[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
FINAL PRODUff FY'94 Task 209&b MCNIMS Eastern Shore Dredging Plan- Phase 11 d@x yrz 4 Nil 7- A ,q!Az ak. enal" Od 6d"", ,@,@-B, eneficial 'Us Ilk, nia A liawartw _X cu@t bY Christopher W. Frye, 11F -,,Np stlerode.' and bert-J.' Byrnp.. J, V, e Final Report td th E. 5@._@, @,4@z @rir i ',,Resource Comrai'sioti- kinfa ar ne S S J- _v. -Inst of-@ -scien-C - irg@pia! itute Airific e Ke rO T 'o I MI& 01 Th Devartifient of nvilro, mental... Quality, E' Viiginia'Coastal Resource At P ogram,-, ;nagement and T C@ ad Occlnic a - _M i-ph 1 tion h Nati?Ln" nd mo., cric Admin s6a' J May 1996 GC1 71 P38 1996 3W, y A ir [email protected] Uses of Dredged Material from the aterway on the Coast of Virginia (WCV) by Walter 1. Priest, 111, Christopher W. Frye, Janet Nestlerode, and Robert J. Byrne Final Report of the Virginia Marine ResourcesCommission and Virginia Institute of Marine Science To The Department of Environmental Quality Virginia Coastal Resource Management Program and The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration This project was funded. in part. by the Virginia Coastal Resource Management Program through grant number NA470ZO287 01 of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 972 as amended Special Report No. 330 in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering QN Virginia Institute of Marine Science vims School of Marine Science College of William and Mary Gloucester Point, Virginia 23062 May 1996 Table of Contents Chapter Page I. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 11. Historical Dredging and Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Background Dredging History Dredge Material Placement Sites Plates I - 13 Ill. Natural Resources Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Shellfish/Aquaculture SAV Fishes/Blue Crabs Colonial Waterbirds IV. Sediment Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 V. Benthic Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Introduction Methods Results Discussion V1. Beneficial Use Option Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Introduction Evaluation Process Application of Evaluation Process Planning Process VII. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Appendices A WCV Channel Sediment Data B Benthic Assessment Method (B.A.M.) C VMRC Subaqueous Maps D Seaside Baylor Grounds - Bottom Type Survey 1. Introduction There is increased acknowledgment that dredged materials can have environ- The Waterway on the Coast of Vir- mentally beneficial uses. For several ginia (WCV) is an inland waterway along decades the Corps has utilized the con- the Atlantic coast between Virginia's bar- cept of beneficial uses of dredged mate- rier islands and the Eastern Shore main- iial throughout the United States. Ex- land, extending from Cape Charles to amples of beneficial uses vary from Chincoteague Bay. Segments of the WCV shoreline stabilization and erosion were originally designated under the control to marsh creation, oyster reefs, Intracoastal Waterway and provided a and upland sites suited for bird and protective navigational route along the wildlife use. Several beneficial use-type eastern seaboard. The quiescent waters projects have been accomplished within found within the marsh/lagoon complex the Chesapeake Bay region. They behind the barrier islands provided this include Barren Island (198 1), Smith protection, but the depositional nature of Island (1987). Slaughter Creek (1987), the area made maintaining a navigational Eastern Neck National Wildlife Refuge channel difficult. The current project is (1993), and Kenilworth Marsh (199 1) [ 11. maintained by the Norfolk District of the Within Virginia beneficial uses of dredged U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) as material have mostly centered on beach a Federal Project channel (Plate 1). Since nourishment (e.g Virginia Beach, .1962, an average of 275,000 cubic yards Willoughby Spit, Queens Creek, and of material per year have been dredged c thers). from the channel of the WCV and placed The Barren Island project is an within a variety of nearby estuarine habi- example of how sandy dredged material tats. can be placed along a shoreline to abate Traditionally the Corps has held the erosion as well as creating vegetated responsibility of evaluating each dredging vietlarids and high marsh habitat capable project and identif@ring the potential of sustaining avian wildlife. In the placement sites within the seaside la- '@'-,Iaughter Creek project fine-grained goons that would adhere to a 50-year dredged material was placed overboard in dredging plan. Once the Corps identified a mound configuration and planted with their preferred placement sites, a Joint oyster cultch to mimic a natural oyster Permit Application was submitted to the reef. The Eastern Neck National Wildlife State depicting the site locations and the Refuge project is another example of estimated amount of material to be placing dredged material along an dredged. As a result. it sometimes was eroding shoreline, in conjunction with difficult to realize the effort expended by offshore breakwaters, to abate erosion. the Corps during their internal The intertidal portion of that placement assessment and what environmental area was also sprigged %vith smooth and considerations were made. saltmeadow cordgrass, creating a A more comprehensive approach vegetated wetland. proposed by this plan, would be to Although a fair number of these involve a broader based interest group projects may have been designed with a during the preliminary site selection single goal in mind such as marsh process. The result would be a group creation, oyster reef creation, shoreline decision over the proposed dredged protection, and development of upland material placement sites that -,N-ildlife habitat. the end product benefits incorporates beneficial uses, lessens the a wide range of communities and environmental impacts, and considers organisms. For example, an overboard value engineering. placement area that is mounded and planted with oyster cultch not only I provides a more desirous habitat for such as silt and clay. Coarse-grained oyster spat to attach and flourish, but materials are also more resistant to the new substrate provides a similar erosion processes, making them structural habitat for other organisms. desirable for beach nourishment, marsh Many valuable fish species, as well as the erosion control, and basement substrate very important blue crab, are known to for oyster habitat. The beneflcial uses or orient and feed around oyster reefs. In habitat options are somewhat limited addition, oysters are ftlter feeders that 'within the Eastern Shore barrier island remove algae and suspended solids from @system due to the fine-grained nature of suspension, thereby having a positive @the dredged material and the remoteness influence on water quality. of the dredging sites. There are, however, Intertidal wetlands created &orn slight variances in the character of the dredged material can protect an eroding dredged material along the entire WCV headland, but the wetlands also provide which improve the pool of potential foraging areas for wildlife and refuge for placement options. juvenile finflsh and crabs. The vegetated Most of the material dredged from the wetlands also serve as a natural filter by INCV is a mixture of silt, clay, and some removing sediments, nutrients. and other Sand. There are a number of potential matter transported by upland runoff into beneficial uses, according to the particle the adjacent waterways. size. for these types of sediments: upland Since each dredged material uses, oyster habitat creation, avian placement practice has a host of nesting and foraging habitat, wetland potential benefits which are intertwined creation. and beach nourishment. The with estuarine ecology, it is difficult to dredged materials generated from the singularly define a placement project 1VCV navigation project have traditionally with respect to a targeted beneficial use. been placed in open water sites, It might be more appropriate to refer to intertidal mudflats. contained upland beneflcial uses in broader terms, such as sites, and along eroding marshes and habitat creation or modification. It beaches. Although Virginia's resource should be noted, however, that at each agencies and navigation experts have placement site one targeted habitat may realized that incidental benefits could be more appropriate than another. accrue from these placement practices, Selecting the best placement option will there has been little effort to develop a depend on the physical characteristics of comprehensive plan that would exploit the site, nature of the material to be the material generated from the WCV. dredged. and the resource tradeoffs The goal of this project is to develop a especially associated with benthic long-range management plan for the habitats (see Chapter V). For the placement of dredged material from the purposes of this report, beneficial uses NVCV. This management plan will will be described as they have been in the provide a set of goals. objectives, and past (i.e. oyster reef habitat. marsh mechanisms upon which long-terin creation and protection, beach planning and the appropriate beneficial nourishment, etc.). use options can be based. Furthermore, The primary factors to be considered this report focuses intensively on when determining what type of structure assessing the environmental impacts to or habitat can be constructed from the Eastern Shore's benthic community dredged material are the geotechnical since this is the habitat most often properties and the method by which it disturbed by the maintenance of the will be dredged. Hydraulically dredged, WCV. This and other information was unconfined, coarse-grained material collected, compiled, and included in this (sand and gravel) will stack more quickly report to support the management plan. and steeper than fine-grained material 2 H., Historical Dredging and 'h Plates 2 through 13 which is keyed, in Placement Table 2. to the dredging dates and sites utilized. Background Virtually all dredging is effected using hydraulic methods with disposal The Waterway on the Coast of achieved via pipeline to overboard or Virginia (WCV) was authorized in the upland sites.'Table 3 indicates the site River and Harbor Act of 19 10 with characteristics as: modifications in the River and Harbor Act a Overboard of 1945. The project, completed by 1959, 0 Marsh, diked provides for a waterway channel of six * Marsh, unconfined foot depth and sixty foot width between 0 Upland Chincoteague Bay and the Chesapeake 0 Beach Nourishment Bay at Cape Charles. Similar sectional The locations of all the dredged waterways were authorized and realized sections of the WCV channel and any along the Maryland and Delaware coastal corresponding overboard placement sites embayments. In 1970 Congress shown in Plates 2 through 13 have been authorized development of a continuous entered into the VMRC mapping system. Delaware Bay-Chesapeake Bay Waterway fly integrating the survey data collected which would connect and enhance the by the Corps with the survey information sectional projects. Due to prohibitive found in the VMRC mapping system, a cost, the project was not engaged [2.31. highly useful tool is now available that Maintenance of the Virginia waterway, will assist in the process of selecting however, continues under authorization dredged material placement sites and of the WCV. beneficial use options. The following provides a brief Dredging History description of each of the project areas and a summary of the dredging history. Of the total length of approximately Chesapeake Bay to 85 miles much of the WCV waterway blagothy Bay (Plate 2) follows channels with natural depths exceeding project depths. Some 15 The southern reach of the WCV sections do require periodic maintenance begins by connecting the Chesapeake dredging (Plate 1). For the most part, the Bay to Magothy Bay through Fishermans areas that shoal transit shallow bays Inlet and a man-made canal between exposed to wind wave agitation as well as Raccoon Island and the mainland. The tidal currents that contribute to total length of this reach is approximately sedimentation in the channels. Since 23,000 linear feet and at least one million 1962 the total maintenance dredging cubic yards of material have been (Table 1) amounts to approximately 9 rnaintenance dredged from this reach million cubic yards(MCY) [4]. over a 30-year period. The maintenance Dredge Material Placement Sites rnaterial generated from this section of the WCV has a high concentration of During initial construction and s@ind and has typically been placed along subsequent maintenance a large number eroding shorelines (CBMB 1, 2, 6 and 7). of placement sites have been utilized. Some of these placement sites have Some sites have been used on a provided positive benefit s to the avian continuing basis but many have been community. However, a large amount of used on a periodic basis. The geographic material was placed on marsh during the distribution of placement sites is shown initial construction and now harbors 3 Table 1. Summary of Maintenance Dredging Channel Segment Total Time Approximate Maintenance Period Dredging Dredging - CY Frequency (Years) Chesapeake Bay to Magothy Bay 1,029,792 1962 to 1993 5 Magothy Bay (north) 369.508 1977 to 1993 4 Eckichy Marsh Channel 68,406 1991 Gull Marsh Flats 1,427,409 1962-1994 4 North Channel 943.346 1963-1992 4 Sloop Channel 804,1513 1962-1992 4 Swash Bay & White Trout Creek 1.215,081 1962-1993 5 Bradford Bay 358,382, 1962-1991 7 Burtons Bay and Cedar Island 1.110,613 1962-1994 4 Bav Metompkin Bay 1,308,6715 1963-1993 6 Gargathy Inlet 67,490 1961-1974 Kegotank Bay & Northern 280.914 1964-1983 6 Narrows Bogues Bay 20,189 1978 Hog Creek 178.1313 1974-1991 8 Lewis Creek 113,662 1972-1992 TOTAL 9,295,756 4 Table 2. Placement Sites Utilized for Channel Maintenance. See Plates I through 13 for Locations DELAWARE BAY - CIIESAPEAM BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Chesapeake Bay to, Magothy Bay Placement Sites _(CBAIB) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged IL 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 June-September 1958 NW V V July 1960 Maintenance & Widening January-May 1962 114,160 April-May 1964 86.450 V? July 1964 39.263 March-April 1965 78.694 M@Ly 1966 63,195 V Mav-June 1967 133,636 October-November 90,010 1967 June-JuIv 1969 72,901 June-July 1970 24.116 V March-Mav 1972 91.239 October 1976 43,495 April-May 1982 108.607 Februarv 1988 51,896 V April 1993 32,130 5 Table 2 (continued) DELAWARE BAY - CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Magothy Bay Placement Sites (ME) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 October-November 144.257 1977 1982 ? March-April 1987 102,852 February 1990 1 50,635 December 1993 71,764 6 Table 2 (continued) DEIAWARE BAY - CEESAPEAKE BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Eckichy Marsh Channel Placement Sites (ECM) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged IL 2 June 1 69 24,484(NW) October 1991 68,406 Gull Marsh Flats Placement Sites (GMF) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 September 1958 (NV%f) September 1962 150,980 March 1965 133,203 June-JuIv 1969 185,991 ? March-May 1976 231,191 March-April 1982 274,805 March 1986 204,871 JuIv 1991 120,586 January- February 125,782 1994 7 Table 2 (continued) DEIAWARE BAY - CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County North Channel Placement Sites (NQ Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 August 1957 (NW) February 1963 97.990 June 1967 115,161 January-March 1972 120,278 March 1975 139,574 April 1982 114,868 February 1986 101,914 May 19 1 lu,626 June 1992 142,935 Sloop Channel Placement Sites (SQ Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 4 August 1957 (NW October 1962 106,900 July 1967 161,890 January 1974 113,580 November 1977 92.565 May 1982 97,189 March 1986 82,303 Mav 1 62,247 June-JuIv 1992 87,482 8 Table 2 (continued) DELAWARE DAY - r.I=ArEAKE DAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Swash Bay & White Trout Creek Placement Sites (SBUT) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 August 1957 (NW) V V V October 1962 178.6 45 V July 1967 208,822 January-February 1974 239,990 October 77-Januarv 1978 157.589 V September - November 187, 100 (SB) 1983 September -November 83,500 (Wr) 1983 March 1988 47.886 March-April 1993 111,519 V 9 Table 2 (continued) DELAWARE BAY - CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Bradford Bay Placement Sites (BB) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 4 July 1957 (NW) October 1962 65.566 July-August 1967 47,150 March 1977 101,802 November 1983 37.000 November 1983 41,000 October 199. 65,850 10 Table 2 (continued) DEIAWARE BAY - CHESAYEAKE BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on he Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Burtons Bay and Cedar Island Bay Placement Sites (BBCIB) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 4 June 1957 (NW) November 1962 139,776 September 1967 193,276 July 1969 21,752 December 1973 194,186 December 77 - 176,618 January 1978 April-September 1983 198,635 April-June 1987 95,326 V November-December 39,250 1992 Februarv 1994 51.794 ? ? Table 2 (continued) DELAWARE BAY - CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Metompkin Bay Placement Sites (MTB) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. November 62-February 699,350(NVr) 1963 September 1967 217.853 February-September 1973 498,851 October- November 1986 465,375 1990 , ? JIluary-February 1993 126,596 12 Table 2 (continued) DELAWARE BAY - CEMSAPEAKE BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Gargathy Inlet Placement Sites (GI) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 September 1957 (NM November-December 1961 18,730 July 1964 4,313 V March 1965 7,930 August 1967 3,832 August 1969 5,660 V June 1970 9,128 V anuary 972 7,551 --February 1974 1 10,346 13 Table 2 (continued) DEIAWARE BAY - CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway, on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Kegotank Bay & Northam Narrows Placement Sites(KBNN) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 4 October-November 1958 (NW) June-July 1964 108.194 May-June 1970 133,756 February-March 1978 27.542 August-October 1983 11,422 Bogues Bay Placement Sites (BB) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 4 Januarv-Februarv 1978 20.189 14 Table 2 (continued) DEILAWARE BAY - CHF-SMEAKE BAY WATERWAY (Previous Project - Waterway on the Coast of Virginia) Accomack - Northampton County Hog Creek Placement Sites (HC) Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 4 February 1974 55.121 October 1983 64.077 August 1991 58,935 Lewis Creek Placement Sites (LQ Date Dredged C.Y. Dredged 1 2 3 4 Au.i4ust-October 1963 80.255 (NW February-May 1972 34.415 August 1992 79.247 T- 15 Table 3. Character of Dredge Material Placement Sites Chesapeake Bay to Magothy Bay Magothy Ecklchy Gull Marsh North Sloop Channel Swash Bay/WbIte Trout (SBVM (CBMB) Bay (MB) Marsh Flats (GMF) Channel (SC) (EChO (NC) 1 2 _ 3 4 5 6 7 11 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 3 4_ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Overigiard v Marsh. Marsh, Unconfined Upland I I Beach Nourishinew -LL I I I Bradford Bay Buttons Bay/Cedar Metampkin Bay (MTH) Gar&& Kegotank Bay/ Rogues Day/ (BB) island Bay (BBCIB) thy Northern Narrows(KBNN) Rog Creek (BB) I (GI) -(HC) 1 2 -1 4 1 2 3 4_ 5 1 2 3 4 1 -5-1 6 7 1 8 9 1- 2 1 2 3 4 1 1 Overboard wr Marsh, Diked Marsh, Unc(.1111ned Upland Beach Nourishment -LL v @3 large stands of Phragmites australis eriod. the greatest amount of all of the (CBMB3, 4, and 5). WCV shoals. The entire 1.4 million cubic yards of dredged material has been Magothy Bay (Plate 3) placed overboard onto subaqueous bottom (GMFl, 2, and 3). Several The WCV extends northward from intertidal hummocks emerged from lower Magothy Bay through upper subaqueous bottom as a result of the Magothy Bay and into Mockhorn successive placement of dredged material Channel. The shallowest section of the within those same areas. WCV in this area occurs in upper Magothy Bay where approximately 7,800 North Channel (Plate 5) linear feet of channel requires maintenance dredging. The amount of Where Gull Marsh Channel merges material maintenance dredged since with Great Machipongo Channel. the 1977 is approximately 370,000 cubic WCV turns north through Hog Island yards. According to historical records, all Bay. At channel marker 186, the WCV of this material has been placed then turns northeast into North Channel. overboard on subaqueous bottom A 5, 100 linear foot section of North (Table 3). Channel has yielded 943,000 cubic yards of maintenance material over a 29-year Eckichy Marsh Channel period. All of the material has been and Gull Marsh Channel (Plate 4) placed overboard on subaqueous bottom C)IC 1. 2, and 3). Based on surface grab The WCV follows Mockhorn Channel samples, the material appears to be a northward to Sand Shoal Channel. where mixture of sand, silt, and clay. Records it then turns to the east and continues indicate that several areas within the towards Sand Shoal Inlet. As the WCV above-referenced placement sites were approaches the oceanside, it turns subsequently leased by seaside northwest into Eckichy Channel at waterman. Apparently the placement channel marker 224. A short section of sites became suitable habitat for oysters the WCV channel near Eckichy Marsh to set and grow. has experienced minor sedimentation, therefore, requiring maintenance Sloop Channel (Plate 6) dredging on two separate occasions. The dredged material resulting from these The WCV follows North Channel to episodes has been placed on marsh Cunjer Channel where it traverses the (ECM1) and in an overboard site (ECM 2). northern end of Hog Island Bay, heading The material placed against and upon the towards Sloop Channel. The southern vegetated marsh at ECMI has provided portion of Sloop Channel, approximately some erosion protection and possible 5, 100 linear feet, has required the benefits to colonial waterbirds. removal of approximately 840,000 cubic From Eckichy Marsh the WCV yards of material over a 30-year period. continues through Spidercrab Bay in a The majority of the fine-grained dredged northeasterly direction within Gull Marsh material has been placed overboard and Channel. Gull Marsh Channel contains adjacent to an eroding marsh fringe approximately 7,200 linear feet of shoal. (ISC 1, 2, and 4), but in 1974 113,580 Table I indicates that this section of the cubic yards were placed unconflned on WCV has had over 1.4 million cubic an intertidal marsh site (SC3). Several of yards of material removed over a 32-year these placement sites have been utilized as nesting habitat by colonial waterbirds. 17 Swash Bay and White Trout is a 7.200 linear foot section of the WCV Creek (Plate 7) that requires maintenance dredging. Appro)dmately 358,000 cubic yards of The WCV follows Sloop Channel to dredged material has been removed from the northeast until it crosses Sandy this section of the WCV since 1962 and Island Channel. and then enters Little placed in overboard sites (13131, 2, 3 and Sloop Channel along the western side of 4). Site BB3 was located near an eroding Revel Island Bay. These areas remain marsh ftinge and may have provided naturally deep and do not require any some erosional protection for the high maintenance dredging. Little Sloop marsh. It should also be noted that Channel converges with White Trout material placed along the southwestern Creek at the head of The Swash, where side of the dredged channel (BB1 and 2) the WCV then turns north into White created intertidal mounds that became Trout Creek and towards the southern productive oyster habitat. end of Swash Bay. Appro)dmately 4,500 linear feet of flurtons Bay and Cedar Island White Trout Creek and 8,400 linear feet flay (Plate 9) of Swash Bay require maintenance dredging. It is difficult to determine the Upon miting Bradford Bay, the WCV volume of maintenance material that has continues easterly within Wachapreague been removed from each of the two Channel until reaching Custis Channel. projects, since they are usually Custis Channel takes the WCV in a more accomplished under the same contract. northerly direction into Burtons Bay. A combined total of 1.2 million cubic There is appro2dmately 21,500 linear feet yards of maintenance material has been of channel within Burtons Bay and Cedar dredged over a 3 1 -year period. The fine- Island Bay that requires maintenance grained material has been placed in dredging. The total amount of mateflial confined inarsh sites (SBW71, 2. and 4). maintenance dredged from these two as well as overboard on subaqueous bays since 1962 is appro2dmately 1. 1 bottoms (SBWT3, 5. 6, and 7). million cubic yards. A large portion of Records indicate that dredged the dredged material was hydraulically material was initially placed near SBWT2 placed on upland (BBCIB I) and into an in an unconfined manner, the area overboard site (BBCIB2). Areas of the subsequently became a heron rookery. overboard site have been leased due to Moreover, dredged material placed on the oyster habitat created. More subaqueous bottoms along the western recently, the material has been placed side of Swash Bay Channel created well into other overboard sites (BBCIB3. 4. developed intertidal mounds that became and 5). suitable oyster habitat. SBVM is no longer used as a rookery, but the Nfetornkin Bay (Plate 10) intertidal mounds on the west side of Swash Bay remain under private lease by The WCV e2dts Cedar Island Bay via watermen. Longboat Creek, follows Longboat Creek to a man-made passage connected with Bradford Bay (Plate 8) Folly Creek, and then e@dts Folly Creek through another man-made passage into The WCV enters Seal Creek at the lower Metomkin Bay. northern end of Swash Bay and The WCV channel through Metomkin continues northeasterly until reaching Bay is appro2dmately 26,400 linear feet Millstone Creek. Once into Millstone long. Due to high sedimentation and Creek the WCV turns northwest towards rapid barrier island migration rates in Bradford Bay. Within Bradford Bay there this area, a 16,000 linear foot section of 18 the channel was relocated during the late placed unconfined on tidal marsh 1980's. Appro)dmately 1. 1 million cubic [KBNN2, 3, and 4) and at an overboard yards of material have been dredged over site (KBNNl). a 30-year period. Placement sites have varied from diked marsh (MTBl), Bogues Bay (Plate 12) unconfined marsh [MTB2, 3 and 4), overboard, subaqueous bottoms (MTB5 The WCV follows Northam Narrows to and 6). and along the oceanside of Assawoman Creek and continues Metomkin Island (MTB7, 8, and 9). ffirough Hog Creek, Little Cat Creek, and Several beneficial uses have resulted Cat Creek into Bogues Bay. from these placement activities: portions Approximately 2,000 linear feet of of the previously used overboard sites channel through Bogues Bay requires have been leased by watermen for oyster maintenance dredging. Over 20.000 cultivation, and the material pumped to cubic yards of material were dredged in the Atlantic side of Metomkin Island may '1978 and placed unconfined on marsh have provided some erosion protection. arid intertidal flats (BB 1). Portions of these areas have been leased by local Gargathy Inlet, Kegotank Bay, watermen. Northam Narrows and Hog Creek (Plate 11) Lewis Creek (Plate 13) Wire Passage provides a naturally The WCV e@dts Bogues Bay and deep course for the WCV to e2dt follows Island Hole Narrows towards Metomkin Bay and continues in a Chincoteague Inlet and Chincoteague northerly direction to Gargathy Inlet. Channel. The northern stretch of the Gargathy Inlet is a highly dynamic ocean WCV follows Chincoteague Channel into inlet where sand is continuously shifting Lewis Creek, then enters Chincoteague and depositing into the nearby WCV. Bay and continues into Maryland waters. Early records indicate that over 67,000 Appro2dmately 6.500 linear feet of cubic yards of material were dredged channel has yielded 113, 000 cubic yards between 1961 and 1974 with a dredging of dredged material over a 29-year period. frequency of less than two years (Table The material has been placed along the 1). All of the sandy material has been shoreline of Chincoteague Island (LC2 placed along the oceanside of southern and 3), overboard in Chincoteague Bay Assawoman Island and northern (LC4). and on marsh (LCU. Metomkin Island (GI I and 2) as beach nourishment material. It has also enhanced e@dsting shorebird habitat. From Gargathy Inlet, the WCV orignally follwed First Creek into Kegotank Bay. Due to the continued migration of southern Assawoman Island. however. First Creek has been filled entirelywith sandy deposits. As a result the WCV has been relocated through Kegotank Creek into Kegotank Bay. Historically there has been a 4,800 foot section of channel through Kegotank Bay and other short channel segments within Northam Narrows that have yielded over 280,000 cubic yards of maintenance material. The material was 19 Plate 1. Index Map (MD.p -3 16 v S th cif no 'WVF I-A p kfil 'g, 97 1 X 4.1 vx@ R-N 0 1 Va Ic �rjm--t'@ "G -&js N 7 4 t3 112 E199 21 t @L@m 101 17, 20 Plate 2. Chesapeake Bay to Magothy Bay Channel In. LL 05 X f ill PE cz 10 V 2z it i) I T H 'ILt' J'j 7% 1 :X 1 7 Jgi 41 L'y RRAW ly ggm N@ MOM EMN J." Dredged Mat AN. *OA Colonial Waterbir --L, -t- 'W- AD 0 Shrub mar @ @7i w Z ... .... . . 0 X t o, I I I I,' I 41,4 4 4@ 14 4. 4) 4. Aa ,4, 4 11 ',it= , I "4, "1 IN, @,j Vol I zi416 o '17 14 4' 4 14,4 @@ 41, )4 A@, I@P@ N ol, 1 CAk j OW 4 4 TH '16 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ARE, 1 4 4-- p "'4141 41 1V r :4@,T @4 11N, Poo@-@qj I'vfkfil, 4@ ENO 1 4., MAR M n ji jr 4.0 -4,0 4 .4 Ju el k fQ 4, f Ig if %Uil al, Plate 4. Eckichy Marsh Channel and Gull Marsh Channel MEN 'o -M. "N n. -grm S, 0 0- M v-1 MM&4. arv V R V- g S N t `k @"R AV 11 151, Nli-I'l If GMF v Rt v p z ;10 ,v W4 1 - MR 5d -8' t A A 8N 5A R -2f q Ng r IVA @,M i, 1AP. w -K 0, U I; rREQ 4,2, 1, 21 ad aEili:l 4_'WiR @!x zgg "A_ 61- M _E@ -011 A""R Zk7*i,,-, WIL 'A 11,@,@,:,O% ww, - gm X1 N tI'E , R @51 N 4 N@ R -wl - -1 7m@, % .0 "R V "IN Rol @Sp ;N, -Xi, R? R 2 W 'R, V x "M' 'a 01-- MS + - 7' A", SO Rif t_ 'J 1,04 4 . S-I. W... - @S T, 1@ A U ECM M., vt Z,14' W_ li@ M i',4RR, -w- 51i 0" in. MIM R. _54' Nn 05, R. W 5 "M V,'@ j@fb:F@,T3 gwl', - P, AM 1011@1 I". nN Rhlv [3@ r6 g P-0 mg Dredged Material Placement Colonial Waterbird Colonies 1993-1994 [] Shrub 0 Marsh Beach/Dune 0 2 Mile -C U10,15 23 Plate 5. North Channel iM@-@ '4 kf, sx. v v". P I., f W C N T'.g p'. N. A 5" Ae"o., 3h 3F '.5 0, t X", W5- F F "E, vq, R 41. NP A R '5 A, 'E" fy -6, Q v-@;,p g XN Z.V" @'V, n@Z IA Ij 4 V, Rx, 0 ",A 0 1"NA "'.x, A 2 Mal, A ,'Eu Al 'AT tM xj;,nF ICT A UIM gN 66.@ N k- -wn 6-A "( vK 'I" M@ Dredged Material Placement w 25@ @sp U-IM Colonial Waterbird Colonies 1993-1994 Y t Shrub Marsh Beach/Dune 0 2 Mile 24 Plate 6. Sloop Channel ft-d.mtsl.k. fL 1-@ Z107011 z@) 5 ma. "M R 7 'N'.0 INS m -Fz- qy4-2, 4 ka ..3 .0.1 P V21, rz mm 5, @R4- SC 3 -mm V -NN @v "..nuggo, g ft R 4 SC 2 m R + B, 5@' NO ,S@48 w'. 1" C .w '0 ",@f r M-N 49 A jg* . . . ... .. . n-v- 1r, wW UP, IF - A ZAN In ION,, O"Pi OR Rk 1Z -e3 141, rA OR @LT N @T 11 g, OF,! @VM IXlh y, 3y Dredged Material Placement Colonial Waterbird Colonies 1993-1994 [:] Shrub 0 Marsh Beach/Dune 0 2 Mile 17- 25 Plate 7. Swash Bay and White Trout Channel Z. quinb gg rf 44 A -4 -J@ ';B @z r7 -T- Drecig Colonial W Shrub Awl, 1-g- --M2.6 Plate 8. Bradford Bay U R T 14 mock Cove IAX=t v Ae "d 11@' z jj@ Dredged Ma Colonial Waterbir Shrub Ma 0 Plate 9. Burtons Bay and Cedar Island Bay 7 . 4m _7 -F_ -Z 77 cl ji Y- 74* q. 5r BC1 q !IR-a CT @Ikf 4 Z4 @A_ W u. _f," @:6 @2?E ZZI 'N BC1 xell:@'..@:, Ve Dredg gq A". N W, Colonial Wa NEW, R NP Shrub 0 PI a te 10. Metompkin Bay U n j W IL X 7% v Ak ..... @_Z zv ... .... . . ............. IA MTB _7- I e's .. .... .... .4 4 7 '3' .......... Realigh6d ZT, N 7fj ........... MTB MTB 8 V.. ki A EN R-A NII.F., F 31 '26 4@" VWR w . . . . . .. . .. MTB 9 .. ... ..... N MTR vs MIR' - * 1@ . @ g 7E! @i ,@A WIN ...... ... Ak. . ..... NITB Y .......... . . .. . ...... ........ NITB .... ... ........... '@X Id IVI 1 0 2 P _7 R "i Dredged Material Placement Colonial Waterbird Colonies 1993-1994 Shrub Marsh ABeach/Dune 0 2 Mile 29 4 j 4 4@@j 4" @lp 6'j "Nil 149 4@ At' rol, 514119"' A 7/4 A'o I IN, �r. i, yl 4! JN ........... cc wop., '6@ s-1 4 14 -i -T@ "I . .11 'i4 yr, 4 414 4't@'T Pit -1111 t4 VAR A.101 Plate 12. Bogues Bay 'A p ROGUES I-V 4- Ora Itz 18A ;Lz- @7, P, L@-, 8a F't F7 Dredged Colonial Water [] Shrub 0 v i i i j Plate 13. Lewis Creek 'k 4 p 816k. p g - LA., sfvo 77--. - I-V V g - IF, -W INe 7@- ,01 Q: P4 dry" off cz@ CD W P Dredged Material Placement PW :V . Colonial Waterbird Colonies 1993-1994 Beach/Dune Shrub Marsh 0 2 Mile TOMS COVE ------ ------ --- ---- ------------- - -------- 32 M. Natural Resources diseases [6]. These shallow intertidal reef systems are numerous throughout the The WCV stretches along the seaside seaside, but small in size - less than one of the Eastern Shore of Virginia between to two acres [7]. Consequently. there is the barrier islands and the mainland relatively little information about the (Plate 1). The lagoon and marsh complex exact location and productivity of through which the WCV passes is one of individual oyster reefs or bars. the most pristine environments The VMRC's Oyster Grounds Leasing remaining along the Atlantic Coast of the and Surveying Department is responsible United States. The beaches of the barrier for surveying subaqueous ground for islands are used as nurseries by both public and private shellfish cultivation, endangered and non-endangered species leasing private shellfish grounds, and of turtles and shorebirds, and the entire maintaining oyster ground lease records. area supports a large assemblage of All of the existing public grounds and colonial waterbirds, shorebirds, and private leases are surveyed and entered waterfowl. The lagoon and marsh system into the VMRC mapping system. VMRC's also provide important nursery habitat survey and lease records of the entire for many important finfish which are Eastern Shore are contained in Appendix harvested both commercially and C. The VMRC survey and mapping data recreationally. In addition, the seaside of do not indicate, however, the presence or the Eastern Shore has historically been value of any particular resource within an area of very high shellfish mapped grounds. productivity. As a result of this study, the VMRC As a result of the great abundance of mapping system has been updated to natural resources found along the WCV, include the locations of all the sections of and the lack of nearby inland or upland the WCV requiring maintenance disposal sites, the placement of dredged dredging, as well as the historical material has the potential to impact a overboard placement sites. This -will wide variety of environments and natural enable a desktop review that quickly and resources. Therefore, it is essential to accurately locates a dredging project identify the areas of high resource value relative to public and private shellfish so that any impacts from dredge material grounds. Site specific information about placement can be minimized. while the presence of shellfish resources will possibly enhancing various components still have to be garnered from the of the habitat surrounding the WCV. leaseholders, local waterman, and Marine Patrol Officers familiar with the sites in Shellfish/Aquaculture question. The Virginia Marine Resources The seaside of the Eastern Shore has Commission's Oyster Conservation and the largest extent of public shellfish Repletion Department manages public grounds in any one area of Virginia. In a shellfish grounds for the conservation study conducted during the late 1970's and promotion of oyster resources. As a [51 it was determined that approximately part of their responsibilities, public 7.226 acres of public shellfish grounds oyster grounds on the seaside are had moderate to high potential for oyster improved by shell planting and the growth, primarily based on substrate turning of old beds to increase setting composition (Appendix D). Most of these substrate in spawning areas. During oysters (Crassostrea virginica) on the the years of 1992-94 approximately 31 seaside of the Eastern Shore are found individual sites were shell planted and/or on intertidal flats, They have adapted to experienced "turnover", a process intertidal elevations, which lessens their whereby buried shell is brought up to the exposure to aquatic predators and surface. A 1995 survey of those sites 33 showed relatively good numbers (100-300 Virginia. There has been an 8 to 14 oysters per square meter) of small percent annual growth rate for much of oysters. There is some encouragement the last ten years [9]. In 1993 that further reef rehabilitation and approximately 72.2 million clams were creation may have some success on the produced in Virginia, valued at over 11 seaside [71. All of the oyster repletion million dollars. The state's largest clam sites have been surveyed and entered producer is located on the bayside of the into the VMRC mapping system, and can Eastern Shore. There are, however, other be readily identified (Appendix Q. operations working on the seaside that The inter-tidal oyster reef habitat utilize private leases as clam growout found on the seaside of the Eastern areas, as well as withdrawing seawater Shore represent an ecologically valuable from the creeks and channels for their resource. Hopefully, future dredged hatcheries. material placement activities can be A hatchery can be extremely sensitive accomplished in a manner to benefit this to changes in water quality, especially habitat. It is interesting to note that during warm water months when many small intertidal sand and shell productivity is high within the hatchery. mounds were created along the WCV as a A time-of-year restriction of March 15 to result of dredged material being October 31 may be appropriate for repeatedly placed in the same areas over maintenance dredging or material a 30-year period. Some of the mounds placement activities that are in the became colonized by oysters naturally vicinity of a shellfish hatchery. and were eventually leased by watermen Additionally, select areas along the because of their economic viability [6]. seaside have proven to be more Other valuable shellfish resources productive as clam growout areas due to found along the seaside of the Eastern water quality, tidal hydrodynamics, Shore include the quahog (Mercenaria nutrient flux, and other variables. These mercenaria) and surf clam (Spisula areas may be more sensitive to dredged solidissima). Both the surf clam and large material placement activities, and should quahog clams are commonly used in be considered during the evaluation of clam chowder and as clam strips. Small placement options. quahogs, or cherrystones. are valued by restauranteurs for their half shell Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) market. The surf clams are found along the Atlantic beaches and offshore of the There are little to no aquatic grasses barrier islands, while the quahog clam within the barrier island complex from can found throughout the barrier island Fishermans Island to Chincoteague Inlet. system. There is, however, little At the northern extent of the WCV, quantitative information about the however. within Chincoteaaue Bay abundance or location of naturally behind Assateague Island, aquatic occurring clams on the seaside. A review grasses occur quite extensively[ 101. of the VMRC commercial landings data Zostera marina and Ruppia maritima have for the seaside of the Eastern Shore been depicted in very high densities all indicate that clam harvests have along the eastern shore of Chincoteague fluctuated between 75,000 and 620.000 Bay, north of the Town of Chincoteague. pounds (meat weight only) from 1973 to The Lewis Creek project is the only 1992. The trend, however, appears to maintenance dredging project on the show a severe drop in landings during Eastern Shore that has the potential to the 1990's. impact submerged aquatic vegetation. While the harvest of natural clam SAV is very sensitive to changes in water stocks has decreased, aquaculture of clarity and light penetration through the clams has shown solid growth trends in water column. Further investigations 34 may be necessary in order to develop best skates have also been reported to have a management practices for dredged considerable presence within the Eastern material placement near known SAV Shore barrier island complex for use as resources. both a nursery and foraging habitat [ 17). These studies have also shown that adult Fishes\Blue Crabs orjuvenile anadromous fishes are generally not present within the barrier The Eastem Shore seaside inlets and island complm possibly due to the high associated lagoons, or estuaries, provide and stable salinities found within the important nursery habitat for seaside estuaries. commercially and recreationally Due to the highly dynamic and important fishes [ 11, 12,251. Specifically, complex seaside inlets and lagoons, there juvenile summer founder, croaker, and is little, if any. site specific information spot have been found to utilize the pertaining to the geographic distribution seaside barrier island lagoons. Summer of certain species and their preferred flounder, one of the more commercially habitat (i.e. inlets, creeks. lagoons, mud and recreationally valued fishes, migrate bottom, sandy bottom, etc.). It does seasonally from ocean beaches and appear, however, that the majority of estuaries to continental shelf waters. commercial harvesting of firifish occurs Adults migrate during late fall and winter within the inlets and along the shallow from their inshore grounds to offshore waters offshore of the barrier islands. shelf waters where they will remain until Conversely, the majority of recreational April to June. During the summer fisherman concentrate within the months the adults return to shallow protected waters behind the barrier coastal waters having salinities greater islands, but near the oceanic inlets. than 28 o/oo, sandy substrate, and Norcross [121 reported capturing juvenile situated in areas having sNvift flowing flounder exclusively from along the edges waters [ 131. Excellent recreational of the sandy inlets and main channels on fishing opportunities exist along the the seaside, but also recognized that seaside inlets and main channels. extremely young founder may associate Chincoteague and Wachapreague are with silty/clay substrate near salt both very popular destinations for marshes within the lagoons. founder fishermen. During her 1986-88 study [121, Although eggs and larval stages are Norcross found that the number of found exclusively in shelf waters, juvenile species sampled on the seaside showed a founder are found only in the strong seasonal component with the estuarine/ coastal environment. diversity lowest in February and highest Recruitment of juvenile summer founder in October. The most abundant group of begins as early as the fall and continues fish was sciaenids (silver perch, spot, through spring and into the summer croaker, weakfish, kingfish. red drum [121. Furthermore. some studies have and black drum). Croaker were of the indicated that juvenile summer founder greatest abundance during the fall of associate with shallow mud bottom 1986, but were infrequently captured in habitats during their first months of life the winter and spring. Spot abundance [ 141. The backbay lagoon and inlet was high during the spring and summer, environments of seaside provide excellent while newly recruited silver perch and habitat for both adult and juvenile weakfish appeared in late summer and summer flounder. fall. Other researchers [15,16] have The blue crab can be found collected 38 and 99 different species of throughout the barrier island system, fishes from Magothy and Chincoteague but fishing or potting pressure generally Bays, respectively. Sharks, rays, and occurs during the summer and fall 35 within the waters immediately adjacent subaqueous-limited bays within to the navigational channels and Accomack County. Spatial limits of naturally occurring inlets and channels. existing habitat need to be considered The water in which the pots are placed during the site by site analysis of dredged needs to be deep enough so that at low material placement options. tide the crabs remain submerged, and The majority of the sediments also so that the waterman can easily dredged from the WCV are fine-grained navigate and fish the pots. and susceptible to resuspension after Approximately 4.5 million pounds of placement from tidal currents and waves. hard blue crabs were commercially Waves are -capable of resuspending harvested from the seaside of the Eastern bottom sediments in the shallow water Shore in 1983. This represents a peak in environment in which the majority of the the landings data for the period of 1973 dredged materials from the WCV are through 199 1. In 1989 approximately placed. For some of the smaller bays. 2.9 million pounds were reportedly sediments resuspended from dredged landed, but the total poundage fell to material placement areas may contribute 26,500 by 1991. substantially to the overall increased It is not clear what impacts, if any, turbidity during a storm event. the placement of dredged material onto Conversely, resuspended sediments in a intertidal and subtidal habitats has on large bay such as Hog Island mostly adult and juvenile finfish, and blue crabs originate from natural bottom deposits. of the Eastern Shore. It is known, In either case, the shallow water bays however, that overboard placement of can reach very high water temperatures dredged materials does result in short during the summer months and term increases in turbidity and nutrient potentially enter periods of low dissolved levels. and decreased oxygen levels. The oxygen. Therefore, it may be prudent to depletion of oxygen levels, however, further limit dredging and placement during dredging operations is localized activities within small bays and lagoons and of short duration [18,19]. Studies by to the months of low water temperature. Schubel et al. [201 and Masters [2 11 have both found that high concentrations of Colonial Waterbirds suspended. fine-grained sediments did not have significant, adverse impacts on The marsh/lagoon complex through the survival of eggs and larvae of the which much of the WCV traverses blueback herring, alewife, American contains hundreds of breeding colonies of shad, yellow perch, white perch, striped waterbirds. The Virginia Department of bass, and spot. High suspended solids Game and Inland Fisherieswas levels can , however. adversely impact subcontracted through this grant to the hatching success, larval development provide an inventory of the bird colonies and settlement of oysters [ 181. adjacent to the WCV. and their preferred The conversion of subaqueous habitats [221. habitat to intertidal and emergent habitat During a 1993-94 survey [221, 270 through dredged material placement may waterbird colonies were identified within have, however. a longer-term impact on the Eastern Shore barrier the abundance of fishes and crabs. The island/ marsh/ lagoon complex. An bays and lagoons of the lower Eastern estimated 62,979 pairs from 23 species Shore (Northampton County) contain were surveyed, accounting for 72% of the greater areas of subaqueous habitat than colonial waterbirds known to breed in the the bays behind Metomkin, Assawoman, coastal plain of Virginia. Large numbers and Wallops Island. Therefore, of pairs are found within Cobb Bay, Hog productivity of the lower bays may be Island Bay, and adjacent to the causeway less impacted than the more leading to Chincoteague Island. 36 The species identifled in the bird further document any colonial nesting survey [22] can be categorized into three sites within the project area. groups: 1) wading birds, 2) terns and Watts [22], provides several general skimmers, and 3) gulls, pelicans, and and specific recommendations on how Forster's tems. The wading birds prefer dredged material placement along the to nest within island and lagoon shrub WCV can positively impact colonial habitat, dominated by wax myrtle and waterbirds and/or shorebirds. In saltbush, respectively. The majority of summary: the wading birds identified in the 1993- Existing habitat could be enhanced to 94 study were found to nest in patches or better facilitate breeding and/or ridges of saltbush associated with the foraging by 1) placing sandy material marsh/lagoon complex. Only a fraction near the ends of barrier islands to of the available habitat, however, is used maintain elevation of breeding by waders for nesting. The waders grounds, and 2) placing dredged mostly forage within intertidal mudflats materials on low elevation tidal flats and along the edges of the shallow, open to increase their frequency of water areas. subaerial exposure, and thereby, Terns and skimmers are found to improve foraging opportunities, nest on sandy foredune areas along the especially within intertidal-limited Atlantic side of the barrier islands and on lagoons isolated sandy/shell ridges within the Create new habitat by placing sandy lagoon complex. This type of nesting dredged material within open water habitat is also very prevalent and only a lagoons as emergent islands with a portion of it is utilized by the terns and minimum surface area of 0.25 ha skimmers for nesting. Open water lacroons behind the barrier islands are All of the 270 nesting sites identified ID the preferred foraging areas for tems and in the 1993-94 study have been entered skimmers. into the VMRC mapping system. This The third group of birds - gulls, will provide a quick and accurate method pelicans. and Forster's terns can be for identification and location of the found nesting in two separate areas. The nesting sites found during the 1993-94 gulls and pelicans nest in vegetated assessment, and assist in the process of dunes and swales found mostly along the selecting placement options and oceanside, while the Forster's terns nest beneficial uses of dredged materials. in low saltmarsh and elevated marsh ridges in the backbay regions. This group of birds will forage in the surf zone. beach. ocean waters. lagoonal bays and mudflats. It should be noted that not all of the identified nesting sites are occupied on a yearly basis. some colonial nesters move from year to year to new sites. This will have an impact on the restrictions that might be imposed on a particular dredging project within the vicinity of a nest site. In general, projects should be accomplished during the late fall and winter months to avoid the breeding period. For projects that may occur during spring and summer, however, a site by site analysis will be necessary to 37 IV. Sediment Evaluation in Table 4. Results from the sediment analysis of the entire sample set can be One of the most important factors in found in Appendix B. determining the feasibility of a particular A review of the channel sediment placement option, is evaluating the type data indicate that a number of channels of sediment being dredged. The grain have substantial amounts of sand that size of the sediments to be dredged needs could potentially have beneficial uses. to be mapped both horizontally and The highest sand percentages (>750/6) vertically so that the type and amounts of were Wise Point and Kegotank Bay. material available can be accurately Channels with mid-range sand determined. This will dictate, in large percentages (25%-75%) included: measure. how the dredged material will Magothy Bay, Eckichy Marsh, Gull behave once it is deposited in the marine Marsh, North Channel, portions of Sloop environment. Grain size, nominal.side Channel, Metomkin Bay, portions of slopes, and mound stability will have a Northam Narrows, Bogues Bay, and tremendous influence on the size and Lewis Creek. The remainder of the shape of the deposit and, consequently, channels. White Trout Creek, Swash Bay, its usefulness as a habitat modifier. Bradford Bay, and Burtons Bay averaged Since the nature of the sediment is so <25% sand (Table 4). important, this study attempted to characterize the sediments involved in dredging the WCV by systematically sampling each of the shoals that are routinely dredged by the Corps. Table 4. Mean Grain Size of WCV However, due to the large area routinely Channel Sediments* From Frequently maintenance dredged and the limitations Dredged Areas of this study, only the horizontal Percent variations in sediment size were Channel (Shoal) Sand Silt Cla investigated. For more detailed analysis, it will be necessary to map the sediments Wise Point 78.1 10.5 11.4 of a severely shoaled channel both Magothy Bay 39.4 34.6 26.0 horizontally and vertically. For the Eckichy Marsh 57.2 27.8 15.1 purposes of this study, however, the Gull Marsh 52.3 29.8 17.9 North Channel 43.1 34.9 22.1 sampling scheme provided enough Sloop Channel 31.9 42.8 25.3 information to support the proposed White Trout Ck 11.6 55.6 32.8 evaluation process. Swash Bay 5.7 55.4 38.9 Surface sediment samples were Bradford Bav 18.0 50.2 31.8 collected with a grab sampler at regular Burtons Bay 9.8 52.0 38.2 intervals along each section of the Zn Metomkin Bay 41.9 32.9 25.2 Kegotank Bay 80.1 11.8 8.2 dredged channels. The distance between Northam Narrows 50.0 26.1 23.8 each sample varied with the length of the Bogues Bay 65.5 18.4 16.1 channel and ranged between 1000 and Lewis Creek 26.2 40.3 33.2 2000 feet. The location of each sample Based on surface grab samples was determined using a hand held Loran C receiver, The samples were returned to the VIMS Sediment Laboratory where they were analyzed for percent sand, silt, and clay. The sand fraction was then run through a Rapid Sediment Analyzer to determine the sand grain size distribution. The data are summarized 38 V. Benthic Evaluation sediment which can destroy portions of the population. Second, it changes the Introduction physical structure of the site, i.e. elevation or depth and sediment grain The impact of a project on existing size. communities is always a major concern Recovery from the smothering occurs whenever any type of habitat in a number of ways including: vertical modification Is undertaken. In this migration of the existing benthos, regard, a number of questions need to be migration of adults from undisturbed asked during the evaluation of each areas, reproduction and recruitment construction project. Is the habitat that from undisturbed areas and residual is being affected of greater value than the populations in portions of the placement one replacing it? Are the acute short- area [231. term impacts outweighed by the potential The physical changes in the site long-term benefits? Is there going to be a indirectly affect recolonization by net benefit to the ecosystem due to this influencing the types of organisms modification? These questions and capable of repopulating the area. others concerning the long- and short- Changes in elevation from subtidal to term impacts of a project need to be intertidal, for example, can significantly addressed regardless of the type of affect the nature of the benthic project in order to ensure the benefits of community that colonizes the site. a proposed project exceed the potential Similarly, the sediment composition will detriments. strongly influence the kinds of organisms In the case of the WCV, a number of that can be recruited to the placement habitat types, including vegetated area. wetlands, intertidal mudflats, beaches, The difficulty comes in assessing the subtidal bottoms and uplands, can nature and extent of these impacts on potentially be affected by dredging the habitats because the resulting projects. Each of these habitat types has changes in the communities can be very its own inherent set of environmental subtle and, consequently, difficult to values that will be either lost or distinguish from natural variability. In significantly changed if used as a addition, benthic studies of this type can dredged material placement site. Since be very costly and time consuming. most of the dredging on the WCV involves What this study sought was a overboard placement on subtidal methodology that was reasonably bottoms, it was decided to look at these sensitive to changes in the environment impacts in some detail. In particular. and not too laborious or time consuming. there was concern about the value of the The method selected was the Benthic existing benthic habitat both as a Assessment Methodology (BAM), recently commercial shellfish resource and as an developed at VIMS [241. It was chosen ecological resource which provides because it is comparatively easy to foraging and nursery areas for numerous implement, does not require extensive species of finfish. Of interest were the taxonomic identification, is responsive in types of conversions that occur when a timely manner, is not particularly these habitats are used as placement expensive, and is sensitive to the areas including both community anticipated level of impact. This was, responses in the short-term and also the however, the first use of this method in a long-term recovery prospects. marsh/lagoon complex like the Seaside The overboard placement of dredged of the Eastern Shore. material physically impacts the benthic The BAM is unique in that it looks at community in two different ways. First, the long-term stability of the benthic it smothers the existing benthos with community as a measure of its value or 39 importance. This evaluation is based on Methods a number of factors including the depth at which the organisms live, their The Magothy Bay sites (Figure 1) were functional life style, the size of the sampled in May 1995. The new organisms and the percentage of the placement area had last been used in biomass found at depth. All of these December 1993. The old placement area factors imply that large, long-lived, deep had last been used in 1977. The Swash living organisms are indicators of a Bay sites (Figure 2) were sampled in degree of equilibrium and long-term June 1994. The new placement area had stability in the community. Recently last been used in April 1993. The old reestablished or stressed benthic placement area had last been used in communities tend to be dominated by 1983. The Lewis Creek sites (Figure 3) small, shallow-living, short-lived were sampled in July 1995. The new organisms that might have very high placement area had last been used in densities, yet 'are not really indicative of a August 1992. The old placement area stable community. had last been used in the late 1940's. The BAM technique was utilized in Two potential placement areas, a control two different ways in this study. First, it site and a channel station at Ramshorn was used to evaluate short- and long- Bay (Figure 4) were sampled in July term impacts of overboard dredged 1995. material placement on the benthic The sites at each channel were community at three maintenance sampled three times with a 225CM2 dredged channels along the WCV, (I 5cm x l5cm) box corer to a depth of at Magothy Bay (Figure 1), Swash Bay least 15cm. The top 5cm of each core (Figure 2), and Lewis Creek in were removed and bagged separately Chincoteague Bay (Figure 3). At each of from the rest of the 'core. Both sections the channels three stations were selected were stored on ice in transit. Upon to represent the most recently used return to the laboratory both sections placement area, an older placement area were sieved through a 0.5mm screen. that has not been used in at least ten The animals in each core section were years, and an undisturbed area that has enumerated, sized, and weighed and never been used as a placement area. their life history detennined. These data The purpose of this sampling regime was were then used to score each core to investigate the short- and long-term according to the BAM outlined in differences in benthic communities Appendix B to determine its numerical among the sites at each channel as rating. measured by the BAM technique. In addition, sediment cores were It was also used as a planning tool to taken at each site for analysis of sand, compare and evaluate potential new silt, and clay content. placement sites at Ramshorn Bay (Figure 4), the site of a proposed channel Results relocation. Here, it was used to help determine the relative value of the The mean scores for the BAM benthic community at several sites to see technique and the sediment grain size if any significant differences existed that analyses for each site at the three might direct the placement away from or dredged channels have been compiled in towards a particular area as a means of minimizing the impacts. 40 Figure 1. Magothy Bay Benthic Assessment Methodology (BAM) Sites. OUNTONN COVE MAGOTHYBAY MOC@ORJY ISLAND CABIN Q BAM I COVE PO I.ANDING BAM 3 BULLS LANDING C. BAM 2 C@S-!61 @c E.. 41 Figure 2. Swash Bay Benthic Assessment Methodology (BAM) Sites. SM MIX BAM 2 (( lid PUBLIC GROUND BAM 3 C@EL SWASH BAY DREDGED MATERIAL PLACEMENT AREA @ATIE@EASE BAM 1 -n TROUT CMEEK 0 ESLOOP BIRD COLONY BENTHIC SAMPLING SITE SCALE: 1:20000 1"=1666.66' 42 -A Figure 3. Lewis Creek Benthic Assessment Methodology (BAM) Sites. B AM & 2 CHINCOTEAGUE BAY BAM 1 BLAKE PT. PLACEMENT AREA 264 "14, BAM 3 I .!j ,263 CHINCOTEAGUE ISLAND 43 Figure 4. Ramshorn Bay Assessment Methodology (BAM) Sites. VMS CKADDINO LAU 509TREX CREEK 8 3 IQXTREE THE QVTLEr J OUTLET BAY PUBLIC GROUND R-ArHORN BAY 9 A/@ 4 BAM I BAM 2 44 Table 5. The raw data and BAM changes in the physical structure of evaluation scores for each site are sediment such as increased amounts of provided in Appendix B along with the sand and shell might influence the explanation of the methodology. results. The trend in these data, Several sample sections from however, appears to Indicate that the Magothy Bay were lost. Consequently, placement areas recover with time. there were only two complete replicates While the trend remains the same, at the new and old placement sites and the absolute scores are different at each only one complete replicate at the channel. The highest scores, 8.0, 7.7, undisturbed site. and 7.0. indicating good habitats, were The BAM scores were, with one found at the Lewis Creek and Swash Bay exception at Magothy Bay, uniformly undisturbed sites and the Swash Bay old highest at the undisturbed site and placement sites, respectively. With the lowest at the recently used site at each exception of the recently used site in channel with intermediate values at the Magothy Bay, all the other scores, 4.0, old placement areas. The percent sand 4.0, 5.0, 5.0. and 5.7, fell in the slightly in the sediment varied considerably to moderately disturbed habitat range. among the sites at each channel with no The lowest score, 1.5, indicating a poor apparent trends. or seriously disturbed habitat was found The results from Ramshorn Bay are at the recently used site in Magothy Bay. compared in Table 6. The two proposed This channel also had the lowest score. placement areas and the control site 4.0. for the undisturbed site. These showed very little difference. The station scores were likely influenced by the lost in the proposed channel appeared to be core sections and lack of replication at somewhat lower in value according to the each of the sites. Additionally, the BAM technique. With the exception of sediments at the undisturbed and old the inshore placement site, the surface placement sites in Magothy Bay were sediments were also similar. very dense, well-consolidated clays that were difficult to penetrate with the box Discussion corer. At Swash Bay, the major differences The average BAM scores follow a appear to be between the recently used fairly consistent pattern at each of the site and the older site and the unused maintenance dredged channels, with the site. The values of 7.0 and 7.7 at the highest values at the undisturbed site, latter sites are probably not substantially intermediate values at the old placement different and are indicative of well- area. and the lowest values at the most developed habitats according to the BAM. recently used site. The observed pattern The recently used site scored somewhat in the BAM scores is most likely related lower in the slightly to moderately to natural recovery processes following disturbed habitat category. The basic placement but might also reflect changes difference in the data is the percentage of in the habitat not related to recovery. biomass below 5cm which is considerably Following a disturbance the habitat lower in the recently used site. This may or may not be degraded but the score, 5.7, could be taken as an community is shifted to some other indication that the community is configuration. The recovery process (or recovering from the disturbance but has movement towards the original not had sufficient time for the deep living configuration) may be affected by habitat biomass to reach undisturbed levels. changes or biotic processes (recruitment, According to the score of 7.0 for the old competition and predation). site, this appears to be achievable over The BAM method was designed to be time. used in soft-bottom communities and 45 Table 5. BENTHIC ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY (B.A.M.) AND SEDIMENT GRAIN-SIZE SUMMARY Swash Bay Chincoteague Bay Magothy Bay Station Type B.A.M. Sand Silt Clay B.A.M. Sand silt Clay B.A.M. Sand Silt Clay Undisturbed 7.7 9.6 57.5 32.9 8.0 30.4 47.9 21.7 4.0 14.1 47.7 37.9 Old Disposal 7.0 24.8 43.1 32.2 5.0 86.6 10.1 0.3 5.0 13.0 42.5 44.5 New Disposal 5.7 9.5 53.7 36.7 4.0 94.8 0.9 4.4 1.5 36.5 44.1 19.4 Total BAM score interpretation: 0 - I Poor habitat, seriously disturbed 2 - 3 Moderately disturbed or stressed habitat 4 - 5 Slightly disturbed to moderately disturbed habitat 6 - 8 Good habitat Table6 RAMSHORN CHANNEL DATA SUMMARY B.A.M. SEDIMENTS Station Mean Score % Sand % Silt % Clay BAM I - Inshore 7.7 26 57 17 placement area BAM2 - Offshore 6.7 13 47 40 placement area BAM3 - Channel 4.7 18 45 37 near day marker BAM4 - Control 7.0 13 53 34 west of marsh BAM score interpretation: 0-1 Poor habitat, seriously disturbed 2-3 Moderately disturbed or stressed habitat 4-5 Slightly disturbed to moderately disturbed habitat 6-8 Good habitat 47 At Lewis Creek in Chincoteague Bay, Aside from the direct impacts to the the major differences in the cores were benthos and'from a broader landscape the lack of large, long-lived animals living perspective, the physical structure of deeper than 5cm in both the new and old these mounds, i.e. the elevation and placement areas. This may have been coarser-grained sediments found near influenced by the significantly higher the discharge. produces pronounced percentages of sand found at these sites, physiographic differences in otherwise 94.8% and 86.6%, as compared to the homogeneous, shallow, soft-bottom 30.4% sand at the undisturbed site communities typical of bays in the which is the site that scored a perfect barrier island lagoon system. This average score of 8.0. Perhaps these structure creates an "edge effect" that sandier sediments were no longer may increase diversity within the benthic suitable for colonization by deep community resulting from a variety of dwelling, large, long-lived organisms. sediment types, flne to coarse-grained, The BAM scores at the recently used and elevational exposures, subtidal to placement areas at Swash Bay, 5.7, and supratidal. The amount of "edge" and Lewis Creek, 4.0. both indicate only diversity within the habitat would slightly to moderately disturbed habitat increase with increasing elevation. values. This indicates a substantial Increased community productivity is amount of short-term recovery often associated with increasingly diverse considering that the dredged material habitats. Enhanced community had been in place only 14 months at productivity can, in turn, attract mobile Swash Bay and only 36 months at Lewis organisms such as blue crabs, fishes, Creek. and shorebirds to forage in the area The data from Ramshorn Bay thereby increasing its ecological value. indicate that the benthic communities at the proposed placement locations and the control site are not appreciably different. Hence, because the values are similar, the impacts to the benthic community would be similar and, therefore, would not be a deciding factor in the selection of the placement area. Based on the data to date it appears that this method is capable of discerning differences among similar habitats at a particular channel in a simple, comparatively inexpensive and timely manner. The differences observed may be related. in part, to the differences in the sediments found among the sites at each channel and differences in the communities at the different channels as well as differences in recovery time. All of these factors, however, would combine to make comparisons between channels very difficult. 48 V1. Beneficial Use Options Table 7. Beneficial Uses of Dredged Evaluation Material Introduction PLACENZNT OPTION BENEFICIAL USE Beach Nourishment Erosion Control/Avtan Beneficial uses for dredged material Habitat Marsh Toe/Intertidal Erosion Control/Avian can often be realized by exercising Habitat selected options during its placement. Overboard Fish Structure/Avian The feasibility of these options depends Habitat on a number of factors associated with a Oyster & Avian Habitat particular dredging project and the Marsh Island Wetland Habitat Avian Habitat environmental setting of the site. Unconfined Marsh Avian Nesting Habitat Engineering factors influencing the selection of a placement option include Beach nourishment is the placement the pumping distance, volume of of reasonably compatible sandy material, type of sediments, placement sediments along a high energy shoreline area capacity and cost. The to supplement the sediment supply to environmental factors include the that reach and help stabilize the location proximity to e2dsting living resources, of the shoreline. spawning periods, nesting habitats. Colonial waterbird habitat can be water quality concerns and habitat developed in a number of ways using modification or destruction. Physical dredged material. One method is factors. such as tides, currents, fetch and ancillary to beach nourishment projects bathymetry are also important because where the beaches created are high they influence the behavior of the enough and wide enough to provide dredged material during and after suitable habitat for terns and skimmers. deposition. If all of these considerations The creation of island habitats, either can be evaluated and allowances made in shelly subaerial sand, sparsely vegetated the plans to accommodate these transition zone areas, or shrub restraints, avenues can become available communities, can provide habitat to make beneficial use of the material. capable of accommodating the nesting Because of the variety of habitats and requirements of terns, skimmers, gulls, resources found along the WCV, there pelicans or herons. These isolated marsh are numerous options to make beneficial islands also provide a competitive use of the dredged materials from the advantage or increased likelihood of waterway. Table 7 lists a number of nesting success because of the lack of dredged material placement options that mammalian predators. Islands in the could have beneficial impacts. Even with sense of an isolated habitat type can also this range of options, situations may be produced by the unconfined occur where circumstances prevent the placement of dredged material in a incorporation of any of these beneficial monospecific stand of marsh grass. uses into a dredging plan. In these These areas provide increased elevation instances, the aim of the dredging as protection against flooding, shrub process becomes, simply, to dispose of habitat for heron nesting, low ridges for the dredged material in the least gull nesting, and some measure of environmentally damaging method. predator protection through its remoteness. 49 Oyster reef development on the WCV dredged material islands. This involves the construction of an intertidal complexity allows for the integration and platform from dredged material that can interaction. of these communities so that then be planted with cultch and seed the maximum ecological benefit can oysters to initiate the reef The accrue to the system. advantages of this type of habitat are that the oysters are not exposed to as Evaluation Process much predation and disease because they are not submerged as often. This In determining the viability of any of elevation also helps to increase growth these options for beneficial use, the net rates. If quantities of sand are available environmental impact of the proposal in the dredged material the appropriate must be considered. The value of the intertidal elevations can usually be option in terms of increased productivity, achieved during a single placement. If. improved habitat diversity, shoreline however, there is only a small amount of protection or economic benefit must be sand. it may take several dredging cycles weighed against the potential adverse and a number of years to produce a impacts of the proposal. In the final stable platform of sufficient elevation to analysis, the placement option needs to provide the foundation for a new reef. be the most advantageous, least Marsh creation can be achieved by damaging and most efficient. This either island formation or by the analysis involves value judgements by augmentation of an existing shoreline. It project managers and decisi 'on makers involves building the material to that should endeavor to maximize the elevations above mean tide level where public and private benefits while the appropriate grasses can be planted minimizing the public and private and survive. Intertidal wetlands of this detriments. It is hoped that this report type have considerable habitat value and provides the baseline information and a can also provide some measure of framework or process whereby these protection to eroding shorelines. types of decisions can be reached. The concept of island creation When planning a particular dredging inherently incorporates the production of project it will be helpful to follow a all of these habitats: intertidal mudflats, specific process to evaluate which of the intertidal oyster reefs, vegetated placement options are potentially viable wetlands. and sandy subaerial transition and which are not. Figure 6 provides a zones and beach/dune grasses because flow chart that follows a process whereby the lower elevation habitats must be placement options can be identified, developed in order to produce the higher evaluated, and selected for elevation ones (Figure 5). These concepts implementation. Each of the elements in also apply to situations where the the chart are described in some detail in dredged material may be placed along an the following paragraphs. existing shoreline for the development of The initial step in identifying additional habitat or shoreline potential placement options and protection.. It only remains to capitalize associated beneficial uses for dredged on the availability of these areas by material according to the process fostering the development of all of the outlined in Figure 6 is to characterize the potential habitats at a particular site by material to be dredged. Contaminated placing oyster cultch in the intertidal sediments would not be available for use areas and planting the vegetation in the marine environment, but this appropriate to the existing elevations. situation rarely occurs on the seaside of All of these community types and the Eastern Shore due to the pristine attributes contribute to the complexity of nature of the area. However, there are the environment around one of these several harbors and creeks (e.g. Oyster 50 HYPOTHETICAL INTERGRATED HABITAT DREDGED MATERIAL ISLAND Subaerial Sand/Shell-Sparse Vegetation High Marsh S. atterniflora + S. patens 4,1 Upper Limit of Low Marsh Spartina alterniflora Mean High Wat Mean Tide Leve Oyster Shell Cuitch Mudflats Mean Low Wate, Subtidal Bottom Sandy Material oale,4 10, VV AS' -0 -7 "nt, g, @;O'% Plan Vie 4114# Figure 5. Dredged material island. DDOCESS -IC BENEF 11, AL USEEVALNTIONRI F rDredgediValei-ial o WPM- --)-Upland Disposal )..Beneficial Use Options SAND SILT CLAY Oyster Reef Oyster Reef Bird Foraging Habitat Bird Nesting Habitat Bird Nesting Habitat Marsh Protection Beach Nourishment Bird Foraging Habitat Marsh Creation Marsh Creation Construction Material Beneficial Use Options Available I I Site Evaluation and Impact Assessment RESOURCE ASSESSMENT PHYSICAL PARAMETERS ENGINEERLVG Benthic/Marine Community Currents Site Capacity Beach Community Fetch Pumping Distance Marsh Community Bathymetry Geotechnical Properties Upland Commun ity Tide Range Costs PREFERRED OPTION 4 RE ENVIRONMENTAL / GULATORYREVIEW NO +- OPTION ACCEPTABLE I BENEFICIAL USE I MONITORING MAINTENANCE Figure 6. Beneficial use evaluation process. 5-2 Harbor, upper Parkers Creek) that are diversity of adjacent habitats also need to known to have undesirable deposits that be determined. should not be placed within the barrier A concurrent assessment should also island complex. Upland placement be made of the physical nature of the site would be the preferred alternative in this because this will dictate the stability of type of situation. the material once it is placed in the area. A list of beneficial use options For example, if fine-grained sediments appears below the grain size are placed in areas of high currents or determination that is distinguished by wave action, the likelihood that they will the dominant grain size of the dredged migrate out of the placement area would material (Figure 6). Each of the listed be high. The tide range and bathymetiy grain sizes (sand, silt, and clay) respond or elevations at the placement area are differently to the physical processes also important because they will help within the marine environment. As a dictate the capacity of the site as well as result, tide range, fetch. currents. and the amount of material needed to achieve bathymetry, may limit placement options a specific change. at a given location. The listed beneficial The final concurrent assessment uses below each grain size are not involves the engineering feasibility and definitive, but represent the types of project costs associated with each projects that we feel have the greatest potential beneficial use option. After all potential along the WCV. of the pertinent information described Once grain size has been determined above has been obtained and and a list of beneficial use options is interdependently evaluated, a preferred formulated, a series of concurrent placement site and beneficial use can be assessments need to be made of the selected based on the positive and living resources, physical parameters, negative aspects of that option. and engineering factors (Figure 6). The The preferred beneficial use option resource assessment should focus on the would then be introduced to the areas determined to be potential regulatory and environmental review placement sites as well as the adjacent process that is facilitated by the joint areas that could be indirectly impacted. permit application. If approved, the The previously-discussed benthic dredged material would be placed in a assessment method (B.A.M.) is manner consistent with the decision recommended for assessing the benthic rendered during the evaluation process community in and around potential depicted in Figure 6. Monitoring and placement areas located on subaqueous possible maintenance of a placement site bottoms. Other recommended resource may be necessary in order to sustain the assessments would include colonial intended beneficial use. waterbirds and shorebirds: evaluating The one aspect of the management public grounds/private leases and process for the beneficial use of dredged shellfish repletion sites, as well as other material that has been neglected the marine flora and fauna; and evaluating most is monitoring. This is an important potential impacts to adjacent marshes consideration in dynamic systems like and uplands. Seaside's barrier islands. The complex All of the potential community types - physical and biological processes that benthic, marsh, beach and upland, have define this type of system can often ecological values that will be affected. modify the value of once productive These impacts need to be quantified and placement areas through erosion or factored into the decision-making vegetative succession, for example. It is process. If a specific type of habitat is vital to the continued success of being proposed as a beneficial use, the beneficial use projects that monitoring be proximity of similar habitats and the incorporated into the construction plan 53 so that its success can be evaluated and would require several placement cycles to also to identify future measures that accumulate enough material to reach the might be necessary to maintain or even intertidal elevations necessary for oyster enhance the beneficial use of a particular reef development. This would also project. require long-term commitments from all three parties for the eventual success of Application of the Evaluation Process the project. Oyster Reef Development The Corps agreed to continue to place the dredged material at the same location A previous effort that produced the to allow the material to accumulate in Swash Bay Dredged Material Placement the highest profile possible and to make Area Management Plan is an example of every effort to provide cultch for the area how this type of process can be used to once a sufficient intertidal area had been optimize benefits. It was developed as a built. They also agreed to periodically joint effort by the Corps. the Virgi nia survey the placement area to document Marine Resources Commission, and the its behavior between placement episodes. Virginia Institute of Marine Science. It VMRC agreed not to lease the area for involved the development of a new oyster production as long as it is actively dredged material placement area using being used as a placement area by the beneficial uses because the old area had Corps. VIMS agreed to provide been leased for oyster production. monitoring with funding from the Corps. Swash Bay is one of the shallow bays The monitoring of the first placement along the WCV that is routinely dredged episode in 1993 has produced a by the Corps (See Plate 7). Since its substantial amount of information on the construction in 1957, the Corps has used recovery of the benthic community. the a combination of overboard, unconfined distribution of surface sediment ' types. marsh and diked marsh disposal sites for and the behavior of the sediment mound the dredged material. as it responds to the physical Oysters on the Seaside of the Eastern environment of Swash Bay. Shore grow almost exclusively in the Preliminary results from that study intertidal zone where they are less indicate that the intertidal area of the susceptible to diseases and predators. mound created from dredged materials The previous placement episodes had decreased in size from 1.93 acres to 0.41 created a large number of intertidal acres over a 14-month period [6]. This hummocks covered with shell that began type of geophysical information will prove to support populations of oysters. In useful when attempting to design and 1985, the entire placement area was build a dredged material placement site leased from the State for shellfish with specific goals in mind. Other cultivation (See Figure 2). As a results of the stud indicate a relatively Y consequence, it was no longer available short-term recovery of the benthic for dredged material placement. This community that was covered by the precipitated the need to develop a new dredged material [ 191. overboard placement site. The material from the next dredging Because of the potential for oyster cycle will be placed on top of the existing habitat creation demonstrated by the mound in the continuing effort to develop past practices, the Corps decided to a stable platform within the intertidal pursue oyster reef development in Swash zone that can serve as the foundation for Bay as a beneficial use. Unfortunately, an oyster reef. Once future placements the analysis of the sediments to be produce an intertidal area of roughly ten dredged indicated they were very fine- acres, the plan calls for the area to be grained (approximately 6% sand). This cultched to initiate the reef development. 54 0 IA Dredged Channel Dredged Channel w 00 r M o M 8 r+ m CL 0 m tA m LA 5 'A Z w m M 0- 0 0 0 Dredged Channel Dredged Channel VI :r 010 06 06 !LI 0 0 0 0 M \\, N At this point the placement area would associations, local government, and any be moved to a new area and the process other party that might have an interest in begun again. the seaside. Conducted on the shore, This process would be repeated as this initial step would allow groups the necessary to accommodate the volume of opportunity to review a given project and material that needed to be dredged. Once make recommendations on potential all of the area available for reef beneficial uses of the dredged material. development has been utilized, it VMRC would oversee these proceedings. becomes necessary to reuse the original Phase two of the evaluation process sites in the order they were developed. would involve a "Beneficial Use Existing oyster and shell resources would Development Team" comprised of be stripped from the reef and additional regulatory and advisory individuals that dredged material pumped into place. This would normally participate in the Norfolk additional material would help maintain District dredging management process. the required intertidal elevations by The team would follow the procedures offsetting the long-term consolidation outlined in this project in an effort to and erosion processes that would tend to identify the best possible use of dredged lower the elevation of the reef. After the materials. The comments and appropriate elevations and area have recommendations obtained during the been reestablished the reef would then be public review phase would be considered replanted with cultch and seed. A during this process. Final site selections schematic of this process is presented in for the placement of dredged material Figure 7. would then be subjected to the existing regulatory/environmental review process. Planning Process The recommended beneficial use evaluation process and dredged material placement site selection utilizes a team approach, Moreover, we recommend a two phase evaluation for each WCV dred ing project, as each project comes 9 't, up for review. The first phase or "public review" would invite non-regulatory groups such as working watermen, wildlife conservation organizations, recreational and commercial fishing 56 VH. SI'MM=7 subaerial sand and shell. This structural complexity and habitat diversity allow This project has centered on ecological processes to integrate and developing a beneficial use evaluation interact producing a habitat complex process whereby each project could be with an ecological value greater than that reviewed on a individual basis, its of the individual habitats. benefits and detriments assessed, The Benthic Assessment Method resource tradeoffs evaluated, and (BAM) selected to monitor the recovery of placement option(s) agreed upon through the benthic communities at the a consensus process. The beneficial use placement sites appeared to be capable of evaluation process has been presented in discerning differences among the sites at Chapter VI. It is the recommendation of each of the dredged channels. The this study that the described process, or assessment scores with one exception a similiar version. be adopted by the followed the same pattern where the Corps and collectively exercised by the highest values were found at the various regulatory, environmental, and undisturbed sites, the lowest values at advisory groups within Virginia. the most recently used sites, and As part of this process, future intermediate values for the older dredging and dredged material placement placement sites. The absolute values of projects that are designed to provide the BAM scores, however, varied specific beneficial uses should be considerably among the channels and formally designated as construction were not necessarily comparable. The projects. This would emphasize the scores indicated both short and long positive aspects of the beneficial use and term recovery at all of the channels connote the fact that something is being except one. The differences observed built. As such. it is imperative that the appeared, for the most part, to be design be properly engineered and the attributable to differences in sediment placement plan be specifically followed by grain size, benthic community type and the dredging contractor. Oversight by age of the placement area. members of the Beneficial Use Development Team would also be helpful to address unforseen contingencies that might arise during construction. The placement of dredged material can be specifically managed in a number of ways to produce important habitat features such as oyster reefs and colonial waterbird nesting habitat. Additionally, the construction of islands from dredged material placement, regardless of the intended purpose, can contribute to the ecology of the landscape in numerous ways due to the structure and -edge effect" it creates in the landscape. Other types of placement areas produce similar impacts to a greater or lesser extent. This structure fosters a diversity that would not otherwise occur at the site because any island is necessarily made up of a number of habitat components such as shallow subtidal bottom, intertidal flats, vegetated wetlands, and 57 Acknowledgment: Virtually all the documentation on dredging and material placement in the WCV is either U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reports or reports prepared for the Corps. In addition to providing documentation, the project has been specifically assisted by T. D. Woodward, Elizabeth Grey Waring, Roger Pruhs, and Ronald G. Vann of the Norfolk District. We wish to thank Rick Kellam, R.A- Parks, Sid Adams, Hank Badger, Benny Stagg, and Paul Rogers from VMRC for assistance in the field and computerized map development: Janet Nestlerode, Giancarlo Cicchetti, Beth Hinchey. and Randy Cutter for their assistance with the benthic sampling, Mark Luckenbach and Read Bonniwell for their exceptional logistical support: Robert Diaz for assistance in the adaptation of the BAM method which he initiated; Harold Burrell and Diana Taylor for the Figures and Plates, Diane Perry for word processing, Ruth Hershner for final report preparation and Wanda Cohen for her help with publishing this report. 58 References [8] Aquatic Reef Habitat Plan - Agreement Commitment Report, III Garbarino, S. D., R. N. Blama, M. C. Chesapeake Bay Program, Annapolis, Landin, and T. R. Patin, 1994, Maryland, October 1994. Environmental Restoration and Enhancement Using Dredged Material [9] Martin, Richard W., 1995, in Chesapeake Bay, Maryland, In: Proc. Opportunities in Aquaculture, Sea Dredging 1994, pp 384-395. Technology, Vol. 36, No. 9, pp 59-63. [21 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, [101 Orth, R.J., J.F. Nowak, G.F. 1976, Delaware Bay--Chesapeake Bay Anderson, D.J. Wilcox, J.R. Whiting, Waterway in Delaware, Maryland and and L.S. Nagey. 1995. Distribution of Virginia (Delmarva Waterway), General Submerged Aquatic Vegetation in the Design Memorandum Phase 1. Draft Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries and Environmental Impact Statement, Chincoteague Bay - 1994. Virginia Philadelphia District, Corps of Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Engineers. Point, VA 23062. 277 pp. [31 Century Engineering, Inc., 1983, [111 Norcross, Brenda L., 1988, Engineering Analysis to Provide Short- Development of Models Relating Term and Long-Term Maintenance Environmental Variations with Strength Dredging and Disposal Alternatives for of Recruitment of Virginia's Populations Several Shoals on the Upper Reaches of of Croaker, Summer Flounder and Spot, the Federal Navigation Project--WCV, Special Report. Towson, Maryland. 121 Norcross, B. L., and D. Hata, 1990, [41 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Seasonal Composition of Finfish in 1994, Data Compilation on Volumes Waters Behind the Virginia Barrier Dredged and Placement Sites (with Islands, Virginia Journal of Science, Vol. update by T.D. Woodward). Norfolk 4 1. pp 441-46 1. District. 1131 Powell, A. B., and F. J. Schwartz, [51 Sea Grant Marine Advisory Program, 1977, Distribution of Paralichthid 198 1, The Present and Potential Flounders (Bothidae: Paralichthys) in Productivity of the Baylor Grounds in North Carolina Estuaries, Chesapeake Virginia, Applied Marine Science and Science, Vol 18, pp 334-339. Ocean Engineering. Vol. 243. 1141 Norcross, B. L.. and David M. [61 Priest. Walter I., Christopher W. Wyansku, 1993, Interannual Variation in Frye, and Janet Nestlerode, 1995, Use the Recruitment Pattern and Abundance of Dredged Material For Oyster Habitat of Age-0 Summer Flounder, Paralichthys Creation in Coastal Virginia, In: Proc. dentatus, in Virginia Estuaries, Fishery Oyster Reef Habitat Restoration-A Bulletin, Vol. 92, pp 591-598. Synopsis and Synthesis of Approaches, April 23-26,1995, Williamsburg, VA. 1151 Swartz, Frank J.. 196 1, Fishes of Chincoteague Bay and Sinepuxent [71 Fishery Independent Standing Stock Bays, The American Midland Naturalist, Surveys of Oyster Populations in Vol. 65 (2). pp 384-408. Virginia, Chesapeake Bay Stock Assessment Committee. Annapolis, Maryland, October 1995. 59 161 Kimmel, Joseph J., 1973, Food 1241 Diaz, R.J. and A. Maxemchuck- and Feeding of Fishes from Magothy Daly, in prep. Benthic Assessment Bay, Virginia, M.S. Thesis, Old Method: A Rapid Approach to Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia. Environmental Impact Assessment. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, 1171 Hoese, H. Dickson, 1962, Sharks Gloucester Point, VA. and Rays of Virginia's Seaside Bays, Chesapeake Science, Vol 3., No. 3. pp [251 Richards, C.E. and M. Castagna. 166-172. 1970. Marine Fishes of Virginia's Eastern Shore (Inlet and Marsh, Seaside [181 Stem, E. M. and W. B. Stickley, Waters). Chesapeake Science, Vol. 11, 1978, Effects of Turbidity and No. 4, pp 235-248. Suspended Material in Aquatic Environments: Literature Review. Technical Report D-78-2 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 119] Durand, J. B. and J. Gabry, 1981, Overboard Disposal of Dredge Material, Rutgers University, Fourth Annual Report prepared for NJDEP. [201 Schubel, J. R., A. H. Auld, and G. M. Schmidt, 1974, Effects of Suspended Sediment on the Development and Hatching Success of Yellow Perch and Striped Bass Eggs. Ches. Bay Institute Special Report No. 35. [2 1 ] Masters, Meryl A., 1982, The Effects of Dredge Material (Suspended Solid Phase) on the Hatching Success of Spot Eggs, M.S. Thesis, Old Dominion University. Norfolk, Virginia. (221 Watts, Bryan D., 1994. Distribution of Colonial Waterbirds on the Eastern Shore of Virginia: Implications For Beneficial Uses of Dredge Material. Special Report, Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Richmond, Virginia. [23] Maurer, D., R.T. Keck, J.C. Tinsman, and W.A. Leathem, 1982. Vertical Migration and Mortality of Benthos in Dredged Material: Part III- Polychaeta. Marine Environmental Research, Vol 6, pp 49-68. 66 I I I APPENDIX A I Channel Sediment Grain Size Composition I I I I I I I I I I I I I .4 Appendix A - Page 1 Channel sediment composition from the WCV. Channel Sample % Gravel % Sand % Slit % Clay Wise Point WCV 2 0.2% 83.6% 5.0% 11.2% WCV 4 0.8% 93.4% 1.5% 4.3% WCV 6 0.0% 94.7% 0.1% 5.2% WCV 8 2.0% 92.7% 0.3% 5.0% wCV 10 2.7% 92.1% 0.5% 4.7% WCV 12 0.0% 92.9% 1.7% 5.4% WCV 14 0.4% 95.4% 0.2% 4.0% WCV 16 0.0% 83.7% 7.5% 8.8% WCV 18 3.3% 91.9% 0.4% 4.4% WCV 20 1.4% 69.2% 13.0% 16.4% WCV 22 1.5% 46.1% 31.3% 21.1% WCV 24 0.2% 42.6% 30.1% 27.1% WCV 26 0.0% 23.9% 45.2% 30.9% Magothy Bay WCV 28 0.0% 58.3% 24.2% 17.5% WCV 30 0.2% 53.8% 28.0% 18.0% WCV 32 0.1% 77.0% 11.7% 11.2% WCV 34 0.0% 63.4% 22.3% 14.3% WCV 36 0.0% 3.4% 54.5% 42.1% WCV 38 0.1% 11.6% 50.6% 37.7% WCV 40 0.1% 7.4% 51.1% 41.4% Eckichy Marsh WCV 42 0.0% 50.8% 28.8% 20.4% WCV 44 0.0% 69.5% 17.5% 13.0% WCV 46 0.0% 64.4%. 22.6% 13.0% NVCV 48 0.0% 50.5% 34.9% 14.6% WCV 50 0.0% 56.9% 31.6% 11.5% WCV 52 0.0% 56.9% 26.1% 17.0% WCV 54 0.0% 41.6% 40.9% 17.5% WCV 56 0.0% 66.6% 19.8% 13.6% Gull Marsh WCV 58 0.0% 40.4% 37.5% 22.1% WCV 60 0.0% 76.5% 12.4% 11.1% WCV 62 0.0% 32.3% 43.7% 24.0% WCV 64 0.0% 69.9% 19.0% 11.1% WCV 66 0.0% 43.1% 36.2% 20.7% WCV 68 0.0% 60.4% 26.4% 13.2% WCV 70 0.0% 43.2% 33.5% 23.3% North Channel WCV 72 0.0% 32.5% 42.6% 24.9% WCV 74 0.2% 33.3% 40.1% 26.4% WCV 76 0.1% 44.1% 34.2% 21.6% WCV 78 0.0% 40.8% 35.5% 23.7% WCV 80 0.0% 46.6% 31.7% 21.7% WCV 82 0.0% 60.7% 25.0% 14.3% Appendix A - Page 2 Channel Sample % Gravel % Sand % Silt % Clay Sloop Channel WCV 84 0.0% 67.0% 21.2% 11.8% WCV 85 0.0% 48.0% 33.6% 18.4% WCV 86 0.1% 51.6% 31.4% 16.9% WCV 87 0.0% 45.1% 36.7% 18.2% WCV 88 0.0% 20.6% 46.1% 33.3% WCV 89 0.0% 13.8% 55.5% 30.7% WCV 90 0.0% 10.2% 54.5% 35.3% WCV 91 0.0% 10.8% 55.6% 33.6% WCV 92 0.0% 19.9% 50.5% 29.6% White Trout Ck WCV 114 0.0% 27.9% 43.8% 28.3% WCV 115 0.0% 4.0% 52.9% 43.1% WCV 116 0.0% 4.9% 63.2% 31.9% WCV 117 0.0% 9.4% 62.6% 28.0% Swash Bay WCV 118 0.0% 3.3% 57.3% 39.4% WCV 119 0.0% 7.5% 59.4% 33.1% WCV 120 0.0% 3.6% 53.8% 42.6% WCV 121 0.0% 4.6% 56.5% 38.9% WCV 122 0.0% 9.4% 50.2% 40.4% Bradford Bay WCV 123 0.0% 33.9% 40.6% 25.5% WCV 124 0.0% 11.7% 56.6% 31.7% WCV 125 0.0% 3.0% 57.4% 39.6% WCV 126 1.2% 32.9% 40.9% 25.0% WCV 127 0.0% 7.3% 55.7% 37.0% Burtons Bay WCV 128 0.0% 3.4% 51.5% 45.1% WCV 129 0.0% 7.8% 56.6% 35.6% WCV 130 0.0% 2.1% 56.3% 41.6% WCV 131 0.0% 0.5% 50.0% 49.5% WCV 132 0.0% 4.2% 53.1% 42.7% WCV 133 0.0% 8.9% 54.7% 36.4% WCV 134 6.9% 12.6% 53.6% 26.9% WCV 135 0.0% 31.4% 40.5% 28.1% Teagles Ditch WCV 136 0.0% 14.9% 54.0% 31.1% Cedar Island Bay WCV 137 0.9% 37.3% 31.4% 30.4% Metomkin Bay WCV 138 0.6% 93.4% 3.0% 3.0% WCV 139 0.0% 34.8% 39.7% 25.5% WCV 140 0.0% 19.3% 47.0% 33.7% WCV 141 0.0% 1.2% 46.3% 52.5% WCV 142 0.0% 1.6% 50.1% 48.3% WCV 143 0.0% 15.2% 56.8% 28.0% WCV 144 0.0% 88.5% 9.3% 2.2% WCV 145 0.0% 80.3% 11.3% 8.4% Appendix A - Page 3 Channel Sample % Gravel % Sand % Silt % Clay Kegotank Bay WCV 146 0.0% 93.4% 3.3% 3.3% WCV 147 0.0%, 72.8% 16.7% 10.5% WCV 148 0.5% 65.0% 21.9% 12.6% WCV 149 8.1% 80.4% 5.2% 6.3% Northam Narrows WCV 150 0.0% 95.4% 2.1% 2.5% WCV 151 1.3% 94.8% 1.3% 2.6% WCV 152 5.3% 88.3% 2.4% 4.0% WCV 153 0.2% 11.2% 52.0% 36.6% WCV 154 0.0% 1.2% 52.5% 46.3% WCV 155 0.0% 2.7% 46.4% 50.9% Bogues Bay WCV 156 2.4% 85.8% 5.9% 5.9% WCV 157 0.0% 57.8% 23.8% 18.4% WCV 158 0.0% 50.6% 25.5% 23.9% Lewis Creek WCV 159 0.0% 84.4% 6.8% 8.8% WCV 160 0.2% 57.0% 21.9% 20.9% WCV 161 0.0% 5.6% 52.2% 42.2% WCV 162 0.0% 16.8% 46.7% 36.5% I I APPENDIX B I Benthic Assessment Method (B. A. M.) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I @4 Benthic Assessment Method (BAM) Rapid bioassessment needs to be: 1. Reliable at telling impact from non-impact 2. Able to identify impacts from the same disturbance in different communities 3. Affordable, minimize the need for special equipment and taxonomic expertise 4. Rapid return of data and answer 5. Understandable by non-expert Approach to calibration of BAM: 1. Select known impacted sites 2. Select natural undisturbed areas as reference points 3. Establish range of variability in time and space 4. Determine influence of salinity, sediment. and other special environmental conditions that could modify the method 5. Set maximum value for the index in different habitats The Benthic Assessment Method: 1. Developed for use in soft bottom estuarine habitats 2. Is a stepped approach with three levels: 1. Evaluation 2. Identification 3. Biomass determination 3. Is based on the premise that healthy areas contain well developed and diversely-functioning communities 4. Disturbed areas have communities with altered functions The BAM needs the following data: 1. Benthic samples, anywhere frorn 0.02 to 1.0 m2 2. Sampler can be a diver core, box core, or grab with an opening top that can be SUb-cored 3. Depth of sample needs to be about 15 cm; sample needs to be sectioned . into a 0-5 cin layer and a >5 em layer 4. Sieve size should be 0.5 mm, standard in estuarine work, for the 0-5 cm layer; A 1.0 mm. sieve can be used for the >5 cm layer 5. Replicate samples are needed at a site to assess the average condition. Application of the Benthic Assessment Procedure Phase I - BAM - Evaluation Sieve, Look, and Score: Is the fauna in the >5 cm section? yes - 1 no - 0 Is fauna in the >5 cm section large? yes - 1 no - 0 (>2 cm long) Phase 11 - BAM - Identification From the same samples, identify to major group and determine functional life style. If present, then score: Only surface dwellers 0 Small burrowers 1 long-lived large fauna 2 Phase III - BAM - Biomass determination From the same samples determine the biomass of each layer. 0-5 cm layer + >5 cm layer = 100% of biomass Score percentage of biomass in the >5 cm layer as: 0-10% 0 10-20% 1 20-50% 2 50-80% 3 80-100% 4 Add scores from all three phases to get BAM assessment value. For Virginia estuaries the operational ran-se of scores can be from 0 to 8. zn In general, scores indicate: 0-1 Poor habitat, seriously disturbed 2-3 Moderately disturbed or stressed habitat 4-5 Slightly disturbed to moderately good habitat 6-8 Good habitat Interpretation needs to be based on the possible range of BAM conditions within the system being studied. MAGOTHY BAY B.A.M. DATA - 4 MAY 1995 Site Core Fauna Is fauna -[-Fauna Section Total C"o Total ornments: section present in in >5 cm life stule biomass Biomass biomass BAM I I >5cm? h 1(34) fie) in >5 cm Score* New 0 - 5 cm. yes (1) no (0) small 0.911 0.951 4.2% (2) sfc biomass Placement burrowers (0) does not Area include Nassarius >5 cm 0.040 (9.043g with 6 Nassarius) 0 - 5 cm no (0) small 0.293 0.293 0% (1) burrowers (0) (1) >5 cm 0.000 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small top sectio n burrowers of sample (1) missing >5 cm 0.246 Undisturbed 0 - 5 cm, yes (1) no (0) small 2.385 4.131 42.3% (4) Area burTowers (2) >5 cm 1.746 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small 0.701 bottom burrowers section of sample missinc, >5 cm 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small top section burrowers of sample (1) missing >5 cm 0.227 Old 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small 0.530 2.452 78.417v (5) sfc biomass Placement burrowers (3) does not Area include Nassarius >5 cm 1.922 (3.707g with 2 Nassarius) 0 - 5 eni yes (1) no (0) smill top section burrowers of sample (1) missing >5 cm 1.878 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small 0.195 0.373 47.7% (5) burrowers (3) >5 cm 0.178 Total BANI score interpretation: 0 - I Poor habitat. seriously disturbed 2 - 3 Moderatelv disturbed or stressed habitat 4 - 5 Slizhtlv disturbed to moderaLeiv disturbed habitat 6 - 8 Good habitat SWASH BAY B.A.M. RESULTS - JUNE 1994 Core is fauna Is fauna Fauna Section Total % Total Site Replicate Section present in >5cm lifestyle biomass biomass biom ass BAM Comments: in>5cm? laree? I (P) (V) in >5 cm score New 1 0 - 5 cm. yes (1) yes (1) small 1.3330 2.0137 34% (S) burrowm Placement > 5 cm (1) 0.6807 (2) Area 2 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long-lived 0.5582 1.9984 72% M large Nereis large fauna > 5 cm (2) 1.4402 3 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) small 0,5613 1.0661 47r/,. (S) burrowers > 5 cm (1) 0.50,48 (2) Undisturbed 1 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long-lived 0.4827 7.0717 93% large Nereis large fauna Area > 5 cm (2) 6.5890 (4) 2 0-5cm yes (1) yes (1) IQ g-lived 0.6338 3.9136 831/r. (8) large Nereis larigle fauna > 5 cm, (2) 3.2798 (4) 3 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) t'Sniall 0.2770 2.1408 87 rk M UMI%*"S > 5 cm (1) 1.8638 (4) Old 1 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) bsmall 0.6379 4.2831 85% M Placement > 5 cm 1 (1) 3.6452 (4) 1 Area 2 0 - 5 c m yes (1) yes (1) Iong-lived 10.5559 14.7868 29@i (6) laree Nereis. large fauna > 5 cm (2) 4.2309 (2) holothuroidea lone-lived 0.427 C/C. (8) lar-e Nereis 3 13.1988 97 3 0 - 5 cm es (1) yes (1) [urge fuuna .- > 5 cm (2) 12.7715 (4) small J Mercenaria Total BAM score interpretation: 0- 1 Poor habitat. seriously disturbed 2 - 3 I'vloderatelv disturbed or stressed habitat 4 - 5 Sli2htly disturbed to moderately disturbed habitat 6- 8 Good habitat CHINCOTEAGUE B.A.M. DATA - 18 July 1995 otal Total i io om ma FBass biomass BAM Site Core PFra n a fauna F;auna ecmt n ornments: u Is S io s , ;, cm li io ss section e e t in I in -5 nTlfc stule I b a (g) 1 >5cm? laraL? in >5 cm, Score* Undisturbed 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 0.314 3.647 91.4% (8) small Area lived (2) burrowers in sfc; large >5 cm. 3.333 (4) Nereis and Glycera in bottom 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 0.183 2.85 93.6% (8) small lived (2) burrowers in sfc; large >5 cm 2.667 (4) Nereis and Glycera in bottom 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 0.161 3.11 94.8% (8) small lived (2) burrowers in sfc;. large >5 cm 2.949 (4) Nereis and Glycera in bottom New 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small 0.126 0.33 47.6% (4) Placement burrowers Area >5 cm (1) 0.157 (2) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small 0.256 0.356 34.6% (4) burrowers >5 cm (1) 0.123 (2) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small 0.266 0.446 35.4% (4) burrowers >5 cm (1) 0.158 (2) Old 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small 0.132 0.629 79.0% (5) sfc biomass Placement burrowers does not Area include Nassarius >5 cm 0.497 (3) (7.126- with I Nassarius) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small 0.231 0.886 711.9% (5) sfc biomass burrowers does not include 6 Nassarius >5 cni 0.655 (1) (12.2662 with Nassarius) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) small 0.255 0.621 58.9 % (5) sfc biomass burrowers does not include 5 Nassarius >5 cm 0.366 (3) (10.682g with I Nassariusd Total BAM score interpretation: 0- 1 Poor habitat. seriously disturbed 2 - 3 Moderately disturbed or stressed habitat 4- 5 Sliahtlv di sturbed to moderatelv disturbed habitat 6-8 Good habitat RAMSHORN B.A.M. DATA - 17 July 1995 Site Core Fauna fauna Fauna Section Total % Total ornments: section present in Ins >5 cm life stule biomass Biomass biomass BAM I I >5cm? (g) (g) in >5 cm Score* Site # 1 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 1.532 3.749 59% (7) Inshore East lived (2) Side of Marsh >5 cm 2.217 (3) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 0.069 2-209 97% (8) >5 cm lived (2) 2-140 (4) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 0.006 1,265 9 9 C/" (8) >5 cm lived (2) 1.259 (4) Site #2 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) sm burr 0.167 0.934 82% (6) Offshore East Side of Marsh >5 cm 0.767 (4) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 0.018 2.347 99% (8) lived 02 >5 cm 2.329 (4) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) sm burr 0.063 0.512 88% (6) (1) >5 cm 0.449 (4) Site # 3 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 3.828 7.485 49% (6) Channel lived (2) Station Near Day Marker >5 cm 3.657 (2) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) sm burr 0,198 1.384 86% (6) >5 cm 1.186 (4) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) no (0) sm burr 1.359 1.452 6% (2) >5 cm 0.093 (0) Site # 4 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 0.306 1.71 82% (8) Westside lived (2) of Marsh >5 cm 1.404 (4) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) long 0.272 1.826 85% (8) >5 cm lived (2) 1.554 (4) 0 - 5 cm yes (1) yes (1) sm burr 1.849 2.663 31% (5) >5 CM 0.814 (1) Total BAIM score interpretation: 0 - I Poor habitat, seriously disturbed 2 - 3 Moderateiv disturbed or stressed habitat 4 - 5 Sliahtly disturbed to moderately disturbed habitat 6 - 8 Good habitat I I APPENDIX C I VMRC Oyster Lease Ground Maps I I .1 I I I I I I I .1 I I I i 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . RACCOON ISLAND - - - - - - - - - - - - RACCOON CAEEK ------ 12-02-01 - ------ WIN ISLAND ISLAND NAY LONG Fl. 11-11 X-m-H ----- 12-04-00 CHANNEL P.O. 22 IV$ --l x:: P.O. 23 IM WIN.- SMITH ISLAND INLET ,,_02-02 ... FISHEIMAN INLET IS-63-09 4 ATLANTIC OCEAN s 0 . N, 12. 0 00 COMMONVEALIH OF VI LW INE RESOURCES C E\l BU17H ISLAND I FI*VMAw 3 ISLAND ADAMS ISLAND "OR.THMP7oN Co. DI 40 ti WIN I $LAND ATLANTIC OCEAN 12_ 00-00 COLWONWEALTH 0 UARINE RESOURCES SM17" 15 Mj% I Mm NOR7KAMP7ON Co. A 05-2760 T-1 COMMONWEALTH OF VIROINIA a MARINE RESOURCES COMMIIIISION SMITH ISLAND SAY P.O. 40 (311 11 1 P.10 cum --v 20Q MAOOTHY BAY I XAND NORTHAMP70N CO. DIST. 25 NOTE@ ALL COORDINATED PIS IN C:\CAD\CAT6\Z85274QF. % SOME C40RD. PTS ALSO IN Cl\CAD\CAT&\JOO274OF, to 1311 + ,% .6. 20 % -r MAG01HY SAY (all 12-03-01 P.O. 41 MILI CREEK 2 03.03 5K I DMOIRE I$LANO SMITH ISLAND BAY 12-04-00 BE LONO PIT. CHAW"HIEL coo SL P.O. (111). @@2740 P.O. 40 (311 HOLE llis k"SIA CA. 17 12-21-00 12 R. P.O. 45 P.O. 42 1311 + P.S. 44 1311 SMITH ISLAND P.O. 43 1313 ATLANTIC OCEAN 12-00-00 SMITH ISLAND lAY P.O. 40 1411 COMMONWEALTH MARINE RESOURCE SMITH ISL P.O. 2; (31) - .. .11, tz NORTHAMPTON C ofto WWI" SQCKWIN W= I 11LAND ISLAND V bovn4 jAY 23 P.O. 37 1301 P.O. 47 13011 A. -- N'Iv= .IOE7KNI*ff 24 1 @'-" 13AL 04LNKL P.O. 40 130) MINIK ISLAND gig CAEEK MAAS" 12-21-00 INVU: 1`0773@ CA 9 m 0110111N. AY 12-13 EOGNOO CA, CO"NWEALYN OF VIROINIA WARIME RESOURCES COMM16610H 3OU7W DAY SHIP 6140AL 04ANNEL so Is (Sol HOR7KALAPTON Co. DIST. 25 All. P.O. 39 1301 If WIN 19LAW 14 THOM CA. 3 15 -270D COVE rQI P.O. 21 t3l I MACH MARSH MOCKHOAN ISLAND 0 0 10 1311 CASIN DREDGED AREA � COVE UAWTW $A 12-01-01 COML40NWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MARINE REWURCU COWAMSION MAG07HY SAY W*-V MOCKHORN MAND KAE 14- SMIIN ISLAND W P.O. to 411) 1@ HoR.'KAmplom CO. DtST. 25 P -. 7T .0. 40 31 -2740 = m = M 'SN I I 8 IN L AKREL @?A os 17 M. M f.G. 4 ISO? U%lLf ISLAM INK CA. + ATLANTIC MEAN .... 12-00-00 COMMONWEALTH MARINE RESOVRCE SHIP SHOAL MYRYLE I --AZ Am NOR714AMP70@N CO. MOCKNORN SAY 1 MOCKWIDAN CH&NNEL 12-01-05 F.G. 16 430) Moll" SCO17 co", THE MAXRO" 12-03-04 + MOCKHDRM ISLAND lpAwTw SAM 12-03-01 COMMONWEALTH OF VIROINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION MOCKHORN OAY MA007HY DAY NORTHAAMPTON CO. DIST. 25 'Ar- COMIAONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA @IJIARIKE RESOURCES COMMISSION SOUTH OAY -.E I.W NORTHAMPTON Co. DIST. 2S MOCK"DA" ISLAND cutritl rNiM. RED DRUM DR as 1601 P.O. 36 130) 11@11 lAY 94 (SO) 12-14-00 /JOE WEST 37 P.O. 37 1301 T", ISLAND A-01 % :"@ m P.O. 47 (30) "0-2760 P.O. 30 (30) SOUTH JAY % .0, RED DRUM Z.G. It (lot DRAIN NEW INLET 12- 4-02 49 32 34 GODWIN ISLAND 31 12-14-01 &ILA IC OCEAN SHIP 300AL ISLAND 30 00.00 P.S. 34 1301 290 NMI" ISLAND 7 COLMONVEAL MARINE RE30 HE SHIP 6 0'"it SHOAL VAAHHEL 12-14. 03 -2700 NORT!"T'01, 8ANP $110 NI Jkly RAY 51OCK112-0 CO11 IAY OY57ER Uit 12-17-00 P.O. 17 1501 OYsTEA CD 40 low moc 13 qm 39, u F.0 16 (;0) MOCAO"m It- 05-0 POINT OF 11OCK CHANNEL COMUDNWEALTH OF VIROINIA MARINE REOOURCES COMAISF)iON VOCKWA SAY MOCKHORN BAY 12-0V 06 OYSTER NORT14AMPTON CO. D187. 25 1 11 @45-2740 .171 COAS SAY 0.6. 24 % st MAN AND SOY 440 MARSH so + + lb, 40 RVNNING CKANKL P.O. 27 ISO) 52 COMMONWEALTH OF VIROIHIA NEW MARSH MARINE RESOURCES COMMI "ION SOUTH BAY 43 NEW MARSH Z" 42 NORTHAMPTON CO. DI'ST, 25 MOC"AN ISLAND t- 10WH SAY 12-14-00 P.O. 35 ISO$ .Igo Vol) SAY P.O. 25 1301 53 P.O. 24 130) 54 WRECK IPLAND .,Jul N. 33 ATLANTIC OCEAN 12_09.00 P.O. 26 t301 Ss $6 COMMONWEALTH MARINE RESOURC SOUTH so =V WRECK SOUTH SAY 12-14-00 P.O. 2 1 NORZAMPTON C %-2700 TAYLOR CREEK RAMIRO" IAY 13-05-00 P.O. 14 129 301 P.O. 15 430) CHANIIL BOACK NIERRY IAY ob ELKINS MARSH COMMDNWEALTH OF VIROINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION RAMOHORH BAY 47 BROCKENDERRY DAY 1110190 WIM L,.'IIL WRINAMP70N CO. DIST, 25 P.O. 17 01 360-2140 f.b. 14 1. A 301 ECKICHY MARSH F.S. 13 1301 CROW #AV CEDAR CREEK IS_Os_Oz 12-20-00 ECKICHY FLA72 -Tar'.. Wo SAY ELKINS MAAS" 12-17-00 COCKLE P%o CA. 12-1a 46 COLSONWEAL7H OF VIR MARINE RESOURCES Cohl COBB BAY Al. CEDAR CREEK SAM SHOAL CHIMINEL MORTHMPTON CO. D W276D :Qi4 IMM = x-n IIA 110 EASTEA 6 6, MAIIIIN No 67 P.O. Is (30) cob lot 1,1111loy FLATS Coll 1AY U-17-09 LOON CH&NNE 60 CARVKLL 110LE ATLANTIC OCEAN Ir-00-00 3ANC, 3NOAL INLET C044DNWEALTH OF V MARINE RESOURCES CO WRECK COBB BAY IIILAND 119= --v %.,%% $AND SHOAL IN 'Dior 'MR.TH"PTON Co. 0 3 0-2760 COll 43LAND ATLANTIC OCEAN 12-00-00 COLIWONWEALTH OF MARINE RESOURCES C COBB ISLAN rim 2-1.1 :441a NOR-THAMP70H CO. Hai P. 0. EAOTVILLE INDIAKTOWK CIEEK 13- OS-03 P.O. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION INDIAUTOWN NECK RAUBMRH SAY =BwA =t Wk% INDIANTOWN CREEK EMNORTRUPTON CO. DIST. 25 t 9@'2740 4100 MIND COMMONWEALTH OF MARINE RESOURCES 105 RAUSHORN a SPIDERCRAB OU7LET BA mirm W., r_m 3UNDAY Plic" NORTHAMP'TON CO. D 104 102 101 OknLE7 JA P.O. 14 (M 13-rI00Y ELKINS MAA$H RAMSHOIN SAY P.O. 13 1201 d ot, 97 + + N 06 III IDEACAAA SAY 13-01-00 95 ECKICHY 9a MAAsm :M. VAr 375-2760 all@ 111111milm llw@m@ mm mm im COMMONWEAL7N OF MARINE RESOURCES H" ISLAND OUILE7 8 r V;at x A r- NORTK`AMP7ON CO. 72 PARCHASY T IkW 11A 74 + MOISISLAW SAY MUSH -2$-00 76 77 OVI E IIA .00 -7. P.O. + 4 AIL OR .4.-Q 94 OA lQ-210 v L117LE EASIER 81 so UARSH N. 12 110 EASIER U&ISH Coca SAY i 03 375-2790 U11401mimm@-mmmmm moo N09 ISLAND NORTH CHANINIEL CAEA7 MACHIPONGO INLET 13-02-00 HOO I!LAHP 6AY 1, 23-00 lob ATLANTIC OCIAN 15-00-00 107 COO$ ISLAND COMIAONWEALTH 0 MARINE RE30URCES GREAT MACH IP HOG 16LAN 7. .'s NORTHAMPTON CO. OR ICK HOLM Wit CA3TLE 61 DOE CREEK IS- 1-00 120 + bmAT FIONO MAA114 + 1;-07-00 ISLAND c*" I INI; HARSH SOMEE CREEK I ar PONELLI CA. M lor SOXIKEE THE OUTLET P.O. Is 4291 OUT ET lAY M21-00 o"SHORN BAY COMMONWEALTH OF HOLT ti-05-00 MARINE REGOURCES 111110101" 1011n OUTLET B WEBB6 ISL P.O. 14 420) 110 IORZP7'0@14 Co. milml so Mae M M M m m MM m M 0. 3 1291 SHORT PROMS W&R$H 120 13-07-00 Ulht-l 24 + 122 121 THE PEEPS AND HOG I!L #AY 1, 29-00 OUT El lAY 113 Im 9ML MARSH CHUMEL P.D. 13 1") 114 lit NOTE: 3.P. 144 NOT mA COMMONWEALM OF MAR INE RESOURCES WAL WAISH 1400 ISLAND 314ORT PRONG 117 3" 1 tin NORTHAMPTON CO. 390-2780 HOD ISLAND ATLANTIC OCEAN 13-00-00 ROGM ISLAND WQ I AV ",!LAM 9 29-00 COMMONWEALTH OF MARINE RE5OURCE3 MG ISL&K XXII ROOM 13L rMs I-$. 1 1 fm NlOR7K-&M-lP-7-0-H CO. @-9-0-28GO Ho WAIDNIFILLE PHILLItS CREEK 13-1 01 THE kUfADCK$ REP lAJ4K CREEK 13.10-00 RED IANK x FOOLIND POINT $RICK NOUVE NECK we CA37LE KIbW COL. 13-17-00 Je P COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCES COWAISSION SHORT PRONG MARSH RED BA14K CREEK PHILLIPS CREEK 3MAI PRO" MASH 13-07-00 M33 I- NOR7HAMP7ON Co. 1115T, 2s 405-2750 OREAl UACHIPONOO !ny .1.0.1 -N.T CHANNEL V HDO ISLAND DAY P.O. 3 (29) 13.23-00 NOTE: S.P.**S 143 A 145 HOT MAPPED O&EAT COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA M&CHIFON90 MARINE RESOURCES CONM13$ION CHANNEL POO ISLAND BAY wr_ GREAT MACHIPONGO CHAN. 7-@ NORTHAMPTON CO. DIST. 25 4 - L730 will m m MONTH INLET 14-01-00 EOOINO MUSH 141 t4 143 140 ".AV lap wom!"NARROWS 13 -00 144 :J:f. *krvx + P.O. 1 (20-29) NO I!LAND SAY 23-00 STAKE -ISO P.O. 2 129$ .. . .. ...... I'm OIL 130 AL 134 An RION 3NO UARSH ISIF AUR .Sir 142 CONMONWEALIN OF V IROINI U. UARINE RESOURC :ommlss mwq E3 C W* ISU SAY NORTH INLET UV HODGES NARRM POINT NORTKUIPTON CO. 61. 25 & ACCCUACK CO, AIL -AOS-2800 NN ISLAND AILAN11C OCEAN 145 1&-90-90 COWAONWEALTH OF V MARINE RESOURCES C ATLANT:C OCE "DO KAND NORTHAMPTON CO. V, 1111 foul I111N 111110 INS m 1110 111111 11110 1111111 111110 m IN WA CILEEk P.O. 6110"OVILLE K"IAWADOX COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION t NZISET +--.- ^1-1EE11 RED,BANK CREEK MACH PONOO RIVER mm wa. V-= 995-El Z 7. "A !.3 1"1 NORTHAMPTON CO. DIST. Z5 I[ I! lito CALIK I I Imoo 1 420-2760 till 1111 liimii m m UP W" NECK COMMONWEAL TH OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION 1400 ISLAND DAY MACH IpoNGO R IVER =A-A --W, mxr_ UPSHUR NECK MACHIPONOO RIVER WRTVI'PTON CO. DIST. 25 & 29 ACCOMACK Co. 1107EI P. 146 Nor MAPPED OREENS CREEK P.O. 06 128-291 m. 0-23-00 P.O. 67 (20) M04TH CHANNEL 420-27BO 11111 Imp =I M M M M f 001DENS'FAKE BAY 164 14-01-0$ 167 KOOP CHANNEL SANDY 14-01-12 ISLAND 165 SANDY IS ,@AND too CD 03-02 161 40 P.O. 65 128) J41 SANDY ISLAND BAY ILACOKVrK 162 14-03-01 C a- + 160 157 65 1251 BIG C" IS, P.O. (28-291 $55 film INLE 4:111 "Y POLE IAAA3H ISO 156 14-01-14 152 COMMONWEALTH OF VIROINIA + + MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION rHE STAACOHYS SANDY ISLAND SAY ISHO TER CHAN.) CHIMNEY POLE MARSH "-Xr. IS$ DNA I X", I N 1ORl1AMP7'0"N CO. DIST. 25 20 ACCOMACK CO. 1400 AND BAY 13-23-00 #UAL IC OAOUND 148 1281 P.O. 1 (26-20-1 0147 IAR SAY ISLAND NEVIEL ISLAND THE WASH 14-01 -P& $11 El folul AILA)n 11 OtEAN 14-00-00 SANDY IS 4@&Nb V.R&WIEL 03-02 QUINDY INLET MAIN INLET 14-01-00 COMMOWEALIN OF MARINE RESOURCES C SANDY ISLAND C NOUN INI. Noo ISLAM U-"%L OUINBY INL HORYNAMPTON CO. DIS ACCOMACK CO. L I COMMONWEALTH OF VIROINIA P.O. oll (281 MARINE RESOVRCES COMMISSION MACHIPONOO RIVER PARIINO CREEK ACC-0MA,C-KI CO. 29 NORTHAMPTON CO. SELL NECK ) t.o. A-xrl- 01, P.O. P.O. 6 WILLIS VdAltF P.O. I- MACIPON00 RIVER 7 4-01-01 P.O. 64 1 t.O. v P.O. A-12 CKUT 21 VISHLIN P.9. 10 14 .01 P.O. 11 .0. 12 PARTING COEEK UPINIA NE4:K ot-3 -5- 2 7 6 0 $HUR DAY I 'IfEl"'EL &L. BAY 11ADFOAD ISL. CHAN. 14-07-17 76= P.O. 61 128) LI7YLE 111.99t ACCOMACK CO. 0;6,7 29 .44'. CVLANNEL COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION UP910A BAY MAJOR HOLE SAY 14-01-07 177 W411E PERCH COVE 17$- REVEL,,!ILAW SAY I of-or P.O P.O. 02 174 P.O. al 121 P.O. so its) P.O. $9 Its) %172 63 1261 Ira) SANDY ISLAND P.O. 64 6201 " @29 N IA "a I ON 101DENSTAKE SAY SANDY 13 4@AMD CRANNEL REVEL bLOOt 03-02 "L 14-01-05 04RMNEL 14. 14-01-62 1 1211, '4 5-2000 OVAIN #AV 14-05-03 f.o. 35 126) P.O. 124? OAAAAMORE 11LAND $WA164 REVEL I KAND AILAMIC OCEAN 14. 90 COWM07EALIN OF VIROI MAR I NE E60URCES COMMIS IWAM SAY 714C SWAtH r-"m I ACCOMACK CO. DIST. -2420 i - - QUINSY plow f.a. f6a CAT3 It I DGE 11W MDAELAND MW MACH:4poNeo RIVER I 01-01 PA. t2ft COMMONWALIH OF VIROINIA UARINE RESOURCES COUMISSION MArHIPOH00 RIVER FARI I NO CAEEK rim pilm U.-AIM OUINSY RRIME 14-01-15 ACCOMACK CO. D137. 20 SELL NECK *4 450-2780 COMMONWEALIN OF VIRG I t.$. 30 t2sl IN A 681" MARINE REODWCES COMMI UFSHUR BAY P.O. 30 120) MAMPOHOD RIVER $WASH BAY BRADFORD fAY 44-01-01 . - A IA-05.05 Aw. 1. laf ACCOMACK CO. DIS1. 29 C7 $RADFORD MCI. ISO P.O. al 1281 WIRE CREEK IMF RD MALM 14007-17 P.O. 34 1281 SWARM lAY VVINAV UPSM& �AY 14-01 .1,7 LIZ P.O. 111 (20 171 WHITE TROUT Ca'EK PEALEII FT. 11 N-I 50-2600 OIL fill 36 (24 3EAL ca K MILL3TONE CMEEK lot 14-05-04 14-OS-01 Wil CLUBH"E OUT .F CAEEN CHANNEL tARAMOSE SoLAND P.O. 33 428) DAAWINO CHANNEL 0LAWIC OC IA-00-00 3WAIN JIAY 14-OS-01 COMWNWEALTH OF MARINE RESOURCES 0ASH HORSESHOE -J. P.O. AS Iz& MILLSTONE P.O. 35 l' 'QLE 4'Ej ACCOMACK CO. 450-2020 PAIIAMORE I OLAND AILAN11C MAN 14-00 00 COMMONWEAM OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCE$ COMMISSION PARRAMORE ISLAND =tr,� wivnrm ACCOMACK CO. D167. 29 4 450-2a4O L COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION Wig U.419L BRADFORD DAY WACHMREAWE ACCOMACK CO. DIST. 29 14-07-16 F.C.O. NO. f.c.o. No. I RUXOVER 1261 + 990101tb NECA 9AUf0f!ofAY 14-os "04100fto AIVER 14 -01-01 0 f 6-38 ZPA: 0 0. 147 9271 205 IVRTONS SAY 14-05-07 ISO& M= % 204 % 1601 10.0 As t27 201 A7LAN 14 196 IT v ILE 01*15 Ulu- Uri ISO jx* Qfu 104 19 -%A;r H cei WWII CEDAR ISLAND 102 AQk IP3 CUALEW SAY 14-OS-06 117 -a' m NWEALTH MAMUE RESOURC WACIWAEA" CHANNEL BURTON f.f. 37 14-07-IS WACWREA Mu 111FAY00D ACCOMACK CO. 14-OS-05 144 CLUSHOWE Igs MARSH WACWAEAOM INLET I'l-65-00 102 I.e. 36 1 it)LL$ HEAD IRADFORP CKkNKL 133 14-05-DA NOASESHH LEAD 14.05.01 fAlkAMOAE ISLAND 5- 0 lop so m m an m no m m m m m ATLANTIC OCEAN 14-00. 00 OM044 sHoALS COW"HKALIN 0 MARINE REbOURCED PARRAMDRE =6-A MAU PAAAAMPAE IsLAND I ACCOMACK CO. 4"A RPHWO . @-2 0 @40 LOUSIVILLE F INN p. NICKAWAkPU3 CILEEK 14-07-16 COMMONWEAL71-1 Or VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCEO COMM1681ON FINNEY CREEK LOCU67VILLE =901=11: 4.131fil. IM ACCOMACK CO. D1 67. 20 moo mmm@mm m mm m CURTIS NECK P.O. 40 ==t M. r-li& Ww P.O. 49 C0TIS CREEK 40 4271 IIIILAI 00 TEAGLES CEDAR IV-AND lAY DITCH 14-OS-OP COMMONWEALTH OF VIROIHIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION P.O. 42 127) BURTON$ BAY 16 OREAT CHANNEL XMIA. ACCOMACK Co. DIST. 20 '.127 4. 43 CEDAR ISLAND LE + ATTIEL P.O. 44 1271 206 - OAEAT CHANNEL IA-07-12 t P.O. 'Is 127) 207 SLOOP P.O. A7 12 1 CHANNEL ItA1701411 RAY 14-05-07 Sol 202 8 P'O. 41 (27) -.0. AS 1271 "EAT Kff COVE 200 203 ,EDAA IPLAND ATLANTIC OCEAN 14-00-00 COLIMONWEALTH OF VIROINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION OREAT CHANNEL CEDAR 16LAND ACCOMACK Co. D1 $7. 29 LA 480-2840 Mae M M No M MM m M M m man MI P.O. so (27) JOYNES NICK FOLLY CREEK %4.97.97 NAYS Olml CoMMDNWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCE$ COMMISSION I FOLLY CREEK CEDAR ISLAND DAY xrr. r.."13. CROSS CREEK 14-97-96 LOW040AT CREEK 14-07. 01 ACCOMACK Co. DISI. 20 cfb&A Is 017110 NECK CED&A ISLAWD lAY 1, 05 CU9714 CREEK . .09 14' 14-05. 13 f.e. 40 (2711 MAI CKMML 14-05-12 I P.O. Vgr 495-2020 Mao m mmm MM M M mm m MM T METOW iomAN.O." ME70MKIN 6AY 14-0-00 f.e. 51 ter) P.O. 50 127) - 213 CP@ IXTOI&IN INLE7 211 14-07-00 FLOUNDEft Will tit .... ATLANTIC OCEAN 14-00.00 A LONOSOA7 'CREEK 4-07-01 N -1 .U.N. 210 CEDAR I%LAf0 COMMONWEALTH OF ..... MARINE RE30URCE3 Rop METOUKIN I W.01 "-w. um ACCOMACK'C'o'l 28140 [Nil low m m an 1111111110 m w m m MIND m COMMONWEALTH OF VIRrINIA 21 MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION METOMKIN DAY PARKER CREEK =Irma =I0 n191. ACCONACK Co. DIST. 20 PARKER NECK PARKER CRIER. wtr. IAYLYS NECK IATTLE VT. 114STON CREEK 14-09-01 FOLLY CREEK $A-07.07 F ' EEK k-. AL 07@ 7 JOY1411 NECK NET it 11 ISLAND PARKER NECK 224 225 #.a. st 4271 a 223 P.O. $1 1271 222 wr AAW 221 2to ATLANTIC OCEAN 14-00-00 21* 217 NEIONKI ISLANDN NETOLOUN SAY 14-09-00 COMMONWEALTH OF MARINE RE30URCE3 METOWIN tis P.O. $1 1211 ACCOMACK CO. 0 / li JACK*$ OUT GAROATHY NECK 04 OAAQATW CREEK 14-11 01 CRE201K IF 17 S CREE 4! it .11, K WIRE PA SAOE un. 14. 0939 231 OAKOAIHY $EACH 90"71(Y lAY 14-ti-al I"IPOINO CA. 14.11- 12 P.O. S2 (26) WHITES NECK 2" TAOvr CA, 14-11-10 CRIPPEN CREEK ATLANTIC OCEAN 14-09-07 14-WOO WE'SOMKIN ISLANI) U ZZIP SUM ICK CREEK 14-OSI-05 PEEP CREEK 14-09.11 227 COMMONWEALIH OF V LIARINE RESOURCES C GARGA7HY DA PARKE& NECK WIRE PASSA &CIONKIN #Ay mu M. 'Alit. U."M 94-09-00 WIRE PAS$AGE P.O. St (271 I ACCOMACK CO. D 52$-2840 IA- IS-OF, NODEPT TOWN WORIHM CREEK 14-13-07 EGO MAR P.O. HOO NECK KEfO ,AjAHK lAY 11-02 P.O. 55 P.O, $4 426 (26) DA. &CK:Ii OW 4-11 04 All CREEK COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 14-11 06 MARINE RUOURCE6 COMMISWON KE007ANK BAY OAROA7HY CREEK WAGAIRY CREEK KEG*IAW CREEK fag _,Iwu_ 14-11-OA T.Ar". ACCOMACK CO. 016T. 29 OAA"7IfY NECK 540-2840 ASSAWOMAN CAEEK 14-13-02 233 ASSAWMAN ISLANV KEOOTANK #AY IA-11-02 ATLANTIC OCEAN 14-00-00 P.O. 126 + COMMONWEALTH OF MARINE RESOURCES A44AWOMAN ASSAWOMAN AM ACCOMACK c"o. PETTIT NIANCH All + FERSIL&ION WHY ADIANIONAN CREEK U&PI'SVILLE COMMONWEAL71-1 OF VIROINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION ASSAWOMAN CREEK HOGNECK CREEK @@..EEK HoGWCK 5CREEK ACCO"MACK CO. DIS7. 29 t55-21J40 CAT ARIUCKLE NECK HOO CREEK 14-13-00 WALLOPS,ISLAND N.A. A . OYSIER IIA 14-1 3.12 P.O. 57 (26) AAlI,ICK E CREEK - LITTLE L AT CREEK 3-04 14-11-06 T14 1' 3If I IIAV 14 C P.O. 56 4261 ATLANTIC OCEAN 14-00-99 AIISAW"N CR EEK HDO CREEK 14-13-02 14-13-00, UU, MUD NARAOIRS 14-13-06 COMMONWEALTH OF WATHM NAAA MARINE RESOLIRCES 14-13-05 A33AWOWN WDUANS A53AWOUAJ( CREEK MAIL WALLOP3 13 14-11-02 tt�tzt=2tz4 Z' ACCOMACK"'Cl. OLD, 9001 mulon IMF ?OML,te IlAy 05 (26) P.O. 22 126 0. 1261- P.O. 2s THE P.O. 2b 1261 WLAST KARRO" 235 TAYLOR NUA0103 ISLAND 426) HOLE "Ur to 426) OOOLIES fAY 14.15_03 WALLO COMMONWEALTH OF VIROINIA K.PA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION THE NARRO 6 POWELLS BAWY 2b) cm =Q BOOKS BAY P.Om 29 ACCOMACK CO. 01$7. 28 CAT CREEK 14-13-10 570- 660 TEA" C CHINCOTEAOM OIMT THE HAMMOCK 01. 245 CAJUL MAAbH AS AT CHA CHIFICOTEAOM CHANNEL 14.1 5-26 A3% t '7- WALKER #I. "lOAl THE '01 SLACRIP91KY DRAIN NAllows A-16-05 14-IS-40 236 1101; DATW) CHINC07!AGM I?&El 14 IS-00 TOM 14.1 W&LLOPS ISLAM SLOOF N.A.s.A. Ovi 'DINT t14 + ASSATEAVUE ISL CHINCOTEAGM M, ATLANTIC OCEAN COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 14-00-00 "'NCOTE 110, MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION CHINCOTEAGUE IMET Im ACC-QUIA"C-K Co. D11-811T." 28 CHIMCOICAGM H.W.A. LEA3ECOINERS 1-10 ON 1027 DATI.M. ILEASECOINEA* 29,-73 ON 1603 DATIA1. 10@ 1 DATLU OVEALAIt. TO UATCH 1027 I'Anu.IVIS VATVU FAQM 1170$774. AOOATEAOVE ISLAND Ar.-L. LITTLE TOM COVE + TOMS COVE IA-15-02 ATLANTIC EAN 0 .:C 14- 0 0 P,C.O.4 AWlEAOUE ISLAND COMONIVEALTH OF L.El" L. I DA WINE REQOURCES TOMS C =It-.% *Wr. &M KAM 14. 1 570-2900 1 ACCOMACK CO. WALLOPS NECK JENNY*l ow 14-IS-34 P.11 ,IUTIOK41L AERICS SINONEASTON SPACE ADMINMRATION PAY 14-15.1 I LIME SIMONEAS70H CLEEK 14MESt"I 4 Ito SIMONEASION CREEK KENDALL C mm VIROINIA WAIII PAY o ONWEALTH OF 14-15-10 MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION SIMONEASTON BAY -P.O. Is 1251 WATTS BAY P.O. I l:um ml =r- 425) f.O.z Its) WALKE ACCOMACK CO. DIST. 28 (it, 585-2860 e, P.O. its 125 14 4low'S WT 14-is-30 Um P.C.9. f. t3 12s!l 240 IN. Mato" II&E musk 3IWW0T0V SAY U91 gist 0.0, 14 J4. V301 CRIKOITAOM lAY 1% IAV IRS AV 14-ls-v 'bit UASU omf" vokm 14-ts-20 2so VA, Fir IUZ to I UT 243 t4O WILL)II Matti "'-ts.24 WILLI1, CkUK 14-15-27 I"It it" clklubg + Xfl waste Z40 age #UOLIC CLAMMINO IAOtM wZ6.04 culwAnti" ISLAM 1EAU I A R I NE M04E 4 0 URUC Asp CVQIWRot 1414 10 K OUEEN 11IOUND 14@ If 237 210 to" 14-15.1 134 NEW MARSH 16LAND =Irm cm malm 244 ILAU 1111. 14 CMtNCGnA" .'6.05 1001 DAT cma OVEWIP Im mIli A ILA I fillm4l. IP27 DATUM DEEP HotE CHINCOTEAGUE SAly CREEK 14-15-17 L I TTI 963 DATUM LE OYSTER lAY 14-IS-96 IV DATUM JAMEYT A13H CJEEK m"3H CAARS 14-16-02 MAA3H EEL CHINC01EAOUE CREEK ISLAND PINEY ISLAND AWTEA4VE CHANNEL JANE 'S I A CREE KWAIES uzu- .Zfir... ASSATEAOUE ISLAND ATLANTI CHINCOTFAOUE N.W.A. 14.0 Z, 1#03 DATUM HAALLY'll L IYE t:NOAL OWN A. .03 1901 DATUM HOAVE MARSH 14-16-04 WEI ! 943 DATUM OVERLAID 70 MATCH 127 DATUM. 196S DATUM 11 F OM 11763774 AND 11603774. COMMONWEAL711 MARINE RESOURCE LIVE 6 ASSAIEAGUE =IAlA"-Wrm 013 DATUM ACK 'I. DRAIN IL 14-16- ACCOMACK CO. Loin M an m m PF 462-1 4 I"3f ARE 1013 DAW + SAIAtIl"90" ISP10. iff-H&AVED11"Jil OVERLAID 10 MA104 19,21 UJ!E" LITTLE VOSOUSTO CREEK 14-15-29 COMMONWEALTH OF VIROINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION LITTLE MO$OUITO, CA. NATIONAL AERONALITICS AND SPACE ADMIN. ACCOMACK CO. DISY, 28 L 600-2860 COMMONWEALIN OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION CHINCOTEAGUE DAY =w" =w A-IL ACC'O@U'ACK CO. DIST. 28 9.=t NORM70M LANPINO HORRIOWN SAY tHIMtOlE&OkX 10 14-15-17 262! tF 11632. I'IAII:NIVRU" MOSOU,70 ARE , 3 A7W _(.E OVEALAID ON IP27 MAP. ArIN #.0. 11 125) L117LE MOSOU110 CREEK FAX 29 b*VTH 260 261 164 MOIOVI TO CREEK COCKLE P.O. 9 - I - Is-il" WIAE MAXII003 14-15-23 CREEK 251 bBO CMISAININEALTH OF VIROINIA MARINE REGOURCES COMMI44ION 'ILDCAT MUSH CHINCOTEAOUE BAY ASSATEAGUE CHANNEL ACCOUACK CO. D16T. 20 PUBLIC tLAMMINIS OAOUV BAY EAST OUT AS.;!mw BAY CHIHCO7EA8UE BAY 14 15-37 14 &ACH I E -15-17 COVE Jill woos WOVE P.S. 12 ASSAT W, CHINCOT P.O. of LITTLE MORRIS + l2s) ISLAND 14 1 -16-01 ILAKE ?I. L= 4 CHINC97EA" ISLAM MORRIS 15LAND Z63 1-40 STE y y rJr' 4-15-08 M07Ee 11 ISLAM. -Ur 11TOTOLY'STEEPJAY. AND A1:ATEAr Al ON 10 3 AW OVERLAIP 102, 0AILU. I T AOM 198"3OACT 1 111LE CHIKOTEAOLE SAY W LEAS0 NOT SHINN Pep MAI .164 -�L. ;Uwig upp I full Lm SUM lAY 14-15-as ASSAIEWA ISLAND CHIMCOIEAOM N.W.A. ATLANTIC OCEAN IA-OD-OO COMMONWEALT14 OF UARINE RESOURCES ASSATEAOVE =11-A L72920 m ACC@OM'ACICI@Cvo. illimm m @muwmvw@mwmm MGM COMMONWEALTH OF V ROINIA IRI MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION CHINCOTEAGUE PAY r.m GREENBACKVILLE ACCOMACK CO. 1>131. 2b MARYLAND . ............... VIROINIA + CAflAIM*9 COVE SUIDV. moll 1 SlA7IOM3 CAI. lOWN3END. CEpn(*. CAP NO, COORDINAIED OR MA#FEP. ICHINCOTEASM SAY P P.O. NO. 9 W-IS-IT $WA4 OVF CREEK I'VILIC CLAMMI P.O. NO. 4 P.O. NO. 5 WE LON% f7 PUILIC CLAWINS SKOtM 1251 CHINCOTEA W SAY 14.1 VIT 269 Co"Ps M&ASHEs "Imp HSI tUILIC CLAMMIHS GAWJNP 12S) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION CHINCOTEAGVE SAY MarIll MATI. COARDS MARSHES Ku @WN COVE TILKAT PT. ACCOMACK7CIO. 0';ST. 23 I pz@ Mimi m@@lwomlmwwm COMMONWEALTH OF VIROINIA MARINE RESOURCEOP COMM166ION CHINCOTEAOVE OAY FOPE6 SAY mm -_w =Ira -ME I I.- ACCOMACK CO. DIST. 26 14-15-17 I I APPENDIX D I VIMS Baylor Ground Surveys I I 1, I I I I i I 2 0 a 14 44 @tllmmmmmwwlmmm - SEASIDE cm.c It 4.1 GZB Lf SEASIDE Jr P7 )2 Ar 44 Ar V-1 SEASIDE "n" Kc. co 0,.I. R.Ck S..d -d M.d S"I ard M,d Clay Sb.11 ww S&W clpne* 8-d S4 S..d MS.. MW S-."d Gut OCC OClhipod a Old Boyllw U. ...... Fw-,,S?wel,n 12 S,01, ..d.1y Rw-fld SEC A 0 .000 Ou TON SEC's SHOPES A- 0 -"It (SEC-C 10-al -7- -7 LOCUSTVILLE GRE4,' -k- f-T G 0.0. BUR70,V -7 .0. ly cqvc. 8.2 y CEOAn HAVLOVIR ISLAND ... @loc@ N., V. 9iL m GOO WYE a -C mEAGUE CHA A'S C0 L@ O@ ,C, 40WACHA@E"VE ..be; O.G 0 SEASIDE LW- O@T 5 SEASIDE 2 ORA a -A V c..AC. HAUL ,RADfORO CHAN 10 OVER 13 \4 .. .1. '0 84qA ZPAOAD BAr PARRAMORE ISLAND 110 BRADFORD NECK S.,-*SH BAY Oy,W Rock So.* .@o M@d Shell Wd Md cl., DRAW Shell d.d Soho 7., S-d Shell 8Arrv Bolt- S-d NS Not S-eyea OCC occ.p,ta S-YIQI L - - - Old SQyI0, L- -------- F.,rner Sh.,.I,.. %if CHAP4 S101. Sowtdcry k.ol.t.d UPSHUR NECK j1.,,SH4UjR BAY IRMO MAJOR 'OLE RAY - 0 oysle, Rack She]) and Mu4 Shell and Sand B.,..d shell w ED Smd N S Baylor Lin 10 Old Baylor Lino 12 For or Shwehns S."' Boundary 13 1.11 stricted LANUMG- swAsH 8Ar cp TROUr % ups@A CIYA A, @Oop .4y* 1w ft WH rf PfACH -Z Cove 4 t \x REVEL I to, Al fNR N f C11 SAN SAmD. .......... SANDY ISLAND 4 BOROE,.,TAKE 0 qAf 0 00 SEASIDE 0 SEASIDE Y 7*30' 7-30' + SANDY ISLA 4 p UPSH R NECK % ab, WESTCOTT ...... _@06 ISIAIVO BAr --A 9.7 .4. CU %E@ NORrtf CHANNFL A 0 Oym, Rock Sand and Mud Shell and Mud Cloy UR E'A Shell and Sand G,o,oel (L- Buried Shell Barren Bottom Sand NS No'uSu,,,eyed IZZ) occ Occ ped EGGI G EGGING N - - - Baylor Line MARSH - - Old Baylor Line d .600 ---- Farm, Shouehne State Boundary Restricted 0 loll 1111111110 M M 010 M M ON M SEASIDE &LACAf DOCK COYAf NoRrm cNANNIL UR V ... 4. RSm so_ NOG ISLAND BAY A ;41 f., -1@ A.1 01, OV. 7r : xk-@ + HiGH SHOAL MARSH + + d ow., OcIc Nl1'.a sNoRT Z-Z B., L.. PRONG Old ft@ L. MARSH a *oo d, Lo..wl a '.Y' 6U" 0 SEASIDE LY 7' ecle- A.'s + + 11 11E 10 SEASIDE ---- ------------ 4.@ ITT IT LITTLE cma U..o SIG -I- 41, C2 Oil 11 SEASIbE JYJ _x zn@o MIN "4, 12 SEASIDE + + + COW SAY 5AAo [email protected] jmxrr SAAIV SAVAL CHANVIt QA, A- mr .01 *RECK ISLAND MAN Y MARSH NEW MARS14 l: SOUTH sAy CZ No GODWIN ISLAND mps -ITE PERCH MIOGLI NIN, -IN- 'SLA-0 V S. S .1 S-. @c 0 r /n( BIG CREE. "As. 0 13 SEASIDE ..................... NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY 1 3 6668 14110950 6 1. I I i I I I I I i I i I I I i i I i