20191085 Ver 1_B-4942 Aquatic Species Survey Report_20190814

Aquatic Species Survey Report
Replacement of Bridge No. 121 on SR 1702 (Mark Edwards Road) over West Bear Creek
Wayne County, North Carolina
WBS # 39905.1.1
West Bear Creek in Survey Reach
Prepared For:
UR
Qf
NC Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
Contact Person:
Jared Gray
Biological Surveys Group
North Carolina Department of Transportation
jgraygncdot. gov
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1598
January 10, 2018

Prepared by:
324 Blackwell Street, Suite 1200
Durham, NC 27701
Contact Person:
Tom Dickinson
tom.dickinsonnthreeoaksenizineerin
919-732-1300

Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Waters Impacted..................................................................................................................
1
2.1 303(d) Classification........................................................................................................
1
2.2 NPDES discharges...........................................................................................................
2
3.0 Target Federally Protected Species Descriptions................................................................
2
3.1 Elliptio lanceolata (Yellow Lance)..................................................................................
2
3.1.1 Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
2
3.1.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements....................................................................
2
3.1.3 Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
3
3.1.4 Species Listing..........................................................................................................
4
4.0 Other Target Species Descriptions.......................................................................................
4
4.1 Fusconaia masoni (Atlantic Pigtoe).................................................................................
4
4.1.1 Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
4
4.1.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements....................................................................
5
4.1.3 Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
5
4.1.4 Species Listing..........................................................................................................
5
4.2 Noturus furiosus (Carolina Madtom)...............................................................................
6
4.2.1 Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
6
4.2.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements....................................................................
6
4.2.3 Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
7
4.2.4 Species Listing..........................................................................................................
7
4.3 Necturus lewisi (Meuse River Waterdog).........................................................................
7
4.3.1 Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
7
4.3.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements....................................................................
8
4.3.3 Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
8
4.3.4 Species Listing..........................................................................................................
8
5.0 Survey Efforts......................................................................................................................
8
5.1 Stream Conditions at Time of Survey: West Bear Creek .................................................
8
5.2 Methodology....................................................................................................................
9
6.0 Results..................................................................................................................................9
7.0 Discussion/Conclusions.....................................................................................................
10
8.0 Literature Cited..................................................................................................................
11
Appendix A. Figures:
Figure 1: Project Vicinity & Survey Locations
Figure 2: NCNHP Element Occurrences
Figure 3: 303(d) Streams and NPDES Discharge

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes the replacement of Bridge
No. 121 on SR 1702 (Mark Edwards Road) over West Bear Creek (TIP B-4942). On April 5,
2017, the USFWS proposed the Yellow Lance (Elliptio lanceolata), which is known from
Wayne County. Additionally, the Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), Carolina Madtom
(Noturus furiosus), and Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi) are being considered for listing
by the USFWS and are known to occur in Wayne County.
According to the October 2017 NC Natural Heritage Program database (NCNHP 2017), accessed
November 10, 2017, the nearest current element occurrence (EO) for Yellow Lance is in Mill
Creek approximately 64.5 river miles (RM) away from the survey reach (EO ID 21888); it was
first observed in May 1994 and last observed in June 1994 (Figure 2). The nearest current
Atlantic Pigtoe EO (EO ID 5261) is in the Little River approximately 84.6 RM away from the
survey reach; it was first observed in January 1986 and last observed in June 2014 (Figure 2).
There is a closer historic EO for Atlantic Pigtoe (EO ID 15611) in the Neuse River
approximately 19.7 RM away; it was first and last observed in 1985 (Figure 2). The nearest
current Carolina Madtom EO (EO ID 3858) is in the Little River approximately 68.9 RM away
from the survey reach; it was first observed in June 1961 and most last observed in July 2005
(Figure 2). There is a closer historic EO for Carolina Madtom (EO ID 17908) in the Neuse River
approximately 17.8 RM away; it was first observed in 1960 and last observed in 1985 (Figure 2).
The nearest current Neuse River Waterdog EO (EO ID 10741) is located in Bear Creek
approximately 8.9 RM downstream of the survey reach; it was first observed in January 1979
and last observed in February 2013 (Figure 2).
As part of the federal permitting process that requires an evaluation of potential project -related
impacts to federally protected species, Three Oaks Engineering (Three Oaks) was contracted by
NCDOT to conduct surveys targeting Yellow Lance, Atlantic Pigtoe, Carolina Madtom, and
Neuse River Waterdog.
2.0 WATERS IMPACTED
The study bridge is in the Middle Neuse subbasin within the Neuse River Basin (U.S. Geological
Survey [USGS] Hydrological Unit 03020202). West Bear Creek flows approximately 4.7 RM
into Bear Creek which flows approximately 10.2 RM to the Neuse River.
2.1 303(d) Classification
West Bear River is not listed on the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
(NCDEQ, formerly NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, NCDENR) -
Division of Water Resources 2014 Final 303(d) list of impaired streams. Bear Creek,
approximately 4.7 RM downstream of the survey reach, is listed for Benthos (NCDEQ 2014). At
the time of the writing of this report, the 2016 303(d) list had not been finalized and it does not
make changes to the above referenced impairments (NCDEQ 2016 Draft).
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 1

2.2 NPDES discharges
The closest active permitted NPDES discharge to the survey reach on West Bear Creek is 19.7
RM away (USEPA 2017); Rockford Church Road Water Treatment Plant (WTP, NPDES Permit
# NC0086918) is located adjacent to the Neuse River (Figure 3).
3.0 TARGET FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS
3.1 Elliptio lanceolata (Yellow Lance)
3. L I Species Characteristics
The Yellow Lance was described from the Tar River at Tarboro, North Carolina in 1828, by I.
Lea (1828). Johnson (1970) synonymized this species with 25 other named species of lance -
shaped elliptio mussels into Elliptio lanceolate species complex. Genotypic and phenotypic
analysis suggests that some of these formally described species are valid, including Elliptio
lanceolata (Bogan et al. 2009). This species differs from other lanceolate Elliptios by having a
"waxy" bright yellow periostracum that lacks rays. Some older specimens are brown towards
the posterior end of the shell. The periostracum can also have brown growth rests. Yellow
Lance have a distinct pallial line and adductor muscle scars. The posterior ridge is distinctly
rounded and curves dorsally towards the posterior end. The nacre ranges from an iridescent blue
on the posterior end, sometimes becoming white or salmon colored on the anterior end. The
lateral teeth are long, with two on the left and one on the right. Each valve also has two
psuedocardinal teeth; on the left valve one tooth is before the other with the posterior tooth
tending to be vestigial, and on the right valve the two teeth are parallel and the more anterior one
is vestigial (Adams et al 1990).
The Yellow Lance is a tachytictic (short-term) breeder, brooding young in early spring and
releasing glochidia in early summer. Based on the pelagic, "net -like" glochidia the fish host
species is speculated to be some type of minnow (USFWS 2017). White Shiner (Luxilus
albeolus) and Pinewoods Shiner (Lythrurus matuntinus) were the most effective fish hosts for
Yellow Lance in laboratory studies (Eads and Levine 2009).
3.1.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The reported range of the Yellow Lance has changed several times over the years due to
taxonomic uncertainty regarding "true" Yellow Lance, and other "lanceolate Elliptio' species.
The Yellow Lance is currently thought to be distributed in Atlantic Slope river basins from the
Neuse River Basin in North Carolina north to the Rappahannock River in Virginia, with the
exception of the Roanoke River Basin, as well as the Patuxent River Basin in Maryland and
possibly the Potomac River Basin in Virginia and Maryland (USFWS 2017). It is in
considerable decline throughout its range; however, extant populations still occur in all historic
river basins, except possibly the Potomac (USFWS 2017). This species has been found in
multiple physiographic provinces, from the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains, through the
Piedmont and into the Coastal Plain, in small streams to large rivers, in substrates primarily
consisting of clean sand, and occasionally gravel, with a high dissolved oxygen (DO) content
(USFWS 2017, Adams et al 1990). Alderman (2003) stated that no remaining populations
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 2

appear below point source pollution or other nutrient -rich areas. Associate mussel species
include Atlantic Pigtoe, Tar River Spinymussel (Parvaspina steinstansana, formerly Elliptio
steinstansana), Yellow Lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa), Notched Rainbow (Villosa constricta),
Triangle Floater (Alasmidonta undulata), Paper Pondshell (Utterbackia imbecillis), Eastern
Lampmussel (Lampsilis radiata), Creeper (Strophitus undulatus), and other Elliptio species
(Adams et al 1990).
3.1.3 Threats to Species
The cumulative effects of several factors, including sedimentation, point and non -point
discharge, and stream modifications (impoundments, channelization, etc.) have contributed to the
decline of this species throughout its range. All of the populations are generally small in
numbers and restricted to short reaches of isolated streams. The low numbers of individuals and
the restricted range of most of the surviving populations make them extremely vulnerable to
extirpation from a single catastrophic event or activity, much like the endangered Dwarf
Wedgemussel (DWM, Alasmidonta heterodon, Strayer et al. 1996). Catastrophic events may
consist of natural events such as flooding or drought, as well as human influenced events such as
toxic spills associated with highways, railroads, or industrial -municipal complexes.
Siltation resulting from substandard land -use practices associated with activities such as
agriculture, forestry, and land development has been recognized as a major contributing factor to
degradation of mussel populations. Siltation has been documented to be extremely detrimental
to mussel populations by degrading substrate and water quality, increasing potential exposure to
other pollutants, and by direct smothering of mussels (Ellis 1936, Marking and Bills 1979).
Sediment accumulations of less than one inch have been shown to cause high mortality in most
mussel species (Ellis 1936). In Massachusetts, a bridge construction project decimated a
population of the DWM because of accelerated sedimentation and erosion (Smith 1981).
Sewage treatment effluent has been documented to significantly affect the diversity and
abundance of mussel fauna (Goudreau et al. 1988). Goudreau et al. (1988) found that recovery
of mussel populations may not occur for up to two miles below points of chlorinated sewage
effluent.
The impact of impoundments on freshwater mussels has been well documented (USFWS 1992a,
Neves 1993). Construction of dams transforms lotic habitats into lentic habitats, which results in
changes in aquatic community composition. The changes associated with inundation adversely
affect both adult and juvenile mussels as well as fish community structure, which could eliminate
possible fish hosts for upstream transport of glochidia. Muscle Shoals on the Tennessee River in
northern Alabama, once the richest site for naiads (mussels) in the world, is now at the bottom of
Wilson Reservoir and covered with 19 feet of muck (USFWS 1992b). Large portions of all of
the river basins within the Yellow Lance's range have been impounded and this is believed to be
a major factor contributing to the decline of the species (Master 1986).
The introduction of exotic species such as the Asian Clam (Corbicula fluminea) and Zebra
Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) has also been shown to pose significant threats to native
freshwater mussels. The Asian Clam is now established in most of the major river systems in the
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 3

United States (Fuller and Powell 1973) including those streams still supporting surviving
populations of the Yellow Lance. Concern has been raised over competitive interactions for
space, food, and oxygen with this species and native mussels, possibly at the juvenile stages
(Neves and Widlak 1987, Alderman 1995). The Zebra Mussel, native to the drainage basins of
the Black, Caspian and Aral Seas, is an exotic freshwater mussel that was introduced into the
Great Lakes in the 1980s and has rapidly expanded its range into the surrounding river basins,
including those of the South Atlantic slope (O'Neill and MacNeill 1991). This species competes
for food resources and space with native mussels, and is expected to contribute to the extinction
of at least 20 freshwater mussel species if it becomes established throughout most of the eastern
United States (USFWS 1992b). The Zebra Mussel is not currently known from any river
supporting a Yellow Lance population, nor the Neuse River basin.
3.1.4 Species Listing
Yellow Lance was petitioned for federal listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (ESA) within the 2010 Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland Species
from the Southeastern United States by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD 2010), and is
state listed as Endangered in North Carolina. On April 5, 2017, the USFWS proposed the
Yellow Lance as Threatened. Following the proposal, there was a 60-day comment period for
the public to provide input to help USFWS in making its final decision. The USFWS usually has
one year after a species is proposed for listing under the ESA to make a final determination on
listing the species as threatened or endangered.
4.0 OTHER TARGET SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS
4.1 Fusconaia masoni (Atlantic Pigtoe)
4.1.1 Species Characteristics
The Atlantic Pigtoe was described by Conrad (1834) from the Savannah River in Augusta,
Georgia. Although larger specimens exist, the Atlantic Pigtoe seldom exceeds 50 mm (about 2
inches) in length. This species is tall relative to its length, except in headwater stream reaches
where specimens may be elongated. The hinge ligament is relatively short and prominent. The
periostracum is normally brownish, has a parchment texture, and young individuals may have
greenish rays across the entire shell surface. The posterior ridge is biangulate. The interdentum
in the left valve is broad and flat. The anterior half of the valve is thickened compared with the
posterior half, and, when fresh, nacre in the anterior half of the shell tends to be salmon colored,
while nacre in the posterior half tends to be more iridescent. The shell has full dentation. In
addition to simple papillae, branched and arborescent papillae are often seen on the incurrent
aperture. In females, salmon colored demibranchs are often seen during the spawning season.
When fully gravid, females use all four demibranchs to brood glochidia (VDGIF 2014).
The Atlantic Pigtoe is a tachytictic (short-term) breeder, brooding young in early spring and
releasing glochidia in early summer. The Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) and Shield Darter
(Percina peltata) have been identified as potential fish hosts for this species (O'Dee and Waters
2000). Additional research has found Rosefin Shiner (Lythrurus ardens), Creek Chub (Semotilus
atromaculatus), and Longnose Dace (Rhynichthys cataractae) are also suitable hosts (Wolf
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 4

2012). Eads and Levine (2011) found White Shiner, Satinfin Shiner (Cyprinella analostana),
Bluehead Chub (Nocomis leptocephalus), Rosyside Dace (Clinostomus funduloides), Pinewoods
Shiner, Creek Chub, Swallowtail Shiner (Notropis procne), and Mountain Redbelly Dace
(Chrosomus oreas) to also be suitable hosts for Atlantic Pigtoe.
4.1.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements
Johnson (1970) reported the range of the Atlantic Pigtoe extended from the Ogeechee River
Basin in Georgia north to the James River Basin in Virginia; however, recent curation of the H.
D. Athearn collection uncovered valid specimens from the Altamaha River in Georgia (Sarah
McRae, USFWS, personal communication). It is presumed extirpated from the Catawba River
Basin in North and South Carolina south to the Altamaha River Basin. The general pattern of its
current distribution indicates that the species is currently limited to headwater areas of drainages
and most populations are represented by few individuals. In North Carolina, aside from the
Waccamaw River, it was once found in every Atlantic Slope river basin. Except for the Tar
River, it is no longer found in the mainstem of the rivers within its historic range (Savidge et al.
2011). It is listed as Federally Endangered in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, and
as Federally Threatened in Virginia. It has a NatureServe rank of G2 (imperiled).
The Atlantic Pigtoe has been found in multiple physiographic provinces, from the foothills of the
Appalachian Mountains, through the Piedmont and into the Coastal Plain, in streams less than
one meter wide to large rivers. The preferred habitat is a substrate composed of gravel and
coarse sand, usually at the base of riffles, however, it can be found in a variety of other substrates
and lotic habitat conditions.
4.1.3 Threats to Species
Threats to the Atlantic Pigtoe are similar to those described for the Yellow Lance above and have
contributed to the decline of this species throughout its range. Atlantic Pigtoe appears to be
particularly sensitive to pollutants and requires clean, oxygen -rich water for all stages of life. All
of the remaining Atlantic Pigtoe populations are generally small in numbers and restricted to
short reaches of isolated streams. The low numbers of individuals and the restricted range of
most of the surviving populations make them extremely vulnerable to extirpation from a single
catastrophic event.
4.1.4 Species Listing
Atlantic Pigtoe was petitioned for federal listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended within the 2010 Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland Species from the
Southeastern United States by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD 2010), and is listed as
Endangered in North Carolina by NCWRC.
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 5

4.2 Noturus furiosus (Carolina Madtom)
4.2.1 Species Characteristics
The Carolina Madtom (a small catfish) was described at Milburnie, near Raleigh, NC in the
Neuse River by Jordan and Meek (Jordan 1889). The Carolina Madtom reaches a maximum size
of 132 min (5.2 inches). Compared to other madtoms within its range, it has a relatively short
stout body and a distinctive color pattern of three to four dark saddles along its back that connect
a long black stripe on the side running from the snout to the tail. The adipose fin is mostly dark,
making it appear that the fish has a fourth saddle. The Carolina Madtom is tan on the rest of its
body and yellow to tan between the saddles. The adipose fin and caudal fin are fused together, a
distinguishing characteristic from other members of the catfish family (Ictaluridae). There are no
speckles on the Carolina Madtom's belly, and the tail has two brown bands that follow the curve
of the tail. The Carolina Madtom, like other catfishes, has serrae on its pectoral fins and is
thought to have the most potent venom of any of the catfish species (NCWRC 2010).
4.2.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The Carolina Madtom is endemic to the Piedmont/Inner Coastal Plain portion of the Tar/Pamlico
and Neuse River Basins. It occurs in creeks and small rivers in habitats generally consisting of
very shallow riffles with little current over coarse sand and gravel substrate (Lee et al. 1980).
Burr et al (1989) found most records came from medium to large streams, i.e. mainstems Neuse
and Tar Rivers and their major tributaries. The population in the Trent River system (part of the
Neuse River Basin) is isolated from the rest of the Neuse River basin by salinity levels, so it is
therefore considered a separate population, though it has not been detected in Trent River in the
last five years (Sarah McRae, USFWS, personal communication). In the lower portions of these
rivers, Carolina Madtom is usually found over debris piles in sandy areas. During nesting
season, May to July, Carolina Madtoms prefer areas with plenty of cover to build their nests with
shells, rocks, sticks, bottles, and cans being suitable cover types. Males guard the nests, in which
females may lay between 80-300 eggs.
Carolina Madtom is found in water that ranges from clear to tannin -rich, which is usually free -
flowing. It is generally rare throughout its range and is apparently in decline. The Tar River
population has historically been more robust than the Neuse River population (Burr et al. 1989),
which has shown declines in recent years (Midway 2008). The Little River of the Neuse River
Basin has the largest population of Carolina Madtom in the Neuse River Basin, with records
from 2017 indicating the Carolina Madtom is present (Tom Dickinson, personal observations).
A few specimens have been collected from Swift Creek of the Neuse River Basin. Fishing Creek
and Swift Creek of the Tar River Basin are also productive systems for Carolina Madtom
populations, with around 14 specimens collected in the mid- 1980s from Swift Creek (water
levels in Fishing Creek prevented sampling during that study). In 2016, a total of 17 individuals
were recorded in Swift Creek, and a total of four individuals were recorded in Fishing Creek
(Sarah McRae, USFWS, personal communication). At least 36 localities of Carolina Madtom
have been observed (Burr et al 1989).
The Carolina Madtom has a lifespan of about four years, with sexual maturity being reach at
around two years in females and three years in males. Sampling for Carolina Madtom is most
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 6

effective at dawn and dusk when they are most active and feeding (Mayden and Burr 1981).
Their diet consists mostly of benthic macroinvertebrates, which they collect by scavenging along
the bottom of the stream.
4.2.3 Threats to Species
Identified threats to the Carolina Madtom include water pollution and construction of
impoundments (Burr et al. 1989). It is susceptible to threats due to its limited range and low
population densities (Angermeier 1995, Burr and Stoekel 1999). As a bottom -dwelling fish,
Carolina Madtom is susceptible to habitat loss when stream bottoms are impacted by
urbanization, impoundments, deforestation, etc.
4.2.4 Species Listing
Because of its limited distribution, Carolina Madtom is listed as Special Concern and is Proposed
Threatened in North Carolina. It was petitioned for federal listing under the ESA of 1973, as
amended within the 2010 Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland Species from the
Southeastern United States by the CBD (CBD 2010).
4.3 Necturus lewisi (Neuse River Waterdog)
4.3.1 Species Characteristics
The Neuse River Waterdog is a fully aquatic salamander and was first described by C.S. Brimley
in 1924 as a subspecies of the Common Mudpuppy (N. maculosus); it was elevated to species
status in 1937 by Percy Viosca, Jr.
The Neuse River Waterdog ranges in size from 15.24 to 22.86 centimeters (cm) (6 to 9 inches) in
length; record length is 27.94 cm (I I inches). It has a somewhat stocky, cylindrical body with
smooth skin, a rather flattened, elongate head with a squared -off nose, and small limbs. The tail
is vertically flattened with fins on both the top and bottom. Distinct from most salamanders, the
Neuse River Waterdog has four toes on each foot. The Neuse River Waterdog is a rusty brown
color on the dorsal side and dull brown or slate colored on the ventral side. Both dorsal and
ventral sides are strongly spotted, but the ventral side tends to have fewer and smaller markings;
spots are dark bluish to black. They also have a dark line running through the eye. Adults are
neotenous and retain three bushy, dark red external gills usually seen in larval amphibians. Both
male and female are similar in appearance and can be distinguished only through differences in
the shape and structure of the cloaca (Beane and Newman 1996; Conant and Collins 1998;
EDGE of Existence 2016).
Individuals become sexually mature at approximately five to six years of age. Breeding
normally occurs in the spring. The male deposits a gelatinous spermatophore that is picked up
by the female and used to fertilize between 30 and 50 eggs. The fertilized eggs are attached to
the underside of flat rocks or other submerged objects and guarded by the female until they hatch
in June or July (Conant and Collins 1998; EDGE of Existence 2016).
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 7

4.3.2 Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The Neuse River Waterdog is found only in the Neuse and Tar River Basins of North Carolina
(AmphibiaWeb 2006; Beane and Newman 1996).
The Neuse River Waterdog inhabits rivers and larger streams, where it prefers leaf beds in quiet
waters. This species needs high levels of dissolved oxygen and good water quality. The Neuse
River Waterdog is generally found in backwaters off the main current, in areas with sandy or
muddy substrate. Adults construct retreats on the downstream side of rocks or in the stream
bank where they remain during the day. This species is active during the night, leaving these
retreats to feed. The Neuse River Waterdog is carnivorous, feeding on invertebrates, small
vertebrates, and carrion. The Neuse River Waterdog is most active during winter months even
when temperatures are below freezing. During summer months, it will burrow into deep leaf
beds and is rarely found. It has been suggested that this inactivity in summer may be an
adaptation to avoid fish predators, which are more active at these times. In addition, the Neuse
River Waterdog produces a defensive, toxic skin secretion that is assumed to be distasteful to
predators (AmphibiaWeb 2006; Beane and Newman 1996; Conant and Collins 1998; EDGE of
Existence 2016; NatureServe Explorer 2016).
4.3.3 Threats to Species
Any factors that reduce water quality are all threats to the Neuse River Waterdog. These can
include changes that result in siltation and pollution reducing habitat quality (e.g. channelization,
agricultural runoff, and industrial and urban development). Impoundments are also a threat to
the dispersal of the species as it is unable to cross upland habitat; Neuse River Waterdogs do not
climb and are unlikely to use fish passages (NatureServe Explorer 2016).
4.3.4 Species Listing
The Neuse River Waterdog was petitioned for federal listing under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended within the 2010 Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland Species
from the Southeastern United States by the CBD (CBD 2010).
5.0 SURVEY EFFORTS
Surveys were conducted on November 7, 2017, by Three Oaks personnel Tom Dickinson
(Permit # 17-ES00343) and Nancy Scott with assistance from Matt Haney and Mike Sanderson
of NCDOT and Anne Burroughs with Dewberry Engineers, Inc.
5.1 Stream Conditions at Time of Survey: West Bear Creek
Habitat in West Bear Creek consisted of very shallow, primarily run habitat, with a few
interspersed pools (most notably the scour pool below the crossing structure) and occasional
riffle breaks. Overall, the channel ranged from 12 to 25 feet wide with banks six to 10 feet high
that were generally unstable. Substrates consisted of silt, sand, clay, and occasional pebble. A
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 8

natural wooded vegetation buffer to surrounding agricultural land use was variably absent to
narrow in width.
5.2 Methodology
Mussel surveys were conducted from approximately 1,312 feet (400 meters) downstream of each
respective crossing to approximately 328 feet (100 meters) upstream for a distance of
approximately 1,640 feet (500 meters) (Figure 1). Areas of appropriate habitat were searched,
concentrating on the habitats preferred by the target species. The survey team spread out across
the creek into survey lanes. Visual surveys were conducted using glass bottom view buckets
(bathyscopes). Tactile methods were employed, particularly in streambanks under submerged
rootmats. All freshwater bivalves were recorded and returned to the substrate. Timed survey
efforts provided Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) data for each species. Relative abundance for
freshwater snails and freshwater clam species were estimated using the following criteria:
➢ (VA) Very abundant > 30 per square meter
➢ (A) Abundant 16-30 per square meter
➢ (C) Common 6-15 per square meter
➢ (U) Uncommon 3-5 per square meter
➢ (R) Rare 1-2 per square meter
➢ (P-) Ancillary adjective "Patchy" indicates an uneven distribution of the species within the
sampled site.
While conducting the mussel surveys, searches were also conducted for Carolina Madtom by
overturning logs, rocks and other debris on the stream bottom which are often used for cover by
madtom species. These techniques can also locate Neuse River Waterdog, although standard
presence/absence methods involve four consecutive days of trapping during winter months using
baited minnow traps upstream and downstream of a project area.
6.0 RESULTS
Surveys were conducted for a total of 5.42-person hours, with one species of freshwater mussel
being found (Table 1). Other mollusk species found included the Asian Clam and the aquatic
snail Pointed Campeloma (Campeloma decisum).
Table 1. CPUE for Freshwater Mussels in West Bear Creek
Scientific Name
Common Name
# live
Abundance/
CPUE
Freshwater Mussels
CPUE
lli do com lanata Pastern Elli do 45
8.30/hr
Freshwater Snails and Clams
Relative
Abundance
Corbicula uminea
Sian Clam
—
C
Cam eloma decisum
�—ointed Cam eloma
PU
Appropriate habitats for the Carolina Madtom and Neuse River Waterdog were present in the
reach, however, the species were not observed during these efforts.
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 9

7.0 DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS
The results indicate that the study area supports a freshwater mussel fauna of the common
Eastern Elliptio. The Yellow Lance was not found during this one-time effort and have only been
documented far from the project area (Section 1.0). While other species were not found during
these surveys, appropriate habitat is present; thus, there is the potential for additional species to
occur within the study area.
Based on these survey results, impacts are unlikely to occur in the study area. Strict adherence to
erosion control standards should minimize the potential for any adverse impacts to occur.
Biological conclusions on potential impacts from the project to this species are provided below.
The USFWS is the regulating authority for Section 7 Biological Conclusions and as such, it is
recommended that they be consulted regarding their concurrence with the finding of this
document.
Biological Conclusion Yellow Lance: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
While the following species are not currently federally protected and biological conclusions are
not necessary at the time of the writing of this report, if these species were to receive federal
protection, appropriate biological conclusions are as follows:
Biological Conclusion Atlantic Pigtoe: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Biological Conclusion Carolina Madtom: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Biological Conclusion Neuse River Waterdog: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect -
trapping recommended
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 10

8.0 LITERATURE CITED
Adams, W. F., J. M. Alderman, R. G. Biggins, A. G. Gerberich, E. P. Keferl, H. J. Porter, and A.
S.Van Devender. 1990. A report on the conservation status of North Carolina's
freshwater and terrestrial molluscan fauna. N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission,
Raleigh. 246 pp, Appendix A, 37 pp.
Alderman, J. M. 1995. Monitoring the Swift Creek Freshwater mussel community. Unpublished
report presented at the UMRCC symposium on the Conservation and Management of
Freshwater Mussels II Initiative for the Future. Rock Island, IL, UMRCC.
Alderman, J.M. 2003. Status and Distribution of Fusconaia masoni and Elliptio lanceolata in
Virginia. USFWS Grant Agreement:1148-401 81-99-G-113. 118pp.
AmphibiaWeb: Information on amphibian biology and conservation [web application]. 2006.
Berkeley, California: AmphibiaWeb. Accessed: March 22, 2016.
http://amphibiaweb.org/index.html.
Angermeier, P. L. 1995. Ecological attributes of extinction -prone species: loss of freshwater fishes
of Virginia. Conservation Biology 9:143-158.
Beane, J. and Newman, J. T. 1996. North Carolina Wildlife Profiles — Neuse River waterdog.
Division of Conservation Education, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.
Bogan, A.E., J.Levine, and M.Raley. 2009. Determination of the systematic position and
relationships of the lanceolate Elliptio complex (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionidae) from six
river basins in Virginia. NC Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh, NC. 37pp.
Brimley, C. S. 1924. The waterdogs (Necturus) of North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell
Scientific Society 40: 166-168.
Burr, B. M., B.R. Kuhajda, W.W. Dimmick and J.M. Grady. 1989. Distribution, biology, and
conservation status of the Carolina madtom (Noturus furiosus, an endemic North Carolina
catfish. Brimleyana 15:57-86.
Burr, B. M., and J. N. Stoeckel. 1999. The natural history of madtoms (genus Noturus), North
America's diminutive catfishes. Pages 51-101 in E. R. Irwin, W. A. Hubert, C. F.
Rabeni, H. L. J. Schramm, and T. Coon, editors. Catfish 2000: Proceedings of the
International Ictalurid Symposium. Symposium 24. American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda, Maryland.
Center for Biological Diversity (CBD). 2010. Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland
Species from the Southeastern United States as Threatened or Endangered Under the
Endangered Species Act. April 20, 2010, 1,145 pp. Available online at:
http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/esa/Candiate%20 Spp/SE—Petition.pdf.
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 11

Conant, R. and Collins, J.T. 1998. A Field Guide to the Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and
Central North America. Third Edition, Expanded. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston,
Massachusetts.
Conrad, T.A. 1834. New freshwater shells of the United States, with coloured illustrations; and a
monograph of the genus Anculotus of Say; also a synopsis of the American naiades. J.
Dobson, 108 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1-76, 8 pls.
Eads, C.B. and J.F. Levine. 2009. Propagation and culture of three species of freshwater
mussel: Alasmidonta varicosa, Medionidus conradicus, and Elliptio lanceolata from July
2008-June 2009. NC State University, Raleigh, NC. 16pp.
Eads, C.B. and J.F. Levine. 2011. Refinement of Growout Techniques for Four Freshwater
Mussel Species. Final Report submitted to NC Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh,
NC. 15pp.
EDGE of Existence website. "165. Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi)". Accessed: March
22, 2016. http://www.edgeofexistence.org/amphibians/species_ info.php?id=1361.
Ellis, M. M. 1936. Erosion Silt as a Factor in Aquatic Environments. Ecology 17: 29-42.
Fuller, S. L. H. and C. E. Powell. 1973. Range extensions of Corbicula mandensis (Philippi) in
the Atlantic drainage of the United States. Nautilus 87(2): 59.
Goudreau, S. E., R. J. Neves, and R. J. Sheehan. 1988. Effects of Sewage Treatment Effluents
on Mollusks and Fish of the Clinch River in Tazewell County, Virginia. USFWS: 128 pp.
Johnson, R.I. 1970. The systematics and zoogeography of the Unionidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia) of
the southern Atlantic slope region. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology.
140: 263-449.
Jordan, D.S. 1889. Descriptions of fourteen species of freshwater fishes collected by the U.S.
Fish Commission in the summer of 1888. Proceedings of the United States National
Museum 11:351-362.
Lea, I. 1828. Description of six new species of the genus Unio, embracing the anatomy of the
oviduct of one of them, together with some anatomical observations on the genus.
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 3(N.S.):259-273 + plates iii-vi.
Lea, I. 1828. Unio lanceolatus. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society.
Philadelphia, PA. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/26103 259-267.
Lee, D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, R.E. Jenkins, D.E. McAllister, and J.R. Stauffer. 1980.
Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural
History, Raleigh.
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 12

Marking, L.L., and T.D. Bills. 1979. Acute effects of silt and sand sedimentation on freshwater
mussels. Pp. 204-211 in J.L. Rasmussen, ed. Proc. of the UMRCC symposium on the
Upper Mississippi River bivalve mollusks. UMRCC. Rock Island IL. 270 pp.
Master, L. 1986. Alasmidonta heterodon: results of a global status survey and proposal to list as
an endangered species. A report submitted to Region 5 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. 10 pp. and appendices.
Mayden, R.L. and B.M. Burr. 1981. Life history of the slender madtom, Noturus exilis, in
southern Illinois (Pisces: Ictaluridae), Occas. Pap. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kans. 93:1-64
McRae, Sarah. United State Fish and Wildlife, Personal communication.
Midway, S.R. 2008. Habitat Ecology of the Carolina Madtom, Noturus furiosus, an Imperiled
Endemic Stream Fish. M.S. Thesis. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. 74 pp.
NatureServe. 2016. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application].
Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org.
(Accessed: May 23, 2016). Species Accessed: Necturus lewisi
Neves, R.J. 1993. A state of the Unionids address. Pp. 1-10 in K.S. Cummings, A.C. Buchanan,
and L.M. Kooch, eds. Proc. of the UMRCC symposium on the Conservation and
Management of Freshwater Mussels. UMRCC. Rock Island IL.189 pp.
Neves, R. J. and J. C. Widlak. 1987. Habitat Ecology of Juvenile Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia:
Unionidae) in a Headwater Stream in Virginia. American Malacological Bulletin 1(5): 1-
7.
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources (NCDENR) - Division of Water Resources.
2014. 2014 North Carolina 303(d) List. https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/planning/clas sification-standards/3 03 d/3 03 d-file s
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). 2017. nheo-2017-10. Natural Heritage
Element Occurrence polygon shapefile. October 2017 version.
North Carolina Scientific Council on Mollusks. 2011. Reevaluation of Status Listings for
Jeopardized Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks in North Carolina. Report of the
Scientific Council on Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks, 38 p.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC). Unpublished Aquatics Database.
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC). 2010. NCpedia profile for Carolina
Madtom (Noturus furiosus) [web application]. By Brian Watson, updated by Chris Wood.
June 14, 2010. http://ncpedia.org/wildlife/carolina-madtom Accessed November 4, 2016.
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 13

O'Dee, S.H., and G.T. Waters. 2000. New or confirmed host identification for ten freshwater
mussels. Pp. 77-82 in R.A. Tankersley, D.I. Warmolts, G.T. Waters, B.J. Armitage, P.D.
Johnson, and R.S. Butler (eds.). Freshwater Mollusk Symposia Proceedings Part I.
Proceedings of the Conservation, Captive Care and Propagation of Freshwater Mussels
Symposium. Ohio Biological Survey Special Publication, Columbus.
O'Neill, C. R., Jr., and D. B. MacNeill. 1991. The zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha): an
unwelcome North American invader. Sea Grant, Coastal Resources Fact Sheet. New
York Sea Grant Extension. 12 pp.
Savidge, T. W., J. M. Alderman, A. E. Bogan, W. G. Cope, T. E. Dickinson, C. B. Eads,S. J.
Fraley, J. Fridell, M. M. Gangloff, R. J. Heise, J. F. Levine, S. E. McRae, R.B. Nichols,
A. J. Rodgers, A. Van Devender, J. L. Williams and L. L. Zimmerman. 2011. 2010
Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks in
North Carolina. Unpublished report of the Scientific Council on Freshwater and
Teresstrial Mollusks. 177pp.
Strayer, D. L., S. J. Sprague and S. Claypool, 1996. A range -wide assessment of populations of
Alasmidonta heterodon, an endangered freshwater mussel (Bivalvia: Unionidae). J.N.
Am. Benthol. Soc., 15(3):308-317.
United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water. NPDES facilities by permit
type. NPDESPERMIT_WMERC. Accessed February 20, 2017.
https://watersgeo. epa. gov/arcgis/rest/services/OWPROGRAM/NPDESPERMIT_WMER
C/MapServer
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992a. Special report on the status of
freshwater mussels.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992b. Endangered and Threatened species
of the southeast United States (The Red Book). FWS, Ecological Services, Div. of
Endangered Species, Southeast Region. Govt Printing Office, Wash, DC: 1,070.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2017. Yellow Lance Species Status Review
Viosca, P., Jr. 1937. A tentative revision of the genus Necturus, with descriptions of three new
species from the southern Gulf drainage area. Copeia 1937:120-138.
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF). 2014. Atlantic Pigtoe
Conservation Plan. Bureau of Wildlife Resources. VDGIF, Richmond, VA. 31 pp.
Wolf, E.D. 2012. Propagation, Culture, and Recovery of Species at Risk Atlantic Pigtoe.
Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute, Project No. 11-108. 55pp.
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report January 2018
Job #17-324 Page 14

APPENDIX A
Figures
B-4942 West Bear Creek Aquatic Species Survey Report December 2017
Job #17-324 Page 1

1795
GREENE
COUNTY
WAYNE COUNTY ,
r h i
LENOI R
11J57COUNTY -'
O OpenStreetMap (and)
Contributors, CC -BY -SA
61
� V "
P-XxEER/,f Prepared For:
C � E NONiN
�..
N/b33�119�
-Bridge 121
Freshwater Mussel Survey
B-4942: Replace Bridge No. 121
on SR 1702 (Mark Edwards Rd)
over West Bear Creek
Vicinity Map
Wayne County, North Carolina
w
41
a
t.
tom'
i
.�A
i
f
PARKSTOVVI'd ��-
i 1
WestBearBridge
Survey Reach
Streets
orte. November2017
scakb 200 400 Feet
1 L 1
Job No-
17-324
Drawn By.
Checked By:
KEMS
TES
Figure

EO ID: 10CEO
EO ID. 5261 ;, 4 0 I D: 2650
EO1D:13953 EOID:32187 EOID:13521usn7
US301 ID: 7006
EO I D: 19065 9 US 117
- - - - - EO ID: 17799
1795
EO D: 21929 1 16141
�lo�`` EOID:3858 '•
/ 1 795
8
9 E01 D: 31093
t e
Us 70 + J•,,'7
EO I D: 16545 EO D: 14153 arg D
\\ r 1
} I` Wayne
L'S'C rrecuVve
Mm[—
f'pl" 13;'� E0ID:16142 us 13
US 70
� .� `358�361.
EO ID: 4929 Bridge No. 121
E0 ID: 17447
_ J '.Be US 13
14828yo dsboro 6.4
seymaura us 70
NC 111 r
ar F on Ar r
'• �'� ? rr force- J \
O 1 i90 r
Us 70
US , 7 ,�� •1
US 13 + I US 13
`CQx�Granrham
Aoeld
NCNHP Element Occurrences
Yellow Lance
Atlantic Pigtoe
Carolina Madtom
Neuse River Waterdog
� V "
P-XxEER/,f Prepared For:
C � E NONiN
t 4
W \ e++
�.�
N
�, 11;
US 70
f
EO ID 10741 US,
EO ID: 17908
� f
Freshwater Mussel Survey
B-4942: Replace Bridge No. 121
on SR 1702 (Mark Edwards Rd)
over West Bear Creek
NCNHP Element Occurrences
Wayne County, North Carolina
IEO ID: 15611
© OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC -BY -SA
Dace November 2017
Scale o 1 2 Miles
I 1
Job No-
17-324
Drawn By.
Checked By:
KIEMSI
TED
Figure

'358j�f
11
US 13
US 70
N( 111
r T '• `� -
US 70
Seymour NC 111
Johnson -
Air Farce '
.�,
Rose �
_ J
J u_
i
J
1 � �
J
NC 111
i
,J
Cuffs of
INC 111 the Neuse
State Park - -
Survey Reach -
303(d) Listed Stream
NPDES Discharge
P-X �EER/,f Prepared For:
� V "C Al E NONiN
t 4
W \ R7
�.�
N
I
I �
I IJ
I
1 U` 71)
i
I
F
1
1
F
1
1
I
Rockford Church Rd
WTP (NC0086918)
© OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC -BY -SA
Freshwater Mussel Survey
B-4942: Replace Bridge No. 121
on SR 1702 (Mark Edwards Rd)
over West Bear Creek
303(d) Streams and NPDES Discharge
Wayne County, North Carolina
Dace November2017
Scale 0 0.5 1 Miles
I , 1
Job No-
17-324
Drawn By.
Checked By:
KEMS
TES
Figure