HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 06-07-1993 - VII-C 1
ORANGE C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: June 7, 1993
Agenda Abstract
Item #
SUBJECT: REPORT - ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE STUDY
DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: Yes No
ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT:
Executive Summary/2nd Draft- Planning Director X2592
Albemarle-Pamlico
Estuarine Study PHONE NUMBERS:
Magazine Article Hillsborough 732-8181
Mebane 227-2031
Durham 688-7331
Chapel Hill 967-9251
PURPOSE: To receive a report from a representative of the
N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR) concerning the Albemarle-Pamlico
Estuarine Study.
BACKGROUND: The widespread degradation of major estuaries across
the United States prompted the EPA to begin working
with states to better manage these vital ecosystems.
Although the Albemarle-Pamlico estuary is not
critically degraded, the State of North Carolina, in
cooperation with the EPA, initiated a study of the
estuary in 1987 . The goal of the study is to produce
a Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
(CCMP) for the estuary which will recommend
potential environmental protection strategies for
the Albemarle and Pamlico estuarine system and
watershed.
The actual writing of the CCMP began in early 1992 .
As of March, 1993, the CCMP has been through two
public reviews and considerable internal revision by
study committees. A third draft is now underway and
is scheduled for completion in early July.
A representative of NCDEHNR will report on the
study, including recommendations concerning
environmental protection strategies and
implementation techniques.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive as information.
2
Executive Summary
of the
Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study
Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan
Introduction
The Albemarle-Pamlico estuary forms a complex and dynamic ecosystem which provides us with
an invaluable bounty of natural resources. The sounds, rivers, creeks, wetlands, and terrestrial
areas in the watershed of the system support a variety of uses. We depend on the system to
supply food, recreation,jobs, a mode of transportation, and vital habitat for fish and shellfish.
Economically, the Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds system represents the region's key resource base
through commercial fishing, tourism, recreation, and resort development. Economic benefits are
also derived from uses of the natural resources for mining, forestry, and agriculture.
In coastal areas around the nation, human populations and uses of the coastal resources are
increasing. The Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine region is no exception. With these increases come
increases in conflicts among the various users of the resources.
•
Fortunately, the Albemarle-Pamlico is a relatively healthy ecosystem when compared to heavily
populated and industrialized estuarine systems in other parts of the country such as Boston
Harbor or Long Island Sound. However, several signals of environmental stress have been
recognized in the Albemarle-Pamlico system, including: declining fisheries, recent outbreaks of
fish and crab disease, frequent blooms of nuisance algae, closures of shellfish waters to harvest,
losses of historic shellfish and submerged aquatic vegetation beds, and degradation of wetland,
fish, and upland habitats. This plan responds to these signals with recommendations for
protecting the health of our invaluable estuarine system, for both its important ecological role and
its sustained support of our uses of its resources.
The System
The Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system is the second largest estuarine complex in the United
States. The system supports an abundant and rich variety of organisms. It encompasses
important habitat areas for fish and shellfish including key nursery areas for east coast fisheries.
The extent of the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system is illustrated in Figure 1. The system is
composed of seven sounds: Albemarle, Currituck, Croatan, Pamlico, Bogue, Core, and Roanoke, and
is drained by several major river basins: Chowan, Tar-Pamlico, Neuse, Roanoke, Pasquotank,
Perquimans, Little, North, Pungo, and Alligator. The rivers drain a basin of over 30,000 square
miles including 36 counties in northeastern North Carolina and 19 counties and independent cities
in southeastern Virginia and discharge fresh water into the western side of the sounds. On the
eastern side of the sounds, a chain of islands with only a few inlets form a barrier with the
Atlantic Ocean. (See Figure 1 on next page.)
The Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system supports an array of ecological, economic, recreational,
and aesthetic functions which are of regional and national importance. The critical importance of
sustaining the system's ability to fulfill these functions is reflected in its nomination by the
Governor of North Carolina and its designation as an estuary of national significance in the
National Estuary Program by the Administrator of'the Environmental Protection Agency.
Executive Summary— I
~
3
°
'�~A,..,"?'
-,"?' `\ tj»-`� ~. ~ � /
. CHE�zn CHESTERFIELD‘'-. '
\e�u�
/
-
.
'\ �r` 1
,
�_- pom^ �, 'I°«~-' I.' ` )` `,+pnmc EDWARD, `~-"'- 7.._^ e �' nc, ' ~" ^'- ` ',
/ l ` ».~oW^r PRINCE .. '•,
~ ‘.d '- ^oynuOTTc , 's | »mmooIE 1 .. �.- '
/ ' -"1 uwconu~n~ `—~~' . �
� ,' / =/ ` m(`— / "S' ^�' / /'/il* 5
' .--Ilk, HALIFAX � ' '�_).~uxsxun ' . ~�' ` '' BEACH' , '/ SOUTHAMPTON 'uc��r�un'lu — � /_ . ' cxts^PEAxo/ nnromv/"?` SUFFOLK CITY CITY | "
/ .
/
/ ___ '�"" ' / "�xr,oxo_
•
/ \cuxuc,�^vo ' / - `�` ~~-
. ` uwp�n� ' / '
yowc \ ' JONES `~
\ ' '
. '� ` i
/ ` ncrL/x \ /
- —~' \-' --' ' — . / .' ' '
\ \ \ / ��
, \ . '
,' \ BLADE '
, ._- - __4 » Lai�/
� � 7 ` ~� ~,~�==^
' \ '
pu
y xozn \ `��. `
� _ ^^ \� ■ _ —
^ `'
.
� ''. . '
c
Figure I : Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study Area
. .
ltaangivreSumwoarY-2
4
The Study
The Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study (APES) is a five year cooperative effort jointly sponsored
by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It is one of twenty-one estuary projects nationwide that
are a part of the EPA National Estuary Program. The National Estuary Program aims to protect
the local, state, and national interest in maintaining the ecological integrity of the important
estuaries through long-term planning and management.
Important components of the National Estuary Program and APES are the consideration of water
quality, fisheries resources, land and water habitats, and the interaction of humans with the
natural resource of the estuarine system as a whole. The charge to APES was to look at this
system as a whole and to consider all aspects of its ecological integrity.
The APES program has generated research information and public awareness to support the
development of this Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan (CCMP) composed of
recommendations for management strategies to protect the system's estuarine resources. In these
efforts, APES has been guided by four committees composed of 95 members: a Policy Committee, a
Technical Committee, an Albemarle Citizens Advisory Committee, and a Pamlico Citizens Advisory
Committee. The members of these committees represent government agencies, university
researchers, and the public including a variety of interests: environmental groups, agriculture,
forestry, developers, industry,fishermen, and local elected officials. The members of these
committees are listed at the end of this summary.
The Plan
The CCMP is a blueprint for maintaining and restoring the biological, physical, and chemical
integrity of the A/P estuarine system. It identifies the most pressing environmental problems in
the Albemarle-Pamlico system and presents specific management actions to protect and enhance
the estuarine system, its water quality, and its natural land and water resources, for present and
future generations.
The CCMP is the product of a collaborative, consensus-building effort involving numerous federal,
state, and local agencies, interest groups, organizations, and individuals. The staff has worked
with APES committees and many others to determine the most pressing resource protection issues
in the Albemarle-Pamlico system and the most effective strategies to address these issues. These
issues and strategies are summarized below. While some recommended management actions
reflect the consensus of the numerous interests involved in the development process, other
management actions reflect compromises. The recommended actions presented herein are believed
to be the most effective, the most feasible, and the most immediately necessary to protect the
health of the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system.
The CCMP is organized into a series of smaller plans. The bulk of the recommendations are made
in the action plans. Each action plan addresses a specific area of concern: Human Environment,
Vital Terrestrial Areas and Wetlands, Water Quality, Fisheries, and Public Education
and Involvement. Each action plan presents background material on the area of concern and
'Executive Summary-13
5
then presents the recommended management actions. Each management action is explained with
respect to its benefits, implementation strategies, considerations, implementation costs, and
implementation timeline. The management actions are summarized below. For additional
information or clarification, please consult the full document; references are provided in the
summary below.
Additional recommendations are made in other plans in the document. These plans include:
Implementation, Monitoring and Assessment, Research, Information Management, and
Financing Options. These plans are also referenced in the summary below.
Other sections of the CCMP provide important background information and useful summaries of
the recommended management actions. The introduction to the CCMP provides background
material on the APES program and the uses of the estuarine system. Additional background
material can be found in the Program Descriptions appendix. These descriptions provide
information on the activities of agencies and programs which are involved in the management and
protection of the resources of the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system. In this summary, the
Recent Milestones for System Protection section summarizes the important efforts these agencies
and programs have made recently which will contribute to the protection of the estuarine system.
Another appendix to the document lists the management actions by the agency or program
designated as responsible for implementation.
Concerns and Management Actions •
Unplanned growth and development can have substantial cumulative impacts on the natural
resources of a region. While the Albemarle-Pamlico region is generally less densely populated than
other estuarine systems in the nation, permanent population growth has been substantial,
especially in the Virginia Beach area including Dare and Currituck counties; in the Research
Triangle area including Orange, Wake, and Durham counties; and in a region including Craven,
Carteret, and Pitt counties. Seasonal population growth has been substantial in counties which
border the sounds and the ocean.
With expected further increases in the population and development of the region, use of the
estuarine resources will increase and may result in increased conflicts among the various uses of
those resources and degradation of environmental quality. Allowing for economic growth while
protecting the natural resources which support the long-term economic health of the region can be
addressed through planning by local governments to guide their growth and development.
• Require and fund development of local land and water plans for all counties and municipalities
in the North Carolina portion of the Albemarle-Pamlico region.
Local land and water plans identify the preferred uses of land and water resources and
serve as a guide for growth. Local land and water plans should be developed and regularly
updated in accordance with minimum environmental planning standards set by the state to
ensure adequate consideration of the impacts of land and water use, growth, and
development on state public trust natural resources. The plans should be reviewed and
approved by a state planning authority for their consistency with the state environmental
guidelines. (See Human Environment Plan, Management Action A)
-''Executive Summary —;
6
• Maintain and expand a geographically-referenced database for the Albemarle-Pamlico region to
support the planning efforts of local governments;increase opportunities for local governments to
access the database.
A geographic information system (GIS) is a computerized, geographic database which
provides a valuable tool for conducting local and state environmental planning. The state
has an extensive GIS database in the APES region. Maintenance and expansion of this
database, accompanied by increased accessibility to the database at the local level will
greatly enhance the development and implementation of local environmental planning.
(See Human Environment Plan, Management Action B and Information Management
Plan).
The waters of the Albemarle-Pamlico estuary and government-owned lands in the region are held
in public trust for the citizens of and visitors to North Carolina. As population and development in
the region increases, the demand for use of and access to public trust areas increases. State and
local governments must respond to these demands with management that ensures the stewardship
of public trust resources in balance with public access to these areas.
• Develop state comprehensive public trust legislation by 1995 which includes public compensation
for the private use of public trust resources to recognize and implement public trust rights.
Public trust legislation would facilitate the implementation of effective stewardship of
public trust areas and rights. At this time, North Carolina has a permissive stance with
regard to private use of public trust areas. Fees should be charged to compensate for
private use of the public trust and should go toward protection of other public trust
resources. (See Human Environment Plan, Management Action C.)
• Develop a comprehensive state public access plan by 1996 to recognize and implement public
trust rights along the estuarine, ocean, and riverine shoreline.
Public access provides an avenue for increasing public awareness and stewardship of
natural resources. A comprehensive public access plan developed by local governments
would help to ensure public access to public trust areas now and in the future. A
comprehensive plan would support efficient management of public trust areas, provide
justification for access projects, and allow targeting of project funding. (See Human
Environment Plan, Management Action D.)
viiir.`•i'�i?iii��::i$? �i�ir:iii>x':ii�:�:':4ii iii}:'i::i iii i�rii:`:,:Y}:�::�!.`•: -'•.iii'":i`.ii:�['i'?�;i;: ;:;.;?',:�:%�'•i`%2:2ii"i`%`'� iCi: Yi?r;
!•.•Y.v::::'t..:.•r: .:.t,•1••/fi:.:./v::.:.:::.r:::.::,F,•:w:.v:::::.v...x:r:::::::::v:::.:::::::::•::::•::^:r:. .�}:m:::.v:.,v:.�:.::::.�:::::.�::::::::;:::::... ,
Human activities such as agriculture; forestry; and residential, commercial, and industrial
development have often resulted in the loss or degradation of important terrestrial and wetland
habitats. The Albemarle-Pamlico region includes many important terrestrial habitats which are
essential to the survival of rare plant and animal species or are considered rare.natural
communities. The region also includes an extensive variety and acreage of wetlands which provide
important habitat for terrestrial and aquatic species and which provide important water control
and water quality functions. Protection of these vital habitats and their important functions can
be enhanced with management measures which complement existing regulatory efforts.
Executive Summary--5
•
7
• Promote coordinated inventory and mapping of vital terrestrial areas and wetlands to maintain
accurate and current data which can be used for habitat protection.
Accurate and current inventories and maps of these important habitats are critical to
support resource managers and planners, conservation organizations, and citizens in
protecting these areas. They are also important in providing predictability for development
interests. (See Vital Terrestrial Areas and Wetlands Action Plan, Management Action A)
• Increase efforts to protect and conserve vital terrestrial areas and wetlands through government
and nongovernment acquisition,government protection strategies, and incentives for private
conservation.
Acquisition and careful management of vital habitats is often the best method to protect
these areas. Acquisition efforts, by both public agencies and private organizations, should
be targeted toward 23,000 acres of high quality rare natural communities. Acquisition
efforts should be complemented by the implementation of conservation oriented
management strategies including recovery plans which address habitat needs of
endangered and threatened species, wildlife corridor planning, and site-specific
management plans for government-owned property. Protection of vital terrestrial areas
and wetlands should also be pursued through incentive programs to encourage private
landowners to implement conservation measures. (See Vital Terrestrial Areas and
Wetlands Action Plan, Management Action B.)
• Address the preservation, conservation, and management of vital terrestrial areas and wetlands
in local land and water plans.
Important decisions about the protection and management of vital terrestrial areas and
wetlands are often made by local governments. Many local governments in the Albemarle-
Pamlico region conduct land use planning. Local land and water plans should address the
protection of vital terrestrial areas and wetlands, including policy statements regarding
this issue and considering innovative development tools such as cluster or rural village
approaches which promote habitat protection while allowing development. Addressing the
management of vital terrestrial areas and wetlands in local plans allows for special
attention to issues of local concern and local priorities, and also for local control over
impacts on these areas. (See Vital Terrestrial Areas and Wetlands Action Plan,
Management Action C; see also Human Environment Action Plan, Management Action A)
• Develop a statewide comprehensive wetlands stewardship program to complement existing
regulatory protection with acquisition strategies, private conservation incentives, public
education efforts, and restoration and mitigation projects.
The current regulation of wetlands is generally driven by federal policy. A state-level
wetlands stewardship program would allow for specific attention to state priorities in
wetlands management and protection in a non-regulatory manner. This program would
not be a new regulatory permit program, but rather it would encourage the stewardship of
wetlands resources through voluntary acquisitions, private conservation incentives, public
education programs, and restoration and mitigation efforts. The state program would serve
to facilitate coordination among the agencies which manage wetlands, provide for the
consideration of cumulative impacts to wetlands, foster enhanced wetlands policies, and
promote local wetlands management strategies. (See Vital Terrestrial Areas and Wetlands
Action Plan, Management Actions D, E, and F.)
•
Executive Summary-6
8
N�npotnt$Ow-c�P u ou
•
Water flowing over the land surface dislodges and dissolves pollutants from a broad range of
sources including agricultural, silvicultural, and urban areas. The transport and deposition of
these pollutants into the waters and wetlands of the estuary create nonpoint pollution. This type
of pollution is difficult to identify and manage, but is now widely recognized for the substantial
contribution it makes to water quality degradation. Increased management of land uses which
contribute to nonpoint pollution can minimize loadings of sediment, pathogens, toxicants, and
excess nutrients, carried into the water by runoff.
• Expand funding for the North Carolina Agriculture Cost-Share Program to meet the farmer's
requests for cost-share money to implement best management practices which protect water
quality.
Agriculture is the industry actively covering the greatest area of land in the Albemarle-
Pamlico region, and agricultural practices are known to be a prominent source of nonpoint
source pollution. The state has a program, the Agriculture Cost-Share Program, which
efficiently addresses nonpoint source pollution from agricultural lands by providing farmers
with cost-share funding to implement "Best Management Practices" (BMPs), measures
which protect water quality. Applications for cost-share funds always far exceed the
amount available. Increasing the funding for this program by $2.5 million annually in the
Albemarle-Pamlico region would enable the program to expand implementation of BMPs
through cost-sharing. In addition, many farmers would implement BMPs without cost-
share funding if technical assistance were available to assist them. Increased funding for
the Agriculture Cost-Share Program would also support the provision of expanded technical
assistance. (See Water Quality Action Plan, Management Action C.)
• Institute a cost-share program for nonagricultural nonpoint source control measures for urban,
suburban, industrial, and silvicultural areas.
The success of the Agriculture Cost-Share Program in promoting water quality protection
suggests that further water quality benefits would be gained by expanding the approach to
other land uses which contribute to nonpoint source pollution. A cost-share program
• should be established to develop and fund the implementation of nonagricultural BMPs for
application in urban, suburban, and forestry areas. (See Water Quality Action Plan,
Management Action D.)
• Require the maintenance of a minimum undisturbed 20-foot buffer strip of endemic vegetation
along all perennial streams, rivers, and tidal water bodies (i.e., the blue line on U.S. Geological
Survey topographic maps) in all new land disturbing activities;encourage the establishment of
buffer strips in existing land uses with the nonpoint management cost-share programs.
As a component of an integrated water quality management system, vegetated buffer strips
offer a variety of environmental benefits including the removal of excess nutrients and
sediment from surface runoff and shallow groundwater. The requirement for a 20-foot
buffer would apply to any new, ground-disturbing activity. Minimal clearing of vegetation
in the buffer strip should be permitted to preserve reasonable sight lines, accommodate
water dependent facilities, address erosion control projects, and provide for access paths,
general woodlot management, and best management practices. Existing land uses which
are not land disturbing should remain exempt from the buffer requirement through a
"Grandfather" clause. However, buffer strips should be encouraged on "grandfathered"
lands as a BMP in nonpoint source management cost-share programs. (See Water Quality
Action Plan, Management Action F.)
• Apply the current coastal state stormwater regulations watershedwide and ensure the proper
installation and regular maintenance of all stormwater management systems.
Executive Summary-7
9
While urban runoff impacts are less widespread than, for example, agricultural impacts,
they can have severe impacts on local water quality, and the harmful contributions of
urban runoff are increasing in the Albemarle-Pamlico region. The expansion of stormwater
control regulations to apply to the entire watershed would provide inland waters and
downstream estuarine waters with the same protection from urban and suburban runoff
that is now afforded coastal waters. In addition, the implementation of these regulations
should be conducted with increased levels of monitoring to ensure proper construction,
operation, and maintenance and with increased availability of technical assistance to those
who are subject to these regulations. (See Water Quality Action Plan, Management
Action G.)
• Improve outreach to small landowners and small logging operators to increase education
concerning forest practice guidelines for water quality protection.
Landowners and logging operations can voluntarily use forestry best management practices
(BMPs) to remain exempt from the Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act, and their use
of forestry BMPs helps to protect water quality. Increased outreach efforts to educate
small landowners and logging operators about forestry BMPs and regulations would
encourage the use of practices which protect water quality. (See Water Quality Action
Plan, Management Action H.)
• Create an enforcement program which specifically targets nonpoint source violations of water
quality standards.
Currently, it is difficult to enforce against nonpoint sources of pollution for violations of
water quality standards. Nonpoint source enforcement actions are time and labor intensive
and usually only occur in response to citizen complaints. A specific program for nonpoint
source enforcement would increase active enforcement of water quality standards and
provide more complete resource protection. (See Water Quality Action Plan, Management
Action J.)
• Increase efforts to research alternative on-site wastewater treatment systems;investigate the
adequacy of the protection that current on-site wastewater regulations provide for water quality;
improve maintenance inspections of existing septic systems.
In the Albemarle-Pamlico region, approximately 4.4% of the population is served by septic
tanks. Much of the land in the region, however, is unsuitable for effective operation of
septic systems. Additional research is needed on alternative systems which can be used in
areas where conventional systems are unsuitable. As they are proven effective, the use of
alternative systems can be supported through the nonpoint source nonagricultural cost-
share program discussed above. Installed septic systems and alternative systems should be
more closely monitored through increased levels of local enforcement. A small fee charged
when systems are installed could support local inspections. In addition, the impacts of
conventional systems and the adequacy of existing regulations needs further research.
(See Water Quality Action Plan, Management Action E.)
• Consider the establishment of a state marinas policy as a forum to address concerns regarding
siting, maintenance, public trust rights, cumulative impacts, sewage management, public
education, and permit enforcement for marinas, piers, and mooring areas;provide cost-share
opportunities to support projects to retrofit existing docking areas with pump-out equipment;
increase education programs concerning water quality impacts of boating.
Recreational and commercial boats can contribute a variety of pollutants to the estuarine
environment, particularly in places where boats are docked or stored. Most pollution
caused by boating, however, is preventable or controllable. Proactive strategies should be
• pursued to manage boating sources of pollution. A state marinas policy may provide for
enhanced protection of estuarine resources and public trust rights. This policy should
Executive Summary --8
10
address not only marinas, but also, docks, piers, and mooring areas. A cost-share program should
be established to support the retrofit of existing facilities with marine sanitation device pump-out
equipment. Increased levels of boater education should encourage boating practices which protect
• water quality. (See Water Quality Action Plan, Management Action I.)
• Refine water quality criteria and classifications as necessary to improve the protection of aquatic
communities from cumulative impacts of nonpoint source pollution.
Water quality standards are designed to protect the aquatic environment from degrading
conditions and cumulative impacts which threaten the survival and propagation of aquatic
life. To provide adequate protection to important aquatic resources and habitats,
additional research should focus on the feasibility of water quality criteria for
transparency, nitrate, total suspended solids, biotic indices, and vital fisheries habitats
classifications. (See Water Quality Action Plan, Management Action A.)
• Expand estuarine water quality modeling efforts.
Modeling provides an understanding of the functioning of and cycles in complex
ecosystems. Expanded efforts to model the estuarine system would increase the ability to
assess the impacts that can be expected from various uses and would assist in setting
discharge limits that take nonpoint source loads into account. Expanded modeling efforts
should increase consideration of terrestrial and airborne nutrient loading; surface and
groundwater cycling; toxicant loadings, fate, and transport; and cumulative loadings
effects. (See Water Quality Action Plan, Management Action B.)
... :; ......:......... x;::?:i•.;5::;5>5:::>:::::::;<:::�::;iii%i22`;+::;Sy;P;So-:�;;;«;:;:;;;::;: ::;:<;:%<::
:::<::::�i::::..,::,:::::.::.::�� ..�i:ai :i'i'i'=>::::a:,::...............:.....:.•...........................,.....................
The pollutant loadings caused by point source discharges are more easily identified and managed
than nonpoint sources, and are therefore, more closely regulated. Point sources continue to be a
significant source of biological oxygen demand, toxicants, fecal coliform, and excess nutrients to the
Albemarle-Pamlico system. The impact of point sources can be further controlled through
proactive management approaches and clean-ups which address past contamination.
• Strengthen criteria used in setting point source discharge permit limits by lowering the
allocation of instream assimilative capacity to 75% and upgrading secondary wastewater
treatment requirements.
Assimilative capacity is the natural capability of a water body to receive a pollutant
without violating water quality criteria or impairing its functional use. The Division of
Environmental Management currently allocates 100% of assimilative capacity when setting
permit limits for dischargers. Lowering this allocation to 75% would provide a safety zone
that.would protect the water from unforeseen cumulative impacts. In addition, further
water quality protection would be provided by upgrading wastewater treatment
requirements for new or expanded treatment plants. Economically feasible technology
exists to comply with higher limits. (See Water Quality Action Plan, Management Action
K)
• Increase availability of waste reduction and plant performance analyses and operator training
programs to promote the improvement of point source operations and impacts.
Technical assistance provided to dischargers through the state's Pollution Prevention
Program and Pre-treatment Program have aided in reducing pollutant inputs, increasing
efficiency, and reducing waste at the source. Increased levels of technical assistance will
fill a demand for such service and achieve further water quality improvements. (See
Executive Summary—9
11
Water Quality Action Plan, Management Action L.)
• Evaluate the potential remediation of areas of sediment shown to be toxic.
Areas of sediment with elevated levels of metals, some with potential toxicity, have been
identified. The sites are usually associated with sites of point source discharges and
marinas. Efforts to document further potential toxicity in the sediments and to evaluate
the feasibility of remediation activities should be pursued to address any highly
contaminated areas. (See Water Quality Action Plan, Management Action M.)
•
S ::.: .. ...:.. .:::: ..:..:. :.: _.::i`;::::"y::?::^::':'::'.::ii:y:}iii:�::�:.ii:ii:i:ii:::J::v:i'::::i::i:::i<:5;:;::;:i::i... .. :.::v:ii:^'i:!:.:'• ..-.:..:..
.}i:;•:: ♦.:. ... .. ....:.. :....: ..:.:......::...:.::.::::::::.::::.�:::.�::::..::::v:.�:::::::::::::.i J;e,{.:!:v:�:::.:::::.:::::::::.::.::5•:iii::.:i::.�:.�:.�::.�:.�::::::::::.::.::.�::.�:.::...Sv:i:..ii'..::....::....
The Albemarle-Pamlico estuary offers a broad range of fishing opportunities for commercial and
recreational interests alike. Increasing fishing pressure,however,has resulted in generally
declining catch per unit effort and notably declining landings for some species. Sustaining the
long-term productivity of the region's fisheries in the face of overfishing of some species, bycatch by
large commercial gear of nontarget species, conflicts between different fishing sectors, habitat loss,
fish kills and diseases, and insufficient data for management is of substantial concern in the
Albemarle-Pamlico region. Fisheries management can be improved with planning efforts and the
promotion of best fishing practices.
• Develop and implement state fishery management plans for important recreational.and
commercial species.
State fishery management plans would enhance the coordination, scientific justification,
and predictability of fisheries management measures. Developing plans will require the
completion of stock assessments to gather the data necessary to support management
decisions. A plan should suggest the best measures for managing a fishery and give
consideration to the use of effort control schemes where appropriate. When effort control
tools such as transferable quotas or trap certificates are proposed, appropriate
consideration should be given'to economic and social impacts. (See Fisheries Action Plan,
Management Action A.)
• Expand development of bycatch reducing gear and practices and require their use as their
practicality is demonstrated.
Bycatch reducing gear and practices can reduce the catch of nontarget organisms in large
commercial gear and thereby, decrease potential negative impacts caused by the loss of
those incidental catches. Some gear types which reduce bycatch, such as the finfish
excluder device used in trawls, have already been developed and are successfully being
implemented. A gear development program with a bycatch reduction focus in the Division
of Marine Fisheries could promote the development of measures to reduce nontarget
catches in all sector's of the region's commercial fisheries. (See Fisheries Action Plan,
Management Action B.)
• Establish a cost-share program to support the use of"Best Fishing Practices."
A cost-share program for commercial fishing should support the use of required and
voluntary fishing practices, such as the use of bycatch reducing gear, which reduce
• negative impacts on fisheries productivity. Cost-share money should be used to help
existing users of a particular fishery phase in new gear and practices. Where gear
purchases are cost-shared, fishermen should trade in old gear to the state so as to remove
that gear from use. Cost-share money could also be used to support the participation of
fishermen in research projects testing new Best Fishing Practices. (See Fisheries Action
Plan, Management Action J.)
• Institute a license to sell fish and shellfish and a recreational saltwater fishing license.
These licenses would improve the ability to collect data which would characterize the
.Esocutive Summary--10
12
fisheries and support the development of state fishery management plans. The licenses
would also provide a source of revenue which can be directed toward supporting fishery
. management efforts. (See Fisheries Action Plan, Management Action K)
F :aid' e Habitat
;..:•.::...
Within the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system, many areas function as vital habitat for aquatic
organisms: nursery areas, spawning areas, shellfish beds, and submerged aquatic vegetation. The
degradation and loss of these areas caused by direct physical disturbance and water quality
degradation threatens the productivity of ecologically and economically important organisms.
Specific protection and restoration measures targeted at these habitats can sustain and enhance
their important functions.
• Create official designations for native submerged aquatic vegetation, shellfish beds, spawning
areas, and additional nursery areas;protect designated areas through use standards, water
quality criteria, local land and water plans, and targeted acquisition and private conservation
efforts on adjacent lands.
Designation and subsequent, protective management and regulation for vital fisheries
habitats protect important ecological functions of these areas and support their
contributions to long-term productivity of important fisheries stocks. After designation, use
standards and water quality criteria should protect these areas from physical alteration
and water quality degradation. Local land and water plans should develop local policies
and management tools to address vital fisheries habitats. Further protection should be
afforded to vital fisheries habitats through voluntary acquisition and private conservation
on adjacent lands. (See Fisheries Action Plan, Management Actions C, D, and E. See
also Water Quality Action Plan, Management Action A.)
• Restore, where feasible, vital fish and shellfish habitats.
Restoration projects mitigate for previous losses of important habitat areas and functions.
Restoration expands the amount of existing habitat and supports a potential for increased
levels of fisheries productivity. The restoration of shellfish beds, particularly oysters, may
contribute to improving water quality by increasing filtering activity which can reduce
levels of nutrients and suspended particles. (See Fisheries Action Plan, Management
Action F.)
shin!! ts::sad: ''<«' <><>>>'> <`` '>> « ~'s ` > ><> ; '
::. l •
tip:•:
Despite many years of research, the causes of fish and shellfish kills and diseases are,
unfortunately, still not well understood. Recently, however, research supported by APES has
discovered a new toxic algae that kills fish and was found in association with fish kill events on
• the Pamlico and Neuse rivers. Further significant steps toward determining causes of fish and
shellfish kills and diseases can be made with continued research and expanded monitoring efforts.
Upon determining causes, management strategies can be designed to minimize human
contributions to the occurrence of fish and shellfish kills and diseases.
Executive Summary --11
13
• Continue to investigate the causes of fish and shellfish kills and diseases through management
oriented research which is supported with expanded monitoring data provided through an
environmental response network.
The investigation of fish and shellfish kills should be made a top priority through
the establishment of a response network for the Albemarle-Pamlico region. This
network would create a database of information on kill events and thereby, support
research aimed at determining the causes of fish and shellfish kills. Research
• concerning fish and shellfish kills and diseases should have objectives which are
closely coordinated with management objectives. In such research, if human
activities are determined to be a factor in the occurrence of a fish and shellfish kill
or disease, management strategies should be designed to reduce or eliminate the
human impacts. (See Fisheries Action Plan, Management Action G.)
PubU .e�lwarenea>t
:}{::..:�::riii�i:.ii•.i:.. :Iiii;�i:�::}i::i::•ii:'!'r.i"i}:ri�ii:�i::�iii::i::;:i;i:^::i:i�i:'•:::i::::i.:....... :v:........:�.: ::.
Environmental education efforts can instill in the public a sense of ownership and responsibility
for the protection of natural resources. Effective management of the Albemarle-Pamlico region
depends upon the participation of an informed and involved public. Public education and
involvement opportunities concerning the Albemarle-Pamlico system should be expanded to
encourage environmental stewardship and increased public participation in resource management
decisions.
• Enhance environmental science education in primary and secondary schools.
• Improvements in environmental science education for students would increase awareness
and encourage stewardship of the region's resources. Such improvements can be made
with increased curricula requirements for environmental science, development and
distribution of environmental science teaching resources, continuing education
opportunities concerning environmental science for teachers, specific requirements for
science coursework in undergraduate and graduate education programs, and partnerships
with business, industry, and government to provide science learning experiences. (See
Public Involvement and Education Plan, Management Actions A, B, C, D, E, F, and G.)
• Establish institutional arrangements to foster public involvement in environmental decision
making in the Albemarle-Pamlico region.
Organizations and facilities such as non-profit organizations, local Environmental Advisory
Boards, and educational centers provide a forum for consideration of environmental issues,
a clearinghouse for information, and organizational support for education and public
involvement activities. Furthermore, they serve to promote environmental education, a
sense of personal environmental responsibility, and involvement in local and regional
environmental issues. Any organizations formed for these purposes should receive
guidance from a board representing diverse interests. (See Public Involvement and
Education Plan, Management Action H.)
• Promote interaction between the general public and government agencies and officials through
increased information dissemination in the form of newsletters, fact sheets, media releases, and
citizen's manuals;provide increased public notice concerning actions of regulatory commissions.
Increased opportunities for communication between the public and government agencies
will foster public involvement, representation of public interests in policy making decisions,
and increased dissemination of information. (See Public Involvement and Education Plan,
Management Actions I and J.)
Executive Summary—12
14
• Provide for active public involvement in environmental research through volunteer environmental - -
monitoring.
The APES Citizens' Water Quality Monitoring Network has provided opportunities to
citizens across the region to participate in assessing the health of the estuary. This
program should be continued and expanded to include additional parameters and data
analyses. Regulatory agencies should be encouraged to utilize the data collected. (See
Public Involvement and Education Plan, Management Action K; see also Monitoring and
Assessment Plan.)
• Address the need for specific outreach staff positions in the existing water quality and fisheries
management agencies.
Increased public education efforts by state agencies may improve the implementation of
several existing programs. Agency outreach efforts and needs for staff devoted to public
education and involvement should be evaluated and addressed. (See Water Quality Action
Plan, Management Actions H, I,J, and 0 and Fisheries Action Plan, Management Action
H.)
•
Several regulatory programs exist which aim to protect important natural resources and habitats.
However, the effectiveness of regulatory programs depends, in part, on the effectiveness of their
enforcement. In many existing programs, enforcement staff and activities are limited by budget
constraints. Enforcement effectiveness may also be limited by fines which are not high enough to
create a deterrent to violations.
• Strengthen enforcement of existing programs by addressing needs for increased levels of
enforcement monitoring and staff and by raising fines as necessary to create adequate deterrents
to violations.
Adequate levels of enforcement and fines which serve as a deterrent to violation are needed
to fully implement existing regulatory programs. Several state programs should be
assessed for enforcement staff needs and for the effectiveness of fines issued for
- noncompliance, and these needs should be addressed. (See Vital Terrestrial Areas and
Wetlands Action Plan, Management Action G; Water Quality Action Plan, Management
Actions J and N; Fisheries Action Plan, Management Action I.)
• Establish a pilot program to cross-train enforcement personnel from the various state resource
management agencies to recognize and report potential violations for other resource management
programs.
Multi-agency enforcement training for state enforcement officers would effectively increase
in-field surveillance for compliance with environmental regulatory programs. (See Public
Involvement and Education Plan, Management Action L.)
•
ado
Monitoring provides data to increase our understanding of the estuarine system, its resources, and
the effects of human activities. Comprehensive long-term monitoring is essential in the
implementation of the CCMP to determine the effectiveness of management actions, to evaluate
the health of the system, and to support future management decisions about estuarine resources.
Executive Summary--IS
15
• Maintain the existing comprehensive network of water quality monitoring stations in the
Albemarle-Pamlico region to assess long-term water quality trends and ecosystem health.
An extensive network of fixed station monitoring has been established in the Albemarle-
Pamlico region. This network should be maintained so that the data may continue to be
used for assessment of long-term water quality trends. (See Monitoring and Assessment
Plan.)
• Conduct area intensive assessments on a rotating basis and problem area assessments on an as
needed basis to support the development of area specific management strategies.
The existing monitoring network should be complemented with area intensive and problem
area monitoring to allow for the targeting of management strategies to basin-specific,
concerns. (See Monitoring and Assessment Plan.)
• Conduct baseline mapping and change detection monitoring,for wetlands, rare natural
communities, essential habitat for rare species, and land use and cover.
The assessment of specific changes in vital habitats and potential human impacts in the
Albemarle-Pamlico region requires the collection and analysis of comprehensive locational
information on important habitat types and human land uses. (See Monitoring and
Assessment Plan; Vital Terrestrial Areas and Wetlands Action Plan, Management Action
A)
• Expand fisheries monitoring efforts to gather more comprehensive information documenting the
occurrence of fish and shellfish kills and diseases, assessing the extent of vital fisheries habitats,
and supporting the completion of stock assessments for fishery management plans.
Often fisheries management is hampered by a lack of sufficient data. Expanded collection
of data is needed to address fish kills and disease issues, to protect fisheries habitats, and
to develop state fishery management plans. (See Monitoring and Assessment Plan;
Fisheries Action Plan, Management Actions A and G.)
• Maintain the APES Citizens'Water Quality Monitoring Network and expand the program to
include data collection on vital habitats, water quality problem areas, and recreational fishing.
The activities of the APES Citizens'Water Quality Monitoring Network can be expanded to
provide additional training and information which may aid in resource management. (See
Monitoring and Assessment Plan; Public.Involvement and Education Plan, Management
Action K)
While much information that has contributed to our understanding of the estuarine system was
collected under APES, many new technical and management oriented questions have developed,
and some old questions remain unanswered.
• Pursue the completion of research projects which aim to address the research priorities listed for
each CCMP Action Plan. (See Research Plan.)
Research needs are described under the "Considerations" section of each management
strategy. The Research Plan summarizes these needs in order to target limited funding to
the most pressing issues.
I
Executive Summary'-- 14
16
Implementing the management actions recommended in the CCMP will require additional
resources. Research in the APES program has shown that the public is willing to support
additional costs. The Financing Options chapter explores and evaluates the feasibility of a broad
range of fees, taxes, and voluntary funds which might be considered to support management
efforts. (NOTE: federal funding sources will be investigated further for the next draft). Some of
the most highly recommended options include:
• Create Iocal Environmental Improvement Funds.
This type of fund could be used to support the development of local land and water plans,
cost-sharing for best management practices, and the installation of stormwater controls.
Such funds could be created through a voluntary check-off on property tax forms or
through a mandatory flat fee for all property owners.
• Institute a saltwater recreational fishing license.
A saltwater recreational fishing license could be used to support Division of Marine
Fisheries management and conservation efforts.
• Institute a commercial license to sell fish.
It is possible that fees collected for this type of license may generate revenues which can be
used to support fisheries management and conservation efforts.
• Institute on-site sewage system fees.
The counties would collect fees to support local costs for more effective management of
septic and other on-site sewage systems.
(See Financing Options.)
In the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system, several federal, state, and local agencies oversee
planning, regulation, enforcement, and other government activities which concern the estuarine
resources. Implementing the management actions of the CCMP will require a high level of
coordination by those agencies and other organizations and individuals that have been involved in
the development of the CCMP.
• Establish an Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Council to serve as a forum for coordinating
implementation activities.
A coordinating council would provide for regular interaction among the agencies,
commissions, organizations, and members of the public that are implementing the
recommendations of the CCMP. The council should include the following members:
the Chairs (or designee) of the following boards: Marine Fisheries Commission,
Environmental Management Commission,Wildlife Resources Commission, Soil
and Water Conservation Commission, Coastal Resources Commission, Forestry
Advisory Council
the directors of the following agencies: Division of Marine Fisheries, Division of
Environmental Management,Wildlife Resources Commission, Division of Soil and
Water Conservation, Division of Coastal Management, and Division of Forest
Resources
representatives of the following federal agencies: Environmental Protection Agency,
Army Corps of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
Executive Summary—15
17
a representative of Virginia
two representatives each from Local Government and Citizens Advisory Committees
the secretary of the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
• Support the coordinating council with a Local Government Advisory Committee and a Citizens
Advisory Committee.
The Citizens Advisory Committees have provided valuable input and representation in the
APES program. In the implementation of the CCMP, the Albemarle-Pamlico Council
should be assisted by the input of a Local Government Advisory Committee and a Citizens
Advisory Committee. The Local Government Advisory Committee should represent a
mixture of municipal and county interests including Soil and Water Districts and regional
associations of local governments. The Citizens Advisory Committee should represent a
broad range of interests, geographic locales, and expertise. The advisory committees will
meet regularly to consider implementation issues, and each will have two representatives
on the Council.
• Review implementation progress annually in a report prepared by the Council and presented to
the Governor of North Carolina and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency,
The Council will be held accountable for the timely and complete implementation of CCMP
recommendations. The Clean Water Act requires the monitoring of the success of
implementation of National Estuary Program CCMP recommendations. To report on
progress of implementation, the Council should be responsible for the preparation of a
summary report on implementation and environmental results.
• Establish a Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and Virginia to ensure
continued cooperation in implementation of the CCMP.
This Memorandum should be established to ensure coordination in implementation of the
CCMP and to detail Virginia's Implementation Strategy for pertinent CCMP management
actions.
(See Implementation Plan.)
Public Review
This is the second draft of the CCMP. A first draft was issued in August, 1992, and was
reviewed by the APES committees and the public. Four public meetings were held to gather input
on the document. Based on comments received at the meetings,from committees, in writing, and
through phone calls, the document has been revised into this second draft. The APES committees
have approved this draft for release to the public for review. The comments we receive from the
public, as well as committee members, will help further shape the document into a meaningful
management plan.
This draft will be discussed at a series of public meetings to be held in the APES region. The
dates and locations are listed below. These meetings are held early in the comment period to
introduce the draft to the public and discuss the revisions of the text. For further information
regarding the meetings, please call the APES office in Raleigh at (919) 733-0314 or in Washington
at (919) 946-6481.
Location: Date:
Manteo, N.C. Aquarium - Roanoke Island Tuesday, January 19, 1993, 7:00pm
Morehead City, Crystal Coast Civic Center Wednesday,January 20, 1993, 7:00pm
Raleigh, Archdale Building, Thursday, January 21, 1993, 7:00pm
Ground Floor Hearing Room
Following the public meetings, the CCMP will again be revised to address comments and
Executive Summary—16
18
concerns raised during the review. Written comments concerning the CCMP will be accepted until
February 8, 1993. Please submit these comments to one of the APES' offices listed below. The
APES committees will then endorse a final document which will be presented to the Governor of
North Carolina and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for final approval.
Following approval, the management actions in the CCMP can only be accomplished through the
support and coordination of federal and state agencies, legislators, local governments, and
members of the public.
It is important to note that while this draft is out for review, APES researchers are finishing
important research projects. We expect that the completion of these projects will provide
important information which will be incorporated into the CCMP. For example, we will receive
information on the how nutrient concentrations in the water may affect the activity of the newly
discovered toxic dinoflagellate which causes fish kills. A fisheries research project will provide
information on the effectiveness of bycatch reducing gear for the long haul and pound net fisheries.
A water quality project will show how effectively a stormwater detention pond,built with APES
funding, removes pollutants from urban runoff. We will also receive analyses conducted on each
river basin which will describe basin specific concerns and support the targeting of specific
management actions. The timing of the completion of these projects, unfortunately, makes us
unable to include this new information in this draft for public review. How the addition of this •
information may affect the CCMP will be presented by the APES staff at the public meetings in
January.
Your review of this document is very important to the APES Management Conference. Without
your suggestions for improvements, this plan cannot fully benefit from the diversity of interests
located within and outside the Albemarle-Pamlico basin.
Please submit any written comments concerning the CCMP to either one of the APES' offices listed
below. Comments will be accepted until February 8, 1993.
Department of Environment, Health, Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources and Natural Resources
Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study
P.O. Box 27687 P.O. Box 1507
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 Washington, N.C. 27889
•
'Executive flntoasey-17
A/P STUDY STAFF
Randall Waite, Project Director, (919) 733 -0314
PO Box 27687, Raleigh, NC, 27611 -7687
Joan Giordano, Public Involvement Coord., (919) 946 -6481
PO Box 1507, Washington, NC, 27889
Joe Hollowell, Local Government Liaison, (919) 4824578
202 Terry Avenue, Edenton, NC, 27932
COMMITTEE CHAIRS
Policy Committee - 12 Members
Jonathan Howes, Secretary, NC DEHNR, (919) 733 -4984
PO Box 27687, Raleigh, NC, 27611 -7687
Ray Cunningham, US EPA, Atlanta, (404) 347 -4450
345 Courtland Street NE, Atlanta, GA, 30365
Technical Committee - 24 Members
Steve Levitas, Deputy Secretary, NC DEHNR, (919) 7334984
PO Box 27687, Raleigh, NC, 27611 -7687
Bowman Crum, US EPA, Atlanta, (404) 347 -4450
345 Courtland Street NE, Atlanta, GA, 30365
Citizens Advisory Committees - 60 Members
Derb Carter (Pamlico CAC), Chapel Hill, (919) 967 -1450
137 E. Franklin Street, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514
Brewster Brown (Albemarle CAC), Winton, (919) 332 -5921
PO Box 527, Winton, NC, 27896
TENTATIVE TIMELINE FOR COMPLETING CCMP
March - May 14 - CCMP second draft revised
May 17 - July 9 - Revised draft reviewed by APES
committees; third draft printed and delivered
July 12 - August 13 - Public review of third draft
August 16 - 20 - Formal public meetings on third draft
August 23 - September 17 - Final draft written, reviewed
September 20 - November 5 - Final revisions made
November 8 -12 - CCMP printed
November 15 - CCMP sent to Governor and EPA Administrator
Buffer Strivs
The CCMP recmmends that the state prohibit new
ground - disturbing activities in a'!20 =foot strip along:.: 'th
shoreline of all perennial :streams (not drainage' d1 ches)v.
Grasses, shrubs and trees along shvrelmes help trap::
sediment; :nutrients and other pollutants that run off Of
upland areas down to waterways A0 foot vegetative,
buffer would reduce about 2090 of the :nuthents! and.40
of the sediment entering waterways.
Cost -Share Initiatives
The state durrently helps farmers pay. for expenses incurred
when they use ".Best Management Practices"
their farms. BMPs are designed to help reduce the runoff
of soil; farm chemicals, and animal wastes into waterways;
However, many:riore BMP projects are.apphed for tlan`
can.be funded each year, so ;the' CCMP recommends,
.
expanded funding for the program in order to increase<its
effectiveness. The- CCMP also. recommends that similarly
operated cost -share programs be established.. for
commercial fishing operations and non- agricultural land
usesiao encourage sounder environmental practices m those
industries:
AILBE, MARLE -- MLIC,o
i
ZA
ESTUARINE STUDY
The
OMPREHENSIVE
ONSERVATION
and
MANAGEMENT
What Is It?
What Will It Do?
,� - 7 -�U
19
. .,„,
, .
_ .. .
„,.Saving
Sounds
. . .. .
._
_ .. •
. .
. _ .,.
. . . ,., ,
. .,,
. . . .., . ,...,.
• ,.
In a five-year search for consensus, the Albemarle-Pamlico
Estuarine Study hatched a management plan that almost no ,h i..
one likes. Pssst! That maybe just the key to its success. �' x4
by Lawrence S.Earley
fter five years and$10 million,after inshore waters,80 percent of the state's total, • r :}
scores of public meetings and 65 In effect,these rivers drain almost one third t"'
cientific studies,after several drafts of the entire state,their watersheds extend- , ,� F4•
and 11th-hour revisions,and after a lengthy ing as far west as Hillsborough in Orange x ` '4:;,.7.0-a
search for an elusive consensus,a plan to County,north to Petersburg,Va.,and south `. 's '`- i
restore the sickly Pamlico and Albemarle to Cape Lookout in Carteret County.As the • ;IFS '
sounds will likely be approved this month. plan states without exaggeration,the Albe- • y € ?,
If it's like the first draft—over 300 pages of marle-Pamlico estuarine system"dominates"
highly technical presentations—the Corn- the North Carolina coast. � , - .g
prehensive Conservation Management Plan It dominates the state's$1 billion-a-year
(CCMP)of the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine commercial fishing industry as well The ~, .
Study(APES)will be a formidable document. Albemarle-Pamlico area(including Core ,..--7 n
Those who expected the plan to propose Sound)ranks as the largest and most pro- - a , --
restrictive new laws and regulations on dis- ductive of all the state's estuaries,providing
chargers,wetlands developers and the like will 55.2 percent of the state's commercial marine
be disappointed—carrots rather than sticks fisheries from 1972 to 1990.Recreational fish- r -- =
are the order of the day.Others who wanted a ing also represents a significant portion of the
few well-focused actions to emerge may also annual harvest.Fisheries support 14,000 to - _ :i
be disappointed—the management plan con- 20,000 full-time jobs in the region.
tains dozens of action plans,in no apparent In recent years,however,two trends have
priority order.And those who feared that the been at work throughout this vast area.One - _ may"•
plan would slight the importance of eco- is the unprecedented growth in the region. - -
nomic development along the coast feel that From 1970 to 1990,the human population of
this is exactly what has happened. the study area rose by over a half million, – ;
Indeed,in its preliminary stages,the from 1,420,000 to almost 2 million.At the _ -;__- -`
CCMP seems to have succeeded in offending same time,the estuaries'waters began to
both ends of the coastal political spectrum, suffer from plagues of environmental prob- .
environmentalists and developers.Yet,though lems—periodic outbreaks of algae that
CCMP drafters are still hoping to achieve robbed oxygen from water;terrifying diseases .►�'' '
consensus with their final draft,they believe that seemed to eat right through fish and ,
that the plan's staunch middle-of-the-road shellfish;declines in fish and shellfish har- �F�=,,,,r*`
approach is its best bet for success. vests;and the disappearance of aquatic grass --" -
As the second-largest estuarine complex , - _ :.: ..,:
in the United States(after Chesapeake Bay) Across the vast reach of Pamlico
and the third largest in North America,the Sound,a fleet of sailboats seeks the `
Albemarle and Pamlico sounds lie like vast,
wind during a weekend regatta.
green lagoons behind their barrier island Recreational boaters are not the only -
bulwarks.They receive the daily flows of ones who depend on clean coastal
some of the largest rivers in the state,among waters.Sportsmen,commercial
them the Neuse,Pamlico,Pungo,Roanoke, , and other citizens are
Chowan and Alligator.So vast is this system all affected by the water quality
that it represents 2,900 miles of protected in our sounds. 5
4
20
•
J
.e A ,.a •••a -' .•4.4 r .41.I. - 1
"1 • ^`r t '•�.e_�e�l .'.i.'d.' �•e 4 .a V` -, y.- 1 1} '( "4 .' '.F y
rw- T■
,<;w,..rtr StS'u"x-...e,.<-•.r-^+w •. - ..—o.- ..y.,,, M:-. r..u'c+,raa._ L-7+...',�ty^ 'f ,.."-:. .•i.e,sr r k;.�,. r M W+.•a_7.'7-,„,..yrF,kFf ,. i •w__ � .1a� , dV4 - .r .,:' W_.+. '' j 'r '
;r
7%.1 i -1 1.1'
r
-s-, , ' i Ir t , tte � �G
iy • t ! -/ 'y ``r, j':,,.,,;•:; k�'&xY'SW./ tit '‘,......t......4);}i �1' F -r, �> ,
l
I•. �� l ,....4,',. �,' .. I ,r 1 1 �ICir I � ! 1 \ ixt,td tfP 9 JI.ltJ
.� �'''Z,',..4'.''.1':, {.' ,, r {d,,.(t 4 �r ,I ti ', t j`t FS}r 1, P
:-,:,,,...s..„ dl I. �,4�t•7 / jl i ''• i f / f '' �!
r :If, , ( t l.. ., �, /,... v to t 4':,.:•i!,W. i`ti,: te
a , t r- - 1,'`tiv`( i• -tt , +1 j�{r , f J ''11� i, Y•'� ... / - .. � , I { I'r1 1 Z I lf(-4.,:.:.41 Ijr
r_! r J d� ,.• !: ./ . ,,N 1, Nf 111 g 1 t .' :` 4 r }1.r, ..
� f: Iltf r r, i .•' 1-'1:-'1 ' t�, '# 1 I I ;.:..,1 �}` Y,l 1Lt ",,
.l
}t., 1J. LI'' i f . ∎I'fi'111{ ', l t ,, , J r" +i 1 f. ,r
J1 Y,iiA /¢ t t l:J/ \ f. :' t� .1F t. +' .t I �_. _•,I > 1
( ; L , �` 't 'i� t ) 'l° �1 • t / /1
t 74-, r' ;
l k / , ! z - ;A:...:"/__
1! t _-_.---_-Z-2 . -0 1!f 1 •i1 'fi t
� ' I 4
r .1:. - t .� �'- it ° ..\:,:\c-i.. I - _..
- - IE.TAYL()F
Freshwater wetlands like this marsh problems in the estuaries really getting worse? policies and goals for the program.The
fringing Pamlico Sound are nurseries Were they related to the expansion of the Technical Committee provided technical
for many different kinds offish,shell- human population?And could the region support to the Policy Committee.And two
fish and wildlife.The Albemarle- both plan for more growth and restore its citizens-advisory committees,one for the
Pamlico Estuarine Study recommends estuaries to health? Albemarle region and one for the Pamlico
a variety of strategies for preserving region,represented the concerns of citizens
wetlands like these. It was on the flood tide of questions like and a variety of interests including tourism,
these that the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine development,fishing,forestry and agriculture.
Study was launched in 1987.In that year, The five-year study was funded by$7.5
beds,so necessary for sheltering and feeding under the authority of the Clean Water Act, million from EPA and$2.5 million from the
marine life. the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency state of North Carolina,of which nearly&
As the region developed,in addition,more formed the National Estuary Program to percent went to research and data acquisition,
and more wetlands were converted to other identify"estuaries of national significance" 15 percent to education and pui tlic involve-
uses and more shellfish waters were closed threatened by growing human uses.In ment, 10 percent to information management
due to pollution.Freshwater drainage from November 1987,the Albemarle-Pamlico and perhaps another 15 percent to program
farms and forestry operations was blamed for study was named the first National Estuary administration.The goal of this effort was to
alterations in the salinity of the sounds,possi- Program,one of an eventual 17 such programs produce the comprehensive conservatlot
bly affecting their productivity. nationwide. management plan that would restore and
Although scientists have been studying The goals of the Albemarle-Pamlico maintain the health of the estuaries.
these problems for years,some evidence indi- Estuarine Study(or APES,as it is often The plan is divided into five sections,
cares that the problems are growing worse. called)were to identify the environmental corresponding to five major concerns.
From 1966 to 1984,for example,87 fish and problems afflicting the estuaries and to •Human Environment—Population
crab kills were reported on the Tar-Pamlico develop a plan to keep them healthy.The Growth Action Plan—This plan recognizes
River.The annual kills increased each of the plan was to represent the interests and the the problems affecting the estuaries due to
following five years,topped by 1989 when 69 concerns not only of scientists,but of the human population growth in the region.
kills were reported. citizens of the area and the special interests Among other things,it recommends that
With the prospects of another half million affected.To represent all of these groups,four local land-use and water-use plans be devel-
people moving into the area by the year 2010, committees were established.The Policy oped for all counties and municipalities in the
the questions grew more urgent.Were the Committee had,among its goals,to form Albemarle-Pamlico region.
6
•Vital Terrestrial Areas and Wetlands 21 —
`Action Plan—Highlights of this plan include -Albemarle-P- '- . C tll r •e • ll e,N4 r': ',
a statewide comprehensive wetlands steward- �I�
ship program for coastal and noncoastal wet- / i, PRIN - - PRI E , \ - ,,
lands,and increased acquisition of wetlands EDWARD- nOwAY ,TA: ;dEGAGE''^ijRRy ,
and other important terrestrial areas by gov- ;CHARLOTTE; -
;'�. DINWIDDIE 1;- N '
�,. E
ernment and private groups. j ELI ENBURG� --.'RY o ) GHT/ -, i- .
•Water Quality Action Plan—Some I , ' i I ;EA•i HALIFAX /MECKLENBUR -- ..'1,...;', /SUFFOK 1
recommended actions are new funding to i -714 ia- ' -,,,,_ I •i. 1 , ■VIRGINIA
develop non-agricultural best management i A w - '^h, - •• •, • `..` . ii. NORTH CAROLINA
- - ORTHAMPTON- . , ! o -
practices to control other non point sources �PERSO J�J , WARREN 1 �∎5
of pollution,coordinated guidelines for manag- - i < i .. I HERTFORD_`; " :,` ,,• .r
ing marinas,and strengthened water-quality -1.1'-t -� : �"- ! :�
policies on secondary treatment of waste. 1 W i • / F'. IN /. . ''TIE ` JP�gEMA�V '�
•Fisheries Action Plan—A number of `� -
plan ° ;.. ``'.\// r /.EDGE 2M.E? ARTIN - p5,'\\G3'. '•E'.!. DARE ATLANTIC OCEAN
actions in this lan would control the over-
harvest of fish and shellfish reduce the by- - WAK ' - o
if `'N +� \1`1
catch(non-target species),protect \ P "' �. .�I-
fish habi- _ !. /�
ft,.4•,.. ' r . I .. r. ,.EAUFOR '! O
tat,address fish and shellfish kills and diseases, �cio 0 E 50`y�
and strengthen fisheries management. a� •`, / HARD• /_. NE !"-- N. e-. �.�GO \ �.
•Public Education and Involvement I LEA•. �,
Action Plan—This plan would develop and �' ! CRA'r- 0� ,'QP .
•support environmental science education in CUMBE ND, SAM ON 0 .
primary and secondary schools in the state,
,n. , DUPL1N `-\_1 *-• 1 't ' (j.:7
and it would encourage more public involve- _ 1�_._ -` o SLOW
CART
ment in environmental decision-making.
All in all,the management plan contains a ‘, -
total of 16 goals,29 objectives and 51 actions. , \ /-
One of the highlights in the plan,says —
Randy Waite,APES director,is a recom- Wildlife Commission game lands,oyster- 1.:',,, r � � :,= -. - ,
i , I9 �
I � �
mendation that both Virginia and North producing areas and municipal,state and `'-' , . `L 'r,'4 i :+o-.w''r =,
Carolina pass legislation requiring counties county boundaries.
and municipalities in the study area to have "We think this information system will '`�'? t tk� i 2 FL't
land-use and water-use plans.Thirty-three help tremendously in the land-use planning w 4 j a ✓� 3 y , "5.
of the 36 North Carolina counties in the process,"says Waite."It will allow planners to - ,+ . :1:$:,,,p.,i-+'� 1 i .� f
study area and all 16 Virginia counties already consider all the information they needed '` H - ` f =0 4--. -.+ 4"'-'
have some form of land-use planning."But before,but which would have taken too much -. _-- � r
that doesn't mean that their current land- time to gather."The study also recommends _ ;l '+r '-- 1"'." ._.%'
use plans would meet the guidelines proposed public access to the database by means o' 1'� 1
to protect natural resources,"says Waite. computer work stations in libraries and state
The proposal would extend mandatory land- aquariums in the region. -; . 1,?
use planning to cover nearly a third of the Another recommendation that Waite likes - , :>:;
state."Without trying to plan for the extra- is one that would develop management plans f l
ordinary growth this region will experience, for specific fish species to eliminate the over- KE4 TAYLOR t
we could find ourselves in serious trouble," fishing threatening many of them.The N.C. From the beginning of the five-year
explains Waite. Marine Fisheries Commission would be the APES study,public involvement has
"The county can decide how it wants to lead agency in continuing to develop plans been important in finding prescrip-
grow and what it wants to do with its lands. that might provide a basis for further regu- tions to restore and maintain the
We want to make sure the county plans on lations if necessary. health of North Carolina's ailing
how its growth is going to impact the natural "The fishermen are concerned about that," sounds.Citizen committees'recom-
resources.We want the stare to take a hand in admits Waite."But these plans will give the mendations were revised after being
saying that counties must plan for their effects fishermen some long-term planning ability.A presented at public meetings.
on the environment." lot of times,fishermen don't know what the
As a basis for effective land-use planning, restrictions will be even the day before the
the CCMP also recommends the mainte- season opens.These plans will give us more regulating wetlands have drawn fire in recent
nance of a geographic information system predictability." years.CCMP drafters don't recommend
for the APES area.Over the past five years, A third highlight of the plan,according to further regulation,but they recognize the
APES has given about$1 million to the N.C. Waite,is the recommendation to increase value of these wetlands and other natural
Center for Geographic Information and government and non-government acquisition communities.By the year 2003,the plan
Analysis to build up data for state and local of vital terrestrial and wetland areas in the recommends that the state purchase a mini-
planners in the region.This computerized region.The topic of wetlands is controversial, mum of 16,000 acres of rare,high-quality
system can produce maps showing as many as especially in eastern North Carolina where natural communities.
48 different information"layers"—the the majority of North Carolina's wetland The plan also recommends that state,
location of wetlands,fisheries nursery areas, acreage occurs and where federal programs local and federal governments offer more
7
22
`'f • t , - •
•
i I - •' 't , -' - it . ry. , k -c.i-«S
t •
_
--. ..TO z4---aliee,f'--.;- •-: -..,:;*---- ti•-*ii,t-4/7-. r.,--,..-....--• ::- •• -.•:;,....-; * -c ;:dir -Z.::: • .. %.•_<:..s'•----'-':-.--_-.:.17-7_,-1:-.:--_:----,'...-- --"-:---.:-. '..
f d r �T, ftf ,4, 71 } `�r~", l `{ µ 'i {4.
Y.-
f� X [U[i�,h r a;.x r .»s ,, .f .0 a 11/ R t .t,4'...'",` 3• �
s-` 1- r c S! s
• c t r *s r'x rt,�r:`,;� r lye --'ci s �'
„,y� d , t t 4, , S ? L .. ,t • '•x' �vrYye �' �� f ) L
f ` 1', '. r1 , - } , ate`.. 'Z ''.-=,4,--"•• ,1
1 • r t -;yr S��1; .f , ,L' Y 1 7 �
ter. . . .. ..
rt`
.. f } t"1 '
KEN TAYLOR
APES-sponsored scient i{ic studies need more regulations later,great.But some-
f - ^- -,t ^ #4 J �'` grappled with the coral,icated effects times you can save money by helping people
x r T -, t'” of forestry,agriculture,industry and to do the right thing instead of forcing there;."
.Y F`r ,,,< �'rz7 x � u`"4• . r,*'.' towns on the water quality of Pamlico But trying to reach a consensus among all
�e r x 4 „, f and Albemarle sounds(above).A the interests involved has proven to be an
a-`' ,'�` [ symptom of the estuarine system's i1; elusive quest.The first draft of the plan drew
"� " health,mats of algae like this one a surprising amount of criticism when it ti•as
4;,A ��' ' rr (left)erupt periodically along the released last July.It seemed that there wa
!'T �.� "PL t ry f e' "
FI•. • is'N ,-; " lower reaches of coastal rivers like sometl ing in the plan tha offended just
';, i t . the Chowan and Neuse. about everybody.
�. ,, Econ dlopnt interests
i ��. ,� plained o thmic at the feveive yeamer planning process com-
r :; incentive strategies to encourage private was controlle l from start to finish by el.vi-
w A2 r--c,1 owners to protect rare communities and ronmental groups.Environmentalists u.lmt
' ,. , wetland areas on their property."A lot of nated the composition n of both citizens-
'. ', '� >: .,,. 'i11, people are interested in being stewards,"says advisory committees,says Ken Stewart,
wy4 rE ,
*�, L k = Waite."They're fascinated to find out that executive director of Economic Alliance of
� �,'� ," "i; '' they have something that is so rare.All they North Carolina,Inc.,a group representing
n � r , want is some help so they can protect their development interests.He blasted the CCMP
.y< R, '`y; '"'"r ,'" Y•r property—tax incentives,conservation as a"biased,one-sided view without consid-
, ,- t S s » -° - easements,covenants and the like." erasion of economic development interests."
4_ . G °`.i- , ., 1 `1 In a letter to APES director Waite written
' t s"r� = r r _" ;s�; .' �` Not surprisingly,the CCMP is charac- last fall,Stewart added that environmental
terized more i,y carrots than sticks.Incentives protection,though important,was only a
" t•,' � �r*�'`q.,x # are in;nev legislation and regulations,for the part of the coastal equation:"Public officials
°i ce '"'s}e f , Yer °-,44 '' , .,„ "` • `�' M`' 1
�-�;� y� ;� •ti,��`'��# �2z�.* �� � ��� � most part,are out.It was a planned strategy, and the citizens of the area are concernec
,` a �+t L- ' �7•s ,i = says Waite. about jobs;infrastructure such as roads,
# < Jz0. �� : Ktr et,., 4 z
-'• - � � �"�"'�{��'"��� �:��,•�„� i z `I guess we agree with the side that says,we water,sewer,scl;c�olscat
and hospitals;tax base:
�" _A.• R- i r , + , don't need new rules because we haven't affordable housing;productive traditional
Y,x r„ played out the rules we have.We re involved industries such as agriculture,forestry and
'' ^; ' ,' -,� 71' .»�_ r :, in a consensus-building process•working with fishing;and an improvement in the overall
" people,rather than against them....If we quality of life.
8
23
No less disappointed by the study's out- $ 7.7 7 , ,,
come were many in the enviromentalcom- `' t'` x `] r'r `* ' a
�c a it� Arc"'fir .,-ao, a A ,8� '4^ s.; , •
munity.Most praised the process that f f t,� ,r.„ ': ` r� �'.,-' " gµ {.
assemi,'ed a variety of people from different ,<aJ,� i -z .;�Y , �'.-'4"� r
interests and got them to work together on a �f;r ""�"' V� 1 �+ -
common goal.Yet the final product was like -'p e 4�i 3i a A: -""" \Y f 3 , *4-, -"
sf
an out-of-shape boxer,they said,too heavy V� �t `� -' t \ _\i. �` 4: n „& 1
and cumbersome to fight well.Aimed at &-T ,o- ,
44.1 " ' a .. 4i.. fi
comprehensiveness,the management plan ' ; �' �' I f\ ,
P g P sn }ntrrtc„ �. .� tip. ;
ended by being too bulky,too unfocused and , max' `®//� *� t-- , *- '
Y g Y> n t , .fi"t ti p aw (,.
too soft. �:�e+3a 41;,-..
� � x r ��ti< t4 �� �.; ?? �:�i7prf ;
We tackled every issue under the sun in "t ° ' / - / ' x
this report, said Todd Miller,executive ;r�5 I .� • r u. .., a h
t x= urn Gm '
director of the N.C.Coastal Federation and , t ,,, l Isi t®�' 4� _�, 'am' Ti .4"10" '� r a-
a member of the Pamlico Citizens Advisory , e� 10174064111� x M ,: •` ., t r '
Committee."Asa result,we missed an �t �� f::''''42::'...:'. '
CO establish limited - - ?Y+u� s1 ���" 11 "�'I'�.-. t;•71i�R.r, ,e!-I � Lt� :`.-$�
opportunity imited objectives 1
F t .lt rt� I F.,��, �� 1.
with measureable results."He compares the v' - .I
bulky CCMP with a similar plan,the Chesa �,. e�l�/�!�
peake Bay Agreement of 1987,that concisely � t"' ate j F
explained its goals and objectives in seven =� ,-.'''; 1,--__,_ i'` sa•
pages and established target dates for each --�..——'1" _ = = —
action plan.
"In a lot of cases,"added Dave McNaught,
KEN TAYLOR
executive director of the Pamlico-Tar River ject to criticism that the plan had prejudged The rich seafood resources of the two
Foundation,"the immediate action items in what the problems were,he adds.A compre- sounds will continue to decline unless
the CCMP are buried in a good deal of hensive plan—one that identified the envi- strategies,like the ones proposed in the
rhetoric.Some of the rhetoric is good,but ronmental problems in the estuaries and the APES conservation management plan,
what we'd like to see is an effort to highlight shortcomings of existing regulatory programs— are implemented.
the most immediate and direct action items." can result in more effective management of
McNaught also blamed the consensus- these two large sounds. 1
building approach itself as a reason why the ity that would hand down edicts,"Waite
document seemed to lack hard-hitting plans. Carter agrees,however,that the next step explains.The council would not have any
"When everyone sits down together to reach is to focus on action plans that are most criti- regulatory power,but would be accountable
consensus,what happens all too frequently is cal and that can be accomplished with the for the plan's implementation.Criticism like
that everyone is trying to make sure that their state's limited resources."We don't want this Shecter's may mean that the composition of
ox doesn't get gored,"he said."As a result, to become just another study that will sit on a the council and the way it relates to other
the final plan may be politically viable because shelf and collect dust." agencies will be revised by the time the docu-
it's come from a consensus of different par- These sentiments are echoed by almost ment is approved in February.
ties,but it can't make clear recommendations everyone.All agree that the most critical Other weaknesses in the management plan
of legitimate repair work because too many factor in the management plan is to make sure will also be addressed by the time the final
people are protecting[their own]interests." that it's put to work."We may think that we're draft appears this month.After the second
Waite says he knows that not every part of finished with the management plan,"says draft was released in December,it was sub-
the plan will meet with everyone's approval. Waite,"but the battle has really just begun." jected to another round of public meetings in
That was the whole purpose of the consensus The plan calls for a coordinating body— January and still more revisions.After this ,
approach—to produce a document that could the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Council— process,the plan may achieve a tenuous
be supported as a whole.It's a matter of practi- to put the management plans to work.Accord- consensus.
cality,he says."Environmentalists may want ing to the preliminary draft,the 22-member Even as it stands,however,the document
more regulation—say,restricting discharges council would be made up mostly by repre- provides a definitive overview of the problems .
into the estuary system,but we won't get that sentatives of the state and federal agencies in the nation's second largest estuary system.
accomplished because the other side would with current responsibilities for water quality, From now on,this will be the document that r
object.This conference was set up to find fisheries and related issues. people refer to in grappling with eastern North
some of the right answers that would work." This may be more difficult than it seems. Carolina's"troubled waters."After five years E
Derb Carter,an environmental lawyer for Waite admits that the idea of a coordinating and millions of dollars worth of scientific t.
the Southern Environmental Law Center in council has made some agency heads nervous. scrutiny,one could expect nothing less.
Chapel Hill,also defends the comprehensive Already the Division of Coastal Management Yet,it takes nothing away from the strengths
aims of the study.Carter was the chairman of has publicly expressed reservations about the of the document to say that the jury is still out
the Pamlico Citizens Advisory Committee council.According to Roger Shecter,director on the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study.If
and also sat on the Policy Committee. of Coastal Management,"I think more it is to fulfill its expectations,it must produce
"It's important that the overall plan be thought needs to be given to how existing actions that will accomplish what it set out to
comprehensive in assessing the existing authorities like Coastal Management would do five years ago—to restore the environ- ,
problems and the adequacy of the existing dovetail or overlap with an as yet non-exist- mental health of the Albemarle and Pamlico
programs to address these problems,"he says. ing authority like the implementation council." estuarine system,North Carolina's largest
If the plan had limited aims,it would be sub- "We're not recommending a new author- and most precarious waterhody.