils are adjacent to drainageways. They are
a fine sand, weakly cemented in the upper part of the subsoil. The very poorly drained Murville
soils occupy the middle of broad interstream areas and in slight depressions. They have a
mucky fine sand surface and a weakly cemented fine sand subsoil. Kureb soils are of minor
extent on sand ridges. This catena is generally too wet for residential or recreational
development. Artificial drainage only partly corrects the wetness problem (USDA 1986).
The project vicinity, for the most part, supports woody pocosin vegetation. The area is
composed primarily of many Carolina bays overlain on broad, low, non-alluvial flats and relict
sand dune ridges. These features are known to occur together in only five locations, with this
area holding the largest known occurrence in the state. The PSA is made up of three landscape
systems, maintained utility lines, and residential/commercial development. The three landscape
systems are (Figure 4A): an interstream system consisting of the northern two-thirds and the
western edge of the PSA, a riverine system encompassing most of the southern third of the
PSA around Dutchman and Jump and Run creeks, and a Limesink system along the
southeastern corner of the PSA. System designation terminology in the ensuing tables follows
these examples: "IS1" refers to Interstream System, Wetland 1, "LS1" refers to Limesink
System, Wetland 1, "RS7" refers to Riverine System, Wetland 7. Approximately the northern
two-thirds of the PSA is part of the Boiling Spring Lakes Wetland Complex Natural Heritage
Area (Figure 1). This system is the headwaters for small drainages to both the Cape Fear River
to the east and the Intracoastal Waterway to the south. The southern third of the PSA is
dissected by more prominent natural drainageways that have been channelized and augmented
by drainage ditches to facilitate development or agriculture on drier ground near Southport.
Lastly, an area of natural depressions occupies the eastern corner of the PSA near Bethel Road
(Figures 4a and 4-11). Prominent man-made features connect the northern and southern
systems: NC 83/133, an old railroad bed, and a long, frequently deep canal primarily adjacent to
the abandoned bed that drains to Dutchman Creek (Figure 2).
2.2 Water Resources
The PSA is located within the Cape Fear River basin; North Carolina's largest river basin.
Contained entirely within North Carolina, the Cape Fear River basin extends over a 9322 square
mile drainage area and contains 6049 miles of freshwater streams. The basin includes portions
of 26 counties and 116 municipalities. As of 1990, 1.4 million people resided in the Cape Fear
04-203.08 5 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
N
i.d
V
L
U
N
?IIO^^
vI
r
F-
d
m a
y a V Cl) V N V co V O N 00
? w
o
CL
O O O m
t U U U U
Of d

++ _ ?p
y m ?"' y
N w
O U)

O

L
O t

(n =3

N
C
m
,t
D
N

C
N

O
M

N

O

M
O
N
cu
,t
N

N
C

,t
N

N
C

O

O

0
co
d 3 0 0 0 0
CO) Q Q ¢ a
U)
m

U

o
c
x w

_0
a

=
U

Q
L)

=
N°
N m
O f0
d

?.
m
°? o
~ a
2

'0
y
m
(L
U
Q
Q

_0

m
CL
U
=a
Q

E
U
o
a a
U) 'N
m
a

O

a
m
=
a
_0
0
Q

Q
U

Q Cl)

m

d
y
Q o

°
Q
U
a
>
o
d
° 0
c
7
N
3
o
(n
3
o
(n
3
y o
> Cn
3
0
(n
3
0
(n
3
0
(n
3
0 0
> vi
3
0
(n
3
0
(n
3
0
N
*T'

m

E
a T
N
f6 U

o Q.
v m

a T
O N
6 v

3 a
-° `°
U E T
N
f0 -O

a
a `°
O
i0

N
o 70
2

0

m T
m
-0

a
70 co
2

2 -0

a
a m
2
N

(Q
m
o 2

-0
a
v m
2

yNj

C m

V
N
C
'(p

'O

m
O

N .C
O N

'O
0

a C
N

N O

N -O
_0 -.

N O

N 'O
'D L

m 'O
? N

d) .C
N

-O

N
O
a C a

C -0
m C

t
'O 'n
(0 C.

L

N ?'..
N X
w N 'O
> O
3 O N
3 X -0
w N U
> O
0 O O
U 0 O
L
a a
c

N

0
d
d
CL

cmi

N

m

J x

V

_0
U
m
m 'j

rn =o

3

O
J

n
N N
U
m N

a m

C

m
a N

m

U

a

Fu
C
a s

C

m
d

0
J m E

_
m

c N
X m
> N

c m

0

T

L
m c
o
Vl

m 70
>

N
m E

c m
'm

N
m c
N
Z

N

N

O
0)

m

3

c c N
o

N
> O
O L

N O
N N

N w N
c_ LO
-

m c
a m
-o
O
2 N
LL N
a? 0
m
C
y .N N
O N

C N co
L a O)

O 'm0

v m
°
E C O
(n m 'c
0 0 0
?p m
O N
m m

N

m

E

O

N m
0

m
N
O N

O
m .0

N

N a

N N
c ? I.

70
m
°
m
U
N
'O m
S U

m

m

Q

m

z

m

Q

Q

m

co
C
O.

C
a
O
LO

O

N

N

N
O

co

N
Z

N
Z N

N
Z N
T_
N
Z N

ai
.G1

y w
-
'00
C

o N
T
co
(u cu
c
c U
C

C o
m
m Y

E

O

U T
m
O Cc
U

N
N
w
o
IL N
?c- E
° m0
O

-
m

m
0
m
N In
_

N

Y
0
=3 E

m

J V
m
N
N

O N
ac E
m0
O

_0
C m

m N

'C 'D

C
'O tmn
m
ti
0
7
U
C
U
T
L
m
O
U
T
m
E
L
U
3 -
0 0
0.2
y
V T
p L
L
c Z
Z ??
N
L
d
r+
V
L
L
V
N
d
d
.O
i.
C
C
V
r
_d
cc
d
a
ci a
a M
v
v
00
v
d O
a
U
L

w

D C_1 a)

m F-
C
O .r
y m
d

y

w

N

cu
N
C
O

CO
o

sT
O

C6

L6
Lf)

6
O
3 0
U) Q
N N N N
lyC

U

o
C

I-

U

E
N
-o

o
'o
C
LlJ
7
o
>

m

U
F
7
a
>
a)
a
U

(n a

?

m
?
2

a
T
H
a)
C

CO It
N
O
p
O
p
> U)

m

E
`m
CL O N
m

? a
m a m
E a)

m
0 a)
t

a?
0

v
76
a
m
N
O) N
c M
U
`p
a
;
a
S N
C
m
a) c
m m
0 1
p a
a .?

y

O
m
a

U
y
c
m
J

O
2]
c
N
c
O
N
N

O
0

m
N
`m
E

y

N
a)
C N
y
'0
E

E

N
c
X
m
C

N N
m N
3 m
rn E
m
C N

a
a1
(D c
Z ?
c
m a)
U

E a%
E

N N
a)
C N
- C
C13 O
O O
U m
U
y
a Q CO CO Q
S U
y
O

a ?

N
a)
N T 1 _
N
N >
Z

a

to

U) >

Ei

'?

?

o

umi
a>
?_
E
m a
O
Y o,
a)
C
Z
N E
C m
O
3
O 'O
C C
O T
U m
7 O
E
m ?
C ?Cp
o y
o c
H w
U
t
m
O
U
T
m
E
L
U_
L
3-
N O
N
N U
U T
U L
L O
c Z
Z n
u

River basin. The population is projected to increase to over 1.9 million by 2010. The most
populated regions of the basin include the Triad area (Greensboro, Burlington, and High Point),
the Durham-Chapel Hill area, and Fayetteville. While the majority of the basin is forested, the
amount of developed land (approximately 43 percent of basin area) has increased sharply in
recent years (NCDWQ 2000).
The PSA occurs within the South Atlantic/Gulf Region in USGS Hydrologic Unit (HU) 03030005
(NCDWQ subbasin 03-06-17). Two named streams and their unnamed tributaries are located
within the PSA: Dutchman Creek (NCDWQ Index No. 18-88-9-3-[1]) and Jump and Run Creek
(NCDWQ Index No. 18-88-9-3-2) (NCDWQ 2005a) (Figure 1). Also within the PSA is an
unnamed tributary to White Spring Creek (Figure 1).
North Carolina streams are assigned a best usage classification by the NCDWQ which reflects
water quality conditions and potential resource usage. Unnamed tributaries receive the same
classification as the streams to which they flow. In addition, waters receive a use-support rating
based on the best intended uses and how well the waterbody supports the designated uses.
Surface waters are rated as Fully Supporting, Fully Supporting but Threatened, Partially
Supporting, Not Supporting, or are Not Rated.
Dutchman Creek, from its source to the Progress Energy discharge canal, has a Best Usage
Classification of SC; Sw, HQW (NCDWQ 2005a) and a Use Support Rating of Not Rated
(NCDWQ 2000). Jump and Run Creek, from its source to Dutchman Creek, has a Best Usage
Classification of SC; Sw (NCDWQ 2005a) and a Use Support Rating of Not Rated (NCDWQ
2000). Both streams are designated SC; Sw waters. Class SC waters are tidal salt waters
suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, wildlife, and secondary recreation. Secondary
recreation includes activities such as fishing, boating and other uses involving minimal body
contact with waters. The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) requires stormwater controls
for developed areas draining to SC waters. There are, however, no categorical restrictions on
discharges. The Swamp Water (Sw) supplemental classification pertains to waters with
naturally low flow velocities, low pH, and low dissolved oxygen. This classification does not
carry any specific restrictions on development. Dutchman Creek also carries the High Quality
Waters (HQW) supplemental classification. This classification applies to waters that exceed
state water quality standards. NCDWQ requires wastewater treatment and development
controls for waters receiving the HQW classification (NCDWQ 2005b). Dutchman Creek Outlet
Channel (NCDWQ Index No. 18-88-9-3-3), just south of the PSA, is a designated Shellfishing
Area, SA, and is therefore considered to be HQW by definition (NCDWQ 2005a).
NCDWQ's Basinwide Assessment Reports address long-term trends in water quality through
chemical monitoring and sampling of benthic macroinvertebrates and fish communities at fixed
monitoring stations. One benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring station (BB-182) is located
within the PSA on Jump and Run Creek. The monitoring station received a water quality rating
of Not Rated in 1999 (NCDWQ 2005a).
Sub-basin 03-06-17 of the Cape Fear River basin supports 41 permitted, point source
dischargers, 13 of which are major dischargers and 28 of which are minor discharges. In total,
the 41 permitted discharges release over 99.9 million gallons per day. The 13 major
04-203.08 8 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324

dischargers account for 96.1 million gallons per day of the above total (NCDWQ 2005a).
Eleven of the 41 dischargers are in Brunswick County; four of them are major dischargers.
None of the major dischargers are in the project vicinity (NCDWQ 2005c). No dischargers are
located upstream of the PSA within the two named watersheds.
Non-point source pollution refers to pollution that enters surface waters through stormwater or
snow melt runoff. Unlike point source pollution, non-point source pollution is diffuse in nature
and occurs at random intervals depending on rainfall events. Approximately 45 percent of the
waters in this subbasin are impaired by nonpoint source pollution (NCDWQ 2000). All the
waters of the subbasin are affected by nonpoint sources. Major non-point sources of pollution
within the Cape Fear River basin include stormwater runoff, forestry, agricultural activities, rural
residential development, septic systems, and mining. Sedimentation and nutrient inputs are
major problems associated with non-point source discharges (NCDWQ 2000).
No streams within the PSA are listed as impaired on the NCDWQ 2002 or draft 2004 303(d) list
(NCDWQ 2002, 2004a). However three water bodies downstream of the PSA are impaired for
shellfish harvesting: Dutchman Creek (NCDWQ Index No. 18-88-9-3-(2.5)), Dutchman Creek
Outlet Channel (NCDWQ Index No. 18-88-9-3-3), and Dutchman Creek Shellfish Area (NCDWQ
Index No. 18-88-9-3-(4)) north of the Intracoastal Waterway. These streams will be added to
the 303(d) list of impaired waters (NCDWQ 2005a). The streams of the entire Cape Fear Basin
are designated as warm water streams (USACE et al. 2003).
2.3 Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Impacts to water resources in the PSA may result from activities associated with project
construction. Activities that would result in impacts are clearing and grubbing on stream banks,
riparian canopy removal, in-stream construction, fertilizer and pesticide use for revegetation,
obstruction and redirection of surficial groundwater flows, and pavement/culvert installation.
The following impacts to surface water resources could result from the construction activities
mentioned above.
• Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of road crossings and increased
erosion in the PSA.
• Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and
groundwater drainage patterns.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation and
vegetation removal.
• Changes in and destabilization of water temperatures due to vegetation removal.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface and
ground water flow from construction.
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
• Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in roadway runoff.
• Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil from construction
equipment and other vehicles.
04-203.08 9 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the PSA, NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and Design Standards for Sensitive
Watersheds should be strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project.
Long-term impacts to streams along the selected construction corridor will be limited to stream
reaches within the road facility footprint. Impacts to stream reaches adjacent to the facility
footprint will be temporary and localized during construction. Long-term impacts to adjacent
reaches resulting from construction are expected to be negligible. Impacts due to stream
realignment will be minimized through the transfer of the existing stream bed to the constructed
stream and stabilization of the new stream bank through a combination of hardened structures
and vegetation plantings.
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
3.1 Terrestrial Communities
The PSA includes ten plant communities (Figure 6): 1) Pond Pine Woodland, 2) High Pocosin,
3) Low Pocosin, 4) Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater subtype), 5) Wet Pine
Flatwoods, 6) Pine Savanna, 7) maintained/disturbed land, 8) Coastal Fringe Sandhill, 9) Xeric
Sandhill Scrub, and 10) Small Depression Pond. Community names are capitalized if they are
used to represent communities described by Schafale and Weakley (1990). Pine Pond
Woodland, High Pocosin, and Low Pocosin occur on a continuum starting at the outside edge of
the Carolina bays and moving inward, while Xeric Sandhill Scrub occurs on the sand rims
bordering most bays. Pine Savanna and Wet Pine Flatwoods occur on or adjacent to bay rims
often occurring along a wetness gradient moving from the xeric sand rims away from the bay
interior. Pine Savanna sometimes grades into Coastal Fringe Sandhill (rather than Wet Pine
Flatwoods) communities up slope on relict dune ridges. Maintained/disturbed land consists of
roadside margins, utility right-of-ways, fallow land, agricultural fields, and maintained lots/lawns
associated with residential and commercial developments. Small Depression Pond
communities occupy a small portion of the southeastern edge of the PSA. Individual plant
communities and associated wildlife are described below. Wildlife directly observed or
determined to be present through evidence (tracks, scat) during field investigations are
indicated with an asterisk (*).
Pond Pine Woodland - Schafale and Weakley (1990) describe this plant community as
occurring on the outer part of domed peatlands on poorly drained interstream flats like those
which dominate the northern and western portions of the PSA. This community typically
provides a relatively open canopy of pond pine (Pinus serotina), longleaf pine (Pinus palustris),
and loblolly bay (Gordonia lasianthus). The subcanopy is often dense with canopy species as
well as water oak (Quercus nigra), sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), red bay (Persea palustris),
red maple (Acer rubrum), and blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica). The shrub layer is denser still with
staggerbush (Lyonia mariana), fetterbush (Lyonia lucida), titi (Cyrilla racaemiflora), inkberry (Ilex
glabra), swamp pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), gallberry (Ilex coriacea), wax myrtle (Morella
cerifera), huckleberry (Gaylussacia frondosa), and highbush blueberry (Vaccinium
corymbosum). Laurel-leaf greenbrier (Smilax laurifolia) is common. The herbs usually found at
the edge of the community or in areas of disturbance include giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea),
04-203.08 10 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324

Virginia chainfern (Woodwardia virginica), beakrush (Rhynchospora sp.), sphagnum moss
(Sphagnum sp.), netted chainfern (Woodwardia areolata), and sedges (Carex spp.).
The stratification of the Pond Pine Woodland community and density of sapling/shrub layers in
particular provide excellent habitat for insects and insectivorous wildlife species. Insectivorous
amphibians such as the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor), Carolina anole (Anolis carolinensis),
marbled salamander (Ambystoma opacum), and southern leopard frog (Rana utricularia) thrive
in this community. Largely insectivorous birds that are likely to be supported by this community
include downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), white-eyed vireo* (Vireo griseus), Carolina
chickadee* (Poecile carolinensis), Carolina wren* (Thryothorus ludovicianus), golden crowned
kinglet* (Regulus satrapa), pine warbler (Dendroica pinus), prairie warbler* (Dendroica discolor),
Swainson's warbler (Limnothlypis swainsoni/), and common yellowthroat* (Geothlypis trichas).
Largely granivorous and fructivorous bird species including yellow-throated vireo (Vireo
flavifrons), red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), and American goldfinch (Carduelis
tristis) are expected to take advantage of the large year-round array of forage provided by, for
example, inkberry, greenbrier, huckleberry, blueberry, pine, and blackgum. The dense
understory of this community favors small mammal species like the granivorous gray squirrel
(Sciurus carolinensis) and herbivores like marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris) and cotton mouse
(Peromyscus gossypinus), providing excellent cover from predators along with large amounts of
foraging resources. Large mammals favoring the refuge of the dense, nearly impenetrable
cover include the herbivorous white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) as well as the
omnivorous black bear (Ursus americanus), and coyote* (Canis latrans). A robust reptile
community that survives on insects, the amphibians that feed on the insects, or small mammals
would include predators such as dwarf salamander (Eurycea quadridigitata), southern leopard
frog (Rana sphenocephala), copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix), eastern kingsnake
(Lampropeltis getulus), eastern ribbon snake* (Thamnophis sauritus), and rat snake (Elaphe
obsoleta) as well as omnivores such as eastern box turtle* (Terrapene carolina), and snapping
turtle (Chelydra serpentina). Pine dominated woodlands in the Coastal Plain with well-
developed to dense understories regularly support omnivores such as tufted titmouse*
(Baeolophus bicolor), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), and eastern towhee* (Pipilo
erythrophthalmus). Several species that prefer to inhabit neighboring communities like the drier,
more open rim or the bottomland hardwood communities bordering the pond pine woodland
have been observed in this community such as squirrel treefrog* (Hyla squirella), southern toad*
(Bufo terrestris), little grass frog* (Limnaoedus ocularis), southern chorus frog* (Pseudacris
nigrita), oak toad* (Bufo quercicus), pine woods treefrog* (Hyla femoralis), and great crested
flycatcher* (Myiarchus chnitus).
High Pocosin - Schafale and Weakley (1990) describe this plant community as occupying the
central to intermediate parts of domed peatlands on poorly drained interstream flats and peat-
filled Carolina bays and swales like those which occur frequently within the PSA and dominate
the northern and western portions of the PSA. The canopy of this community is more scattered
than Pond Pine Woodland with a few robust individuals of pond pine, loblolly bay and some
longleaf pine. A distinct subcanopy of sweetbay and red bay is still distinguishable from the
shrub layer. Shrubs are dense and include red bay, sweetbay, fetterbush, titi, honeycup
(Zenobia pulverulenta), gallberry, highbush blueberry, and inkberry. Laurel-leaf greenbrier is
04-203.08 11 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324

once again found throughout. Vines also include Carolina jessamine (Gelsemium
sempervirens). The herb layer is generally absent.
Inland freshwater wetlands in the Coastal Plain provide a diverse, abundant habitat. Standing
water made accessible by vegetation gaps can provide habitat for water birds such as puddle
ducks: mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), green-winged teal (Anas crecca), wood duck (Aix sponsa),
and American wigeon (Anas americans), particularly during fall and winter. In summer, they are
likely used by least bittern (Ixobrychus exilis), and the small, primarily insectivorous locals which
frequent the Pond Pine Woodland community. Pocosin vegetation in general and Carolina bays
specifically provide excellent habitat for insects and their predators. Several wetland-dependent
insect species flourish in this community including Amanda's pennant (Celithemis amanda),
Carolina saddlebags (Tramea carolina), common whitetail (Libellula lydia), eastern pondhawk
(Erythemis simplicicollis), great blue skimmer (Libellula vibrans), green darner (Anax junius),
Halloween pennant (Celithemis eponina), little blue dragonlet (Erythrodiplax minuscula),
Needham's skimmer (Libellula needhaml), palamedes swallowtail (Papilio palamedes), roseate
skimmer (Orthemis ferruginea), and yellow-sided skimmer (Libellula flavida). Birds preferring
dense understories and insect resources include tufted titmouse, northern cardinal, eastern
towhee, and swamp sparrow (Melospiza georgiana) should occur here as well. Mammals
favoring pocosin cover would include marsh rabbit, gray squirrel, cotton mouse, white-tailed
deer, and black bear. Reptiles and amphibians found within the Pond Pine Woodland
community (copperhead, eastern kingsnake, eastern ribbon snake*, rat snake, eastern box
turtle*, snapping turtle, gray treefrog, marbled salamander, and southern leopard frog) likely
inhabit this community as well.
Low Pocosin - Schafale and Weakley (1990) describe this plant community as occupying the
central, deepest parts of domed peatlands on poorly drained interstream flats and peat-filled
Carolina bays and swales like those which dominate the northern and western portions of the
PSA. Those low pocosins have a stunted canopy of pond pine and loblolly bay with no
noticeable subcanopy. The nearly impenetrable shrub layer consisted of titi, gallberry,
honeycup, and fetterbush. A few herbs were noted in rare openings: Virginia chainfern,
sphagnum moss, and various sedges.
Low pocosin likely provides the same sort of access to water birds as High Pocosin (detailed
above). This community commonly shares the same reptile, amphibian, and bird species
previously mentioned for Pond Pine Woodland and High Pocosin.
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater subtype) - Schafale and Weakley (1990)
describe this plant community as occurring on relatively high parts of the floodplain of
blackwater rivers. This community occupies the floodplain of Dutchman Creek near the center
of the PSA. A portion of this community has had the undergrowth cleared. The entire area has
evidently been logged but canopy species remaining include red maple, water oak, willow oak
(Quercus phellos), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), loblolly bay,
and blackgum. Subcanopy species included canopy species as well as Atlantic white cedar
(Chamaecyparis thyoides), sweetbay, and red bay. The shrub layer is well developed but not
dense and contains highbush blueberry, gallberry, fetterbush, titi, wax myrtle, and multiflora rose
(Rosa multiflora). The herb layer holds scattered individuals of giant cane, netted chainfern,
04-203.08
12 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), dwarf huckleberry (Gaylussacia dumosa), and cinnamon
fern (Osmunda cinnamomea). Vines include Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia),
muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia), laurel-leaf greenbrier, and greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia).
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods provides a distinctly different wildlife community than the
communities that have been addressed so far. The bottomland understory is noticeably less
dense than those described for previous communities, offering more diverse feeding and
nesting cover and herbaceous food sources. Riverine systems provide different aquatic life and
food sources than wetland communities discussed thus far. Wading birds such as American
bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus), great blue heron* (Ardea herodius), great egret (Casmerodius
albus), green heron (Butorides striatus), and white ibis* (Eudocimus albus) as well as anhinga
(Anhinga anhinga), mallard, green-winged teal, belted kingfisher (Ceryle alcyon), and fish crow
(Corvus ossifragus) may avail themselves of this community. Hardwood species provide
granivorous, fructivorous, and herbivorous species with a wider variety of food resources than
the pine dominated communities surrounding this community. Granivores like the gray squirrel
and American goldfinch may avail themselves of food sources such as oak mast, red maple,
sweetgum, blackgum, and pine seeds. Herbivores such as marsh rabbit and white-tailed deer*
may forage among vegetation such as ferns, greenbrier vines, red bay, and sweetbay. Wildlife
species such as fish crow*, gray catbird* (Dumetella carolinensis), yellow-throated vireo, and
scarlet tanager (Piranga olivacea) will forage fruits of greenbrier, blueberry, muscadine grape,
and wax myrtle. Largely insectivorous birds that utilize this community include yellow-billed
cuckoo* (Coccyzus americanus), red-bellied woodpecker* (Melanerpes erythrocephalus),
pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), downy woodpecker*, great crested flycatcher*,
Carolina wren*, blue-gray gnatcatcher* (Polioptila caerulea), prothonotary warbler (Protonotaria
citrea), hooded warbler (Wilsonia citrina), black and white warbler (Mniotilita varia), worm-eating
warbler (Helmitheros vermivorus), and summer tananger (Piranga rubra). In addition,
omnivores including American crow* (Corvus brachyrhynchos), northern cardinal*, swamp
sparrow, and red-winged blackbird are likely to take advantage of this community. Reptiles
typically include snapping turtle, eastern box turtle*, northern black racer (Coluber constrictor),
copperhead*, cottonmouth (Agkistrodon piscivorus), eastern kingsnake, rat snake, and black
swamp snake with occasional individuals of American alligator* (Alligator mississippiensis). An
amphibian population containing eastern glass lizard* (Ophisaurus ventralis), Brimley's chorus
frog (Pseudacris brimleyi), bullfrog, Carolina anole*, Florida cooter (Chrysemys floridana), and
green treefrog (Hyla cinerea) would likely inhabit this community. A less dense shrub layer also
provides less cover for larger prey enabling predators including red shouldered hawk (Buteo
lineatus), coyote*, and gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), and scavengers such as black
vulture* (Coragyps atratus) and turkey vulture* (Cathartes aura) to prosper.
Pine Savanna - Schafale and Weakley (1990) describe this plant community as occurring on
wet, generally flat areas, saturated part of the year, often with frequent fire and characteristically
with wet mineral soils like the Ultisols and Spodosols occurring in the PSA. Primarily this
community occurs occasionally in the northern half of the PSA. The community has a relatively
open canopy of pond pine and longleaf pine. Loblolly bay, red bay, and a few pond pine and
longleaf saplings occur in the subcanopy. The shrub layer is evident but not dense with
sweetbay, titi, fetterbush, highbush blueberry, gallberry, wax myrtle, myrtle dahoon (Ilex
myrtifolia), dahoon (Ilex cassine), and inkberry. Vines are scattered individuals of laurel-leaf
U4-203.08 13 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
greenbrier and Carolina jessamine. The herb layer is diverse and plentiful. Seedbox (Ludwigia
alternifolia), bluestem (Andropogon virginicus), little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium),
blazing star (Liatris spicata var resinosa), foxtail clubmoss (Lycopodiella alopecuroides), orange
milkwort (Polygala lutea), rush featherling (Pleea tenuifolia), sandmyrtle (Leiophyllum
buxifolium), creeping blueberry (Vaccinium crassifolium), three awn grass (Aristida sp.),
beaksedge (Rhynchospora sp.), sphagnum moss, meadow beauty (Rhexia mariana), and
Carolina yelloweyed grass (Xyris caroliniana) abound. Less frequently, bracken fern (Pteridum
aquilinum), smooth sumac (Rhus glabra), thoroughwort (Eupatorium sp.), spikerush, (Eleocharis
sp.), cinnamon fern, netted chainfern, yellow pitcherplant (Sarracenia flava), the Federal
Species of Concern (FSC) Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula), sundew (Drosera capillaries),
and the federally Endangered rough-leaved loosestrife (Lysimachia asperulaefolia) occur. Red
root (Lachnanthes caroliniana), coastalplain yelloweyed grass (Xyris ambigua), and various
sedges occupy the wettest areas. Most of the two large power line corridors in the PSA share
much in common with this community with mowing replacing fire as the source of disturbance.
For the most part, the corridors are Pine Savannas without the canopy. The recently cleared
flat in the middle of the PSA, formerly a pocosin, has many of the Pine Savanna species as well.
Pine dominated communities in the Coastal Plain with relatively open understories can host an
avifauna characterized by bobwhite*, downy woodpecker*, northern flicker (Colaptes auratus),
mourning dove* (Zenaida macroura), brown-headed nuthatch* (Sitta pusilla), the federally
Endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), and Bachman's sparrow (Aimophila
aestivalis). The abundance of herb species (especially grasses) should result in higher
proportions of granivore foraging than in communities with dense shrub layers and sparse herb
layers. Granivores and omnivores expected to forage seeds of such vegetation as seedbox,
bluestem, little bluestem, three awn grass, and spikerush include American goldfinch, yellow-
throated vireo, northern cardinal*, swamp sparrow, and red-winged blackbird. This community
likely shares many bird species with the pocosin and bottomland communities described above.
Particularly, species which thrive in environments with an open understory, such as larger
wildlife species including black vulture, red-shouldered hawk, American woodcock* (Scolopax
minor), and American crow, are expected within this community. Carolina chickadee*, Carolina
wren*, golden-crowned kinglet*, ruby-crowned kinglet* (Regulus calendula), pine warbler
(Dendroica pinus), common yellowthroat* are also frequent inhabitants. Amphibians and
reptiles which prefer the open sandy landscape of this community include the following:
insectivores such as carpenter frog (Rana virgitipes), little grass frog, oak toad, pine woods
treefrog, southern chorus frog, southern toad, squirrel treefrog, and tiger salamander
(Ambystoma tigrinum); herbivores including eastern chicken turtle; and predators such as
northern black racer and eastern diamondback rattlesnake (Crotalus adamanteus). Several
amphibians and reptiles will occur in this community as well as the bottomland or pocosin
communities described above including American toad, Carolina anole, gray treefrog, green
frog, marbled salamander, southern leopard frog, copperhead, eastern box turtle, snapping
turtle, eastern king snake, ribbon snake, worm snake, and rat snake. Mammals such as white
tailed deer* and coyote* frequently utilize this type of community.
Wet Pine Flatwoods - Schafale and Weakley (1990) describe this plant community as
seasonally wet to usually wet, generally occurring on flat or nearly flat Coastal Plain soils,
usually wet, sandy Spodosols like the Leon and Mandarin series. This community occurs
U4-103.08 14 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
throughout the PSA adjacent to sand rims but predominantly in the northern and western
portions. The canopy consists of pond, longleaf, and some slash (Pinus elliotti/) pine. The
subcanopy contains saplings of the canopy species and loblolly bay. The shrub layer is
dominated by fetterbush, staggerbush, sweetbay, titi, gallberry, huckleberry, and sandmyrtle.
Scattered individuals of dahoon and myrtyle dahoon are present. Laurel-leaf greenbrier was
frequent. The herb layer generally had fewer herb species than the Pine Savanna but included
beaksedge, sphagnum moss, and cinnamon fern.
The faunal community of Wet Pine Flatwoods is, for all intents and purposes, identical to the
Pine Savanna community described above.
Maintained/disturbed Land - This community is concentrated along roadways on the eastern
and southern edges of the PSA. Roadside margins, pasture, and, typically, utility right-of-ways
consist primarily of regularly maintained grasses and opportunistic species including fescue
(Festuca sp.), pennywort (Hydrocotyle americana), eastern daisy fleabane (Erigeron annuus),
blackberry (Rubus argutus), ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), baccharis (Baccharis
halimifolia), goldenrod (Solidago sp.), microstegium (Microstegium vimineum), lespedeza
(Lespedeza sp.), common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), beggartick (Bidens sp.), greenbrier
species, Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), wild onion (Allium canadense),
broomsedge (Andropogon sp.), kudzu (Pueraria montana), clover species (Trifolium spp.), and
dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium). Several woody species are sparsely represented within
the sapling and shrub layers including multiflora rose, muscadine grape, sassafras (Sassafras
albidum), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), smooth sumac (Rhus glabra), winged sumac
(Rhus copallinum), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense),
sweetgum, eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), red bud (Cercis canadensis), slippery elm
(Ulmus rubra), dogwood (Cornus florida), winged elm (Ulmus alata), pine species (Pinus spp.),
oak species (Quercus spp.), red maple (Acerrubrum), and mimosa (Albizia julibrissin).
Several former agricultural areas in the PSA are in transition due to housing and are primarily
bare earth. Uncultivated fallow fields that remain contain a variety of opportunistic species such
as those listed above.
Residential and commercial development areas contain buildings, impervious surfaces such as
parking lots and driveways, and maintained lots/lawns. Vegetation in the residential and
commercial development areas is predominantly herbaceous, with a few ornamental shrubs and
hedges and a few relict canopy (primarily pine) trees, which reflect historic plant assemblages.
Common herbaceous plants in residential disturbed land include planted and opportunistic
grasses and species such as those listed above.
In addition, the maintained/disturbed land contains several depressional wetland areas. These
areas are dominated by herbaceous, hydrophytic vegetation including polygonum (Polygonum
sp.), tearthumb (Polygonum sagittatum), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), soft rush (Juncus
effusus), cardinal flower (Lobelia cardinalis), arrow arum (Peltandra virginica), seedbox
(Ludwigia alternifolia), cattail (Typha latifolia), flatsedge (Cyperus sp.), sedge species, vervain
(Verbena sp.), microstegium, giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), elderberry (Sambucus
canadensis), Asiatic dayflower (Murdannia keisak), and false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica).
04-203.08 15 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Several woody species are sparsely represented within the sapling and shrub layers of the
wetland maintained/disturbed land including sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), red maple, tulip
poplar, sweetgum, Chinese privet, American elm (Ulmus americana), and black willow (Salix
nigra).
Maintained/disturbed land offers varying amounts of foraging, nesting, and breeding habitat for
wildlife due to fluctuating levels of vegetative maintenance, structure, and diversity. Habitats are
fragmented; therefore, resident species must be adapted to such fragmentation and edge
effects. Mammal species which may occur in PSA maintained/disturbed land include Virginia
opossum* (Didelphis virginiana), gray squirrel*, raccoon* (Procyon lotor), Norway rat (Rattus
norvegicus), coyote*, southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris), eastern mole (Scalopus
aquaticus), red bat (Lasiurus borealis), eastern cottontail* (Sylvilagus floridanus), little brown
myotis (Myotis lucifugus), and eastern pipistrelle (Pipistrellus subflavus). Some bird species
expected to occur in this plant community include red-tailed hawk* (Buteo jamaicensis),
mourning dove*, American crow*, black vulture* (Corabyps atratus), brown-headed cowbird,
ruby-throated hummingbird (Archilochus colubris), northern flicker*, Carolina chickadee*, tufted
titmouse*, white-breasted nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis), house wren (Troglodytes aedon),
Carolina wren*, northern mockingbird* (Mimus polyglottos), brown thrasher (Toxostoma rufum),
American robin* (Turdus migratorius), ruby-crowned kinglet, northern oriole (Icterus galbula),
scarlet tanager, American goldfinch*, eastern towhee*, white-throated sparrow* (Zonotrichia
alibicollis), dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis), chipping sparrow (Spizella passerine), and song
sparrow (Melospiza melodic). Reptiles and amphibians may include worm snake (Carphophis
amoenus), brown snake (Storeria dekay/), redbelly snake (Storeria occipitomaculata), eastern
kingsnake, eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus), eastern garter snake (Thamnophis
sirtalis), rat snake, American toad (Bufo americanus), northern black racer*, and broadhead
skink (Eumeces laticeps).
Coastal Fringe Sandhill - Schafale and Weakley (1990) describe this plant community as
occurring in sandy areas such as relict beach ridge systems, generally very near the coast like
those along the western edge and through the central portion of the PSA. This community has
a sparse canopy of longleaf and pond pine. The shrub layer is occasionally dense with wax
myrtle, evergreen wax myrtle (Morella heterophylla), baccharis, American holly (Ilex opaca),
inkberry, maeeberry (Lyonia ligustrina), thoroughwort, and red chokeberry (Photinia pyrifolia).
The scattered herb layer consists of creeping blueberry, wiregrass (Aristida stricta), giant cane,
bracken fern, bluestem, Carolina yelloweyed grass, orange milkwort, sundew, lichen (Cladonia
sp.), deer moss (Cladina evansii), foxtail clubmoss, sandmyrtle, rush featherling and, in places,
pine barren gentian (Gentians autumnalis).
Drier pine woodlands in the Coastal Plain without dense understories can support several of
those species mentioned for their downslope counterparts mentioned above (Pine Savanna,
Wet Pine Flatwoods). An open herb layer beneath pines supplies the largely granivorous
bobwhite*, mourning dove*, and brown-headed nuthatch* with access to seed, as well as
insectivorous downy woodpecker, northern flicker, hairy woodpecker, and Bachman's sparrow
with access to insects. Other granivores and omnivores expected to forage seeds of such
vegetation as bluestem and wiregrass include American goldfinch, yellow-throated vireo, swamp
sparrow, and red-winged blackbird. Other insectivores from downslope communities expected
04-203.08 16 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
in this community are Carolina chickadee*, Carolina wren, golden crowned kinglet, ruby-
crowned kinglet, and pine warbler*. Species such as the federally Endangered red-cockaded
woodpecker*, great-crested flycatcher, sixlined racerunner*, ground skink, southeastern five
lined skink*, pine woods snake, eastern coachwhip, northern pine snake, and Carolina pygmy
rattlesnake typify this community. In this relatively open area amidst very dense vegetation, bird
species preferring edge habitats may also be found, such as Cooper's hawk*, northern cardinal,
and indigo bunting. This community could support the larger scavengers and predators which
thrive in environments with an open understory, including black vulture*, turkey vulture*,
American crow*, and red-shouldered hawk. This community would share with Pine Savanna
those amphibians and reptiles which prefer an open sandy landscape including the following:
insectivores such as carpenter frog, little grass frog, oak toad, pine woods treefrog, southern
chorus frog, southern toad, squirrel treefrog, and tiger salamander; and predators such as
northern black racer and eastern diamondback rattlesnake. Several amphibians and reptiles
will occur in this community as well as the adjacent bottomland or pocosin communities
including American toad, Carolina anole, gray treefrog, green frog, marbled salamander,
southern leopard frog, copperhead, eastern box turtle, snapping turtle, eastern king snake,
ribbon snake, worm snake, and rat snake.
Xeric Sandhill Scrub - Schafale and Weakley (1990) describe this plant community as
occurring on Carolina bay rims like those which occurring frequently within the northern and
western portions of the PSA. This community is exceedingly dry with an open canopy of
longleaf pine. The community is made up of a frequently dense subcanopy and shrub layer
consisting of live oak (Quercus virginiana), turkey oak (Quercus laevis), persimmon (Diospyrus
virginiana), dwarf huckleberry, and sand live oak (Quercus geminata). The fragmented herb
layer is dominated by wiregrass and deer moss.
The fauna of this community closely resembles that of the Coastal Fringe Sandhill with the
possible addition of birds with a hardwood preference such as the yellow-bellied sapsucker*.
Birds from neighboring pocosins, like the common yellowthroat*, and bottomlands, such as
yellow-billed cuckoo*, could frequent this community as well.
Small Depression Pond - Schafale and Weakley (1990) describe this plant community as
occurring around permanently flooded sinkholes like those in the PSA west of NC Highway 87
(NC 87)/NC 133 near Bethel Road (Figure 4-11) and in the project vicinity near the Military
Ocean Terminal Sunny Point (MOTSU) (Figure 1). A canopy of loblolly pine, red maple,
sweetgum, and blackgum combines with a prominent shrub layer of a mixture of pocosin,
sandhill, and disturbed-area species surrounding the pond. The shrub layer consists of
inkberry, American holly, yaupon (Ilex vomitoria), sweetbay, sassafras, red bay, highbush
blueberry, St. Johnswort (Hypericum sp.), red chokeberry, and wax myrtle. Scattered vines
include Carolina jessamine and greenbrier species. The herb layer was largely absent outside
of the pond.
Because of the small size of this community in the PSA, its fauna most closely resembles the
maintained/disturbed areas surrounding it. Mammal species which may occur include Virginia
opossum, gray squirrel, raccoon, Norway rat, coyote, southeastern shrew, eastern mole, red
bat, eastern cottontail, little brown myotis, and eastern pipistrelle. Bird species expected to
04-203.08 17 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
occur include red-tailed hawk, mourning dove, American crow, black vulture, brown-headed
cowbird, ruby-throated hummingbird, northern flicker, Carolina chickadee, tufted titmouse,
white-breasted nuthatch, house wren, Carolina wren, northern mockingbird, brown thrasher,
American robin, ruby-crowned kinglet, northern oriole, scarlet tanager, American goldfinch,
eastern towhee, white-throated sparrow, dark-eyed junco, chipping sparrow, and song sparrow.
Reptiles and amphibians may include the disturbed community residents (worm snake, brown
snake, redbelly snake, eastern kingsnake, eastern fence lizard, eastern garter snake, rat snake,
American toad, northern black racer, and broadhead skink), as well as those favoring ponds like
eastern mud turtle, musk turtle, and bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana).
Table 2: Communities within the Project Study Area
Name Approximate Size (acres)
Pocosin (Pond Pine Woodland, High Pocosin, and Low Pocosin) 613
Maintained/Disturbed Land 439
Coastal Fringe Sandhill 235
Bottomland Hardwood (Blackwater subtype) 112
Pine Savana 88
Wet Pine Flatwoods 78
eric Sandhill Scrub 61
Small Depression Pond 4
Total 1630
3.2 Aquatic Communities
Streams of various size occur within the PSA and provide adequate habitat for a variety of
aquatic wildlife. The stream banks and over-stream air space also act as travel corridors for
non-aquatic species. Aquatic/aquatic dependent wildlife expected to occur within the PSA
include muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus ), mink (Mustela visors), belted kingfisher, great blue
heron", mallard, southern dusky salamander (Desmognathus auriculatus), eastern newt
(Notophthalmus viridescens), snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), painted turtle (Chrysemys
picta), cottonmouth, queen snake (Regina septemvittata), bullfrog, green frog, pickerel frog
(Rana palustris), and marbled salamander.
The larger streams are expected to support a more diverse fishery than smaller tributaries. Fish
that may occur within large streams within the PSA include redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus),
gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum), blueback herring (A/osa aestavalis), channel catfish
(Ictalurus punctatus), rosyside dace (Clinostomus funduloides), longnose gar (Lepisosteus
osseus), and creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus). The smaller tributaries are expected to
support a different suite of species including rosyside dace, banded pigmy sunfish (Elassoma
zonatum), common carp (Cyprinus carpio), coastal shiner (Notropis petersoni), redbreast
sunfish (Lepomis auritus), tesselated darter (Etheostoma olmstedl), and bowfin (Amia calva).
Ponds within the PSA may support a combination of stocked and native fish including
largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), margined madtom (Noturus insignis), goldfish
(Carassius auratus), yellow bullhead (Ameiurus natalis), grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella),
04-203.08 18 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324

pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus), redear sunfish (Lepomis microlophus), and bluegill (Lepomis
macrochirus).
3.3 Rare and Unique Natural Areas
Approximately 800 acres of the PSA belongs to the Boiling Spring Lakes Wetland Complex
significant natural heritage area (NCNHP 2005). The natural heritage area occupies most of the
northern two-thirds of the PSA (Figure 1).
No water bodies deserving of special attention as denoted under the federal Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act of 1968 (Pub. L. No. 90-542, 82 Stat. 906; codified and amended at 16 U.S.C. 1217-
1287 (1982)) or under the Natural and Scenic Rivers Act of 1971 (G.S. 113A-30) are located
within the PSA.
3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
3.4.1 Anticipated Plant Community Impacts
Potential impacts to plant communities resulting from highway construction will likely reflect the
relative abundance of communities within the PSA. Much of the PSA consists of relatively
pristine pocosin communities. Areas classified as Pond Pine Woodland, High Pocosin, Low
Pocosin, Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Blackwater subtype), Wet Pine Flatwoods, Pine
Savanna, Coastal Fringe Sandhill, Xeric Sandhill Scrub, and Small Depression Pond are all
considered to be forested natural areas present within the PSA. Since this project involves
construction on new location, fragmentation of these forested natural plant communities is
expected. Impacts to plant communities are expected to be limited to cut-fill and clearing limits
(Table 3). In terms of plant communities, the best alternatives are 2BD, 2AD, and 213C. These
alternatives have in common low total impacts and low impacts to undisturbed communities.
These are also the only alternatives where the ratio of natural area impacts to disturbed are
impacts are less than 1.0 (2BD = 0.38, 2AD = 0.60, and 213C = 0.85). In terms of total impact
area, alternatives 3ADF and 3ACF have the most. In terms of the ratio of natural area impact to
disturbed area impact, alternatives 3ACE, 3ACF, and 313CE are the most (3ACE = 2.77, 3ACF =
2.36, and 313CE = 2.27).
3.4.2 Anticipated Impacts to Wildlife
Fragmentation and loss of wildlife habitat is an unavoidable consequence of highway
development. Short-term displacement of local wildlife populations will occur during initial
construction. Some local species are habituated to anthropogenic disturbances and are
expected to move back into the vicinity once construction is complete. Movement through the
area will become more dangerous for many transient species due to expected traffic along the
new facility (anticipated to be a two-lane road). NCDOT will coordinate with USFWS and
NCWRC concerning the possibility of incorporating wildlife crossings into project plans.
Some wildlife species which occur within the PSA may be permanently displaced due to
changes in plant community boundaries. Local large mammal populations, such as deer, fox,
and bobcat, may experience disruptions in mating, feeding, or migratory patterns as a result of
construction. Increased urbanization in the PSA has already diminished habitat opportunities as
woodlands and adjacent agricultural lands are committed to development. In addition, migratory
04-203.08
19 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
rr
C
C.
a
C
L
LL
.Q
a
V
Q.
d
a
L
C
d
C
d
m
c
L
Q
N
d
C
L
w
Q ?
%- 4)
O ?-
d ?
C LL
LL
? ,C1
U a
c a
U)
N
N =
O
O
0 C
C E
Q
FL 0
ri
0
Rf
H
U- 0) 0 ? ° 04 LO
,
n
O I? r M .' N
W M co O O O O
O O
m O M M Un (0 Lq

M
r
0)
f?
?
T-
? M
N
LL M oo ? m ? O co
C?
Q O O N
T-
CV
LA It Il- ? C`') (0
N
W ao O O O O `-
to O CY)
Q N r M to (0 U?
W) O (D
N
LL
U 00 (0 M I? O
(0 OD
I? (o tf) M M ,
CV) M O CO M d N
w (Y)
Y LO M
C?
m
(o
c)
0)
I-
00
(O
C
)
M
r-
N
U M (MO N M M O M

M
O
M
O
M
N N
W
U CY)
N
?
N
N O

?

, (0
M 00

++ M
(0
(O
(0
?t
N CV
CQ
C
L LL
r
M (N
N
? C14
-
Q m p C
0 T- N
I? M M , N

N LO M 00 0000 rn

C\i N
? N O , O
m r- M N

? M O O O O 00
M
N CO N LO ?-
M M cM C'M M
W O
N O
(0 (0
N 00
O
, N M
M M _ M ?- N
C)
co
, ( O
U
O cO?
N N M O
N

Q (D

C)

'
00
C)

N
N
N
t1
N O

U
m c- Lf)
O LO
f- 0)
M M O
N M N u7
N
U
Q
ti o rn rn
M U')
(0 v

N
N ?i
N

a a
U' - cca o W 70
;a =
ea °?
L?
.? 0 - o c o =
G. E o 9a ?rna oa ?3 o-0 0
0 0 Mm 0?cM 0M CU am0 Z
U J U u- (n m 2 > u- X co co
0)
U)
N
0
.m
a?
to
z
ui
N
U
m
C
C
a?
m
CD
m
cv
N
Q
and resident bird species which require forest interiors for nesting may be displaced due to
reductions in community tract size. Within and adjacent to construction limits, shifts in species
composition may occur in favor of species adapted to such fragmentation and edge effects.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
4.1 Waters of the United States
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires regulation of discharge into "waters of the
United States." Although the principle administrative agency of the CWA is the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the USACE has major responsibility for
implementation, permitting, and enforcement of provisions of the CWA. The USACE regulatory
program is defined in 33 CFR parts 320-330.
Water bodies such as rivers, lakes, and streams are subject to jurisdictional consideration under
the Section 404 program. However, by regulation, wetlands are also considered "waters of the
United States." Wetlands are described by (33 CFR 328.3(b) [1986]) as the following.
Those areas that are inundated or saturated by groundwater at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally
include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
Wetlands are defined by the presence of three criteria: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and
evidence of wetland hydrology during the growing season (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
Open water systems and wetlands receive similar treatment and consideration with respect to
Section 404 review.
Jurisdictional areas within the PSA were delineated and located using GPS technology during
the period between June 2005 and November 2005. The delineation was field verified by
USACE representative Mr. David Timpy of the Wilmington Regulatory Field Office on July 13,
October 6, October 12, and October 25, 2005. The delineation was verified by Mr. Timpy on
February 15, 2006. Jurisdictional areas within the PSA are depicted on Figures 4-1 through 4-
19. Jurisdictional areas are summarized in the following tables (Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2) and
are described within text of Appendices B and C. For the purposes of this report, streams and
adjacent wetlands and ponds are grouped as "systems" according to physiographic breaks and
the limits of the PSA. The PSA is divided into three landscape systems (Figure 4A), an
interstream system consisting of the northern two-thirds and the western edge of the PSA, a
riverine system encompassing most of the southern third of the PSA around Dutchman and
Jump and Run creeks, and a Limesink system along the southeastern corner of the PSA.
System designation terminology in the ensuing tables follows these examples: "IS1" refers to
Interstream System, Wetland 1, "LS1" refers to Limesink System, Wetland 1, "RS7" refers to
Riverine System, Wetland 7.
Information pertaining to jurisdictional area impacts within the project study area is summarized
in Table 4.
U4-LU3.U6 21 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
V
C
(Q
16.
LL
.a
a
'a
m
W
N
w+
C
d
E
c
m
d
C
r?+
Q
N
>
?+ r
M
C O
O ++
r
Q ?
O d
N
d ?
C ?
= I.L
LL 'a
U v
c
r ?
m
N
V C
m O
m
V
,O O
C m
d m
,o c
= O
m V
E
m N
O L
V
_d
m
H
N O 0 (0 00
CO "T C
O 0
0 p
LO cM 0 0 0 Ti
LU N M o (O 1l-
m (O 'V 00 (0 LO p
W) 0 O O M
LL I- M 0) M (O O I- CO
Q N V- o (O . O 00
to M •- O M O O O 00
LU N co rn M (O o d' O
Q (O d M It (O o (o
in o o (h o o (0 00
U. v
00 LC)
00 O
0) CO
O OD
CD
m
Im c) N O CM
W
m M
(O LO
00 r- 00
O r?
CO
p
M O N M f-
U o?0 CO OM M 00
O O 00 M
M M N 1 cM M O 000

4) W U
(o
cc)
M
(D
o
o N
ti
(o
w M O N O M M O ? 000

C

LL
o
+?0+
It
w
C
m
M
N

?

1
00

O

p
Q m M O O cM 00
W
m M
M M
N
.-
.
.
0)
p
M O O M M
LL
Q I-
00
. o
N -
00
.
O r- O

M
M - N M O M
W
Q M
O
. O
M e-
00
r
. LO
p LO
00 (O
M O O N M O (O M
00 00 CO
m r- LO . t- o
N M O M
? ? 00 () O
Q . . L (O M
N O N M O O CO M
U
m
. ti
00
.
. LO
U)
, N
00
p
N N O r
U
Q
.
00
M
Lo
IT
L)
p
o
0)

N
N
O
N
It
0
0 CO
00

O = d
V M tf) I? O (V M E Q J C
Q - - - L.L L3.. ` N
20
?
I ' y
c
c
.p
_N
0)
U
c
N
co
co
m
C
J
N
U
ca
C
a)
.p
a)
(v
U
co
Q
4.1.1 Stream Characteristics
Streams within the PSA are considered riverine systems, as defined by Cowardin et al. (1979).
Several streams are manmade or heavily altered for agricultural/silvicultural purposes (Table 5).
Manmade streams include 1) natural streams that have been straightened to speed drainage or
moved to make room for development and 2) ditches or canals excavated in vegetated wetlands
and uplands to lower the water table in interstream divides.
The USACE has prepared a Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet. The most recent version
of this worksheet was released in June 2003. NCDOT considers this method a standard
procedure for assessing streams proposed for roadway impacts; for this reason, the USACE
worksheet was used to rate streams identified within the PSA (Table 5). The USACE worksheet
is intended to be used as a guide when gathering data required by USACE to make preliminary
assessments of stream quality. Completed USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets
are provided in Appendix D.
PSA streams are depicted in dark blue on Figures 4-1 through 4-19. Within the PSA, 12
streams totaling 32,648 linear feet were delineated. Of these streams, 11 are perennial stream
segments totaling 32,613 linear feet. Characteristics of PSA streams are summarized in Table
5 and described by system in Appendix B.
4.1.2 Wetland and Pond Characteristics
PSA wetlands and ponds are considered palustrine systems, as defined by Cowardin et al.
(1979). These palustrine systems occur on interstream flats, in low depressions, or floodplains
adjacent to streams and vary in plant community composition.
The Water Quality Section of NCDEM has prepared a wetlands assessment procedure entitled
Guidance for Rating Wetlands in North Carolina (NCDEM 1995). The most recent version
(fourth) of this procedure was released in January 1995. NCDOT considers this method a
standard procedure for assessing wetlands proposed for roadway impacts; for this reason the
"NCDEM" procedure was used to rate each wetland identified within the PSA (Table 5). The
NCDEM procedure rates wetlands according to six functional attributes: water storage,
bank/shoreline stabilization, pollutant removal, wildlife habitat, aquatic life value, and
recreational/educational value. Completed NCDEM Wetland Rating Worksheets are provided in
Appendix D. This procedure was not used to rate the jurisdictional areas that are bank-to-bank
streams.
A new wetland functional rating system, North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC
WAM), is currently under development with the intention of being made available for public use
later in 2006. NC WAM provides functional ratings for general wetland types determined to
occur in North Carolina (Table 6). Each assessed wetland is rated relative to "reference"
condition for its specific wetland type. Ratings are qualitative and expressed as "High,"
"Medium," or "Low." The NC WAM product includes an overall rating for each assessed
wetland, a rating for each primary function (hydrology, water quality, and habitat), and a rating
for sub-functions.
U4-LU3.Ub 23 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
0)
r
L
M
3
0
L
r
N
3
LL
V
'a
G>
N
m
N
O
L
d
d
N
d
L
lQ
J
H
V
N
4)
r
V
t9
L
U
E
L
co
O
V
N
3
LO
C7 E E `

w
LL
? N M

M N

M
U7
(C)
co
w E m
Q LL `O
N M C1
o
O
(0
N
v
m
v
O
(D
co
?
U-)
co
rn
(n
?
LO
n
tf)
r-
u-)
N
U')
N
W)
r-
(O
r-
(n
r`
V)
N
It
ao
m

00

m
(D
Q
Q d m
a? C

c
N

?
O

O
(p
'T

?

LO

LO

O
(p

'7

?

co
co

00 (D

O

?

M

m
?

`

N

q
(0

N

O
co

O
V

O

O
co

N

N
_N

N

O
co

O

O
00

N

M
D)

O

T

--

r
O

?

O
N_

N
a
co
O d

a
M
t
rn -
N w
J d `m

C c
00

-
Cl)
N

M

V

Cl)
O
( 10

M

m
O
O 04

M
LO
st
O

M

N

n
N
V

N
C)
N

co
V
(D

V

t`

r-
O
(D

M
O
V

(D

C')

N

M
O
O

N
V
00

j
0 `

++ a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C -a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C a
C w
m
U) m
U m
U m m m m
U m m m
U m m m m m
U m
U m m
U m
U m
U -
N
d
O) Y t
4 M ? w
> m V (D V co M -T V `7 " V V V V It (D V V V
m
W r
-
Y 'p '
(D c >
3
O
V
(n
(D
(")
co
V
Cl)
(D
N
(()
M
M
M
(D
N
V
N
m
C
C G
-
m
v
3 w
.2 N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N (N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
m

N N
co
Z)
N N
m
Z)
N
U
m

m
E a)
a
m
E a)
-a
m
E a)
-o
m
E d
-o
m
E

-
>

-
>

fO
> a)
-o
m
E ()
-o
m
E a)
-o
m
E a)
a
m
E a)
a
m
E a)
a
m
E a)
a
m
E a)
v
m
E m
a
m
E ()
-O
m
E a)
a
m
E
m C
Z m C
m C
m C
m C
m M
Z (a
Z (a
Z C
m C
m C
m C
m C
m C
m C
m C
m C
m C
m C
m m
Z

V

m
m

E

w
(n -Y
m

U
C
m
E
r

0
O
H- Y
a)
N
U
C
m
E

0
O
?- Y
m
N
U
C
m
E
c

0
O
F- Y
a)
N
U
C
m
E
r

0
O
f- Y
a)
N
U
C
m
E
c

0
O
F-

Y

o

m
E

O=
Y

U

a
'

a
(a

? Y
a)
N
U
C
m
E
t
°
0
O
F- Y
a)
N
U
C
m
E
r_

0
O
F- Y
a)
N
U
C
m
E
L

0
O
H- Y
a)
a)
U
C
m
E
t
w
0
O
H Y
a)
N
U
C
m
E
r
w
0
O
f- Y
m
N
U
C
m
E
L
°
0
O
I- Y
a)
N
U
C
m
E
t
w
0
O
1- Y
a)
N
U
C
m
E
t
w
0
O
F-
,?
N

U

-
°
a)
t
?
E

U

_

a)
O
?

m
Q
E

-)
o U

a)
0
U
C
D

a

m
a

o

N M V (!) co co co co 00 co a0 00 00 O N

J m
y m
a) m (Eo
y m
y m
y m E
m
N E
m
N E
m
N E
m
N E
m
N E
m E
m
m E
m
m
y
_ E
m
N E
co
N E
co
N
U U U in U (? ? U U (? (? ? U U U U ? U ?
E
O
U-
m
V

0 LO M

N m n

N M

N '-T

N O

N M

N M N

M -

V M M (O

(O U')

LO M

r- LO LO .-

N -

N _

N
r
N

w
0
Q GD
(n
CL O
Ln
00
c

L m
Q O O)
V
v O
M V
N O
O M
M O)
(O 00
n O
M O
M M
(O (O
O w
O co
O) N
LO co
N
O N M (C)
O
O 0
O
(U
0
F

O
2 O
2 O
2 O
2 m
W o o
J 0
J
2 0
J 0
2 0
J 0
J 0
J
2 0
2
2 0
J 0
J
2 0
2 0
J 0
J

pL C/

co "2
Ir 3 ?
o
W
M ?
o
J 2

2 2
??
2 ?
o
W 2
0
2 ?
o
J
o
J 2
c?
2 2
c?
2 2
c?
2 ?
o
W ?
0
W ?
o
J 2
c?
2 2
c?
2 2
c?
2 2
c?
2 2
c?
2 ?
o
J 3
o
J ?
0
W ?
o
J

Q O
3
0
Z
_
2

C7
::)

p
2

C?

p

w

p
2

C?

o

w
3

0
J

3
2

O
2

O

p

w

p

w
3

O
J
2

(7
m
S

C7
2
2

C?
m

O

J
2

p
LU
2

C7
2
2

C7
2
2

C7
2

o

J
m

0
?
> 2
O
2 ?_ 2
O
2 2

2 _? 2
O
2 3
o
J ?
o
J 2
9
2 2
O
2 2
9
2 ?
0
J ?
o
J 3
0
J 2
0
2 2
0
2 2
0
2 3
0
J _?
0
I 2
0
2 2
0
2 _?
0
W
o
J

c
is
(`o br'-
3 N
O m

U
U

m

O
LL
a

m

O
LL
s m

a
C6
d'
i--5

0
LL m

U
a
CCI

M

0
LL m

U
a
co

M

0
LL m

a
m
V
m

0
U. m

U
a
m
V
m

0
LL m

a
CCi
V
M

0
U- m

a
CCl
V?
M

0
LL m

a
as

M

0
LL

U

o
LL
a co
m
U)
a
CCi
V
(%>

O
LL co
Cl)
(0
a
m
R
M

O
U-

W

a

U

O
LL
a

U

O
LL
a

U

O
LL
a

?
O
UL
a

2

O
a

LL
N

a

a

LL
N

a

s

U

O
Li-
a

a
N

LL

a

2

m

a
C
y
•? >
1 "C

Ir 0
Z N
C
N
C

O
Z N
c
N
C

O
Z N
c
N
C

O
Z N
C
U)
C

O
Z N
c
N
C

O
Z N
C
N
C

O
Z U)
c
N
C

O
Z N
C
N
C

O
Z N
C
>
C

O
Z N
c
U)
C

O
Z
N
c

Cr N
c
N

C
O
Z N
C
U)

C
O
Z U)
c
N

C
O
Z
O
C

CC
O
C

Cr
O
C

CC
O
C

Cr
O
C U)
C
N

C
O
Z N
c
N

C
O
Z N
C
N

G
O
Z N
c
N

C
O
Z
01
T

~
'p
C
3

Q

3

U
Z

>

[n

O

c
a

o
>
fn

N

c

a

w

O

U
O
a

W

O

U
O
a

w

O

U
O
a

w

O

U
O
a

w

O

U
O
a

w

O

U
O
a

w

O

U
O
a

w

O

U
O
m

o
?

?1
N

3

m

2

M

O

U
O
a

n

O

U
O
s N

w

3 L
C

L 2

~

c
0
Z

U

N

3

a

Co
2

U

d

3

v

M
2 N
0

"O
a

N
2

•0

c
T
0

0
co

U

d

3

o
m
2

O

O
C

O_

0

o
LL
10

c

O

Cc

m
=

m
(n

a
m

N

cu

m
=

m
(n

N

E

-

c

c

n

O

m

M

c

C

O

a

I

C
j
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n _O
(n
(n N
(n _M
(n _V
(n
CC N
CC M
a' V
CC (O
Cr
J N
J M
J V
J _
a
1
N
V
N
V
V
e4
t
V
C
0
CL
V
C
C
d
C
O
V
N
7
t6
H
X_
LLJ
O C
O X
C n
CL c
a? Q
E C: a
C Q
N C
n cn ?
n n
L -o
o
a rn nv
v ^ E ?
o d
U Q
U L,6
m O
j y
U
C
LLJ
o U
U Z Z
N M f
PSA wetlands subject to Section 404 are depicted in black hatching and isolated wetlands are
depicted in red hatching on Figures 4-1 through 4-19. Within the PSA, 23 wetlands and one
pond totaling 850.8 acres were delineated. Characteristics of PSA wetlands and ponds are
summarized in Table 6 and are described by system in Appendix C.
4.1.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
The best alternatives, with regard to jurisdictional area impacts, are 5BE, 26D, and 3BDE.
These alternatives have in common low total impacts and low impacts to high quality areas as
defined by NC WAM. These alternatives also are among the lowest impacts to riverine areas
(5BE = 0.66 acre, 26D = 3.76 acres, and 3BDE = 3.74 acres). Alternatives 3ACF and 3BCF
have the most total impact area.
4.2 Permit Issues
4.2.1 Permits
At the time of preparation of this document, preliminary plans were available for this roadway
improvement project. A final permitting strategy cannot be developed until a final construction
footprint has been determined and construction impacts are firmly quantified. However, due to
the inclusion of multiple streams and extensive wetlands within the PSA, permits will be required
for any proposed alternative encroachment into these jurisdictional areas and the most likely
permit will be the USACE Individual Permit.
Section 401 of the CWA requires each state to certify that state water quality standards will not
be violated for activities which 1) involve issuance of a federal permit or license, or 2) require
discharges into waters of the United States. The USACE cannot issue a Section 404 permit
until 401 water quality certification is issued by NCDWQ. Therefore, NCDOT must apply for a
401 water quality certification as part of the permit process.
The proposed project will occur in one of the 20 counties covered by the Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA). Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC) within these counties are
under the jurisdiction of the NC. Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM). Because the
project study area is located within coastal fishing waters but does not contain navigable waters
(Public Trust Areas [a CAMA AEC]), no AECs are expected to be affected by the proposed
project (Public Trust Areas are defined in 15A NCAC 07H .0207). If there are no impacts to
AECs, NCDCM must still review the permit application for CAMA consistency.
4.2.2 Mitigation
The USACE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a wetland
mitigation policy that embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and mitigation
sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and
physical integrity of waters of the United States, specifically, wetlands. Mitigation of
jurisdictional area impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include avoiding impacts, minimizing
impacts, and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). These three aspects (avoidance,
minimization, and compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
04-203.08 26 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities for averting impacts
to waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the USEPA and the USACE, in determining "appropriate and practicable" measures to
offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of
those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of
overall project purposes. Impacts to jurisdictional areas are expected due to the nature of the
project. However, use of appropriate BMPs per NCDOT's Best Management Practices for
Protection of Surface Waters and Design Standards for Sensitive Watersheds will be utilized to
prevent those impacts which are avoidable.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce adverse
impacts to waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required through
project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on decreasing the
footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of median widths, right-of-way widths, fill
slopes, and/or road shoulder widths. All practicable efforts will be made in the project design
phase to decrease impacts to surface waters.
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to waters of the
United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is
recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and
every permit action. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506(h), NCDWQ may require
compensatory mitigation for projects with greater than or equal to 0.1 acre of impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total stream impacts.
Furthermore, in accordance with 67 FR 2020, 2092; (January 15, 2002), the USACE requires
compensatory mitigation when necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic
environment are minimal. The size and type of the proposed project impact and the function
and value of the impacted aquatic resource are factors considered in determining acceptability
of appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation. Appropriate and practicable
compensatory mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all
avoidance and minimization opportunities have been implemented. Compensatory actions
often include restoration, preservation, enhancement, and creation of waters of the United
States. Such actions should be undertaken first in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the
impacted site. A final determination regarding compensatory mitigation rests with the USACE
and NCDWQ.
Opportunities for compensatory mitigation may be present within the PSA. Many stream
reaches within the PSA have been straightened and/or degraded. These streams may offer
restoration or enhancement opportunities. In addition, stream reaches flowing parallel to the
construction alignment may be relocated within the floodplain, outside of the construction limits
to avoid culverting of the stream channel. Temporary impacts to floodplains associated with
construction activities could be mitigated by removing temporary fill material upon project
completion and replanting disturbed areas with native riparian species. Potential wetland
mitigation opportunities exist within the PSA. The degraded wetlands in the northern portion of
the PSA, in the area between NC 133 and NC 87 and in the area towards MOTSU, and in the
southeastern portion of the PSA, in the Dutchman Creek floodplain, could be mitigation options.
04-203.08 27 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
If this on-site mitigation possibility is insufficient or infeasible, off-site mitigation options may be
investigated.
In accordance with the "Memorandum of Agreement Among the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), the North Carolina Department of
Transportation, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District" (MOA), July 22,
2003, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (EEP), will be requested to provide off-site mitigation to satisfy the
federal Clean Water Act compensatory mitigation requirements for this project if necessary.
4.3 Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered, Threatened, or officially Proposed for
such listing are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The term "Endangered Species" is defined as "any species which is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range," and the term
"Threatened Species" is defined as "any species which is likely to become an Endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range" (16
U.S.C. 1532).
Fifteen federally protected species are listed for Brunswick County as of January 11, 2006
(USFWS 2006). Of the listed species, nine are designated as Endangered and five are
designated as Threatened. Table 7 presents the federally protected species listed for
Brunswick County and specifies their status as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Threatened
due to Similarity of Appearance (T S/A).
Table 7. Federally Protected Species listed for Brunswick County.
Common Name Scientific Name Status
American alligator Alligator mississipiensis T(S/A)
Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus T
Eastern cougar Puma concolor couguar E
Green sea turtle Chelonia mydas T
Kemp's ridley sea turtle Lepidochelys kemph E
Leatherback sea turtle Dermocheylys coriacea E
Loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta T
West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus E
Piping plover Charadrius melodus T
Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis E
Shortnose sturgeon Acipenserbrevirostrum E
Wood stork Mycteria americana E
Cooley's meadowrue Thalictrum cooleyi E
h-leaved loosestrife
Rt Lysimachia asperulaefolia E
eabeach
amaranth
T/C/A\ - T1............? A4maranthus pumilus T
---Y -Fv-0"uc. r bPVU1V5 uldi is rnrearenea aue to simuanty or appearance with other rare
species and is listed for its protection.
T = Threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range."
E = Endagered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
04-203.08 28 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Habitat potential for pelagic or maritime species does not exist anywhere within the PSA.
Therefore, habitat potential for green sea turtle, Kemp's ridley sea turtle, leatherback sea turtle,
loggerhead sea turtle, West Indian manatee, piping plover, and seabeach amaranth is not
expected to occur on-site. Habitat evaluations and/or surveys for these species will not be
required prior to construction. Biological conclusions for these species are "NO EFFECT".
Alligator mississippiensis (American alligator)
Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
Family: Alligatoridae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967
Date Delisted: June 04, 1987
The American alligator is listed as Threatened due to the Similarity in Appearance (T[S/A]) to
other federally-listed crocodilians; however, there are no other crocodilians within North
Carolina. American alligators can be found in a variety of freshwater to estuarine aquatic
habitats including swamp forests, marshes, large streams and canals, and ponds and lakes.
T(S/A) species are not subject to Section 7 consultation and a biological conclusion for this
species is not required. Potential habitat for American alligator exists within the study
corridor. American alligator was observed in Dutchman Creek within the PSA and
approximately 0.8 mile southeast of the PSA in several Wal-Mart stormwater ponds. In addition,
NCNHP records document two occurrences of American alligator within 2.0 miles of the PSA:
approximately 1.7 miles south of the PSA in Cottage Creek, and approximately 0.5 mile east of
the PSA near Walden Creek just north of the crossing of the Progress Energy powerline corridor
over Bethel Road. Construction activities may temporarily displace any American alligators in
the vicinity; however, no long-term impact to American alligator is anticipated as a result of this
project.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Bald eagle)
Threatened
Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967
The bald eagle is a large raptor with a wingspan greater than 6 feet. Adult bald eagles are dark
brown with a white head and tail. Immature eagles are brown with whitish mottling on the tail,
belly, and wing linings. Bald eagles typically feed on fish but may also take birds and small
mammals. In the Carolinas, nesting season extends from December through May (Potter et al.
1980). Bald eagles typically nest in tall, living trees in a conspicuous location near open water.
Eagles forage over large bodies of water and utilize adjacent trees for perching (Hamel 1992).
Disturbance activities within a primary zone extending 750 to 1500 feet from a nest tree are
considered to result in unacceptable conditions for eagles (USFWS 1987). The USFWS
recommends avoiding disturbance activities, including construction and tree-cutting within this
primary zone. Within a secondary zone, extending from the primary zone boundary out to a
distance of 1.0 mile from a nest tree, construction and land-clearing activities should be
restricted to the non-nesting period. The USFWS also recommends avoiding alteration of
04-203.08 29 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
natural shorelines where bald eagles forage, and avoiding significant land-clearing activities
within 1500 feet of known roosting sites.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
No large bodies of open water present foraging opportunities adjacent to or within the
PSA; consequently, suitable habitat for bald eagle does not occur within the PSA.
NCNHP records document no occurrences of this species within 2.0 miles of the PSA
and no individuals were observed during field investigations.
Felis concolor (Eastern cougar)
Endangered
Family: Felidae
Date Listed: 6/4/73
The eastern cougar is described as a large, unspotted, long-tailed cat. Its body and legs are a
uniform fulvous or tawny hue. Its belly is pale reddish or reddish white. The inside of this cat's
ears are light-colored, with blackish color behind the ears. Sometimes the cougar's face has a
uniformly lighter tint than the general hue of the body. Cougars feed primarily on deer, but their
diet may also include small mammals, wild turkeys, and occasionally domestic livestock, when
available.
No preference for specific habitat types has been noted. The primary need is apparently for a
large wilderness area with an adequate food supply. Male cougars of other subspecies have
been observed to occupy a range of 25 or more square miles, and females from 5 to 20 square
miles. The eastern cougar has been hunted and trapped relentlessly as a pest. Much of its
habitat has been eliminated through extensive deforestation.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
Suitable habitat for eastern cougar does occur within the PSA in the form of wooded
pocosin and bottomland hardwood forest encompassing the northwest quadrant of the
PSA and constituting an edge of a large, relatively undisturbed wilderness area already
experiencing development pressure. However, NCNHP records document no
occurrences of this species within 2.0 miles of the PSA and no individuals were
observed during field investigations.
Picoides borealis (Red-cockaded woodpecker)
Endangered
Family: Picidae
Date Listed: October 13, 1970
Primary nest sites for Red-cockaded Woodpeckers (RCWs) include open pine stands greater
than 60 years of age with little or no mid-story development. Foraging habitat is comprised of
open pine or pine/mixed hardwood stands 30 years of age or older (Henry 1989).
This small woodpecker (7 to 8.5 inches long) has a black head, prominent white cheek patches,
and a black-and-white barred back. Males often have red markings (cockades) behind the eye,
04-203.08 30 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
but the cockades may be absent or difficult to see (Potter et al. 1980). Primary habitat consists
of mature to over-mature southern pine forests dominated by loblolly, long-leaf, slash, and pond
pines (Thompson and Baker 1971). Nest cavities are constructed in the heartwood of living
pines, generally older than 70 years that have been infected with red-heart disease. Nest cavity
trees tend to occur in clusters, which are referred to as colonies (USFWS 2003). The
woodpecker drills holes into the bark around the cavity entrance, resulting in a shiny, resinous
buildup around the entrance that allows for easy detection of active nest trees. Pine flatwoods
or pine-dominated savannas which have been maintained by frequent natural or prescribed fires
serve as ideal nesting and foraging sites for this woodpecker. Development of a thick
understory may result in abandonment of cavity trees.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT
Suitable habitat for RCW within the PSA was identified during intensive field explorations
(associated with federally protected plant species surveys and jurisdictional area
delineations) between June and November 2005. Suitable habitat for RCW within 0.5
mile of the PSA was identified with the use of recent aerial photography. All suitable
habitat was investigated for RCW cavity trees with the use of a helicopter in October
2005. Helicopter surveys were conducted by flying north-south oriented transects just
above the forest canopy and primarily observing trees looking from west to east. During
the flight, 19 potential cavity trees were located with the use of GPS technology.
EcoScience biologists walked to all of these trees during November 2005 to verify their
condition with regards to RCWs.
Wetlands supporting suitable habitat primarily support pocosin vegetation and are
therefore difficult to traverse on foot. RCW cavity tree surveys within wetlands were
limited to the helicopter reconnaissance and on-site verification of identified potential
cavity trees. Uplands supporting suitable habitat primarily support vegetation
characterized by an open understory and minimal groundcover, allowing for relatively
easy access. Within all uplands supporting suitable RCW nesting habitat, EcoScience
biologists conducted systematic walking surveys. These surveys were conducted by
walking north-south oriented transects and looking from west to east, with distance
between transects determined by the distance biologists were able to clearly observe
candidate trees. RCW surveys resulted in the location and verification of 15 cavity trees
(Figures 4-5, 4-6, 4-7, and 4-9), six of these trees appear to have active cavities, and
two appear to have starter holes. EcoScience Corporation was accompanied on a tour
of the RCW cavity trees by a representative of the USFWS (Mr. Gary Jordan) on
January 12, 2006. During this field visit, the group heard then observed a single RCW in
the vicinity of RCW Tree #3 (Figure 4-5). This was the only observation within the PSA
during our field investigation.
The Section 7 consultation process allows Federal agencies to obtain a Biological
Opinion (BO) that: (a) documents the USFWS determination of "no jeopardy;" (b)
authorizes the agency to cause "incidental take" subject to enforceable terms and
conditions; and (c) provides the USFWS's recommendations on how the agency can
meet its duty to "conserve" listed species affected by the activity. A foraging analysis
04-203.08 31 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
has been recommended by USFWS with an assessment of quality foraging habitat
within 0.25 mile and within 0.5 mile of cavity cluster centers.
NCNHP records document one occurrence of RCW within the PSA approximately 0.2
mile north of the NC 133/NC 211 intersection near the southwest corner of the PSA.
That tree was not found and is presumed to have been removed. In addition, NCNHP
records list nine occurrences of RCW within 2.0 miles of the PSA: approximately 1.1
miles west of the NC 133/NC 211 intersection near the southwest corner of the PSA;
approximately 0.7 mile west of the NC 133/SR 1535 (Bethel Road) intersection;
approximately 1.2 miles west of the NC 133/SR 1535 intersection; just north of the
Progress Energy powerline corridor approximately 1.9 miles west of the powerline
crossing of NC 133; within the Boiling Springs Lakes Wetland Complex approximately
1.4 miles northwest of the NC 133/NC 87 intersection near the north end of the PSA; just
east of NC 133 approximately 1.3 miles north of the NC 133/NC 87 intersection; within
the Boiling Springs Lakes Limesink Complex approximately 2.1 miles north of the NC
133/NC 87 intersection; within the Orton Plantation macrosite approximately 1.8 miles
north-northwest of the NC 133/NC 87 intersection; within the MOTSU Northwest Natural
Area approximately 1.8 miles northwest of the NC 133/NC 87 intersection, and within the
MOTSU Governor's Creek Natural Area approximately 2.0 miles west-northwest of the
NC 133/NC 87 intersection.
Acipenser brevirostrum (Shortnose sturgeon)
Endangered
Family: Acipenseridae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967
The shortnose sturgeon is a bottom-feeding fish that occurs in Atlantic seaboard rivers from the
St. Johns River, Florida to eastern Canada. The sturgeon is anadromous, spending most of the
year in brackish estuarine environments and moving into freshwater only when spawning
(Gilbert 1989).
The Lower Cape Fear River drainage area may contain North Carolina's only self-sustaining
population of shortnose sturgeon (Ross 1997). Several shortnose sturgeons have been
documented in the Cape Fear River and Brunswick River (NCNHP records). Moser and Ross
(1993) recommended that dredging and blasting activities be performed between August and
November to reduce potential impacts to shortnose sturgeon spawning migrations.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Typical habitat of the shortnose sturgeon is estuaries and lower sections of large rivers.
Several streams occur within the PSA; however, the reaches of these streams are of
insufficient depth for this species. Therefore, no habitat for shortnose sturgeon exists
within the PSA. In addition, NCNHP records document no occurrences of shortnose
sturgeon within 2.0 miles of the PSA. Based on available information, this project will
not impact shortnose sturgeon.
04-203.08 32 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Mycteria americana (Wood stork)
Endangered
Family: Ciconiidae
Date Listed: February 28, 1984
Wood storks are strong winged birds that fly with their necks stretched straight ahead and their
long legs trailing behind. Adult wood storks are predominantly white with black flight feathers,
dark legs and bill, and dark unfeathered heads. Immature wood storks are similar in color;
however, they may have a yellow bill (Potter et al. 1980). Adult birds are tall, measuring
approximately 50 inches, with a wingspan of 60 to 65 inches. Typical foraging habitat includes
shallow salt or brackish water, shallow water of bays, tidal creeks, ponds, or other bodies of
water (Hamel 1992). Wood storks usually feed in 6 to 10 inches of water. Wood storks typically
feed on fish, but also prey on amphibians, crustaceans, and reptiles. Wood storks do not breed
in North Carolina, but a few disperse to southeastern North Carolina following the breeding
season. A small flock has been regularly present in Sunset Beach, Brunswick County in mid- to
late summer (NCNHP files).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Wood storks nest in cypress (Taxodium distichum) or hardwood trees surrounded by
relatively open expanses of water (USFWS 1996). Colonial nesting sites remain
inundated at from 3 to 5 feet for the entire nesting cycle which lasts between 110 and
160 days (Ogden 1990). The only areas within the PSA that would satisfy the inundation
and vegetation requirements would be the Dutchman Creek which does not provide the
number of trees surrounded by water required by a colony. Storks feed primarily (often
almost exclusively) on small fish between 1 and 8 inches in length (Ogden 1990).
Typical foraging habitat for wood stork is a shallow wetland area where fish become
concentrated either through local reproduction or the area drying and stranding the fish
(USFWS 1996). Within the PSA, areas likely to contain fish do not provide the open
water preferred by the large birds, are permanently inundated at too high a level, and do
not provide the density of fish required by the wood stork. Therefore, no habitat for
wood stork exists within the PSA. In addition, NCNHP records document no
occurrences of wood stork within 2.0 miles of the PSA. Based on available information,
this project will not impact wood stork.
Lysimachia asperulaefolia (Rough-leaved loosestrife)
Endangered
Family: Primulaceae
Date Listed: June 12, 1987
The rough-leaved loosestrife is a rhizomatous perennial herb that often reaches the height of 2
feet. Plants are dormant in the winter, with the first leaves appearing in late March or early
April. The triangular leaves typically occur in whorls of 3 or 4. Leaves are typically sessile,
entire, 0.3 to 0.4 inch wide, broadest at the base, and have three prominent principal veins
(Godfrey and Wooten 1981). These leaf characteristics help differentiate this species from
Loomis' loosestrife (L. loomisi/), which may occur in the same areas as rough-leaved loosestrife
(Kral 1983). Individuals of rough-leaved loosestrife, especially young plants, have been
04-203.08 33 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
observed by ESC biologists to have paired, opposite leaves rather than whorls of 3 or 4; this
pattern has also been observed on new growth resprouting from the upper leaf axils in
individuals that have been browsed or mowed. Five-lobed, yellow flowers, approximately 0.6
inch across, are produced on a loose terminal raceme 1 to 4 inches long (Godfrey and Wooten
1981). Rough-leaved loosestrife is reported to flower from late May to June (USFWS 1995);
however, ESC biologists have observed scattered individuals flowering through mid-July in New
Hanover County. Seeds are formed by August, but the small, rounded capsules do not dehisce
until October. Populations also reproduce asexually from rhizomes, with rhizomes producing
several shoots. Rough-leaved loosestrife is endemic to Coastal Plain and Sandhill regions of
the Carolinas, and was previously known to be extant in only 11 counties in North Carolina and
one county in South Carolina. Typical habitat of rough-leaved loosestrife consists of the wet
ecotone between longleaf pine savannas and wet, shrubby areas where lack of canopy
vegetation allows abundant sunlight into the herb layer. This species is fire maintained;
suppression of naturally occurring fires has contributed to the loss of habitat in our state. In the
absence of fire, rough-leaved loosestrife may persist for several years in an area with dense
shrub encroachment; however, reproduction is reported to be suppressed under these
conditions, leading to eventual local extirpation (USFWS 1995). Kral (1983) indicates that
rough-leaved loosestrife is typically found growing in black sandy peats or sands with a high
organic content. Because rough-leaved loosestrife is an obligate wetland species (Reed 1988),
drainage of habitat also has an adverse effect on the plant.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: UNRESOLVED
Suitable habitat for rough-leaved loosestrife occurs in several locations within the PSA in
disturbed/maintained areas including roadside margins, utility right-of-ways, maintained
fields, and forest margins, as well as in natural areas such as along the edge of sand
rims bordering Carolina bays. NCNHP records document no occurrences of this species
to occur within 2.0 miles of the PSA. However, systematic plant-by-plant surveys
conducted in June 2005 within areas of suitable habitat resulted in the discovery of 10
populations of this species (Figures 4-10 and 4-13) primarily within the Progress Energy
utility powerline corridor running east and west through the PSA. The species was also
found in undisturbed habitat, in the ecotone along Carolina bay sand rims and pocosins
both north and south of the Progress Energy powerline. New areas of suitable habitat
were added to the PSA after the survey window for rough-leaved loosestrife was closed.
Therefore, those additional areas of suitable habitat will be surveyed for this species
beginning in mid-May 2006.
Thalictrum coo/eyi (Cooley's meadowrue)
Endangered
Family: Ranunculaceae
Date Listed: February 7, 1989
Cooley's meadowrue is a rhizomatous, perennial herb with a smooth stem; the 3-foot high plant
is normally erect in full sun but lax in the shade. Leaves are ternately divided; the leaflets, less
than 1 inch long, are narrow, with untoothed margins. The small, petal-less, unisexual flowers
appear on an open panicle in June and the fruits, small ellipsoidal achenes, mature in August
and September. Moist bogs and savannas are the preferred habitat of Cooley's meadowrue.
U4-ZU3.U8 34 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
This species is endemic to the southeastern Coastal Plain of North Carolina (11 locations) and
one location in Florida. Typical soil substrates are fine sandy loams that are at least seasonally
saturated (but not inundated) and only slightly acid (pH 5.8-6.6). Some form of disturbance is
usually needed to sustain the open quality of the meadowrue's habitat. Consequently, Cooley's
meadowrue is sometimes found along utility corridors, roadside margins, or other maintained
areas. Cooley's meadowrue is threatened by fire suppression and land-disturbing practices
such as silviculture or agriculture (USFWS 1994).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: UNRESOLVED
The project study area contains a number of pockets of suitable habitat for Cooley's
meadowrue, where a favorable combination of soils, open canopy, and moisture occurs.
The NCNHP records no occurrences of the Cooley's meadowrue within 2 miles of the
project study area. Detailed surveys for this species in June 2005 determined that no
Cooley's meadowrue occurs within the PSA. However new areas of suitable habitat
were added to the PSA after the survey window Cooley's meadowrue was closed.
Therefore, those additional areas of suitable habitat will be surveyed for this species
beginning in mid-June 2006.
Federal Species of Concern
Forty-eight FSC are listed by the USFWS for Brunswick County (USFWS 2006). Federal
species of concern are not afforded federal protection under the ESA of 1973, as amended, and
are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or
listed as Threatened or Endangered. An FSC is defined as a species that is under
consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to support listing. FSCs that
are listed as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern by the NCNHP list of Rare Plant
and Animal Species are afforded state protection under the North Carolina State Endangered
Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979, as
amended. Table 8 summarizes FSCs listed for Brunswick County, and indicates whether
suitable habitat exists for each species within the PSA. Carolina gopher frog, mimic glass
lizard, Carolina goldenrod, pondspice, savanna indigo-bush, Venus flytrap, and savanna
campylopus have been documented within 2.0 miles of the PSA by the NCNHP. Several
individual Venus flytraps have been observed in the PSA in recently cleared areas south of the
powerline corridor.
Table 8. Federal Species of Concern for Brunswick County
Common Name Scientific Name Potential Habitat State Status"
Bachman's sparrow Aimophila aestivalis Yes SC
Carolina gopher frog Rana capito capito Yes T
Carolina pygmy sunfish Elassoma boehikei Yes T
Eastern Henslow's sparrow Ammodramus henslowii Yes SR
Eastern painted bunting Passerina ciris Yes SR
oldie owws. t = cnaangerea, any species or nigner taxon of plant whose continued existence as a viable component of the
State's flora is determined to be in jeopardy, T = Threatened, any resident species of plant which is likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range; SR = Significantly Rare; SR-T = Significantly
Rare throughout species' range, SR-L = species is limited to NC and adjacent states; SR-P = species is at the periphery of its range
in NC; SC= Special concern; W1 = Watch category 1, species is rare but relatively secure.
(Franklin and Finnegan 2004, LeGrand et al. 2004).
04-203.08 35 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Table 8 (continued). Federal Species of Concern for Brunswick County
Common Name Scientific Name Potential Habitat State Status*
Mimic glass lizard Ophisaurus mimicus Yes SC
Northern pine snake Pituophis melanoleucus Yes SC
Rafinesque's big-eared bat Plecotus rafinesquii Yes T
Southern hognose snake Heterodon simus Yes SC
Arogos skipper Atrytone arogos Yes SR
Buchholz's dart moth Agrotis buchholzi Yes SR
Cape Fear threetooth Triodopsis soelneri Yes T
Carter's noctuid moth Spartiniphaga carterae Yes SR
Greenfield ramshorn Helisoma eucosmium No E
Magnificent ramshorn Planorbella magnifica No E
Rare skipper Problema bulenta No SR
Venus flytrap cutworm moth Hemipachnobia subporphyrea Yes SR
Waccamaw spike Elliptio waccamawensis No E
A quillwort lsoetes microvela Yes SR-L
Awned meadow-beauty Rhexia aristosa Yes T
Carolina asphodel Tofieldia glabra Yes W1
Carolina atamasco lily Zephyranthes sp. 1 Yes SR-L
Carolina bishopweed Ptilimnium sp. 1 Yes SR-L
Carolina bogmint Macbridea caroliniana Yes T
Carolina goldenrod Solidago pulchra Yes SR-L
Carolina grass-of-parnassus Pamassia caroliniana Yes E
Chapman's sedge Carex chapmanii Yes SR-L
Chapman's three-awn Aristida simpliciflora Yes SR-T
Coastal beaksedge Rhynchospora p/eiantha Yes SR-T
Coastal goldenrod Solidago villosicarpa No E
Dune bluecurls Trichostema sp. 1 No SR-L
Dwarf burhead Echinodorus parvulus No SR-T
Harper's fimbry Fimbristylis perpusilla Yes T
Honeycomb head Balduina atropurpurea Yes SR-T
Long beach seedbox Ludwigia brevipes Yes SR-T
Loose watermilfoil Myriophyllum laxum Yes T
Pineland plantain Plantago sparsiflora Yes E
Pondspice Litsea aestivalis Yes SR-T
Savanna cowbane Oxypolis temata Yes W1
Savanna indigo-bush Amorpha georgiana var. confusa Yes T
Savanna onion Allium sp. 1 Yes SR-L
Spring-flowering goldenrod Solidago vema Yes T
Swamp forest beaksedge Rhynchospora decurrens Yes SR-P
*State Status: E = Endangered, any species or higher taxon of plant whose continued existence as a viable component of the
State's flora is determined to be in jeopardy, T = Threatened, any resident species of plant which is likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range; SR = Significantly Rare; SR-T = Significantly
Rare throughout species' range; SR-L = species is limited to NC and adjacent states; SR-P = species is at the periphery of its range
in NC; SC= Special concern; W1 = Watch category 1, species is rare but relatively secure.
(Franklin and Finnegan 2004, LeGrand et al. 2004).
04-203.08 36 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Table 8 (continued). Federal Species of Concern for Brunswick County
Common Name Scientific Name Potential Habitat State Status"
Thorne's beaksedge Rhynchospora thomei Yes E
Tough bumelia Sideroxylon tenax Yes SR-P
Venus flytrap Dionaea muscipula Yes and observed SR-L,SC
Wirelead dropseed Sporobolus teretifolius sensus stricto Yes T
Savanna campylopus Campylopus carolinae Yes SR-T
'State Status: E = Endangered, any species or higher taxon of plant whose continued existence as a viable component of the
State's flora is determined to be in jeopardy; T = Threatened, any resident species of plant which is likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range; SR = Significantly Rare; SR-T = Significantly
Rare throughout species' range; SR-L = species is limited to NC and adjacent states; SR-P = species is at the periphery of its range
in NC; SC= Special concern; W1 = Watch category 1, species is rare but relatively secure.
(Franklin and Finnegan 2004, LeGrand et al. 2004).
5.0 SUMMARY
NCDOT proposes to construct a connector between NC 211 and NC 133 on new location north
of Southport, North Carolina in Brunswick County. The PSA was delineated by NCDOT and
includes the corridor limits for all anticipated alternatives.
The PSA is located in the Carolina Flatwoods ecoregion of the Coastal Plain physiographic
province of North Carolina, which is characterized by broad, flat, upland surfaces with large
areas of poorly drained soils. The PSA contains 15 soil series; the Baymeade, Lafitte, Leon,
Muckalee, Murville, and Torhunta soil series are considered to be hydric. The Foreston, Kureb,
Lynchburg, Mandarin, Norfolk, Onslow, and Tomahawk soil series are considered to be non-
hydric with hydric inclusions. Approximately 75 percent of the PSA is composed of the Leon-
Murville-Mandarin catena.
The PSA occurs within the South Atlantic/Gulf Region in USGS Hydrologic Unit (HU) 03030005
(NCDWQ subbasin 03-06-17). Two named streams (Dutchman Creek and Jump and Run
Creek) and their unnamed tributaries are located within the PSA. Both streams are designated
SC; Sw waters. Dutchman Creek also carries the HQW supplemental classification. In order to
minimize potential impacts to water resources in the PSA, NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and Design Standards for Sensitive Watersheds
should be strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project.
Approximately the northern two-thirds of the PSA is part of the Boiling Spring Lakes Wetland
Complex Natural Heritage Area. The PSA includes ten plant communities, nine of which are
represented by examples of very near reference quality in the PSA. Within the PSA, 32,648
linear feet of stream and 850.8 acres of wetland were delineated.
Two Endangered species, red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) and rough-leaved loosestrife, have
been found within the PSA. Potential habitat exists within the PSA for many more Federal
Species of Concern.
04-203.08 37 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Due to the extensive wetlands within the PSA, a USACE Individual Permit will most likely be
required for associated impacts to Section 404 jurisdictional area. Alternate 5BE is
recommended because of its minor impacts to jurisdictional areas. Alternatives 3BDE and
313CE are low impact as well. Although they contain more jurisdictional impacts than the
recommended alternative, the impacted jurisdictional areas are not high quality for the most
part. Alternatives 5AE, 2AD, 3ADE, and 3ACE similarly impact wetland areas but also include a
small stream impact; however, that stream is manmade. All other proposed stream crossings
are bridged. Assessment of RCW foraging habitat may dictate a wider berth be given to the
cavity trees in the PSA than that provided by the western-most recommended alternatives. In
that case, alternatives 313DE and 3ADE may prove to be more desirable alternatives.
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the PSA, NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and Design Standards for Sensitive
Watersheds should be strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project.
04-20108 38 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
6.0 REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS -79/31. Fish and Wildlife Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. 103 pp.
Palmer, W.M. and A.L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC forthe N.C. State Museum of Natural Sciences. 412 pp.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical
Report Y-87-1. United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
MS. 92 pp.
Franklin, M.A. and J. T. Finnegan. 2004. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant
Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks
and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Raleigh. 111 pp.
Gilbert, C.R. 1989. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of
Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (Mid-Atlantic Bight)--Atlantic and Shortnose Sturgeons.
Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82(11.122). U.S. Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers TR EL-82-4. 28 pp.
Godfrey, R. K., and J.W. Wooten. 1981. Aquatic and Wetland Plants of the southeastern
United States: Dicotyledons. University of Georgia Press, Athens, GA. pp 501
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F.
McPherson, J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and
South Carolina (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and
photographs). United States Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
Hall, S.P., M.P. Schafale, and J.T. Finnegan. 1999. Conservation assessment of the southeast
coastal plain of North Carolina, using site oriented and landscape-oriented analysis.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, Raleigh,
NC.
Hamel, Paul B. 1992. Land Manager's Guide to the Birds of the South. The Nature
Conservancy, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 367 pp.
Henry, V.G. 1989. Guidelines for Preparation of Biological Assessments and Evaluations for
the Red-cockaded Woodpecker. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service, Southeast Region, Atlanta, GA. 13 pp.
04-203.08 39 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Kartesz, J. 1998. A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Puerto
Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Biota of North America Program.
Kral, R. 1983. A Report on Some Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Forest-related Vascular
Plants of the South. U.S. Forest Service Technical Publication R8-TP2. Pp. 869-872.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr., S. E. McRae, S. P. Hall, and J. T. Finnegan. 2004. Natural Heritage
Program List of the Rare Animal Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh. 106 pp.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison, III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles
of the Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North
Carolina. 264 pp.
Menhinick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. The Delmar Company,
Charlotte, NC for North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, NC. 227 pp.
Moser, M.L. and S.W. Ross. 1993. Distribution and Movements of Shortnose Sturgeon
(Acipenser brevirostrum) and other Anadromous Fishes of the Lower Cape Fear River,
North Carolina. Final Report to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District.
153 pp.
North Carolina Divison of Environmental Management (NCDEM). 1995. Guidance for Rating
the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2000. Cape Fear River Basin Water
Quality Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Raleigh, North Carolina. 274 pp.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2002. Final North Carolina Water Quality
Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2002 Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) Report.
(online). Available:
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdI/Docs_303/2002/2002%201ntegrated%20Rept.pdf [July 15,
2005]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2004a. North Carolina Water Quality
Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2004 Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) Report).
Public Review Draft (online). Available:
http,Hh2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/documents/20041RCategories4-7.PDF [July 15, 2005].
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2004b. "Redbook" Surface Waters and
Wetlands Standards. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Raleigh, NC.
04-203.08 40 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2005a. Basinwide Information
Management System (RIMS)
(http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/reports/basinsandwaterbodies/03-06-17.pdf) [July 14,
2005]. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2005b. Surface Water Classification.
(http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/reports/basinsandwaterbodies/03-06-17.pdf) [July 14,
2005]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2005c. List of Active Permits (online).
Available: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES/documents/BIMS 052705 xls [July 14,
2005]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Biennial Protection Plan: List of Significant
Natural Heritage Areas. 2005. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of
Parks and Recreation, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC). 1998. Significant Aquatic
Endangered Species Habitats: North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh,
North Carolina
Ogden, J.C. 1990. Habitat management guidelines for the wood stork in the southeast region.
Prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Atlanta, Georgia.
Palmer, W.M. and A.L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 412 pp.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of
North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 408 pp.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.
Reed, P.J. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Southeast (Region 2).
Biological Report 88 (26.2). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Publication. Washington,
DC.
Rohde, F.C., R.G. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist, and J.F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel
Hill, NC. 222 pp.
Ross, S.W. 1997. Shortnose Sturgeon: Acipenser brevirostrum Lesuer. In Endangered,
Threatened, and Rare Fauna of North Carolina, Part IV. A Reevaluation of the
Freshwater Fishes. Edited by E.F. Menhenick and A.L. Braswell. 106 pp.
04-203.08 41 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of The Natural Communities of North
Carolina: Third Approximation. N.C. Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh,
NC. 325 pp.
Thompson, R.L. and W.W. Baker. 1971. A survey of red-cockaded woodpeckers nesting
habitat requirements (pp. 170-186). In R.L. Thompson ed., The Ecology and
Management of the Red-cockaded Woodpecker. Tall Timbers Research Station,
Tallahassee, FL.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS), and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ).
2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. State of North Carolina.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1986. Soil Survey of Brunswick County, North
Carolina. United State Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 116 pp.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1993. Hydric Soils, Brunswick County, N.C. Technical
Guide, Section II-A-2.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald
Eagle in the Southeast Region. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service. 8 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Cooley's Meadowrue Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. Atlanta, GA. 29 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1995. Recovery Plan for Rough-Leaved Loosestrife
(Lysimachia asperulaefolia) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlanta, GA. 42 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. Revised recovery plan for the U.S. breeding
population of the wood stork. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Atlanta, Georgia. 41 p.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Recovery plan for the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides
borealis): second revision. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta,GA. 296 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2006. Brunswick County Endangered Species,
Threatened Species, and Federal Species of Concern (online). Available. http://nc-
es.fws.gov/es/cntylist/BRUNSWICK.html [September 18, 2005]. United States Fish and
Wildlife Service.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia,
and Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 255 pp.
04-203.08 42 NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
Jurisdictional streams within the project study area are considered riverine systems, as defined
by Cowardin et al. (1979). Project study area streams are depicted in dark blue on Figures 4-1
through 4-19 of Appendix A. Characteristics of project study area streams including stream
reach name, Cowardin classification, perennial/intermittent status, drainage area, stream
channel dimensions and substrate, total length and acreage within the project study area, and
USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet score are summarized in Table 5 of the
document.
Stream 1: UT to Dutchman Creek (Figures 4-8 4-10 4-12 4-13 4-14 4-15 4-16 and 4-17)
Stream 1 is a canal which traverses the project study area from north to south. Stream 1 flows
south through the project study area to Dutchman Creek. The stream reach is, for the most
part, deep, straight, with low flow, and tea colored. Pocosin vegetation provides intermittent,
moderate canopy coverage for the stream and includes pond pine and evergreen hardwood
species.
Stream 2: UT to Dutchman Creek (Figures 4-8 4-9 4-12)
Stream 2 is a canal which traverses the project study area from slightly northwest to southeast
in the center of the project study area. Stream 2 flows southeast through the project study area
to Steam 1. The stream reach is, for the most part, deep, straight, with moderate flow, and tea
colored. The vegetation bordering the stream is a mixture of mown pocosin and upland pine.
The vegetation provides intermittent, light canopy coverage for the stream and includes pond
pine and longleaf pine.
Stream 3: UT to Dutchman Creek (Figure.4-13)
Stream 3 originates approximately 120 feet east of NC 87 at the base of a roadside ditch and
flows southwest to a confluence with Stream 1. Stream 3 is moderately sinuous with low flow
and moderate clarity. Riparian vegetation provides good canopy coverage for the stream, and
includes Chinese privet, and pond pine.
Stream 4: UT to Dutchman Creek (Figure 4-3 4-4 4-5)
Stream 4 is a canal which traverses the project study area from northeast to southwest. Stream
4 flows northeast through the project study area to Dutchman Creek. The stream reach is, for
the most part, deep, straight, with moderate flow, and moderate clarity. The stream is bordered
by pocosin and fallow fields within a utility line corridor. There is no canopy coverage.
Stream 5: UT to Dutchman Creek (Figure 4-9)
Stream 5 is a natural stream in the headwaters area of Dutchman Creek. The stream frequently
meanders and has moderate clarity and moderate flow. The stream flows southwest through
the project study area. Pocosin vegetation provides intermittent, moderate canopy coverage for
the stream and includes pond pine and evergreen hardwood species.
Stream 6: Dutchman Creek (Figures 4-7 4-8 and 4-9)
Dutchman Creek originates at a culvert under a sand road. The stream flows southeast through
the project study area with low flow, occasional meanders, and is tea colored. Riparian
vegetation forms a well-developed canopy over the majority of the stream and includes
sweetgum, red maple, pond pine and evergreen hardwood species.
04-203.08 Appendix B NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
1
Stream 7: Jump and Run Creek (Figure 4-1 and 4-2)
The stream flows southeast through the project study area with low flow, occasional meanders,
and is tea colored. Riparian vegetation forms a well-developed canopy over the majority of the
stream and includes sweetgum, red maple, pond pine and evergreen hardwood species.
Streams 8a through 8h: UT's to Dutchman Creek (Figure 4-7)
Streams 8a through 8h are a series of relatively shallow ditches cut through the bottomland of
Dutchman Creek. During field delineations, flow was not observed within the streams. Riparian
vegetation forms a moderately well-developed canopy and includes pond pine and evergreen
hardwood species.
Stream 9: White Spring Creek (Figure 4-17 4-18 and 4-19)
Stream 9 is a manmade ditch that drains to White Spring Creek. The ditch has become
naturalized and now forms the headwaters of the creek. The stream flows from northwest to
southeast through the project study area. During field delineations, the stream had no flow.
The stream is bordered by spoil piles form the ditch now supporting with pocosin vegetation.
The stream is wide preventing the pocosin vegetation from providing much effective canopy
cover for the stream.
Stream 10: Intermittent Stream (Figure 4-1)
Stream 10 originates as a intermittent stream from Wetland RS5. The stream flows northeast
and eventually discharges into Stream 2S2. The stream has frequent meanders, low flow, and
good clarity. There is no canopy cover.
Stream 11: Former UT to Jump and Run Creek (Figure 4-1)
Stream 11 receives runoff from maintained/disturbed land. The stream has been diverted to
flow northwest into a detention pond, P1. The stream has occasional meanders, low flow, and
moderate clarity. The stream flows through maintained/disturbed uplands to the roadside ditch.
There is no canopy cover for the stream.
Stream 12: UT to Jump and Run Creek (Figure 4-2)
Stream 12 is part of an unnamed tributary to Jump and Run Creek. The stream flows southeast
to a confluence with Jump and Run Creek outside of the project study area. The stream has
occasional meanders, low flow, and is tea colored. The stream flows through
maintained/disturbed uplands and there is no canopy cover for the stream.
04-203.08 Appendix B NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
2
Wetland IS1: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
Wetlands of type IS1 are on inter-stream flats. They are seasonally saturated by precipitation
and overland runoff. These wetlands have an open understory and rich herb layer. This
wetland type is dominated by long-leaf pine and pond pine, with scattered, low shrubs and
plentiful ground cover. Soils were mapped as Spodosols, primarily Leon fine sand with some
Murville mucky fine sand, having either a muck presence or a dark surface with either standing
water or saturated at the soil surface
Wetland IS2: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
Wetlands of type IS2 are on inter-stream flats. They are seasonally saturated by precipitation
and overland runoff. While near manmade ditches, these wetlands were as wet as type IS1.
These wetlands have an open understory and rich herb layer. This wetland type is dominated
by long-leaf pine and pond pine, with scattered, low shrubs and plentiful ground cover. Mapped
soils were Spodosols, primarily Leon fine sand with some Murville mucky fine sand, having
either a muck presence or a dark surface. Hydrology indicators ranged from inundation of 4
inches to saturated within 2 inches of the soil surface
Wetland IS3: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
Wetlands of type IS3 are on inter-stream flats and in large basins such as peat-filled Carolina
bays. The primary source of water is precipitation. These wetlands occur primarily on soils
mapped as Murville mucky fine sand. Soils were saturated to the surface with evidence of
organic matter accumulation in the form of muck presence. Vegetation is dominated by dense,
waxy evergreen shrubs that typically include gallberries (Ilex spp.), fetterbushes (Leucothoe
spp.), honeycup, and laurel-leaf greenbrier often mixed with pond pine and evergreen
hardwoods (bays).
Wetland IS4: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The large wetland of type IS4 is on an inter-stream flat. The primary source of water is
precipitation. Though bordered by a major canal, this wetland is as wet as type IS3. This
wetland occurs on soils mapped as Murville mucky fine sand. Soils were saturated to the
surface with evidence of organic material accumulation in the form of muck presence.
Vegetation is dominated by dense, waxy evergreen shrubs that include gallberries,
fetterbushes, honeycup, and laurel-leaf greenbrier mixed with pond pine and evergreen
hardwoods (bays).
Wetland IS5: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetlands of type IS5 are on inter-stream flats and connected to IS4. The primary source of
water is precipitation. Though surrounded by a major canal and former agricultural fields, these
wetlands are as wet as types IS3 and IS4. The wetlands occur on soils mapped as Murville
mucky fine sand. Soils were saturated to the surface with evidence of organic matter
accumulation in the form of muck presence. Vegetation is dominated by dense, waxy
evergreen shrubs that include gallberries, fetterbushes, honeycup, and laurel-leaf greenbrier
mixed with pond pine and evergreen hardwoods (bays).
U4-ZU3.Ut5 Appendix C NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
1
Wetland IS6: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The large wetland of type IS6 is on an inter-stream flat in a large Carolina bay. The primary
source of water is precipitation. This wetland occurs on soils mapped as Murville mucky fine
sand. Soils were saturated to the surface with evidence of organic matter accumulation in the
form of a muck presence. Vegetation is dominated by dense, waxy evergreen shrubs that
include gallberries, fetterbushes, honeycup, and laurel-leaf greenbrier mixed with pond pine and
evergreen hardwoods (bays).
Wetland IS7: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetlands of type IS7 are on inter-stream flats occurring in maintained utility powerline
corridors. The primary source of water is precipitation. The wetlands predominantly occur on
soils mapped as Murville mucky fine sand. Hydrology indicators ranged from inundation of 4
inches to saturated within 4 inches of the soil surface. The soils had organic matter
accumulation in the form of a dark surface. Vegetation is dominated by mown dense, waxy
evergreen shrubs that include gallberries, fetterbushes, honeycup, and laurel-leaf greenbrier
mixed with evergreen hardwoods (bays) saplings.
Wetland IS8: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetlands of type IS8 are on inter-stream flats. The primary source of water is precipitation.
The wetlands predominantly occur on soils mapped as Murville mucky fine sand. Hydrology
indicators ranged from inundation of 4 inches to saturated within 4 inches of the soil surface.
The soils had evidence of organic matter accumulation in the form of a dark surface. Vegetation
is dominated by mown dense, waxy evergreen shrubs that include gallberries, fetterbushes,
honeycup, and laurel-leaf greenbrier mixed with evergreen hardwoods (bays) saplings.
Wetland IS9: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type IS9 is on an inter-stream flat with parallel ditches spaced at 300 to 400 feet.
The primary source of water is precipitation. The soils are mapped as Murville mucky fine sand.
During field investigations, soils exhibited organic matter accumulation in the form of muck
presence or a dark surface, and saturation to within eight inches of the soil surface. Vegetation
is dominated by dense, waxy evergreen shrubs that include gallberries, fetterbushes, honeycup,
and laurel-leaf greenbrier mixed with pond pine and evergreen hardwoods (bays).
Wetland IS10: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type IS10 is on an inter-stream flat with several large ditches. The understory
and all but a few trees have been removed from the wetland. The primary source of water is
precipitation. The wetland occurs on soils mapped as Murville mucky fine sand. During field
investigations, soils exhibited organic matter accumulation in the form of muck presence or a
dark surface, and saturation to within eight inches of the soil surface. Vegetation is dominated
by mown dense, waxy evergreen shrubs that include gallberries, fetterbushes, honeycup, and
laurel-leaf greenbrier mixed with evergreen hardwoods (bays) saplings.
Wetland IS11: Riverine (Figure 4-A)
This wetland is found in the headwaters area of Dutchman Creek. Groundwater seepage and
diffuse surface flow are major sources of water. Overbank flooding is not a substantial source
of water. The wetland is irregularly inundated by surface water and seasonally saturated. The
04-203.08 Appendix C NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
2
wetland occurs on soils mapped as Murville mucky fine sand. During field investigations, soils
exhibited organic matter accumulation in the form of muck presence or a dark surface, and
saturation from within two to eight inches of the soil surface. Pond pine and pocosin shrub
species are dominant.
Wetland IS12: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
This wetland is found in the headwaters area of White Spring Creek cut through a large Carolina
bay. The primary source of water is precipitation and groundwater seepage. This wetland
occurs on soils mapped as Murville mucky fine sand. Soils were saturated to the surface with
evidence of organic material accumulation in the form of a muck presence. Vegetation is
dominated by dense, waxy evergreen shrubs that include gallberries, fetterbushes, honeycup,
and laurel-leaf greenbrier mixed with pond pine and evergreen hardwoods (bays).
Wetland IS13: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
This wetland is found in on an interstream flat in a maintained utility line corridor. The primary
source of water is precipitation and probably rare overbank events. This wetland occurs on
soils mapped as Murville mucky fine sand. Soils were saturated to the surface with evidence of
organic material accumulation in the form of a muck presence. Vegetation is dominated by
dense, waxy evergreen shrubs that include gallberries, fetterbushes, honeycup, and laurel-leaf
greenbrier mixed with pond pine and evergreen hardwoods (bays).
Wetland IS14: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetlands of type IS14 occur along linear conveyances. These wetlands are subject to
inundation or saturation for extended periods during the growing season. Soils are mapped as
a variety of types but are often fill material. Vegetation within this wetland type is predominantly
herbaceous (less than 50 percent coverage by woody species) vegetation including polygonum,
tearthumb, soft rush, seedbox, cattail, and flatsedge.
Wetland RS1: Riverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type RS1 is along a tributary for Dutchman Creek which has been channelized
and diverted behind development along NC 87/133. Groundwater seepage and diffuse surface
flow are important sources of water. Overbank flooding is not a substantial source of water.
Soils are mapped as primarily Muckalee loam. During field investigations, soils exhibited
organic matter accumulation in the form of muck presence or low-chroma colors. Hydrology
indicators ranged from inundation of 3 inches to saturated within 10 inches of the soil surface.
Pond pine, evergreen hardwoods, red maple, and blackgum dominate.
Wetland RS2: Riverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type RS2 is along Dutchman Creek. Groundwater seepage and diffuse surface
flow are primary sources of water. Overbank flooding is probably an occasional source of
water. Soils are mapped as primarily Torhunta mucky fine sandy loam with some Muckalee
loam and Murville mucky fine sand. During field investigations, soils exhibited organic matter
accumulation in the form of muck presence and saturation to within ten inches of the soil
surface. Pond pine, evergreen hardwoods, red maple, and sweetgum dominate.
04-203.08 Appendix C INC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
3
Wetland R53: Riverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type RS2 occurs in the bottomland of Dutchman Creek. A number of old ditches
have been cut through the area (Figure 4-7). This wetland is intermittently to seasonally
inundated for long duration. Overbank flooding is source of water as is groundwater and
surface runoff. Soils are mapped as primarily Muckalee loam. During field investigations, soils
exhibited organic matter accumulation in the form of muck presence or low-chroma colors.
Hydrology indicators ranged from inundation of 3 inches to saturated within 10 inches of the soil
surface. Pond pine, evergreen hardwoods, red maple, sweetgum, and blackgum dominate.
Wetland RS4: Riverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type RS4 is a riparian wetland located at the headwaters of a stream which
begins outside of the project study area. Hydrophytic vegetation within the wetland includes
black willow, cattail, and soft rush. During field investigations, soils exhibited low-chroma colors
and inundation of 2 inches.
Wetland RS5: Riverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type RS5 is adjacent to Stream 10. Hydrophytic vegetation within the wetland
includes pond pine, red maple, titi, and soft rush. During field investigations, soils exhibited
organic matter accumulation in the form of a dark surface and saturation to within 12 inches of
the soil surface.
Wetland LS1: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type LS1 occurs in a depression, which is likely a limesink, surrounded by
uplands. This wetland is semi-permanently inundated. Likely sources of water are perched
groundwater, groundwater discharge, overland runoff, and precipitation. The soils are mapped
as Blanton fine sandy loam. During field investigations, soils were inundated to 3 feet.
Vegetation is dominated by blackgum, loblolly pine, sweetgum, and oaks.
Wetland LS2: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type LS2 occurs in a depression, which is likely a limesink, surrounded by
uplands. This wetland is semi-permanently inundated. Likely sources of water are perched
groundwater, groundwater discharge, overland runoff, and precipitation. The soils are mapped
as Blanton fine sandy loam. During field investigations, soils were inundated to approximately 3
feet. Vegetation is dominated by gallberries, pond pine, red maple, sweetgum, and titi.
Wetland LS3: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type LS3 occurs in a depression, which is likely a limesink, surrounded by
uplands. This wetland is semi-permanently inundated. Likely sources of water are perched
groundwater, groundwater discharge, overland runoff, and precipitation. The soils are mapped
as Blanton fine sandy loam. During field investigations, soils were inundated to approximately 3
feet. Vegetation is dominated by gallberries, pond pine, red maple, sweetgum, and titi.
Wetland LS4: Nonriverine (Figure 4-A)
The wetland of type LS4 occurs in a depression surrounded by uplands. This wetland is semi-
permanently inundated. Likely sources of water are overland runoff and precipitation. The soils
04-203.08 Appendix C NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
4
are mapped as Onslow fine sandy loam. During field investigations, soils were inundated to 4
inches. Vegetation is dominated by black willow, loblolly pine, gallberries, and sedges.
Pond P1 (Figure 4-1)
Pond P1 is a small retention pond within disturbed/maintained land. Most of the adjacent land
has been cleared. Runoff from adjacent impervious surfaces provides input for the pond and
Stream 12 flows into the pond. Overflow from the pond is directed into Jump and Run Creek.
U4-20108 Appendix C NC 133/NC 211 Connector TIP R-3324
5
N

W E
BOILING SPRINGS LAKES
LIMESINK COMPLEX S'

r

i
MO HWEST
" N L AREA
133
. \
.

PROJECT ?
RS
STUDY AREA
_ AREA

reek

211
- .. f. z

Ra p?p\ ?
n : -rpCQ?eG _
--
'
-
? npu1•
4?a

dly?a MirAEI
..; ag F1t-.tch rr..*&4 er lL Ccr tsrexi
ya
a_
Koach (Jab.1;'vxl For

?:+ws.kril -
'?F41?1
NATURAL HERITAGE AREAS
1 mi. 0 2 mi. -
1:99,200
Source: 1997 North Carolina Atlas and Gazatteer, p.87.
PROJECT STUDY AREA Dwn. by: MAF FIGURE
EcoScience NC 133 / NC 211 CONNECTOR Ckdby: DKO
-do W;z Corporation (R-3324) SOUTHPORT Date: MAY 2006 1
Raleigh, North Carolina
Brunswick County, North Carolina Project:
04-203.05
k ? y, .. : r OWer '
2000 ft. _ 0 2000 ft.
1:25,260 j.
Source: 2005 Maptech Terrain Navigator Pro, Southport, NC Quad. ,
4. _
-- \
Bt 4Q
j
t
•
.
?_ - PROJECT
STUDY
AREA `'`?•' i?. '' „ Beth
e
Cooivale Cem
J .. ---''?'? • • 8N• I 1
I 1 01
Cem. , ? Goas,et ?_? y _ i
` 1 - y i • ?? ? ? 1 :Yj
?}'?? - 1 , f hur In of the
bS • u tunin. 1 =w J `i , ??
h • . .. • . ?? ?,dhv ie 1
SI Ptt?n , ?tr..:h\ :r •Wr,Slhip PA:w' L'
.:; / ?4 •rf f ?.,_ . ? •s r ? ^_ ?• ?' ? ? tiG BM to
t, -- ?.--rt•. ? `.' - .. .. I'. • San _
y. '? O j '?
r
PROJECT STUDY AREA TOPOGRAPHY Dwn.by
MAF FIGURE
iiiiiiiii. EcoScience NC 133 / NC 211 CONNECTOR Ckd by. DKO
Corporation (R-3324) SOUTHPORT Date: MAY 2006 2
Raleigh, North Carolina
Brunswick County, North Carolina Project:
04-203.05
Yr' Y
SOILS LEGEND Aa 4 ' •
>
BaB Baymeade fine sand
BnB Blanton fine sand
CT Croatan muckt
r`
Fo Foreston loamy fine sand `
GoA Goldsboro fine sandy loam
KrB Kureb fine sand T A
LA Lafitte muck
Lo Leon fine sand
Ly Lynchburg fine sandy loam
Ma Mandarin fine sand
Mk Muckalee loam
Mu Murville mucky fine sand
NoB Norfolk loamy fine sand fi °Ar °!
On Onslow fine sandy loam e
TO Torhunta mucky fine sandy loam y 4 LO
3 ° : ! hltu`
w f
4
MA
IV
e.0 r
x? s
M"? to ct,`'?+1 '+$"s .,aWat. r

1 ?£

r
t PROJEC
a Co STUDY
AREA
Bsri 2000 ft.
. 2000 n.
0
sa ; •
T
t
0 ...
"p r + a .y } r
"
e
1:25,260

PROJECT STUDY AREA SOILS Dwn. by
MAF
FIGURE
Corporation
Corporatio NC 133 / NC 211 CONNECTOR Ckdby: DKO

Raleigh
North Carolina

(R-3324) SOUTHPORT
Date:
MAY ZOOS 3
, Brunswick County, North Carolina Project:
04-203.05
/? \\\ pOp?W x??Q
\ YV?>w??>
\ V
/ \\ OUO>Z Iocz
O05oz O
?\ \ ?3nmO00, Ot m
CD 1 I` \ \
\ \ r N r
\ a 11
e? I II
co
-----=___
1\\ ------ --- - /
? O
O ? x
CIO)
C) o
co)
N
o q W
~ co) Q

W
r =
i ?

0
e U
8 0
P U -
L7 e
W
(sxOatrznos-tZ££Y) U013911 NOD UZ ONI ££I ON ?,L39fOMd
u O
cz
C)
W0
0 Z N
O 3 O
N O M
p Y N O
Z W ¢ d n a W
ui
oe
W
L
JWJ
O U
O N
N
�
N cc �
y
¢
zz
O
ZONa
o0
p
SWM=
Z
�2zCc'
vu
N�
0-0
Zo
N
a
�z
u
m
N
N_
0 Z N
O 3 O
N O M
p Y N O
Z W ¢ d n a W
ui
oe
W
L
JWJ
O U
O N
N

J 3 p
U O cV F- r< Z ° o M
r? VO oC o? 0y r o
j
E a o
(~j O s ?VM= pfd VW n v LLI
L) 0
1. ?O Q. Z Z -Zo?? 3? ?Y
U O_ 0-0 zo ay-Cy o;
?--- m
E-b 133HS HOIVW
am ?? +• ' ".?
Aek
„- ... y'
ON.
N
V
W
W
S
y
2
U
H
Q
.

;. , 117
Y;
z
0
rr o
°?d a a wu aw
oz o o who Q° ?aZ
<?
L wm Ned NdZ a o o o
Boa w zd
o' <o LD ?a>
as min ?3 Dou a? 3°do
Ti
0 0
o i
0
I
y F- UPvp oo Cy >
v Mz? Y Uy„ozo N
T, Z U 0
y o x
`0-0 z1 10
W O - Z y
b-D 133HS HD1bW ,
Z
O
}}
oQ z z z
a wo i
ww
um y 0Z x
o 30w o
o

L
o
oa
? z
w d
a wa 00

J w
Q
ow
da ??n ?3 ?
Ua
<2
U 0<0
U adu
a
S
o
o o '
O U
?r
g ?* 3
gg .d R ??
..,PCrt
O
0
w
w
w
z
O U
O Vl

w I
x
W
x
U
F
a

-------?
U O cc zi Q o 0 0
C 'J VO OC ooso ?y } N o
,:, .. U ?L 0 z V N a W a a v w M
O W 2 YU VE
.
C/) u z Y2
O Q. p z CV)zccD N? y> s o v u
o ¢y
L) 0 (S.?U a _ UU`vOi z
Z M3
L-6 133HS HO1VW
z
W
a
w
J
o a
w ¢r
O z
Z wed
JJ Z w
OQ G JO wV w7 aWw
10 z oz o o w? a° >°m 'az
O U VO z 30 DO Q?W
wm oQ Sa a w?` ow old 7dpo
¢ vow LO O¢ w> » J
vaia °? w~ ~a>
as ?, in ?3 c? ?o °dv a3 3¢0
O
o
o o i
? I
.r4
Nlkl'4;??;

ar
4y
r
}}? '1
4
7
1
1
z 1
1
1
1
1 .
1
k

IK
)O

?? r
yy
a*.
i
?
2
!n *
3y?yY.
a ?y,. rdt .'• _ `
ns
... ? e:1 ? ?
t i
•.
.
L-V 133HS HO1VW

rl
I 'IL
n 1
- — J — - -o z
a
Q N O M
=Z, J Z cn N N
N UF—a0 po Og
Z N U a w
.0 O C SWM= Y� OF S�$� O j
(�] �z V MZ�H U So �o�
O Z �ZOC� NW cn> f o a w
zaN
WO`O
U o
e UU y �z s ?
a
m m
Z o
6 b 133HS HO1VW
z
ZZ o
�-o O O F J wo }WZ
Fla
''o u c~io z ;p~ �~ oZ�
'L Um S O ww xm ULD
Z
W �a N_w N a Baa ¢> ��in =
+ ow w 0 ams a�
J n,% . �3 'o u ap waa> F
4U 360 Q
00 0
N
P
N AM.
E
O
v
� w
w
z_
w
U
N
h� r
KXm-
LO
LLI
N
D \
n r.
g' lI
Y
p t0
W
HOD
y
2 S
i 133HS HD1VW

1;--t 1:3*4wq WI)IWIAI
14
I
0
'tr 0 00,
\§ _CC Z,z U N CL
LU
z
22
LLJ
0
0
m Z
31:
�2 Z Cc :) .3:
(,) >
U 0
0-0 z
u
u
'o... ll� ZAP
m
--Jl
1;--t 1:3*4wq WI)IWIAI
14
I

gg Nx F zz a
0 DD V)
u '00 00 0
CU 2
U W Cv) Y V ?
?(r ?
WU p = a V
ZUN mZ ?y
z , '
00 3 0
N O O
} fA N
Q
c?
a O >
? o
OL-b 133HS HOIVW
CD
4
w
x
x
U
H
Q
•
;vd :4
r'
O to - _ ? 'k? E Fn'?-? :# •
10 z 2 H f-? ?r2 ?WW f ( ' YL 5.r °?
Q Nz O 0 r W?? Q QJ YYK - SkFr'
W wm o ode a www ow boo °w>
J as N 3 DOU aU

w
w
x
N
x
U
N
Q
g
W cj
X.7't.' 0
i. Z
E �* W
+' W
NIF
Z
O_CC
7J
°Fi
O
Z~u ILNO
=
0
U
�LL1mS
mZ°j H
YU
u=
Z
�Z�SNr
0-0
zo
_ UU to
mZ
a Z
X.7't.' 0
i. Z
E �* W
+' W
NIF
Z
o
-
a
Z
o
N
=
p
O
'a
N
OF
8�a�
cc
Y
IL
IV* 133HS HOiVW
X.7't.' 0
i. Z
E �* W
+' W
NIF

r
v C
?a
' V O
_ 0 z
W I?p

S
rn

w
2
N
m
U
F
Q
w
w
x
to
2
U
F
Q
y ^,r #
J
? Z v3 0
U0
?- vO oo ON
0 ? W M= Y< V W 8 a o W
U enZ?j F x ON N ° _ ' ?.
Z COZOCn N N} 2 o "
O"O jo CO
?-
_ UU N ?z
Z m
ZL-V 133HS HUM
w
r' ° a FoC - ?
I b-V 133HS HOIVW
U 0 A <
C� 0 cr z g
L)
Z L)
u LU x
0 z L)
Cf) I? �- � z
40 cv) z En 11
u 0 0 z Ir
0 0
U U z
z
z
I
IMMINNI'll"
L) (L,
0 z z �mo 10
V)z 0 0 1 WED <,
S - -
C) z 3:01 �� 09
z
51 0, W` M i'o ow
V, A 0 0 0
�Un yo
'o
ow a�w 0 <.m ir
Nx L w< M5
"m '15. Z 5 S a 0. W3 9k 8 xw 30:
0
W
ONME
% "INN
\110,
IR
IMMS
INN
IN
----------- ---

u 0
O—W =Z,
le 0 00
z U
U N cL
LU C" Y L)
Z
0 z cc
E.
U 0
L)
WU aw z
SEEMS
QkxxWxxxIkN 1
----- ------
IL-11
IN

- -- — --
� 2 of
Ncc -Z z
a Q N 3o n
Z~ UO 22
�WMS YU UH S $ O !I
C%% ffi L) M Z I H x o N N O£
O Z �Zoc� v3i� N>' o
z x
UU O—o (n
o
W Y ZU N �z -
m
y., r ; * • ¢ry: OO Z z W W} W W
O
Al 3 r Who Q� �Qz
4 , z
xcr
wSaWOwU
W nOd'WjU wa 0
> w0in�wN>w 0 a0 aW
3°do
t,;,,;
Oa
ca
.r, r
9: vt, : y21,
5 �
'�,�!Nom' �; ;':•� � .�; # ��': ! •� '`�. .�
�3. 3
� s• y
t 5'
J7' .
4 4
r ^,
1,
�g� jak l` � • i +�7Fg`x, ! t � �;x rr ' � � y'6 O
`Y ¢ 3t -y, l ! '7p •R a�T',fj/j}r' g�,. _ 'fin '^ , fV
.49
`
r;
iI
N N
L-6 133HS HO1VW

U O Q o
?,I F- UO?O ao Oy r n °
/7i x, ca O Z U N a ?? o a w N
z U cn Z = p fn N o 4
z M OW HO N fns o
¢y
I ?a UU co z
L U J a 2 - -- ?'- ?- -J
M?
441
x \ - s Z
FV- ?. € .rte mew . - W

w
LAJ
u
Q
"
A,
F? Y } ? usTc ' ?y
Ak,
8Y4?' `rYi ..
It
f? .
q
t ? x ti

w
_ t? °
'' T n ,#
A x?' m
? Jf
w
x ? O
U
B 4 133HS H31t/W
0
a
7,
- J
ZN
O cr
Z
D
y
Z
3
O
(A
0
0
N
may- Ug8
U O g
0
0
zUNa
M2
�uJfn
L)%
a
OW
UF-
a
S
y V
w
i!
z
L)
W O
z
2
N
Q
Y
R
UILLLLLLiLLI_Is
UU_to
z
m
4
m
Lig
I IL-
♦ c
„ y r
NN
LU r i'y Ff k
wujarc 3» p
uj
5
�+#• .� &`ata '
E 0
w
M
tp
��N
n
H
LU
LU
x
x
U
V-
Q
�I OL-* 133HS H�1VW £L -b 133HS H�1VW�OL-V 133HS H�1VW £L -b 133HS H�1VW F

0

•

i
V V p ( N-¢ Q p p o
7 O Cc z z z y N O
,u CIS 22 <
v?,TU Z W N= Yw ?F a
(\_ z U M Z ?j H = C y N 0
O Q". Z m
ZOCO Z cny o
W(? - UU`y ?O = O
Z m
- -- -
# f --
N 8" f <
TA,
N
k s
VN,
X
?\ o u7
41
x
0 0 " !-
?4 # x r /!
4 J4
?.,.
R
-` '..
a r r
44-. y
s u ; '
N Tp
z
0
}Y J JJ O
om Q Q ¢ wU d
NOZ O O 1?0 GO IQ?
0 O ? war ??.
Z Wm OQ 0 Q W?W Xw OzXz
W a 0w v» Uaa Ow ¢00
ow Facn
L '¢O wa>
J as N 3 c? Doc ?c? 3ao
I o I
0
° i

Alf
:a Y 5 ?

?t
'
?
- m
Ps i # 7n ?H"
Y .

v
N
LU
w
w
x
x
F
CQ
G
•
^I L
Qi ~ ~ U o .l Q o 0 2 0 > v
z V a a v `L a o v 00
d _ F s
f
r'L and W a o ?
M
CV z ?O?O z~ y? n a oy - w
W? ? ?o UU tq ?o S
LLL
- -- ?a z m
----
,.s `?. ?. -.. N O z z O O Y w Z
w #'' r s a z ?mo?a ? o o xm z x z
-,,.. - ;?^s` t ,:. w zd a w a o w a o 0
W
W a m?i j'v j w 3 m cn0 a 0 oO a r d>
* s t'-teaw ?s J a Sao
5? k ? I ? U
?. N by F
2' x
\ a.> o
J
. Itl
y oM \ Y'? ° _ a rte #} ,..' r.
7 ?
y.
z
- ?\ \ to
`?,\\ r xt ?.:
&MM
?r
H
W
W
to
F
Q
SL-k 133HS HOIVW

s

o,
E g
ma ? h.

qq Y
i9k'3
4
?
4

J
< v G
Clt
}y U O
WU ? n
z
0
}} O
O? Z < W
?Q Q z J W-U aWW
oz o o z IMO a° ?Qz
a Um uO o Sow xE
W °zXz
o ozd a W o Joo
Q of 0 ? N QI-?
OD QO 0O a °QV d Wa>
? as in 3 0 B 3aO
? oo
O
O
O
W ?.
z
O U
N
r
O
0
U
z
1 Ill s°

Z Z J

Q
D
o
z
0
O
N

oM
_
UqO
zl
0o
U
ON
W
} o
u
U, ?d
Yu F
UH o

N
n < o
zcc7
?O-O N?
z10 N>
h
¢ < Q U
UU N ?z ?
Z m P- 7

4

IP"

4
W
W
2
!n
U
N
Q
r
LEGEND
PROJECT
STUDY AREA
JURISDICTIONAL
WETLAND
PROJECT ALTERNATES
PROJECT
STUDY AREA
O
ter; -

LEGEND
Coastal Plain
Bottomland Hardwood G
0 Coastal Fringe Sandhill°ro rr ?=
Maintained / Disturbed 1IN
r
Xerlc Sandhill Scrub `90
Wet Pine Flatwoods
1 -t
0 a
Pond Pine Woodland
Pine Savanna '? • ' {
0
Pocosin Wetland x-
s - °' PROJECT
STUDY lr
41
• ? ? I a r .
Beth
_. S
!. 'gAihel ??. `
- Cent
`h! Z Chu
ly rY • 1 / m4?hv
Ch
•' •' . '• ' . . .. ?. ! fib
2000 ft. 0 $lir'.dtM 'Y ,i? : 1
2000 ft. .. •,r .,-;
1:25,260 railer + .
Source: 2005 Maptech Terrain Navigator Pro, Southport, NC Quad -?'-
-?s
PROJECT STUDY AREA PLANT COMMUNITIES Dwn.by:
MAF FIGURE
EcoScience NC 133 / NC 211 CONNECTOR Ckdby: DKO
lm? -Corporation (R-3324) SOUTHPORT Date: MAY 2006
=7? Raleigh, North Carolina 6
Brunswick County, North Carolina Project:
04-203.05