Ver _COMPLETE FILE_19810513

N'l
of Natural North Carolina Department
Resources &Community Develo ment
3u. h: C "1.161 1
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Howard N Lee, Secretary " i 91'')%%3:: 22J3
a
May ]4, 1981
MEMORANDUM
TO: REVIEW AGENCIES
7
FROM: JOHN PARKER pERMUS ANQ
SUBJECT: MOSQUITO CONTROL PROGRAM
The Morehead City office of the office of coastal. Management has
scheduled a meeting following the regular enforcement conference
to hear about a new proposal from the Pamlico County mosquito
control staff. It is my understanding that officials of the
Division of Health Services, vector control program, will also
be present.
As you may recall, the grid ditching routine has not been pursued
since the early seventies. And many questions have been raised
about the effectiveness of this program and, of course, about its
impacts on the estuarine environment. As a result of the most
recent concerns, Dr. Hugh Tilson of the Health Department ap-
pointed an ad hoc committee to study the issue. A draft report
is now available which may provide guidance for future mosquito
control programs.
If your agency has any interest in this matter., I urge that you
arrange to attend the 1:30 P.M., May 28th meeting in the Fisheries
Building in Morehead City.
(?'6C L 9 J,TV,

An t quaI (.)p(+urIum Ir AIfirmu:nr Aio<,r 1 -Ph;v,r
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. O. BOX 1650
WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28402
SAWCO-EE
IN REPLY REFER TO
22 October 1981
Mr. Russ Talley
N.C. Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
PO Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Talley:
On 28 May 1981 a scoping meeting was held in Morehead City, North Carolina,
regarding the proposed pilot project;.by Mr. Ben Hale, Pamlico County Health
Department, to perform 'ditching activities in the high salt marsh
(Distichlis spicata, Spartina patens) to control mosquitoes. Following this
meeting, most of the agencies and individuals attending felt that detailed
environmental studies needed to be performed on the pilot project marsh
before and after project completion to determine impacts. The environmental
studies proposed would require d to 2 years of monitoring before and after
ditching, and would involve not only documenting mosquito breeding but also
include detailed investigations on detrital and other nutrient fluxes,
impacts on aquatic and terrestrial species and habitats, and cumulative
impacts of similar projects.
I agree that detailed investigation would be needed for such proposals when
impacts have not previously been adequately documented. However, Mr. Frank
Yelverton of my staff has been investigating ditching activities for
mosquito control in other states. Based on his investigations, Maryland,
Delaware, and New Jersey have done extensive marsh ditching and have had
good success in controling mosquitoes. The technique generally used is
called Open Marsh Water Management (OMWM). Standards used in New Jersey for
OMWM are described in enclosure 1.
Both the Philadephia and Baltimore Districts, Corps of Engineers have
processed Department of the Army permits for OMWM activities in the states
indicated above. Processing is somewhat different between Districts and
states but two things are consistent. First, the applicant must provide
detailed information on mosquito breeding sites, detailed plans indicating
how ditches will connect breeding sites, and stake on the ground breeding
sites and ditch alignment. Second, detailed biological information on other
than mosquito data is not required.
SAWCO-EE 22 October 1981 ,.
The reason that detailed biological information is not required is because
many studies that document the impacts of OMWM have already been performed
in the states' mentioned (see example study and selected bibliography in
inclosure 2). Beca4se"of' the.se,;skudies and experience with OMWM, the
agencies that were contacted`-.indars?d OMWM if it is performed properly
(inclosure 3). Tl e,. phrase "if it is performed properly" is crucial since if
the tidal ditches 'are designedproperly they provide a greater exchange of
nutrients between the marsh and estuarine system, and the pond systems
provide habitat for waterfowl and wading birds. On the other hand, in some
cases, ditches have been designed poorly and have drained the marsh and
changed the species compositions In some other cases, poor design of
ditches resulted in low dissolved oxygen levels which caused the death of
the fish which normally consume the mosquito larvae and the mosquito
populations exploded.
The marsh areas that mosquitoes use for breeding in these northern states
- - - containthe-same-marsh species as the breeding areas in North Carolina, even
though the nor -o - - _ __
mosquitoes and tidal amplitude in these northern states are similar to North
Carolina. Therefore, it may be possible to apply the existing results of
OMWM research to North Carolina. This not only would save the applicant time
and money in the permit process, but would provide review agencies a broad
data base for evaluation of their request.
Since OMWM has not been used previously in North Carolina, we plan a meeting
T! I IN golf, IIJ-1611111400 *^ the effectiveness
of OMWM for control of`mosquitoes, its beneficial and adverse impacts on
environment, and its possible application to North Carolina marshes. The
meeting will be at 10 a.m. in the Federal Building, 310 New Bern Avenue,
Room 209.
In an attempt to learn from the experience of others, we have asked three
individuals with experience in OMWM to attend this meeting. These
individuals are Mr. Fred Ferrigno, New Jersey Division of Fish, Game, and
Wildlife; Mr. Cyrus Lesser, Maryland Department of Agriculture; and
Mrs. L. K. (Mike) Gantt, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Mr. Ferrigno is a
leading researcher on the impacts of OMWM on the environment, and we have
asked him to speak on the results on his research. Mr. Lesser is an
entomologist with the Maryland Department of Agriculture which is the
department responsible for controlling mosquitoes in Maryland. Therefore,
Mr. Lesser with speak to us on the effectiveness. of OMWM for the control of
mosquitos. Finally, Mrs. Gantt was actively involved in the OMWM when she
was with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Maryland. Mrs.. Gantt will
talk to us about methods of ditching that conform to OMWM technquies.
2
SAWCO-EE
22 October 1981
Each presentation will last 20 to 30 minutes including a period for question'
and answers. Prior to these presentations, Mr. Frank Yelverton of my staff
will give a brief introduction that will include Corps permit requirements
for OMWM activities.
When these presentations are completed, we will break for lunch. Following
lunch we will reconvene for a detailed question/answer session. Questions
will be directed to a panel consisting of Mr. Yelverton, Mr. Lesser,
Mr. Ferrigno, Mrs. Gantt, Mr. Hale, and Mr. Jerry Perkins, N.C. Department
of Human Resources, Vector Control Branch.
When this panel session is concluded, Mr. Yelverton will briefly summarize
the day's discussions and will indicate the probable course of action for
permit processing based on the day's events. If you have questions, contact
Mr. Yelverton at [phone] or FTS 671-4640.
Sincerely,
W?
3 Incl CHARLES W. HOLLIS
1. N.J. OMWM Standards Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch
2. Example OMWM Study and Bibliography
3. Agency contacts
3
ZZ
.41 ., STANDARDS FOR OPEN MARSH WATER MANAGEMENT (OMWM)
County mosquito commissions, Rutgers University and the New Jersey Division
of Fish, Game and Shellfisheries have been perfecting one technique, Open Marsh
Water Management (ON11•41M) for the control of all genera of salt marsh mosquitoes on
open tidal marshes for over two decades. Perfection is achieved by continued
improvement and evaluation. In order to ensure the finest quality and identify
this management technique, certain standards are a necessity. These standards
should be included in any riparian or other permit. Improper adherence to these
standards would be a violation of the permit and infringement on the quality of
the management technique. The following standards shall be utilized and strictly
adhered to?in any OMWM project:
1. NEED. OMWM will be based entirely on need.and utilized on breeding
marshes only.
A. OMWM will be confined to the Spartina patens or mixed S. patens,
short S. alterniflora or types of similar vegetation that are
irregularly flooded by rains, spring or storm tides. It will not
be employed on marshes that are regularly inundated or affected by
daily tides such as tall saltmarsh cordgrass (S artina alterniflora),
wildrice (Zizania aquatica), cattail (gip ha sue. arrow arum
(Peltandra virginica , threesquare (Scirpus olne i and other types
of similar vegetation.
B. All alterations must directly affect mosquito breeding depressions.
C. The direction and type of alteration used will depend on the dis-
tribution of the mosquito breeding depressions and their proximity
to natural ponds and tidal ditches.
D. An experienced wildlife biologist, mosquito control worker, or both,
shall stake out all breeding depressions ahead of the equipment.
Depression marking shall be utilized to determine the least amount
of alteration needed to eliminate mosquito breeding.
E. -A11 mosquito or other ditches encountered that are not contributing
to breeding mosquitoes will not be cleaned.
F. When possible, ponds previously altered by mosquito ditches will
be restored.
II. ALTERATIONS. Three types of alterations (tidal ditches, ponds and pond
radials, will be used.
A. Tidal Ditches
1. All tidal ditches will be dug with suitable equipment, pre-
ferably with a rotary ditcher.
2. When mosquito breeding depressions are located adjacent to a
tidal, mosquito or other ditch, a tidal ditch alteration will
be utilized.
3. When a tidal ditch is dug near a pond, the spoil should be
deposited on the pond side.
4. Attempts should be made to dig tidal ditches to a depth of
approximately three feet. Meandering or straight ditches are
acceptable.
5. Main tidal ditches are used to provide tidal circulation
through large areas. They should be connected to a tidal
source on both ends where possible. Their location is deter-
mined by the, distribution of breeding depressions.
6. Lateral tidal ditches connect breeding depressions to mains,
natural tidal ditches or other laterals. Such laterals often
dead-end in a breeding depression.
Inclosure 1
-2-
B.
7. All mosquito or other ditches that are breeding will be
cleaned:
8. Spoil shall be used whenever possible?to fill adjacent mosquito
breeding depressions or spread evenly over the marsh to en
courage growth of existing vegetation.
Pond Radials
1. All mosquito:,breeding depressions located near a natural or
other permanent pond shall be connected to this pond by pond,.
radials. These radials will provide access for fish to de-
vour mosquito larvae in the depressions.
2. All pond radials shall be constructed with suitable equipment,
preferably with a rotary ditcher.
3. To prevent drainage of a pond by muskrats or snow geese, all
pond radials shall terminate at a sufficient distance from a
tidal ditch:

C. Ponds
T -Where large numbers of mosquito breeding depressions are
concentrated in a limited area, a pond alteration will be
utilized.
2- Pond nstruction is accom li-shed by--the-use of the rotary
ditcher, amphibious crane or other suitable equipment.
3. Ponds should be shallow, less than one foot in depth, to
promote the best waterfowl, wading and shore bird use.
4. To prevent mosquito breeding during droughts, a reservoir
three feet in depth shall-be installed within the pond.
5. These reservoirs should provide proper pond access by humans.
Uhen large numbers of radials are used, reservoirs are
unnecessary.
eservoirs -
out during droughts by construction of three foot ditches
with a rotary ditcher or other suitable equipment. These
reservoirs will connect all the lowest areas within the pond,
7. Pond spoil should be squashed and leveled without causing
depressions. It should be reduced to the lowest possible
lever to ensure reestablishment of existing vegetation. Spoil
shall approximate the level of the existing marsh.
8. Ponds may take the shape of the breeding area or may be squared
off to facilitate construction. The shape of a pond or ditch
does not appreciably affect wildlife use. Depth, food
--pot-en t i ci-1--a-nd a v-a i 1-ab-i-1 i-ty a-r-e--th e=-ma-i_n f-ac_to_r_s th_a t___cLe t e r- _ _
mine wildlife utilization.
Ill. OBJECTIFIES
A. To adequately serve the three major objectives (control mosquitoes,
eliminate insecticides and enhance the tidal food web) all three
alteration types (tidal ditches, ponds and pond radials) shall be
utilized on each section of marsh whenever possible. Diversity
provides a better marsh environment, prevents marsh surface breed-
ing by all genera of mosquitoes and enhances both major branches
of the tidal food web.
B. Insecticide use is gradually phased out as OMWM progresses to
eliminate breeding acreage. When the project is completed, all
insecticide use should terminate.
I`!. OTHER TECHNIOUES
Impoundments, stop ditches and other types of management techniques
are not OMWM.
V. EVALUATION
Mosquito larval dippings,- vegetational plots, invertebrate samp-
ling and wildlife censuses are to be. conducted on the area treated
with OMWM and compared with a control of similar composition.
Y
OPEN MARSH WATER'MANAGEMENT
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Public Health Association, et al. 1975. Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater 714th ed.). Amer. Public Health
Assoc., New York. 1193 p.
Axtell, R.C. (ed.) 1974. Training manual for mosquito and biting fly control
in coastal areas. Univ. North Carolina Sea Grant Publ. UNC-SG-74-08.
254 p.
Axtell, R.C., G.A. Carlson, and D.V. DeBoard. March 1975. Demand for and
cost of coastal salt marsh mosquito abatement, Tech. Bul. No. 232, North
Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, Univ. of North Carolina Sea
Grant Program Publication UNC-SG-75-11.
Blum, J. L. 1969. Nutrient changes in water flooding the high salt marsh.
Hydrobiologia 34: 95-99.
Bodola, A. 1970. An evaluation of the effectiveness of natural pools, blind
sumps and champagne pools in reducing mosquito production on a salt marsh.
Proc. N.J. Mosq: Exterm. Assoc. 57: 45-56.
Bourn, W.S. and C. Cottam. 1950. Some biological effects of ditching tide
water marshes. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Res. Rept. 19. 30 p.
Bradbury, H.M. 1938. Mosquito control operations on tide marshes in
Massachusetts and their effect on shore birds and waterfowl. J. Wildlife
Management. 2: 49-52.
Brook, J.E. 1917. The circulation of water on the drained salt marshes - the
need for and the way to obtain it. Proc. NJMEA. 4:10.
Bauder, K.W. 1980. The Establishment of Unified OPEN MARSH WATER MANAGEMENT
Standards in New Jersey. Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 67: 72-76.
Burger, J. and J.K. Shisler. 1978. The effects of ditching a salt marsh on
colony and nest site selection by herring gulls (Laurus argentatus).
Amer. Midl. Natur. 100(1): 54-63.
Byron, M.M. 1968. Net nutrient exchange between high marsh areas and an
estuary. M.S. thesis. North Carolina State University 22 p.
Carmichael, G.T.. 1957. Effectiveness of ditching in controlling salt marsh
mosquitoes. Mosquito News. 17(4):265-68.
Inclosure 2

Catts, E.P. Jr. 1957. Mosquito prevalence on impounded and ditched galt '.
marshes, Assawoman Wildlife Area, Delaware, 1956. M.S. thesis. Univ.
of Delaware.
Catts, E.P. Jr., F.H. Lesser, R.F. Darsie, Jr., 0.-Florschutz, and E.E. Tindall.
1963. Wildlife and mosquito production on impounded tidal marshes in
Delaware, 1956-62. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Conf. 28: 125-132.
Chapman, H.C. and F. Ferrigno. 1956. A three-year study of mosquito breeding
in natural and impounded salt marsh areas in New Jersey. Proc. N.J. Mosq.
Exterm. Assoc. 43: 48-65.
Clarke, J.L. 1938. Mosquito control as related to marsh conservation. Proc..
N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 25: 139-147.
Cottam, C. 1938. The coordination of mosquito control with wildlife conserva-
tion. Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 25: 217-227.
Cottam, C. and W.S. Bourn. 1952. Coastal marshes adversely affected by
arainage ana arougn
Cottam, C., W.S. Bourn, F.C. Bishop, L.L. Williams, Jr., and W. Vogt. 1938.
What's wrong with mosquito control? Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Conf. 3:
81-107.
Daiber, F.C. 1974. Salt marsh plants and future coastal salt marshes in
relation to animals. In R.J. Reimold and W.H. Queen (eds.), Ecology of
Darsie, R.F. Jr. and P.F. Springer. 1957. Three-year investigation of
mosquito breeding in natural and impounded tidal marshes in Delaware.
University of Delaware Agric. Exper. Sta. Bull. No. 320. 65 p.
DeBord, D.V., G.A. Carlson, and R.C. Axtell. 1975. Demand for and cost of.
coastal salt marsh mosquito abatement. N.C. Agric. Exper. Sta. Tech.
Bull. No. 232. 85 p.
Dukes,-J.C., R.C. Axtell, and K.L. Knight, 1974. Additional Studies of the
__-Effects-of --SAIt_ Marsh-lmpoundmer?ts__on Mosquito Populations. University of
N.C. Water Resources Res. Inst. Rept. No. 102. 38 p.
Estrada, M., I. Valiela, and J.M. Teal. 1974. Concentration and distribution
of chlorophyll in fertilized plots in a Massachusetts salt marsh.
J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 14: 47-56.
Ferrigno,. F. 1961. Variations in Mosquito - Wildlife Associations on Coastal
Marshes. Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 48: 193-203.
y
'Verrigno, 1970. Preliminary effects of open marsh water management on the
vegetation and organisms of the salt marsh. Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm.
Assoc. 57: 79-94.
Ferrigno, F. and D.M. Jobbins. 1968. Open marsh water management. Proc. N.J.
Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 55: 104-115.
Ferrigno, F., P. Slavin, and D.M. Jobbins. 1975. Saltmarsh water management
for mosquito control. Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 62: 30-38..
Ferrigno, F., L.G. MacNamara, and D.M. Jobbins. 1969.
Improved Management of Coastal Meadowlands. Proc.
Assoc. 56: 188-203.
Fitzpatrick, G. and D.J. Sutherland. 1978. Effects of
insecticides temephos (abate) and chlorpyrifos (Du
of the salt-marsh snail Melampus bidentatus. Mar.
Ecological Approach for
N.J. Mosq. Exterm.
the organophosphorus
rsban) on populations
Biol. 46: 23-28.
Florschutz, 0., Jr. 1959. Mosquito production and wildlife usage in natural,
ditched, and unditched tidal marshes at Assawoman Wildlife Area, Delaware.
Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 46: 1037111.
Frolander, H.F. 1968. Statistical variation in zooplankton numbers from
subsampling with a Stempel pipette. J. Water Pollution Control Fed.
40: R82-R88.
Gabrielson, I.A. 1936. Information needed for a proper understanding of the
effects of mosquito control work on the wildlife of tidal marshes. Proc.
N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 23: 156-163.
Green, R.H. 1979. Sampling Design and Statistical Methods for Environmental
Biologists. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 257 p.
Hansen, J.A., F.H. Lesser, R.W. Lombardi, J.K. Shisler, and P. Slavin. 1976.
The economics of open marsh water management--a New Jersey view. Proc.
N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. %63: 77-81.
Headlee, T.J. 1945. The mosquitoes of New Jersey and their control. Rutgers
University Press, New Brunswick, N.J. 326 p.
Heinle, D.R. and D.A. Flemer. 1976. Flows of materials between poorly flooded
tidal marshes and an estuary. Mar. Biol. 35: 359-373.
Imber, C.F. and T.T. Blailock. 1981.. A Review of and a Plan for Mosquito
Control in North Carolina. Unpublished.
Krebs, C.T. and I. Valiela, 1978. Effect of experimentally applied chlorinated
hydrocarbons on the biomass of the fiddler crab, Uca pugnax (Smith).
Estuarine and Coastal Mar. Sci. 6.: '375-386.
Kuenzler, E.J., 1961. Structure and energy flow of a mussel population in a
Georgia salt marsh. Limnolo. and Oceanogr. 6(2): 191-204.
m
Kuenzler, E.J. and. H.L. Marshall. 1973. Effects of mosquito control #itchyng
on estuarine ecosystems. Univ. N.C. Water Resources Res. Inst. Rept. No.
81. 83 p.
LaSalle, R. and K.L. Knight. 1973. The effects of ditching on the mosquito
populations in some sections of Juncus salt marsh in Carteret County,
North Carolina. Univ. N.C. Water Resources Res. Inst.`Rept. No. 82.
162 p.
LaSalle, R.N, and K.L. Knight. 1974. Effects of Salt Marsh Impoundments on
Mosquito Populations. Univ. N.C. Water Resources Res. Inst. Rept. No. 92.
85 p
Leslie, J.B. 1969. State mosquito control commission approaches to marsh
management. Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 56: 7-11.
Lesser,_ C.R.,-1977. A method to estimate-populations of mosquito larvae in
- --- _
shallow water. Mosquito News 37(3): 517-519.
Lesser,.C.R. and D. Saveikis. 1979. A study o the impacts o a mosque o
control integrated pest management program on selected parameters of the
ecology of Chesapeake Bay high marsh communities in Maryland. Final
Rept., Md. Dept, of Agric., EPA Grant No. X003147-01. 194p.
Lesser, C.R., F.J. Murphey, and R.W. Lake. 1976. Some effects of grid system .
mosquito control ditching on salt marsh biota in-Delaware. Mosquito
News 36(1): 69-77.
Lesser, F.H. 1965. Some environmental considerations of impounded tidal
marshes on mosquito and waterbird prevalence, Little Creek Wildlife Area,
Delaware, M.S. Thesis. Univ. Delaware.
Linthurst, R.A. and R.J. Reimold. 1978a. Estimated net aerial primary
productivity for selected estuarine angiosperms in Maine, Delaware, and
Georgia. Ecology 59(5) 945-955.
Linthurst, R.A. and R.J. Reimold. 1978b. An evaluation of methods for
estimating the net aerial primary productivity of estuarine angiosperms.
J. Appl. Ecol. 15:'919-931.
Lotrich, V.A., W.H. Meredith, S.B. Weisberg, L.E. Hurd, and F.C. Daiber. 1979.
Dissolved and particulate nutrient fluxes via tidal exchange between a
salt marsh and lower Delaware Bay. Presentation at the Fifth Biennial
International Estuarine Research Conf., Jekyll Island, Ga., Oct. 7-12,
1979. (publ. abstract)
Neely, W.W. 1962. Saline soils and brackish waters in management of wildlife,
fish, and shrimp. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Conf. 27: 321-334.
Provost, M.W. 1977. Source reduction in salt-marsh mosquito control: past
and future. Mosquito News 37(4): 689-698.

Richard, G.A., 1978. Seasonal and environmental variations in sediment
accretion in a Long Island salt marsh. Estuaries 1(1): 29-35.
Shisler, J.K. 1973. Pioneer plants on spoil piles associated with mosquito
ditching. Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 60: 135-141.
Shisler, J.K. and D.M. Jobbins. 1977a. Tidal variations in the movement of
organic carbon in New Jersey salt marshes. Mar. Biol. 40: 127-134.
Shisler, J.K. and D.M. Jobbins. 1977b. Salt marsh productivity as affected
by the selective ditching technique, open marsh water management.
Mosquito News 37(4); 631-636.
Shisler, J.K., F.H. Lesser, and T.L. Schulze. 1975. Reevaluation of some
effects of water management on the Mispillion Marsh, Kent County, Delaware.
Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 62: 276-278.
Shisler, J.K., F.H. Lesser, B. Gooley, J. Hansen, and P. Slavin. 1978.
Practical application of the rotary ditcher in pond construction.
Mosquito News 38(1): 112-115.
Shisler, J.K., F.H. Lesser, and T. Candeletti. 1979. An approach to the
evaluation of temporary versus permanent measures in salt marsh mosquito
control operations. Mosquito News 39(4): 776-780.
Smalley, A.E. 1959. The role of two invertebrate populations, Littorina
irrorata and Orchelimum fidicinum, in the energy flow of a salt marsh
eco? system. Ph.D. Diss. Univ. Georgia. 126 p.
Smith, J.B. 1904. Report of the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station
upon the mosquitoes occurring within the State, their habits and life
history. Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. 482 p.
Smith, J.B. 1907. The New Jersey salt marsh and its improvement. Bull. N.J.
Agric. Exper. Sta. No. 207. 24 p.
Stearns. L.A., D. MacCreary, and F.C. Daigh. 1940. Effects of ditching on the
muskrat.,population of a Delaware tidewater marsh. Univ. Delaware Agric.
Exper. Sta. Bull. No. 225. 55p.
Strickland, J.D.H. 1960. Measuring the production of marine phytoplankton.
Bull. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 122: 1-172.
Strickland, J.D.H. and T.R. Parsons. 1972. A Practical Handbook of Seawater
Analysis. Bull. Fish Res. Bd. Canada 167: 1-310. (2nd ed.)
Tindall, E.E. 1961. A two-year study of mosquito breeding and wildlife usage
in Little Creek impounded salt marsh, Little Creek Wildlife Area, Delaware,
1959-60. Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 48: 100-105.
Urner, A. 1935. Relation of mosquito control in New Jersey to bird life of
the salt marshes. Proc. N.J. Mosq. Exterm. Assoc. 22: 130-136.
14
Vollenweider, R.A. (ed.) 1969. A Manual on Methods for Measuring Primary
Production in Aquatic Environments. IBP Handbook No. 12. Blackwell Sci.
Publ., Oxford. 213 p,
Ward, D.V. and B.L: Howes. 1974. The effects of Abate, an organophosphorus
insecticide, on marsh fiddler crab populations. Bull. Environ. Contam.
Toxicol. 12: 694-697.
Ward, D.V. and D.A. Busch. 1976. Effects of temefos, an organophosphorus
insecticide, on survival and escape behaviour of the marsh fiddler crab,
Uca Pu nax. Oikos 27: 331-335.
Ward, D.V. and D.F. Ludwig. 1976. Interactive effects on predation pressure
and insecticide (temefos) toxicity on populations of the marsh fiddler
crab, Uca pugnax. Mar. Biol. 35: 119-126.
Wh-igham, D. F: 1-97-9. The---impact of , open marsh water management on the ecology
of high marsh vegetation. Chesapeake Bay Center for Environmental
Studies.
Wolf, P.L., S.F. Shanholtzer and R.J. Reimold, 1975. Population estimates for
Uca pugnax (Smith, 1870) on the Duplin Estuary Marsh, Georgia, U.S.A.
(Decapoda, Brachyura, Ocypodidae) Crustaceana 29(1): 79-91.
U
z
w
a
z
z
0
zoo
M
uI
v1 a
0
h
n
m
U
O
a
O

a
O
F"
Z
w
VO
da
z z
?O
Q ?
O
Q
E-'
Q
E co s o b>6 6,o `° ro

N` ce
E E t°
2
c y o
Vi c n O 'fl Wl 'D = v c z .D
to u y E 0 co O b p c Uz> .'R N
U 0
J)
-
c `
0 H $- y O 'C v
0
a c Z v °- 3 ou O L > cl

O q 't E O.
?
U
L
C
? .
?
a ro?? b E ?
o? 's
p ?
a
v v. a o b O ?> ? •.r ::
"'? ..+ G U
U
N ?

c V
u>
L w
Q' C U 0 0 ?
? yr U y •«+ z v •0 C C
3 _ w
o o-E
o.g' ?a
> T
O o c O u
c y
C
U _.
p :
.
C :C .
OA E .~+ C U O
e 3 c O a O ?« ° O cf U= c
c ?-' 3 0
a
U
• a
i
a v u LL v 0 u N. O ?"
ew
02 E v
?
E L N
? O C
- .0
.
V
v l y T
V C E v v
L .c .?
a .
+ p 'p
.3 CAS Ofl O O O O E v L c
c> c .O O d LL .r 6 'C r. u .°? x o
?. E u E a 0 a ?cu
3 L 0
CL D y .
SP

o~ b E «? E `' a o
>
E '
'
L
=
E
•
«
.
ou
C c d v b u y
o ? 3 •- r o
c
i
a.
c 0 y «. ,. ' v v= a
O Q ?
N '
. ? U `o
U
..
? p` ?•.
p O L C v
?? y b 3 0 .O uJ c .G b4 4 c c
= Vd N

v E
n
v
C gib.. in a v cd ?+ G .
.a
t
T :E 0 U .n 0 E E
o O .c Q Q d Z V
r3
C
?O O c
C
y O Q
03-0 40 n u u
.'p ar
O o CO

z C a Q v :'
`
b c
a
.
0
ry O O
b

p W to ?3
H E ca •0 Q
N W t
Q p
z u
d. ° a .,
Q P n v
i s
t
6i O G a ca
3 Q c>a C0 00 T
a?
y
? ?.
G ?...D w
04 m
0 -0
+
a
C o
U c
o a°Ai'G o N v 00

E-
d C
? > «, -o t3 y s -o
? H O
>
k ?
.
? o G
y
V V ?' Ca ZS V1 .7 V
y C N .b N U F O OU 0 C vi
o c
_
C7 'O y ro ^c C ?'i r 4? V ? ca 'C ,UN
'
°
z r ... 'v o
?^cs

w
V
n C yj
`
? p 0
? C b G C .C O. ? R
O. n ° U U
° E O O C
4.
Lr? ? c
r 'D 'p ? ? ? OyA ,C O G. ca
... O
°
C Q• C m .C
j C
E
oio °' v
i E a- 3

t"1 0 to
N
.
'? n
=
C
y
Zl
3 Y
c
C O O E s'
U by b4 ?•
3 ? ` 3
y • r' •?
ca O ` L
n. 0
V Tr•{..
Q?
? o U C
y Oa O
c b a"mi
C ? O >
O O U a
ict E Q =
° E
aci ,? '_ c
O 'r E
.In s y .
O pq
? C C
L
_y
R
y
O` bl1 , O .
b U ca
M `n > O ` ° Ca .= C >'' ca C .C N O C O C O 't7 'O T Ca .L OC bVA y
°' C o c o H` 'o ° c s•° c a ;? 3 Fs- °_ c c-`a aci s °?'
a? 'CJ o 3 s. ,o E o a? a E a ao
3 s L
z ° 3 o m °? b 4- o E L a Q y s •o a` j `d o °? o s N a
O y v E to s• c > s sF- U 3 :D ?° S c cca 0 0 3 .3 ?? c a
o o s c T _ = m O .c y b o
00-0
? c _• ? ? ? .? ? ? ? ? '? :?
O a? p c -? °' a> ca ._ c E O o i E p `° F- • h `a «J
y y c m m a o c s E s 0 °_ 0 0 u o o c 3 0> O_ E
Q O o„ o 0 3 c o_ ,- = a? E ci v u -? c o c' 7. p on s u c a?
E .14 °E' n. ai o eEi o0 E E E v o" i -o E to c° c° .ro 4 s
00
M
m 0= E
to ..
E o s Q' o: 3 °' " u 0• m 0 E T v b
° s co
-CA Q ,n '.L,, C .L C aq+ O' C. C v? U U `? d' O b :? E T Q' ` 'fl U E t N 'p ,C C O
z L m m ,a ca 6? O m v :a 'b LL ?, a? x y c a? ..'. y m ca V :a ,,, y ca U
°.' E a c c E E E m c b 4- i°=" o'er'' u o o c ti s? _x E,N
a mom= m> E T° °oc N m M'n 3 3 v ?,s °g o m f
E: o
w E m ?= > m E ee s a? b s ° m c m„„ ` c O O o c .o a? - a
x v ° m 3 E R c a ti o ° o °.? i ca u v c m a .d -v
W y v_ i o s 3 c o r- m
s" '> °A °?' c ?. •> o E° '?-, .y `> m a
O s ro c`a v Y „ b o D o ca G '.r V1 c a ca > " m ?„ ' H
F U «+ ?. N 40 'v , ?, a ca y i... N ca m .o U U c 0 s p a) y w. •fl
j c _0 3 p E o ? p p o U> c c a, v m o?n -o E° o, °
C3 *c
E c E> am`i E 'a °A = c c ° `-c° aoi c x 3 4 0
a E i? m 'E 3 a t> 5
O w a? o : °_ > s _ ? a? 0"= am s
r c ? y r cz
C .° cd C aUi is m O C ° «. " fl O Z C fi° a>i
0 c ea m E o O D T c U °- E s t00 o L
N 7 o` o o. m oa ami z Ca c u `; 1? E .5 ' O w = m e a?i Q c
a? c c m p 0 o - m m c ?q?
° on i „ a? s o o 0 m 0 p 4- D -0 0. 7 c a v ° .. s 4= 0 v n
,' c s a a co s o N o a? c c -v °q o o > Z E c. Q p
m m o - o
`o E c a m ° -o a c E E m m `' W) c° c o " `U' M c " °? e c c
E 3 3 E °" E 3 0 N m a U .1 s„ E to 0 m o =`
z E 0 T "a s 3 •? s c .o ° c 3 F 7v- m 00
E c D ca ° ?° 004
•c m >, b °> E `- 3 .` y ..
O E E o m c o w'- i o .° W 'o o U T
Es.. E [-• .? E O c 'E ca .? s 'm t° m Q a? c ?a y o c W e .=
a? 0 p°???a u7 m oa?o00
s E E s ° ° E o i E E ° O W W ° ami aai o m v o` `= p
a'? T u v o4 E m a:.. a m E u 3 0

O

y b N C

c y y fn N O
L7o

G s
b L O '0

C

y 0 O N b fl
b b I s
3
C G ? L '
a? . C
' L,
Z
• C «? .? L a? ,^
TJ
° ° •
y Oq .. y .? V7 y
? .C"U.. Q s Q ry. o E
`" N U o U O OO
v
e o o c
E bo
° c
0
r,
s
G
0.0 o
z .: y
ao
°
' s o . po
° o c o.°-
'a 7
x
° .
_
,
O M O w cd O ,
cd
O G °n c
„ a
i
Q
O O ?, •+ - a?
° N 00 O
LLI L'

y O
O
L
••? C
V 'a b
b N t+

' y
.y.. N O LU.i ?".' V N
G
3
G
'
N
3
'
W ? C
o u
E 3
° U
5 ''' U T C
N= ".
° ?. • T
.
Q C y
N
c`d ?
y.
ss y a 3 p
o °'
o
p
b «. a
i ca ^
y
.0 H''3 3 y > CO y'x
3 os y v.o.? v-v
49 >
Z O y L O b M- M C G. y^ y.
2.0 y cd C 3 b G¢ a C b O
z O
y L
? G

3 °" 3 cz n C a

" O m° °'

V «S y 0 p «S u bA ?? o Q Oo
oA Y
Q _
G
O
? v o
Q? L ° ?•• a?
, cd H H
I••' a.1
Q? ^ L
, G V U?
y G
Y •? • U . E ? y ?.+ y ?'s U s U
z Q
y O Y N `0 U
Q?
Y c" c
a
E s

-o

c

o c E
3 3 4 'n N °A °
O O
` > L T cd c
O w a7 L
' 0
C y N O L i1 _
b s cd C (r r E^ L C v bA C
na L • ?? ?-, n3 b o a
3 '3 a o 'e w cca a? y ao =j o a o C, of
0

' Q p ?^ a O y y y p G t=ur C a? y
C 3
O
O 7'
'L U •? a> ; O C O i0 C ca W
O
b4
'
?
. N bA Q H O• .C V
N? s C Cd O C
..+ O 6?
F O
.
C C? O
N C E N H
3
cd
.
'?'• 'fl
x 0 L
3 L p« O cd -, • y ? ?.
i,, ? y y p
N
7
s
°
C °
•
6 c 3 o L
0 O
Q
L6 c ?
0 o
,c
'
' 0
i 3
y a
- n o a c s s Y
u
p [-»
G
H y L ?
b `2
«+ ?- fCC ' O C '.? E
O
s O
U O •00 y
U «+ y 0 o G y y `n "
G
v _o " o" ° o c= G E c ti3 `? ?, oq E O b °° 3 cV y
Om E o
u• L `0 c° O
-

z
p
0
=
0 Y
a, aU? b c O W °
L fl
P"
oun y`` =
C
cd O
s O c
b a?
o
C 'C n
S o o Q 3 s y>?
b
b N «+ TJ v? n
fl y
fl
H
3
4 y
0
•C p N
E 0
a>
O
O
s•
t
y 3 '
uj N O 0 .- t C
N ca
a
O co - 6) 'C V
6?
? id L
O N .b '+•-
b 'fl
s bA
V
G O
N 'U
E
V ..+ ._. r
p
,
U .
w, .C y
.0 C4 .G a`? ?
a? C .O C
L
,
,
a > ..
? ° V
cz
U • 0
c
c '
°
°
G 0 O
.' u
L=v o D
3 ? Oq G
L OU s U y W (?
C
EO
a •• >
L M ?
_ c
:
0.)
a
C s 7 OU y ?... s
rn O G ?' :a cl C C L
C. y °' bq ' ^• o «+ ' L y •? ?+ cri
2
° cd
0
. . y
3
>
O .L'
[- . y .+
.r
> > ?- ` .
.
O O .C 0 Q
("' y
N O y y ..
y (n
-. O bq t y
I"'
G «+ U G 3 0 N y
.
N M
0 0 O
° O U C
Q. C U i I.U. L
a
o Q
L Q
b 7
Q? ..+
O 4U L N 4?. L? U y y ..U
-

M o
n° > Ou
S
S a cd s o
a
i
3
y o o-o °
o as u
aci o c ° °'
, L ° 0 c0 ie v
3L'?W 3 1 o H? onm 3?E-4
.
. .
M y 'C ' -'O Uy y O
x Y
M cCd V t= y= T
O
On F" E c :c N .? a•
•'? C N C t1 a. O Q O
bLA E N E 4. ,D E
s o °D °° 0 0 m
a
L U 00 E
p_ H s` a? y v of
?U _U :cCt p, O N VLF In
y w U y 'C E Q Y N ..+
z e 3 o> o .3
C >, fl b eu ^. 0 o
On
?• > O Q • y N CC "'? •?
W b d y .- 0 0
o'
x G d N> Y'-5 .2 U
W u c _t, L y
O 0.0
cEa v -O 3> °
F •0 'O Q 1E
T
C b Ok y a3i E> ?°-
U U .? y
L s t a, E a? 0 s O O`
? O ? 'ai b ? c usu.
w ? o E y a cCa - y ?'.b i
L G Rt O O y .. p. C
3 ° -v y" O c=° 0 0
w > E o c,5 0. 1 L ,j,•' u
O N
G 0 ai s o s o -- 3
v s v aci a? t E
o Ouo,e 0 Ms aui
O O O x O
'v
? u 0
C ?
, O p
•...
a U •^ N ° T
? .r
C N

t0 a?
? C y
y p

' a
? .
O y E° E a
i ro v
•
cl ` `«.
5
o;o c
o .
? G C a".
y
GL y T. .
a` o E E d o
o a??, k ro
=

E
cl U ..+
to 3 cd y 3 O G ?O
E
y ?'' N R7 O L L
tn
N O O
E
s
? L .? Q y
¢
°
E
°
c
a
a
i •
a
i a
i ca
.
N E ` E an 0
a °
_e
• o ? ? p c
N
7
• ? a
i

+r
? 5
«+ G
7 cG
3
L Q.
o ? ?+ Op y
j .C y N O
a'
ar
Vi ? C L 'D
C N a.+ N
s

a
e? c ?v v 'ti 3 a

N cti
+ U
y C

M

?w??wr?••wr?
M
z
O
F
a
U
O
H
H
Q
z
0
F
a
z
x
w
F
k
Ltl
O
F
O
a
0
w
y
a
w
3
w
Z
M1F7• M
* C
V
? o

.F T??w?r?l O V
= 4
O
•.? -
r C R ern
.,?

E
O t
.: $
:n
1
R ?
n b N 7 F. O U v C ?O. y t C
U
?? ? ? aci m i c a ;3 • ? c 'v ?e a
c e .° y o c `° b `_° o 0 3
c on F- a ; 9 E a? b o...
s cn cd v 0 c
L a> ca N O (.. O y O C V p
E c T R a
y ?L to G .o a o u b a?i
c s o ,o .0 0 a"Oi z :E •ti .,o
s E n° o o on
0 o 15 Q s cc ° ° -c b ?_ ? y ao ¢ 8
? ? o Q o
Wn c o Q 'd o' s
a?
•b
'N ? N H^ R C O 'C7 O Y y v
E
u 4) Ln a:
1- 0
tun E E 3 3 a? ca ' E L ? ca i
O 'C ? LI O r c en k- O vi en n. C N
u Y .C ..• O O O 7 v? Q
Fig. 3 Open marsh water management enhances both the permanent pond
and tidal branches of the tidal food web.

i'

o s s
-v
i
c
c
c

_ c

.r

y y
v
a3 y ?
°
' 'C7 ? ca ? a
°
°
$
b
°
bA v
67 '«

h .O
.C _
y C C In
tw Q
o i
s a
'b v v
a
L ^
v
> 3 ?
y
w
c o
%".o L
O
6 c ca
O O y o
v _C v
d
? r 3
«f .O y
C
y
y v C j
'fl y CO s > C
_.
w •
s 'p y O O
E; y 'O
C= bA
..?
V O D. T .. .G Yi .v+ = p
H a U c p Q Cd
"0 ' c y
p p '_
75
c v
O
a
?
v
p •
S
b
a
i -
y 7 =? c b=° ao ^' o c n ro m E

S E
O '?- L
L "'d
«+
C C y Q v
.O '- y y s
L .>.. s7 a
,L L
E... y O V _
fi c° `?
E O
! v 'C v 'b
°
' O L b =
O ° ou -? ?
.U bq a=i
3 o v v 'v '-'
Q'? 'D y -v v ca y
G O E
V
?
v
a _
.a o c y 7
° E a L s s_ L
cC ?; (n
C°
x It CC r p -b O 'C O L L .,?? .C y O- J N E O O -'
4 c a s v ° C
y
c y
> ? b a v Y n L
7 c¢ b
u CL
Ca tw m.

°
3 .
3 c
v
ca
Q v
v Qj
v o s i c c
a c $
x_ ¢ N ao c v
a r o
V) C
C
O
(/I v ar ;? C L. >, 'L7 .•. •? T L ?•" v L
E L ;d b 3
°v'
°'

U
y v v O
"' L V
'b U '
?
? E
C
`d ?'
O=
y C '?• 3
? p .C
? a
u
.. ;3
Z s >, -O E O 4
. O
E •
a C ?,
t p
j 'O p y ,
C y
,n_ = u. G, ?' y y C y L ° O U ` ^Y O.
'.'' L v '? ? v y U
E
-'D
o 19
C y v
U
,p 'v
a v' .D L C'rJ.
r
Q L s
E O _ °
•
'_ qLj U v
`- c~3
s g v
c
C E 3

3 O Cl. ? U t r ?

!'
f-
L p

m c3 S CS ? ..

F- S f L 'J+

F- '
Q y L

G E
a
'
C E
L
i
? 0. L v y
O L ;7 ` y
n
i y
r 1 ? v o
'L y ?' v
J 7 i
r
O x a
i
v: s .v
.
C
O?

f C's
r
7
?
v1
C C C
\C
,
O
,

00
N
c0 O C S
> c v
'? C O :1
M C I (? L C 'n s
O o C G C T7 L E U v
r
M
z
O
F
Q
L
LA
y
Q
z
c
F
z
OG
X
LU
O
F
y
G
LL7
y
m
3
y
z
•r. v •? v v •L v v +J t v v
C
p v L
r -
:e D E
v
' L y ? •?
3 l p '_
`- .L. ? y
a y U :y =
'
p :J
ti? p J •r. v
y G v O

85 7:1 -u r-
O -7 L :J -y .'_ v v 7 C 1 y E

f O O
E c y y
c ?'
?, yU y
s v
c
y °
o v r E a c 3 c
C`0 'O O '3 y ;? 3 C 'C3 0U 7 S ?- S y O p i,

L
a • 7 C .
J = C 'CJ U
C
C l ' ? .. y 'O E
E L> =
aOr ? ' J C `_ ? C "
!1 C C C U 'y

I: ? ° 'O
? ? ? 'D r C
^ E L C y r y v

R
V -0 -0

s

E C

y Q. ° L 7S

'

E °
o "U -4 p
7S
o• • s o =s
'fl 'fl > i y? .D J O v v .?... = v
,0 y :J :S
-5 oj
U y t L '> > y O C> r

' E C

O O

?
L
7 L > L
' ? ?
? C
? C ? t1
e
Y .? C
8 v ? •r, c3

v
^
?
,? J =
=
3 C J .?..
v s
CA ?
L
7E y • >
Y
%
v E s E

O

O u,

c :2
- v
7 1 0 C v n. v U „y
AGENCY CONTACTS`»
NAME TELEPHONE #
Mr. Fred Ferrigno [phone]
N.J. Division of Fish, Game and Wildlife
Tuckahoe, NJ
Dr. Dennis Whigham [phone]
Chesapeake Bay Center for
Environmental Studies.
Edgewater, MD
Mr. Cyrus Lesser [phone]
MD Department of Agriculture
Salisbury, MD
Mr. Tim Goodyear [phone]
National Mar-i-ne Fi i-e e=rg
Oxford, MD
Mr,. George Ruddy [phone]
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FTS) 922-2007
Annapolis, MD
Mrs. L. K. (Mike) Gant [phone]
Raleigh, NC
Mr. Woody Francis [phone]
Corps of Engineers (FTS) 922-4500
Baltimore, MD
Mr. Jeffrey Steen [phone]
Corps of Engineers (FTS) 597-4833
Philadelphia, PA
Mr. Bill Meredith [phone]
DE Division of Fish and Wildlife
Dover, DE
Inclosure 3
f

C ?ry r
DIVISION OF MANAGMOW
Novaaber 10, 1981
HEYORANDOM
TO: an Mn].ligan
t L. Y. Boston, Jr. 70
SU&UCTt Meeting on Mosquito Control and Water Manageamt
On November 18, 1981, a meeting will be hold with the Corps of Engineers
to discuss the matter of water assawmat as a mosquito control tool in
coastal Borth Carolina. I am requesting that you attend this mooting to be
held is Room 209 of the Federal Building at 314 Now Bern Avenue beginning at
10 a.m. I an also by copy of this letter asking that Chuck Wakild attend the
meeting with you so that the lower coast situations may also be addressed.
Your joint participation in this meeting will be greatly appreciated.
cca Chuck Wakild V
Robert Y. Halms

yj ,? 3
...
C
y
aa? 'W1:,Sir

oNa? ???ic?
R?c?
W1L?`sINGTON
,

s
November 2, 1981
MEMORANDUM
Liu. oaf C;,•.?= ?nmc;?:a: •i??:?`•
Mr. Steve Conrad
Mr. Boe Green
FROM: Neil S. Grigg
SUBJECT: Meeting on Mosquito Control and Water
Management
TO: Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mrs
Mr.
Dr.
As you know, the use of water management for mosquito control
in coastal North Carolina has been very controversial. I
wawa like to call your attention to a meeting which will
be held on November A. 8 by the Corps of Engineers to discuss
this matter. The attached letter from Charles Hollis ex-
plains. I believe you will find this of interest and that
it would be to your advantage to have one of your key staff
members attend.
NSG/ch
Attachment
Ken Stewart
Bob Helms
Vernon Bevill
Connell Purvis
Anne Taylor
John Morris
Ed Howard
1'% ? I98I
f -Irv UP
i
WATER QUALITY, . -
SAWCO-EE
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ?•?.? -? ,
WILMINGTON DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. O. 90X 1890
WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28402
IN REMY REFER TO
22 October 1981
Mr. James F. Stamey, Chief
Environmental Health Section
Division of Health Services
PO Box 2091
Raleigh, NC 27602
Dear Mr. Stamey:
On 28 May 1981 a scoping meeting was held in Morehead City, North Carolina,
regarding the proposed pilot project-by Mr. Ben Hale, Pamlico County Health
Department, to perform ditching activities in the high salt marsh
(Distichlis spicata, Spartina patens) to control mosquitoes. Following this
meeting, most of the agencies and individuals attending felt that detailed
environmental studies needed to be performed on the pilot project marsh
before and after project completion to determine impacts. The environmental
studies proposed would require I to 2 years of monitoring before and after
ditching, and would involve not only documenting mosquito breeding but also
include detailed investigations on detrital and other nutrient fluxes,
impacts on aquatic and terrestrial species and habitats, and cumulative
impacts of similar projects.
I agree that detailed investigation would be needed for such proposals when
impacts have not previously been adequately documented. However, Mr. Frank
Yelverton of my staff has been investigating ditching activities for
mosquito control in other states. Based on his investigations, Maryland,
Delaware, and New Jersey have done extensive marsh ditching and have had
good success in controling mosquitoes. The technique generally used is
called Open Marsh Water Management (OMWM). Standards used in New Jersey for
OMWM are described in inclosure 1.
Both the Philadephia and Baltimore Districts, Corps of Engineers have
processed Dapartment of the Army permits for OMWM activities in the states
indicated above. Processing is somewhat different between Districts and
states but two things are consistent. First, the applicant must provide
detailed information on mosquito breeding sites, detailed plans indicating
how ditches will connect breeding sites, and stake on the ground breeding
sites and ditch alignment. Second, detailed biological information on other
-- than mosquito data is not required.
SAWCO-EE 22 October 1981
The reason that detailed biological infonaation is not required is because
many studies that document the impacts of OMWM have already been performed
in the states mentioned (see example study and selected bibliography its
inclosure 2). Because of these studies and experience with OMWM, the
agencies that were contacted.indorsed OMk'M if it is performed properly
(inclosure 3). The phrase "if it is performed properly" is crucial since if
the tidal ditches are designed properly they provide a greater exchange of
nutrients between the marsh and estuarine system, and the pond systems
provide habitat for waterfowl and wading birds. On the other hand, in some
cases, ditches have been designed poorly and have drained the marsh and
changed the species composition. In some other cases, poor design of
ditches resulted in low dissolved oxygen levels which caused the death of
the fish which normally consume the mosquito larvae and the mosquito
populations exploded.
The marsh areas that mosquitoes use for breeding in these northern states
contain the same marsh species as the breeding areas in North Carolina, even
though the northern marsh is more extensive. Also, the species of
mosquitoes and tidal amplitude in these northern states are similar to North
Carolina. Therefore, it may be possible to apply the existing results of
OMWM research to North Carolina. This not only would save the applicant time
and money in the permit process, but would provide review agencies a broad
data base for evaluation of their request.
Since OMWM has not been used previously in North Carolina, we plan a meeting
in Raleigh, North Carolina, on 18 November 1981 to discuss the effectiveness
of OMWM for control of mosquitoes, its beneficial and adverse impacts on
environment, and its possible application to North Carolina marshes. The
meeting will be at 10 a.m. in the Federal Building, 310 New Bern Avenue,
Room 209.
In an attempt to learn from the experience of others, we have asked three
individuals with experience in OMWM to attend this meeting. These
individuals are Mr. Fred Ferrigno, New Jersey Division of Fish, Game, and
Wildlife; Mr. Cyrus Lesser, Maryland Department of Agriculture; and
Mrs. L. K. (Mike) Gantt, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Mr. Ferrigno is a
leading researcher on the impacts of OMWM on the. environment, and we have
asked him to speak on the results on his research. Mr. Lesser is an
entomologist with the Maryland Department of Agriculture which is the
department responsible for controlling mosquitoes in Maryland. Therefore,
Mr. Lesser with speak to us on the effectiveness of OMWM for the control of
mosquitos. Finally, Mrs. Gantt was actively involved in the OMWM when she
was with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Maryland. Mrs. Gantt will
talk to us about methods of ditching that conform to OMWM technquies.
2
8AWCO-EE
N
22 October 1981
w Each presentation will last 20 to 30 minutes including a period for question
and answers. Prior to these presentations, Mr. Frank Yelverton of my staff
will give a brief introduction that will include Corps permit requirements
for OMWM activities.
When these presentations are completed, we will break for lunch. Following
lunch we will reconvene for a detailed question/answer session. Questions
will be directed to a panel consisting of Mr. Yelverton, Mr. Lesser,
Mr. Ferrigno, Mrs. Gantt, Mr. Hale, and Mr. Jerry Perkins, N.C. Department
of Human Resources, Vector Control Branch.
When this panel session is concluded, Mr. Yelverton will briefly summarize
the day's discussions and will indicate the probable course of action for
permit processing based on the day's events. If you have questions, contact
Mr. Yelverton at [phone] or FTS 671-4640.
Sincerely,
?i
3 Incl CHARLES W. HOLLIS
1. N.J. OMWM Standards Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch
2. Example OMWM Study and Bibliography
3. Agency contacts
3
NOR7HR INA DEPA RTMENT OF NATURAL
RES ND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
?- Date - 02 19 U
To:
From: n C
Remarks:
nr X198
? Note and file __ ? Note, initial and forward
? Note and. return to me ? Your comments, please
? Note and see me about this ? For your information
? For your approval ? Prepare reply for my signature
? Per our conversation ? Prepare information for me to reply
? Per your request - ? Please answer, with copy to me
? Return with more details ? To be filed
WPORTANT t ,
T

Date Time
WHILE. YOU WERE OUT
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU " WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE, YOU URGENT
"RETURNED YOUR CALL '
Signed
N. C. Dept. of Natural Resources and Community Development

STANDARDS FOR OPEN MARSH WATER MANAGEMENT OM14M)
County mosquito commissions, Rutgers University and the New Jersey Division
o; risn, Game and Shellfisheries have been perfecting one technique, Open'Marsh
:Water Managetrent (014114M) for the control of all genera of salt marsh mosquitoes on-
open tidal marshes for over two decades. Perfection is achieved by continued
improvement and evaluation. In order to ensure the finest quality and identify
this management technique, certain standards are a necessity. These standards
should be included in any riparian or other permit. Improper adherence to these
standards would be a violation of the permit and infringement on the quality of
the management technique. The following standards shall be utilized and strictly
adhered to in any OMWM project:
1. NEED. OMWM will be based entirely on need and utilized on breeding
marshes only.
A. CM14M will be confined to the Spartint; patens or mixed S. patens,
short S. alterniflora or types of siriilar vegetation that are
irregularly flooded by rains, sprinq or storm tides. It will not
be employed on marshes that are regularly inundated or affected by
daily tides such as tall saltmarsh cordgrass (5 aartina alterniflora),
wildrice (Zizania aquatica), cattail (lypha s .), arrow arum
(Peltandra virainica , threesquare (Scirpus olne i and other types
of similar vegetation.
B. All alterations must directly affect mosquito breeding depressions.
C. The direction and type of alteration used will depend on the dis-
tribution of the mosquito breeding depressions and heir proximity
to natural ponds and tidal ditches.
D. An experienced wildlife biologist, mosquito control worker, or both,
shall stake out all breeding depressions ahead of the equipment.
Depression marking shall be utilized to determine the least amount
of alteration needed to eliminate mosquito breeding.
E. -All mosquito or other ditches encountered that are not contributing
to breeding mosquitoes will not be cleaned.
F. When possible, ponds previously altered by mosquito ditches will
be restored.
II. ALTERATIONS. Three types of alterations (tidal ditches, ponds and pond
radials will be used.
A. Tidal Ditches
1. All tidal ditches will be dug with suitable equipment, pre-
ferably with a rotary ditcher.
2. When mosquito breeding depressions are located adjacent to a
tidal, mosquito or other ditch, a tidal ditch alteration will
be utilized.
3. When a tidal ditch is dug near a pond, the spoil should be
deposited on the pond side.
4. Attempts should be made to dig tidal ditches to a depth of
approximately three feet. Meandering or straight ditches are
acceptable.
5. Main tidal ditches are used to provide tidal circulation
through large areas. They should be connected to a tidal
source on both ends where oossible. Their location is deter-
mined by the distribution of breeding depressions.
6. Lateral tidal ditches connect breeding depressions to mains,
natural tidal, ditches or other laterals. Such laterals often
dead-end in a breeding depression.
Inclosure 1
41
7. All mosquito or other ditches that are breeding will be
.. cleaned.
+ 8. Spoil shall be used whenever possible to fill adjacent mosquito
breedinq depressions or spread evenly over the marsh to en-
courage growth of existing vegetation.
6. Pond Radials
Al mosquito.breeding depressions located near a natural or
other permanent pond shall "be.connected to this pond by pond .
radials. These radials will provide access for fish to de-
vour mosquito larvae in the depressions.
2. All pond radials shall be constructed with suitable equipment,
preferably with a rotary ditcher.
3. To prevent drainage of a pond by muskrats or snow geese, all
pond radials shall terminate at a sufficient distance from a
tidal ditch.
C. Ponds
T. Where large numbers of mosquito breeding depressions are
concentrated in a limited area, a pond alteration will be
utilized.
2. Pond construction is accomplished by the use of the rotary
ditcher, 'amphibious crane or other suitable equipment.
3. Ponds should be shallow, less than one foot in depth, to
promote the best waterfowl, wading and shore bird use.
4. To prevent mosquito breeding during droughts, a reservoir
three feet in depth shaiI -be installed within the pond.
5. These reservoirs should provide proper pond access by humans.
'then large numbers of radials are used, reservoirs are
unnecessary.
6. Reservoirs for fish can be ensured,i'n natural ponds that dry
out during droughts by construction of three foot ditches
with a.rotary ditcher or other suitable equipment. These
reservoirs will connect all the lowest areas within the pond.
7. Pond spoil should be squashed and leveled without causing
depressions. It should be reduced to the lowest possible
level to ensure reestablishment of existing vegetation. Spoil
shall approximate the level of the existing marsh.
8. Ponds may take the shape of the breeding area or may be squared
off to facilitate construction. The shape of a pond or ditch
does not appreciably affect wildlife use. Depth, food
potential and availability are the main factors that deter-
mine wildlife utilization.
Ill. OBJECTIVES
A. To adequately serve the three major objectives (control mosquitoes,
eliminate insecticides and enhance the tidal food web) all three
alteration types (tidal ditches; ponds and pond radials) shall be
utilized on each section of marsh whenever possible. Diversity
provides a better marsh environment, prevents marsh surface breed-
ing by all genera of mosquitoes and enhances both major branches
of the tidal food web.
B. Insecticide use is gradually phased out as OM14M progresses to
eliminate breeding acreage. When the project is completed, all
insecticide use should terminate.
I`/. OTHER T. ECHNIOUES
Impoundments, stop ditches and other types of management techniques
are not OMWM.
V. EVALUATION
Mosquito larval dippings, vegetational plots, invertebrate samp-
ling and wildlife censuses are to be conducted on the area treated
with OMWM and compared with a control of similar composition.
e
,t
I
t
Q
Maryland
Delaware A 12
4) a
o? U
d p ?
Virginia - o
Q 1
N
0 20 40 km
s - study areas
Fig. 1. Chesapeake Bay area of Maryland showing locations of study
areas.
50
M

SUMMARY and CONCLUSIONS
The importance of tidewater marshes in supporting complex estuarine
systems is well documented. However, little or no attention has previously
been given to evaluating how mosquito control practices affect the ecology
of marshes along one of the most productive estuaries in the world;
Chesapeake Bay. The study reported here has made a start in filling this
void.
In the first section of this report we evaluated three strategies of
water management for mosquito control: a tidal system; a semi-tidal system;
and a ion-tidal system; ai compared to an unaltered section of marsh. The
systems are not new in design nor in any way innovative, but never before had
the systems been comparatively evaluated as they were here. We found that in
many ways, the management systems produce similar impacts. All of the
management systems provided good mosquito control. All of the systems
provided additional habitat for fish, shrimp and crabs, and in so doing may
enhance production in the estuarine food web. All of the systems maintained
good water quality, and should pose no threat to the water quality of the
adjacent estuary. The use of the management systems by surface dwelling
invertebrates such as Melampus snails, Amphipods and Isopods was evaluated,
but no clear results were obtained. Additional time and study is needed to
fully define the impact of the management systems on these invertebrates.
In two important points of study we found significant differences
between the three water management systems. Most importantly, we found that
the tidal and semi-tidal systems display significantly lower water tables on
the treated marsh as compared to the control. The closed system also lowered
the marsh water table as compared to the control, but the difference was not
` statistically significant. The closed system also caused the least change
in plant community zonation, whereas two of the tidal systems displayed
appreciably different floral characteristics before and after ditching; with
the plant community taking on a more upland characteristic after ditching.
The closed system. plant community probably retained its original character
due to the fact that the water table was not significantly affected by the
ditching.
Our findings indicate that a closed water management system, when
properly applied on a natural high marsh can achieve a high degree of
mosquito control and produce the least undesirable ecological effects.
We recommend that a closed system management scheme be pursued when
possible. However, it should be pointed out that a closed system will not
be applicable to all situations. The results reported here were obtained
on high S. patens/D. tens/D. spicata marshes, where the mosquito breeding is largely
confined to small, randomly located depressions. In such an instance it is
relatively easy to interconnect the breeding sites so that fish can move
throughout the system and control mosquitoes. Mosquito control may not be
achieved with a closed system on short form S. alterniflora marsh where
mosquito breeding is not always confined to potholes, because, due to the
low elevation of the marsh, large surface pools are often left after flooding
tides or heavy rainfall. Mosquito breeding often occurs in these pools.
In this case, the surface water must be drawn off to achieve mosquito
control and an open or a water control system would be needed. Additional
research is needed on the impact of OMWM techniques in short from S.
alterniflora zone marsh.
Another example of a situation in which mosquito control probably
cannot be achieved with a closed system is a marsh that has been disturbed
by man's activities such as diking and filling. Such practices block
A
natural drainage patterns and create standing water conditions which
provide mosquito larvae habitat. These circumstances require an open
system to effectively remove the surface water.
There were no significant differences observed between the open and
the water control systems in this study. Therefore, the extra time and
expense required to install water control structures may not be justifiable.
A rotary ditcher was found to be more efficient in excavating ditches
than conventional digging equipment. The rotary ditcher also leaves no
spoil piles for undesirable vegetation to colonize. However, except for
the creation of spoil piles and operation speed no significant differences
were noted between a rotary ditcher and more conventional equipment.
The last section of this report presents results obtained in field
and laboratory evaluations of the mosquito larvicide temephos (Abate R)
against non-target organisms. Temephos is an organophosphate with a
reported narrow range of biological activity and short residual life in the
environment. It is the larvicide that is currently used to control mosquito
larvae in tidewater marshes in Maryland and several other Atlantic coast
states. The field test of a 5% granular formulation of temephos produced no
acute toxicological effect on 6 species of non-target organisms. The
laboratory test evaluated the effect of temephos on oyster larvae and spat
and was the first evaluation of its kind. The laboratory test found no
toxicological effect of temephos on the oysters even at several orders of
magnitude higher than would be encountered by oysters in the field during
the operational application of temephos to control mosquito larvae.
While the above evaluations indicate that larviciding with temephos may
not be environmentally detrimental, we should not embrace the technique as a
panacea for mosquito control. Cost factors increase yearly with this control
1Q1
technique. Resistance in the mosquito population is likely to occur in time
and there are no alternative larvicides currently available that satisfy cost,
effectiveness and environmental safety requirements. Larviciding with temephos
should be viewed as only a temporary measure until OMWM can be more fully
implemented on Maryland's wetlands.
This study, funded by a grant through the Chesapeake Bay Program, has
shown that salt marsh mosquito control in the Chesapeake Bay area can be
achieved in an ecologically safe manner. The study made several important
contributions to more fully understanding the ecology of the Chesapeake Bay
area. No previously published paper has examined the impact of a mosquito
control integrated pest management program on the range of parameters
examined here. This study made a significant contribution in the survey of
the fish populations utilizing high marsh zones in the Bay area. The water
table evaluations are unique. The impact of temephos on oyster larvae had
never before been attempted due to the difficulties of performing bioassays
with so sensitive an organism. However, this work was necessary to insure
that using temephos near oyster seed beds would not disrupt the economically
important oyster fishery industry.
By participating in this study the Maryland Department of Agriculture
has gained insights into the impact of its mosquito control program that
would otherwise not have been possible. The future of mosquito control
in the State will be influenced by the results of this study.

1 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Salt marsh mosquito control measures should be initiated only on areas
of marsh documented to produce sufficient numbers of mosquitoes to
warrant control.
2. A surveillance program should be maintained to meet the above
recommendation.
3. The OMWM program currently in use in Maryland should be maintained
as it is the most effective and ecologically sound mosquito control
technique presently available.
4. A closed system of water management should be utilized whenever con-
ditions permit mosquito control to be achieved without surface water
drainage.
5. When surface water drainage is required to provide mosquito control,
ditching should be kept to a minimum so that water table elevations
will not be altered more than necessary.
6. A rotary ditcher should be used when possible.
7. Larviciding with temephos should continue on mosquito breeding
marshes not yet under the influence of OMWM. This larviciding must
be co-ordinated with a sophisticated surveillance program.
8. Research on the impact of OMWM on salt marsh invertebrates should be
continued.
9. Additional research on the impact of OMWM on waterfowl and submerged
aquatic vegetation should be initiated.
10. Additional research on the impact of OMWM on short form Spartina
aiterniflora zone marsh should be initiated.
.y
1!

°? 11
A

4
1979 1980
N Pvs f - -t-r ct. -- --.
EFFECT OF OMW ON A?DF ES_ SOLLICITANS BREEDING - DAVIS ISLAND STUDY SITE
1917 ere

b
0 O FA N

rt rt (A (D :j
0 A
0 .
FA FA o

v rt
v r
i
O
H
.? N
o ?
Obi In N
r N O
V N Cl
0 0 Co
w I
lJt V
rt
ig
Po H
M O
rt
o N
F?
rD O
P
rt
M
C6

0 0 w

4 ?
:3
a0
w .

cr
W r r! O
r rn r V w m w

o w in .A a rt
W to V I-
O
oQ :3
O
ilm

w a, 0 0• rt m w cY rt CO) cr co
0) "0 t-t w 0 K rt w0 n0
H (v Fj N D
( H W 0 H
N A) F-, 10 cn
N' aH a ?
y
t+ H P. r?
W ?y
?+ Fa aH ri 10
: H 1-4 F-• F-U W H F-' F-4 }j• N W (D (D
03 N n (D 0 0 (D (D 0 0 (D 0 O 0

F-
L4
14 k4 FA- I-A.
1-4 F4 W W 0' FL. w a' w ~' a
rt (A
O N
N y ril

1r ?
O O

O
? f7

?O
r00
NV
NV n O
O'4
r N to d CO O N O a` t` O F
O O O
N %0 co LA ON 00 O to O\ P. LA ? O
O 00 W !-? llt N N ON V W (D P-
n rt
w F?
m O

100
O
Fit
0
O
F'•
rt
O
F-j
N
n
C
w
(D
0.
N
rt
W
M
O
K
w
.o
V
r
a
V
rt
O
rt
r
v
I
(D
rt
H
O
A>
P.
O
rt
L;
t3.
0
w

Table 9. Quantitative mosquito larvae data. July 6, 1979.
Estimated no. of
Plot No. larvae per 0.018M2 mature larvae per HA
Deal Is. Closed 3.1 2085
Deal Is. Water Control 0 0
Deal Is. Open 0 0
Control (1)
31.6 88,243
Fourth instar larvae and/or pupae Aedes sollicitans
64

Effect of a closed system of OMWM on Aedes sollicitans
breeding in short form Spartina alterniflora
June 1 to August 31, 1981
Greens Island marsh study plot
No. of larvae collected per 50 dips
Sample Surface
Time Ditches Water Pools Control
1 3 N.D. 385
2 0 N.D. 300
3 26 N.D. 752
4 74 N.D. 47
5 0 84 18
6 66 52 103
7 or 0 0
8 0 0 0
9 210 330 53
10 430 783 0
11 50 263 1,485
12 0 16 230
13 79 70 1,323
14 18 3 0
TOTAL - 956 1,601 4,696
No. larvae/dip 1.37 3.20 6.71
1 way analysis of variance

Source Degrees of
Freedom Sum of
Squares Mean
Square F
Total 37 4,498,430.34
Treatments 2 512,405.16 256,202.58
Error 35 3,986,025.19 113,886.43 2.25

MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
OFFICE OF PLANT INDUSTRIES AND PEST MANAGEMENT
MOSQUITO CONTROL
DAILY SALT MARSH INSPECTION REPORT
FLOODING INSPECTION RESULTS

Station
oad.•
De th No.
Dips Est. No.
Larvae/Di Breeding
Extent
Species
Sta e

COUNTY DATE
FLOODING CONDITION
D - Station dry
P - Depressions holding water
F = Marsh flooded
KEY
# LARVAE/DIP
0 0
1 1-3
2 = 4-10
3 11-30
4 31-100
5 100+
INSPECTED BY
BREEDING EXTENT
0 No breeding
1 Isolated breeding
2 Scattered
3 Widespread breeding
MDA-D-523 (3-80)
Y
.. '._ ,?:.•` ^. .;..r .. t?*I .?? fall ..
IP4
M
1 T • j¦ ?y
;x li.,ak. '? n y
y'Q'!'• ..y, '? Xq' •7+ ^ ? 9? '?`4. 'a<^".., k 1?:. •a.• y Y i•
p if dy1. ,1'4b,?. i.4! !:ems
5 {
-
,. ; ; ,?:, E - ? `? y •• !.W a 46, '' 4•,
4 4 'A1A
` '•55
esq. , ' , ; sa / r 6 Ak I 'P r
1.? A'' 4 4?Mtd S e Ci R,
' 'N '?+ ,,gam ° A t ?' `? • ` z. ,,hh ?' `' t ? r ? ? `?y . ?? " , .. ,
4..
T
•p1
.... ,t Y •'+5- .'.b?} ?' y t 1 '?.? n ? >'r. P`a.. r fS?rS -4 !?'? tax,
3a ?n ,1 R p
,. ? ? ,., Y'; : ? .. J ?,?•?.?x yr } st >
¦ ?.? ? by y.' ,` ? ? j ?lY? J? ! „ 1`
i" \:;; ? v. ? `?r y I? '?j? `}l, ? t ? ` ice' dq Hitii??'?99,,• -, ? ( 1!z .t } lo- 9 },:? A?? ^f y `'?'. Y +§ ? ??. ?/?.aR?
"w
w r_ , p M
'?X OF
JN?"ED STgr?
lk.r?-?'
s
YAW
O ? tl
y a
U N I D S A N IR M AL PROTECTION AGENCY
'Ti?,?rgC PRO'?R E G O N I V
345 COURTLAND STREET
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30365
DEC 0 g 198,
Mr. Charles W. Hollis
DEC' I981
PERMITS AND
ENGINEERING
Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Dear Mr. Hollis:
?? ? ?? ? 8 1981
WATER QUALITY ,
This is in response to the meeting of November 18, 1981, regarding Open
Water Marsh Management for mosquito control in North Carolina marshes.
Our understanding of the material presented is that:
1. The system is proposed only for those marsh areas where Distichlis
s icata and Spartina patens represent the predominant vegetative species.
2. The optimal equipment for use in this system is the rotary ditcher
propelled by a tracked vehicle which exerts less than 2.5 psi on the marsh.
3. -Larval surveys are the most accurate method of determining the
necessity for implementation of such a program.
4. A 200-acre site has been selected by the Pamlico County Mosquito
Control Commission for a test program. An additional 200-acre marsh adjacent
to this would be used as a control.
5. It is difficult to predict the extent of necessary marsh alteration,
depth of ditches and possible changes in water table levels.
6. The system should be.connected to open water for maximum effectiveness.
7. Open Water Marsh Management is an effective system of mosquito control
which would reduce Aedes solicitans breeding areas and subsequent use of
insecticides.
8. The Raleigh office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has offered
to directly supervise the work in the test area.
2
The Environmental Protection Agency requests that an application for a permit
authorizing a test program on the 200-acre site near Hobucken in Pamlico County,
North Carolina, include:
1. A detailed physical description of the proposed work.
2. A description of methods and equipment to be employed, with particular
attention to the psi to be exerted on the marsh.
3. A monitoring program to measure effects of the proposed work on:
a. Water table.
b. Indigenous vegetation.
c. Aquatic and terrestrial organisms.
d. Dissolved oxygen and nutrient levels in connector ditches.
e. Larval populations of Aedes solicitans.
In our opinion, the above information is necessary to afford this office an
opportunity to fully evaluate the proposed test work.
Sincerely yours,
E. T. Heinen, Acting Chief
Ecological Review Section
Environmental Assessment Branch

cc: Ms. Mike Gant, Field Supervisor
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh, North Carolina
Mr. Robert F. Helms, Director
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
Mr. L. P. Benton, Jr., Chief, Environmental Operations
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development
Mr. Preston Pate, Chief, Field Services
North Carolina Office of Coastal Management
Mr. Stuart Critcher
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Mr. John Parker, Permits Coordinator
North Carolina Office of Coastal Management
Mr. Randy Cheek, Area Supervisor
National Marine Fisheries Service
Beaufort, North Carolina
Mr. Harold B. Allen, Acting Regional Director
National Marine Fisheries Service
NtED S 1qr?
o s
n
o c
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Zy. ?,
??r4< PRW"S`
DEC 0 3 1961
REGION IV
345000RTLAND STREET
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30365
Mr. Charles W. Hollis
Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Dear Mr. Hollis:
WA rFR QUALII Y
?oort d /NM 17L /?••+!7
l9,n?is r a,,?
W
/.y/r2
n r 23
191
PER fglrs 4Nt?
Fhu1"1FER,r??
This is in response to the meeting of November 18, 1981, regarding Open
Water Marsh Management for mosquito control in North Carolina marshes.
Our understanding of the material presented is that:
1. The system is proposed only for those marsh areas where Distichlis
spicata and Spartina patens represent the predominant vegetative species.
2. The optimal equipment for use in this system is the rotary ditcher
propelled by a tracked vehicle which exerts less than 2.5 psi on the marsh.
3. -Larval surveys are the most accurate method of determining the
necessity for implementation of such a program.
4. A 200-acre site has been selected by the Pamlico County Mosquito
Control Commission fora test program. An additional 200-acre marsh adjacent
to this would be used as a control.
5. It is difficult to predict the extent of necessary marsh alteration,
depth of ditches and possible changes in water table levels.
6. The system should be.connected to open water for maximum effectiveness.
7. Open Water Marsh Management is an effective system of mosquito control
which would reduce Aedes solicitans breeding areas and subsequent use of
insecticides.
8. The Raleigh office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has offered
to directly supervise the work in the test area.
i
2
The Environmental Protection Agency requests that an application for a permit
authorizing a test program on the 200-acre site near Hobucken in Pamlico County,
North Carolina, include:
1. A detailed physical description of the proposed work.
2. A description of methods and equipment to be employed, with particular
attention to the psi to be exerted on the marsh.
3. A monitoring program to measure effects of the proposed work on:
a. Water table.
b. Indigenous vegetation.
c. Aquatic and terrestrial organisms.
d. Dissolved oxygen and nutrient levels in connector ditches.
e. Larval populations of Aedes solicitans.
In our opinion, the above information is necessary to afford this office an
opportunity to fully evaluate the proposed test work.
Sincerely yours,
E. T. 4inen, Acting Chief
Ecological Review Section
Environmental Assessment Branch
i
cc: Ms. Mike Gant, Field Supervisor
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh, North Carolina
Mr. Robert F. Helms, Director
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
fir. L. P. Benton, Jr., Chief, Environmental Operations
i/ North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development
Mr. Preston Pate, Chief, Field Services
North Carolina Office of Coastal Management
Mr. Stuart Critcher
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Mr. John Parker, Permits Coordinator
North Carolina Office of Coastal Management
Mr. Randy Cheek, Area Supervisor
National Marine Fisheries Service
Beaufort, North Carolina
Mr. Harold B. Allen, Acting Regional Director
National Marine Fisheries Service

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28402
SAWCO-EE
IN REPLY REFER TO
15 January 1982
Mr. Russ Talley
N.C. Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
PO Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Talley:
1a;7?
PE'RMEtS dEw ?
This letter is a follow up to the meeting on open marsh water management
(OMWM) held on 18 November 1981 in Raleigh, North Carolina. As you will
recall, the morning session consisted of presentations on OMWM activities
in Maryland, New Jersey, and Virginia and the afternoon session consisted
of a question and answer period. The major thrust of this letter is to
indicate what we feel is a reasonable and feasible approach to determining
the biological impacts of the proposed pilot project on the marsh
community. Other impacts on the environment requiring investigation will
be discussed in future correspondence.
The 18 November 1981 meeting and the scoping meeting held in May 1981 made
it clear that detailed monitoring to determine biological impacts of the
project will be required both before and after OMWM activities on the
proposed project site and a nearby control site. Monitoring would
include:
a.. Describe in detail the purpose and need for the project. Also
describe how OMWM would be implemented with special emphasis on the type of
equipment and its bearing force on the marsh.
b. Document mosquito breeding sites on the proposed project area and
control site.
(1) Stake locations of breeding sites.
(2) Map location of breeding sites.
(3) Overlay proposed OMWM pattern on mapped breeding sites (not
required for control site).
TEW ' : ;s

SAWCO-EE
15 January 1982
c. Map existing vegetation and monitor any changes in productivity and
species that occur following project completion. An example of a method
..that could;be used to measure productivity is by sampling end of growing
season live standing crop in meter square quadrats along several transects
.lines. 'Species change could also be noted in adjacent .quadrats,
d. Monitor water level changes in the marsh soil before and after the
proposed: project. This can be done by establishing several PVC shallow
wells along the transects mentioned in "c" above.
e. Determine elevation of marsh i
s reams an ditches. This will be used to determine possibility
of lowering marsh water table levels. These elevations should also be tied
into a benchmark so that subsidence if any of the marsh can be measured
following ditching.
f. Monitor changes in fish and invertebrate use of the area. Fish can
be periodically sampled by seining the ditches and seining or trawling
adjacent creeks. Invertebrates ma b
14 , n a so y taking random samples in the ditches.
g. Use of the area by terrestrial species should also be documented.
h. Routine water quality parameters _(temperature, salinity, dissolved
oxygen, pH, and turbidity) should be taken when fish and invertebrate
samples are taken.
A question that has arisen during coordination on this project is whether
or not alteration of marshes by OMWM will promote nutrient enrichment of
"downstream" estuarine areas. Several possible methods of addressing that
question are listed below for your consideration. However,,in discussions
with Dr. Sam Mozley (NCSU) and Dr. Ed Kuenzler (UNC-CH) it has been
suggested that OTMNI probably will shift the locus of decomposition of
particulate organic matter originating in the marsh from "downstream"
estuarine areas to the marsh itself. If this does occur, significant
increases (if any) in downstream nutrient concentrations"would not be
expected as a result of marsh alteration via OMWM. Dr. Mozley indicated
that this type of change has not been associated with environmental
problems to date. We request that you consider this aspect before
formulating your comments on the monitoring alternatives for nutrient flux
measurements which are listed below. It's possible that nutrient flux
measurements are inappropriate with this type of project.
2

SAWCO-EE
15 January 1982
Direct measurement of changes (if any) in nutrient flux before and after
project construction at the project site and control would be logistically
difficult. The project area is dominated by unpredictable wind tides and
lunar tides are not significant. Therefore, reliable measurements of
nutrient exchange between the estuary and marsh would require automatic
samplers, recording gages, and personnel onsite prepared to pick up samples
from the automatic samplers immediately after wind tide events.
Perhaps nutrient exchange could be inferred indirectly if vegetation was
monitored as indicated in part "c" above (i.e., greater productivity, more
nutrient availability). Even this could present problems. If the ditch
bank productivity was higher after construction than before, this could be
interpreted in several ways. Increased productivity could be attributed to
nutrients coming in from the estuary. On the other hand, more nutrients
could be available to the marsh plants because the ditch banks are better
drained, soils become more aerobic, and thus toxic materials blocking
nutrient uptake are removed. (Mendelssohn, I. A. and E. D. Seneca, 1980,
The influence of soil drainage on the growth of salt marsh cordgrass
(Spartina alterniflora) in North Carolina. Estuarine and Coastal Marine
e- nce 11: 27-40.
Sci s
Another possible method to indirectly infer nutrient flux is to sample for
phytoplankton (counts and identifications) and chlorophyll (a) levels at
the proposed site and control before and after project construction.
Phytoplankton (counts and identifications) and chlorophyll (a) levels may
indicate changes in nutrient input to the ditches and creeks due to OMWM.
We would appreciate your comments on the above monitoring procedures by
5 February 1982.
On another subject, Mrs. L. J. (Mike) Gantt with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and.Mr. Cyrus Lesser, Maryland Department of Agriculture, suggested
that a Technical Review Committee be established similar to that created in
Maryland for review of OMWM projects. The committee in Maryland consists
of interested Federal and State agency representatives and other
individuals with additional expertise that is needed in project review. If
this process was adopted in North Carolina, we foresee that the committee's
function would be little different from the processing of a routine Corps
permit action. Routine processing involves review of the project via our
public notice procedure by interested citizens and representatives of
Federal, State, and local agencies. The major difference would be that a
particular individual within an agency (and not the agency in general)
along with specific individuals with additional expertise would be assigned
to review all OMWM projects. If you are interested in serving in such a
capacity, please let us know by 15 January 1981.
3
4