[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]






                          COMPREHENSIVE
                             CONSERVATION
                                         AND
                      MANAGEMENT PLAN

                                     Technical Document
                       Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study - November 1994


















       QH
       76.5
       .N8
       C66
       1994
















                                                         "CHESTERFIELD
                                                 AMELIA
                                     PRINCE                            PETERSBURG
                                   'EDWARD'     OTTOWAY
                                                                       PRINCE        RRY
                                                          DINWIDDIE    GEORGE
                             CHARLOTT
                                        LUNENBURG                                      ISLE OF
                                                                       SUSSEX             IGH
                                                                                                           VIRGINIA
                     HALIFAX                         BRUNSWICK
                                                                                                          BEA    CITY
                                                                                  )N
                                                                       SOUTHAMPTON     SUFFOLK CHES
                                   MECKLENBURG               GREENSVILLE                 CITY        CITY             VIRGINIA
                                                                                                                    ---------------

                                                                                           GATES                      NOFUH CAROLINA
                          PE          0                                NORTH -
                CA. WELL     RS              z         REN             HAMPTON
                                                                          t   / HERTFORD
                                                              HALIFAX                         m
                                                                                              0

                                                                                              >
                  x                        FRANKLIN                               BERTIE      z
                  >      z
                         0
                                                       NASH
                  rm                                                                          WAS
                                                               EDGECOMBE                         H-
                                                                                MARTIN      INGTON TYRRELL        D   E
                                     WAKE
                  CHATHAM                              WILSON
                                                                        PITT        BEAUFORT
                      LEE                JOHNSTON              GREENE                                  HYDE
                             HA  RNETT               WAYNE

                                                                LENOIR
                                                                            CRAVEN

                             CUMBER,                                                  PAM IC
                   HOKE      LAND        SAMPSON                       JONES
                                                       DUPLIN
                                                                       ONSLOW
                                                                                  CARTERET

                     ROBESON         BLADEN
                                                       PENDER



                                COLUMBUS                 NEW
                                                         HANOV  ER



                                            'BRUNSWICK
                                                                       AL'ioDEMAR,.LE9=r
                                                                       PAMLICO,
                                                                       OT
                                                                       R
                                                                                    `ION
                                                                             Ekj


























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




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


                     COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION AND
                                  MANAGEMENT PLAN







                     ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE STUDY



                            ---------------------------- -- ---------- - --- -- ----------- xNawnXINIMMM










            COMPILED AND EDITED BY.



            Randall Waite                                  Guy Stefanski
            Joan Giordano                                  Andy Coburn
            Margaret Scully                                Lisa Everett
            Kristin Rowles                                 Loura Webb-Margeson
            Jeonifer Steel                                 John Chazal
            Mdry-Walter Rumley                             Lucia Peck
            Tom Stroud                                     Nina Petrovich



                                      LIBRARY
                                     NOAA/CCEH      US Department of Commerce
                                                                 services center Library
                                  19,90 HOBSON AVE.
                                                    22@-@ Couth Hobson Avenue
                                 ("HAS, SC 29408-26-93 Charleston, SC 29405-2413











                                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


                          This Comprehensive Conservation and Management
                          Plan was made possible through the hard work and
                          diligence of a great number of'people, and for this the
                          Albemarle-Pa*mlico Estuarine Study extends its heartfelt
                          gratitude.

                          The Study was conducted under financial support and
                          technical guidance of the US Environmental Protection
                          Agency (EPA) through an agreement with the NC
                          Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
                          Resources (DEHNR). Our special appreciation goes to
                          the various divisions within the Department for their
                          expertise and generous sharing of information in the
                          preparation of this Plan. Substantial contribution of time,
                          energy and input also were made by various institutions
                          and consulting firms including East Carolina University,
                          North Carolina State University, the University of North
                          Carolina at Chapel Hill, Resource Analytics, Inc. and the
                          Research Triangle Institute.

                          We acknowledge and appreciate the cooperation and
                          understanding of all those who contributed to the
                          development of this Plan, and our most special
                          appreciation goes to the members of the Citizen
                          Advisory Committees, the Technical Committee and th      'e
                          Policy Committee, all of whom are listed in Appendix F
                          of the Plan. Finally, we would be remiss is we did not
                          recognize the untiring effort demonstrated by the
                          thousands of citizens in the region who attended
                          numerous public meetings, workshops and other
                          activities held during the past six years..

                          The development of the CCMP was often a difficult task
                          and was successfully completed only because of the
                          dedication of those listed, whose love of North
                          Carolina's coastal resources is unsurpassed.









                                                             TABLE OF CONTENTS


                   INTRODUCTION                                                                                                   1


                   WATER QUALITY PLAN                                                                                             25

                   Objective A    ... basinwide plans                                                                             27
                   Objective B    ... nonpoint source control                                                                     41
                   Objective C    ... point source control                                                                        59
                   Objective D    ... to)dc contaminauon control                                                                  65
                   Objective E    ... indicators of stress                                                                        73

                   VITAL HABITATS PLAN                                                                                            81

                   Objective A    ... river basin plans                                                                           83
                   Objective B    ... private & public stewardship                                                                93
                   Objective C    ... vital habitat restorafion                                                                   101

                   FISHERIES PLAN                                                                                                 113

                   Objective A    ... fishery management plans                                                                    115
                   Objective B    ... best fishing practices and bycatch reduction                                                123

                   STEWARDSHIP PLAN                                                                                               129

                   Objective A    ... environmental and economic planning                                                         131
                   Objective B    ... public involvement                                                                          145
                   Objective C    ... environmental education                                                                     155

                   IMPLEMENTATION PLAN                                                                                            159

                   Objective A ... coordinate inplementadon of CCMP                                                               161
                   Objective B ...assess progress of implementation                                                               169

                   REFERENCES                                                                                                     173


                   APPENDIX A


                   REGIONAL SUMMARIES                                                                                             A: 1-34
                   Map of Major Drainage Basins                                                                                   A2
                   Chowan River Basin                                                                                             A3
                            Basin Map                                                                                             A4
                   Roanoke River Basin                                                                                            A7
                             Basin Map                                                                                            A8









                 Currftuck Sound and Pasquotank River / Albemarle Sound
                    Drainage Basin Region.                                                                             All
                          Basin Map                                                                                    A 12
                 Tar-Pamlico River and Pamlico Sound Drainage Basins                                                   A19
                          Basin Map                                                                                    A20
                 Neuse River and Core Sound/Bogue Sound
                   Drainage Basin Region                                                                               A27
                          Basin Map                                                                                    A28

                 APPENDIX B
                 PUBLIC COMMENT and PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
                          in CCMP DEVELOPMENT                                                                          B: 1-18


                 APPENDIX C
                 GLOSSARY AND ACRONYM LIST                                                                             C: 1-15


                 APPENDIX D
                 COST MATRIX                                                                                           D: 1-9


                 APPENDIX E
                 N.'C. AGRICULTURE COST SHARE PROGRAM
                          BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES                                                                    E: i-7


                 APPENDIX F
                 ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE STUDY
                          MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE MEMBERS                                                                F: 1-9


                 APPENDIX G
                 ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE STUDY
                          PUBLICATIONS LIST                                                                            G:1-13


                 APPENDIX H
                 NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM CONTENT AND
                          APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS                                                                        H: 1-7


                 APPENDIX I
                 CCMP MANAGEMENT ACTION
                          IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE                                                                      1: 1-6








                                           INDEX TO MAPS, GRAPHS & TABLES


                 FIGURES

                 1:       The Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine System (map)                                                4
                 2:       Water Quality Classitications in the APES Region (map)                                      6
                 3:       Major Sources of Nitrogen & Phosphorus Loading
                                  in the APES Region (graph)                                                          7
                 4:       Total Nitrogen & Phosphorus inputs from Nonpoint
                                  Sources (graph)                                                                     8
                 5:       Bottom Sediment Sampling Sites with Lead Concentrations
                                  Greater than 35 ppm in the Lower Pamlico &
                                  Neuse River Basins (map)                                                            9
                 6:       Mortalfty Curves Associated with Three Major Categories
                                  of Stress to Fish Populations (chart)                                               10
                 7:       Total Nitrogen & Phosphorus Loading by Source
                                  in the APES Region (graph)                                                          11
                 8:       Inventoiy of Areas Containing Ecologically Signfficant
                                  Natural Communities or Rare Species (map)                                           14
                 9:       Rare Plants, Animals and Natural CommunNes
                                  in Me APES Region (map)                                                             15
                 10:      Causes of Wetland Loss in North Carolina and the
                                  Continental USA (Graph)                                                             16
                 11:      All Mapped Fisheries Nursery Areas in the APES Region (map)                                 17
                 12:      Mapped Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (map)                                                   18
                 13:      Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas: APES Region (map)                                           18
                 14:      1990 Census Population: APES Region (map)                                                   21
                 15:      Miles of Freshwater Streams & Rivers Impaired by Point and
                                  Nonpoint Sources for Each Basin in the
                                  APES Region (graph)                                                                 28
                 16:      Miles of Freshwater Streams & Rivers Impaired from
                                  Nonpoint Sources for Each Basin in the
                                  APES Region (graph)                                                                 41
                 17:      National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES)
                                  Permit Locations in the APES Region (map)                                           58
                 18:      Wastewater Treatment Systems in     the APES Region (map)                                   60
                 19:      Bottom Sediment Sampling Sites with Mercury Concentrations
                                  Exceeding 0. 15 ppm in the Albemarle
                                  Sound Drainage Basin (graph)                                                        65
                 20:      Trends in Commercial Landings for Edible Finfish
                                  and Sheffish (map)                                                                  115
                 .21:     Marine Recreational Fishing Statistics: North Carolina (graph)                              116
                 22:      Citizen Water Quality Monitoring Sites in the APES Region (map)                             145










               TABLES

               1:      Status of Important Commercial and Recreational
                              Estuarine Species: APES Region                                             20
               2:      Basinwide Permitting Schedule for River Basins
                              of Me APES Region                                                          27



I
I
I
I
I
I                        INTRODUCTION
I                           --- --- ------------------- --- --------I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I












                                                                                                                       INTRODUCTION




                                                     OVERVIEW OF THE
                             ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE STUDY



                   The Albemarle-Pamlico estuary forms a complex and dynamic ecosystem which provides an invaluable
                   bounty of natural resources. The sounds, rivers, creeks, wetlands, and terrestrial areas in the watershed of
                   the system support a variety of uses. We depend on the systqm to supply food, recreation, jobs, a mode of
                   transportation, and vital habitat for fish and shellfish. In addition, its diverse ecological communities provide
                   a rich natural heritage for humans and wildlife.

                   Economically, the Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds system represents the estuarine region's key resource
                   base through commercial fishing, tourism, recreation, and resort development. Economic benefits are also
                   derived from uses of the natural resources for mining, forestry, and agriculture. In coastal areas around the
                   nation, human populations and uses of the coastal resources are increasing. The Albemarle-Pamlico
                   estuarine region is no exception. Increases in population and resource use can result in higher conflicts
                   among various groups.

                   Fortunately, the Albemarle-Pamlico ecosystem is relatively healthy, es    pecially when compared to heavily
                   populated and industrialized estuarine systems in other parts of the country such as Boston Harbor or Long
                   Island Sound. However, several signs of environmental stress have been recognized in the Albemarle-
                   Pamlico system, including: declining fisheries, recent outbreaks of fish and crab disease, frequent blooms
                   of algae, closures of shellfish waters to harvest, losses of historic shellfish and submerged aquatic vegetation
                   beds, and degradation of wetland, fish, and upland habitats. Proactive management efforts can be employed
                   now to avert future, more costly and potentially less effective restoration and recovery measures. This plan
                   responds to current signs of environmental stress with recommendations for protecting the health of the
                   invaluable estuarine system, for both its important ecological role and to support sustainable resource use.




                                      THE ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE SYSTEM




                   The Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system is the second largest estuarine complex in the United States. The
                   system supports an abundant and rich variety of organisms. It encompasses important habitat areas for fish
                   and shellfish including key nursery areas for east coast fisheries. The extent of the Albemarle-Pamlico
                   estuarine system is illustrated in Figure 1 (page 4). The system is composed of seven sounds: Albemarle,
                   Currituck, Croatan, Pamlico, Bogue, Core, and Roanoke, and is drained by several major river basins:


                                                                          3







                     MAJOR RIVER BASINS OF THE ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO WATERSHED


                                                 CHES
                                     AMEM
                         nUNCE EDWM6

                                    '\NO                 G      u,,SIMRY
                    CHARLOT                 Y D

                               LUNENBUR
                                                          SUE

              HAUFAX                     BRUNSWICK                                            QDdA BEACH
                                                                                               CITY
                                                                            K C*Y
                                                 /GREEKSVE9Z


              "MO           IVANC                                        GA
                                   WARBEN                                                C
                                              HALIF              HKRITORD

                                                                  BMTIE                     3
          ORANG               NI,        NASH ,             "'._2
          C-          j                      -   DGECOhm        Tj@-     I     GTON TYRRE
                  I   WAKE                       %   1/1,-               f                    DARE
         31ATHAM1                                                         ------  L
                                                        PM

                                                                                      HYDE
                            JOHNSTON
          LEE                                    GREENI@
                                        WAYNE @ - \.., -
                                                 LENOIR      CRAVEN


                                                                       PAMLI
                            SAMPSON                      JONEC
                CUM3ERLAkD
                                       I DUPUN
                           2@\                                       CARTE%A
                      LADEN                      -JONSLOI
                                         PENDER
                                  y                                                      Virgimmia


          1: Chowan River Basin                                           North Carolina
          2: Roanoke River Basin
          3: Currituck Sound & Pasquotank River/Albernade Sound Drainage Basin
          4: Tar-Pamlico River & Pamlico Sound Drainage Basin
          5: Neuse River Basin and Core SoundlBogue Sound Drainage Basin






       FIGURE I                        THE ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE SYSTEM












                                                                                                                    INTROD  UC77ON


                   Chowan, Tar-Pamlico, Neuse, Roanoke, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Little, Noah, Pungo, and Alligator. The
                   rivers drain a basin of over 30,000 square miles including 36 counties in northeastern North Carolina and 16
                   counties and independent cities in southeastern Virginia and discharge fresh water largely into the western
                   side of the sounds.

                   The sounds of North Carolina are uniquely characterized by wind-driven tides which eff ect circulation patterns
                   within the sounds and saltwater concentrations in their tributaries. In contrast to lunar tides, wind tides are
                   more variable and contribute to unpredictable changes along the coast. On the eastern side of the sounds,
                   a chain of islands with only a few inlets form a barrier with the Atlantic Ocean.

                   The Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system supports an array of ecological, economic, -recreational, and
                   aesthetic functions which are of regional and national importance. The critical importance of sustaining the
                   system in order to fulfill these functions is reflected in its nomination by the Governor of North Carolina and
                   its designation as an estuary of national significance in the National Estuary Program by the Administrator
                   of the Environmental Protection Agency.



                                            CONCERNS ABOUT THE APES SYSTEM


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



                   WATER QUALITY

                   Support for Water Uses

                   The Clean Water Act seeks to maintain important human and ecological uses by restoring and maintaining
                   water quality. Water quality can be evaluated on how well a body of water supports its best uses. Best uses
                   include aquatic life propagation and maintenance, wildlif e utilization, secondary recreation, water supply
                   (freshwater), and shellfishing (saftwater). All waters of the state should support, at a minimum, secondary
                   recreation and fish propagation.

                   The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) classifies state surface waters based on their designated
                   best uses for public interest. Primary freshwater classif ications include water supply (WS) and classes B and
                   C. In saltwater, classifications include SA, SB, and SC. Class C and SC waters are maintained for fish
                   propagation and secondary recreation. These water quality classifications set the basic protection level for
                   all state surface waters. Class B and SB waters should support the minimum requirements and primary
                   recreation (frequent use for swimming).

                   The highest quality fresh and saft waters are distinguished by their respective classifi cations, WS and SA.
                   The water supply (WS) classification has subcategories with different requirements to distinguish and protect
                   the most critical water supplies. Class SA waters are maintained for safe shellfish harvesting. These high
                   quality state -waters provide water and shellfish safe for human consumption.

                                                                          5








               -INTRODUC77-ON              - - -------------









                                            a:XX













                                                                                                   .;..e ...........


                                   Nutrient Sensitive Waters
                                   Outstanding Resoume Waters
                                   Ifigh Quality Waters



                       FIGURE 2       WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS IN THE APES REGION

               DEM has developed supplemental classif ications designed to preserve sensitive and highly valuable resource
               waters. Most waters will have one primary and one or more supplemental classifications. These
               supplemental classifications include High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW),
               Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW), Trout Waters (TW), and Swamp Waters (SW) (DEM .1993). Figure 2 shows
               DEM's supplemental water quality classifications in the APES region. DEM takes steps to protect these
               waters through state stormwater management practices. DEM's comprehensive stormwater program
               addresses priority areas including sensitive waters (SA, WSI-WSV, HQW, ORW, etc.). DEM also administers
               the federal NPDES stormwater program to reduce. pollutant loads in stormwater runoff. The Water Supply
               programs cover both coastal and inland counties in the Albemarle-Pamlico region, and basinwide planning
               efforts will continue to address concerns on a basin scale. Expansion of stormwater regulations to
               encompass a-11 surface waters would be a benefit to the state. DEM evaluates surface waters of the state
               using physical, chemical, and biological parameters. These parameters, or water quality indicators, include
               fecal coliform, chlorophyll a, dissolved oxygen, biological oxygen demand (BOD), nutrients, sediment and
               turbidity, pH, and temperature. From this information, DEM can determine 9 state waters are supporting their
               designated uses, support threatened, partially supporting, or not supporting their designated uses. A set of
               water quality standards are established for each primary and supplemental classification outlining the level
               of water quality that must be maintained to support designated uses. In the Albemarle-Pamlico region, there
               are 9,299 miles of fresh water rivers and streams and 1,831,900 acres of brackish, estuarine waters. In the
               fresh water streams, 18% of the stream miles are fully supporting their uses, 32% are support threatened,
               34% are partially supporting, and 8% are not supporting. Another 8% of the fresh water stream miles were
               not evaluated. In the estuarine areas, 88% of the area is fully supporting of its uses, 4% is support
               threatened, and 8% is partially supporting. No brackish areas are considered not supporting of their uses
               (DEM, 1992a).


                                                                    6








                                      ----- ------ --------                                                          INTRODUCTION

                 DEM defines an impaired system as a water body that is either partially or not supporting its designated uses.
                 Impairment of water quality in fresh water streams and rivers in the Albemarle-Pamlico region is attributed
                 to high sedi ment levels for one third of the impaired waters. Low dissolved oxygen is the cause of impairment
                 in 10% of the impaired waters. Other less frequent causes of impairment include high levels of nutrients, -
                 toxicants, biological oxygen demand, fecal coliform, metals, turbidity, ammonia, and dioxin (DEM, 1992a).
                 A much smaller percentage of saltwater areas are impaired. The greatest cause of impairment in the
                 saltwater areas is chlorophyll a (49% of impaired waters). Other causes of saltwater impairment include
                 fecal coliform, dioxin, and low Iiissolved oxygen (DEM, 1992).

                 Nonpoint sources are the greatest cause of impairment for both saft and fresh water. Forestry, construction,
                 urban and agricultural runoff, and land disposal of wastes make significant nonpoint source contributions to
                 water quality impairment. Of these nonpoint sources, agriculture has the greatest affect on water quality.
                 Figure 3 shows the three major sources of nutrient inputs in the APES region. For fresh water, the source
                 of impairment was determined to be nonpoint sources for 85% of the impaired miles. Of the nonpoint sources
                 affecting fresh water, 74% is attributed to agricultural runoff, 4% to forestry, 6% to construction, 9% to urban
                 runoff, and 7% for other sources. Impairment of brackish areas is attributed to nonpoint sources for 60%
                 of the impaired acres. Nonpoint
                 sources of pollution can cause
                 elevation of a variety of parameters
                 including    sediment,      toxicants,                                             SOURCE
                 biological oxygen demand, and                                     M AGRICULTURE            FOREST/WETLAND
                 fecal coliform (DEM, 1992). Point                                 = DEVELOPED LAND
                 sources also contribute to the                                      AMOUNT (MILLIONS KG/YR)
                 degradation of water quality and
                 impairment of best uses.           The                       25
                                                                              20
                 analysis of best use support in the
                 Albemade-Pamlico system indicates                             5-
                 that. the highest levels of water                             0-   TOTAL NITROGEN     TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
                 quality impairment are in freshwater           DEVELOPED LAND           0.748                0.106
                 rivers and streams. While only 8%              FOREST/WETLAND           6.829                0.325
                                                                AGRICULTURE              17.35                1.763
                 of total estuarine acres are deemed        Dodd. 1992
                 impaired, 42% of the total
                 freshwater     stream     miles    are
                 considered impaired.                    FIGURE 3        MAJOR SOURCES OF NITROGEN &
                                                                    PHOSPHORUS LOADING IN THE APES REGION'

                 Nutrients

                 Three of the major river basins in the Albemarle-Pamlico region are designated as "nutrient sensitive-0 In
                 these waters, the lower Neuse River, the Tar-Pamlico, and the Chowan River, high levels of nutrient loadings
                 are of particular concern. High nutrient levels can create a natural imbalance in the water and result in the
                 stimulation of frequent algal blooms. Figure 4 demonstrates the total nitrogen and phosphorus loading from
                 nonpoint sources in the study area. These blooms can cause dissolved oxygen levels to dip and may result
                 in fish kills. Across the APES region, nonpoint sources are the largest source of nutrient loadings to the


                                                                          7








                  INTROOUVION            - - - - --------

                  waters, and of these sources,
                  agricultural runoff contributes the        20-/ Millions (KG/YR)
                  highest levels of nutrient loadings
                                                                                FMTOTALNITROGEN 90'rOTALPHOSPHORUSI
                  (Dodd, 1992). Significant levels of
                  nutrients in these basins also come        16-
                  from point sources and atmospheric
                  inputs.                                    10-

                  Toxic Contamination                         5-                                ... . . .. ...

                  An assessment of the potential for          0
                  toxic contamination in the APES                   AGRIC6LTURE      DIEVELO@ED LAND FOREST/WETLAND
                  region has been            recently                                     Source
                  conducted.     First, this analysis      Dodd. at al. 1492
                  assessed the total loadings Of       FIGURE 4 TOTAL NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS INPUTS
                  toxics from point sources in the                          FROM NONPOINT SOURCES
                  region. Loadings only indicate what
                  is entering the system and do not indicate which toxics that enter the system will be a contamination problem.
                  It was determined that loadings of toxics in the region are highest for three metals, zinc, copper, and lead.
                  The single largest source of toxic loadings was the loading of fluoride from the Texasgulf facility in the
                  Pamlico River system which has been largely eliminated by changes in the facility's wastewater treatment
                  system.

                  Toxic loadings were highest overall for the Albemarle region including the Chowan, Pasquotank, and Roanoke
                  river systems. Next, the analysis determined where discharges may have the potential to exceed water
                  quality standards for toxics at low flow and average flow conditions. For low-flow conditions, twenty-one
                  dischargers were found to have the potential to exceed water quality standards, and for average flows, 12
                  dischargers were found to have the potential to exceed standards. A majority of the discharges identified for
                  the potential to exceed standards were municipal, as opposed to industrial, wastewater treatment facilities.
                  The likely source of toxics; in the municipal facilities is, however, industrial wastes (Cunningham, et al.
                  1992(a)).

                  This assessment examined water quality samples and fish samples to determine potential toxicity for both
                  wildlife and human consumption. Water quality data from across the region during 1988-1991 were examined
                  for the pollutant levels that exceeded state standards or EPA chronic water quality criteria. Exceedances of
                  standards were most common in the headwater areas of the major river systems of the APES region. In
                  freshwater areas, exceedances were most common in the upper Neuse River basin. Exceedances; were
                  minimal in the Chowan, Roanoke, and Tar-Pamlico Rivers. In the saltwater areas, there were few standards
                  exceedances, and most occurred in tributaries to the lower Pamlico and Neuse basins. The examination of
                  fish tissue samples indicated that a total of 75 sites had levels of toxic contamination that exceeded levels
                  of concern for wildlife. The most common contaminants found to exceed levels of concern were copper,
                  mercury, lead, and cadmium. Twelve sites, primarily in the Albemarle region exceeded levels of concern for
                                                                                                                               I



























                  wildlife for dioxin. The examination of fish fillet data indicated that mercury and dioxin were the two toxic


                                                                         8











                                                                                                                            INTROWCTION


                   pollutants most frequently found
                   in fish tissues at levels that may
                   pose a hazard to human health.
                   The sources of dioxin in the
                   region are primarily pulp and
                   paper mills that use,a chlorine
                   bleach processing.             The
                   sources of mercury      are less
                   well understood and may be
                   f rom  a variety of          point,
                   nonpoint, and atmospheric
                   sources (Cunningham, et al.
                   1992 (a)). For shellfish tissues,
                   zinc, arsenic, and lead were the
                   contaminants most frequently
                   found.

                   Toxic contamination of the          FIGURE 5 BOTTOM SEDIMENT SAMPLING SITES WITH LEAD
                   sediments has also been                    CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 35 PPM IN THE LOWER
                   examined in the APES region.                            PAMLICO AND NEUSE RIVER BASINS
                   Only a small number of sediment samples was available for freshwater areas, and no toxic contamination
                   was found at these sites (Cunningham, et al.1 992 (a)). In the saltwater areas of the APES region, a number
                   of sites with enriched levels of metals in the sediment have been identif ied (Riggs et al. 1989, 1991, 1992).
                   Of these sites, 51 were found to exceed concentrations at which toxic effects are likely. Figure 5 illustrates
                   lead contamination greater than 35ppm in sediment at sampling sites located in the lower Neuse and Pamlico
                   basins. These sites were most frequently found in the lower portions of the major river basins and in
                   tributaries to the primary estuarine areas.

                   Shellfish Closures

                   The closure of waters to the harvesting of shellfish is an important water quality concern in coastal areas.
                   In the APES region, 337,809 acres or 17% of a total 1,957,250 estuarine acres are closed to shellfish
                   harvesting. This is misleading due to the fact that most of these closures occur in 607,200 brackish, lower
                   salinity acres, primarily in the Albemarle Sound region, that do not support significant quantities of hard clams,
                   oysters, and bay scallops. In these areas, generally only Rangia clams are available for harvest, and the
                   demand for Rangia clams is quite low.

                   There are 1,350,050 higher salinity acres that do support harvestable populations of hard clams, oysters, and
                   bay scallops, of which 21,611 acres, or 2%, are closed to shellfish harvesting (Shellf ish Sanitation Branch
                   data). The amount of shellfish closures in these waters is somewhat low. However, it is important to
                   recognize that most of these closures occur in shallow, nearshore areas that are often high quality shellfish
                   habitat. The closed areas usually continue to produce shellfish, but are considered unfit for human
                   consumption, consequently these closures have the greatest impact on shellfish harvesters. Additional


                                                                              9








                -INTRODUCRON                            -------- -

                shellfish closures are made on a temporary basis after rainstorm events cause high levels of nonpoint source
                runoff. Approximately 15,000 additional acres are frequently subject to such temporary closures (P. Fowler,
                Shellf ish Sanitation Branch, personal communication). In recent years, the area affected by temporary
                closures has increased.

                Shellf ish closures have been attributed to a variety of point and nonpoint sources. Bacteria f rom agricultural
                and urban runoff and from septic tanks in unsuitable soils have contributed to shellfish closures.
                Development along the barrier island has caused the closure of'some shellfish beds (DEM, 1992). Another
                source of bacteria that leads to closures is wastewater treatment plants. There are eight such plants in the
                APES region that could impact shellfish waters. Shellfish closures are made by rule within a certain distance
                of all wastewater treatment plants and marinas.

                Fish and Shellfish Kills and Diseases

                A prominent water quality-related
                concern is the occurrence of fish             100 CUMULATIVE MORTALITY W
                and shellf ish kills and diseases in
                the APES region. In many cases,               go-.                                        Oxygen depletion
                                                              so-                                         Virulent bacteria
                the causes of kills and diseases are                                                      Chronic pollution
                unknown, and the relationship of              70-
                                                              Go-
                human impacts to their occurrence
                is diff icult to assess.       Recent         '50
                                                              40
                emphasis on water quality in the                                                . .. ..... . ..
                                                              30
                APES area has brought closer                  20-
                attention to the number of fish kills,        10-
                as evidenced by increased                       0      --------- -----------
                reporting.     However., there is                0     1   2    3    4    .5   6    7    8    9    10   11   12
                insufficient data to determine if                                        TIME (DAYS)
                there has been an actual     increase      U.S. Dept of tin Interior
                in fish kills. Fish kills may be an    11
                indicator of general ecosystem          FIGURE 6       MORTALITY CURVES ASSOCIATED WITH
                stress. Many fish kills are attributed                 THREE MAJOR CATEGORIES OF STRESS
                to low dissolved oxygen and algal                               TO FISH POPULATIONS
                blooms (DEM 1990, 1988).             In
                1987, a Red Tide algal bloom caused extensive mortality in the bay scallop population, but it is unlikely that
                this algae has persisted in the system (Tyler 1989). Recently, a toxic dinoflagellate (Pfiestefia piscimorte)
                has been discovered in the APES system which has been shown to have caused at least 25% of the fish kills
                in the Pamlico and Neuse Rivers over the past two years (Burkholder and Noga 1993). The possible impact
                of nutrient levels on the blooms of this dinoflagellate is being investigated. Figure 6 illustrates mortality rates
                of fish exposed to three categories of stress.

                Various finfish and shellfish disease epidemics have been reported in the Albemarle- Pamlico system since
                the 1970s. These diseases include ulcerative diseases that affect finfish, shell disease that affects blue


                                                                        10











                                                                                                                    INTROCILCTION


                 crabs, and two oyster diseases (Levine et al. 1990a, 1990b, Noga et al. 1990, Morrison et al. 1990,
                 Sherman et al. 1991). The causes of diseases and their impacts on fish and shellfish populations are
                 generally not well understood. The potential for impact, however, may be considerable (Steel 1991). It is
                 known that the impact of disease on oysters has been severe in recent years.

                 Thereare insufficient water chemistry and long-term monitoring datato implicateor refulethe contentionthat
                 specific pollutants are the cause of the increase in the prevalence of disease. The occurrence of fish and
                 shellfish diseases is not limited to polluted areas, and disease o*utbreaks have been observed far from any
                 pollutant sources (Steel 1991). As with fish and shellfish kills, disease may be an indicator of general
                 ecosystem health (Sindermann 1988). In unpolluted environments, fish and shellfish disease rarely affects
                 greater than 10% of the organisms (Brown et al. 1977, Couch 1985). Higher prevalence in the APES system
                 suggests the possible cont(ibution of human impacts. The number and magnitude of diseases which aff ect
                 fish and shellfish in the APES region suggest that these populations are exposed to abnormally high stress.
                 Skin ulcers and shell disease are believed to be associated with reduced water quality (Sindermann 1983,
                 1989); However, it is not known to what degree stress on fish populations can be attributed to anthropogenic
                 or natural causes (Steel 1991). Additional studies are also looking at the possible link between the newly
                 discovered toxic clinoflagellate and some disease epidemics.



                                        TOTAL NITROGEN  TOTAL PMOSPMORLIN     MIllbas Wami
                           RUNOFF            23.927,169       Z183,608      20
                           POINT SOURCES      Z731,370        1.263.233
                                             IZ470.940          054,185
                           DRE:0ER8V"n001FN RELEASE             1911-700    .10.
                           TOTAL             43.194.380       4.297.780



                                                                                 "map?   POINT SOUNCE DEPOSITION RESERVOIR RELEASE
                           Dodd. at al. 1902
                                                                                  =70TALKITHOOEN EMTOULPHOSPHCHIU11


                     FIGURE 7          TOTAL NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS LOADING BY SOURCE
                                                              IN THE APES REGION


                 Summary

                 In summary, the primary water quality concern in the Albemarle- Pamlico region is the inability of 42% of the
                 freshwater miles and 8% of the saltwater acres to fully support their designated uses. An additional 32% of
                 the fresh water miles and 4% of the saltwater acres are threatened in their ability to continue to support their
                 uses. Much of the impairment of waters in the APES system can be attributed to nonpoint sources of
                 pollution. The most prominent of these sources has been agricultural runoff, but runoff from construction,
                 forestry, urban runoff, waste disposal areas, and airborne pollutants also make significant contributions to the
                 impairment of APES region waters. A smaller, but still significant amount of water quality impairment in the
                 region can be attributed to point source dischargers. Figure 7 shows total nitrogen and phosphorus loadings








                -INTRODUCTION

                from all sources in the region. These sources of pollution contribute to the elevation of sediment, nutrients,
                biological oxygen demand, toxicants, and fecal cDliform in the water. These factors all cause degradation
                of habitat for living madne organisms and of the ability of the water to support human uses. Nutrient levels
                are of specific concern in several APES region river basins. The impacts of toxicants and bactefia have been
                shown to cause localized water quality problems across the APES system.

                Water Quality Management Initiatives

                The importance of a systemwide strategy in effecfive resource management has been emphasized in the
                Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan. Basinwide water quality management is a new
                approach being implemented by DEM to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and consistency of its water
                quality protection program. It is not a new regulatory program,rather it is a watershed based approach which
                provides a vehicle for basinwide permitting and integration of point and nonpoint source controls through
                existing regulatory and cooperative programs.

                The Neuse River Basinwide Management Plan which has already been released is the first in a series of
                seventeen basinwide plans being prepared by DEM over the next five years. In this plan, specific.areas of
                the Neuse Basin have been targeted for intensive study and immediate implementation of remediation
                projects. Additionally, all permits are on the same renewal cycle. The basinwide plans for the remaining
                basins in the APES region will be released in 1995 for the Tar-Pamlico, 1997 for the Roanoke, 1998 for
                Chowan-Pasquotank.

                Pollution from nonpoint sources contribute to the greatest cause of water quality impairment in the Albemarle-
                Pamlico region. To combat this problem, DEM adopted new Water Supply Watershed Protection Rules in
                1992 which require municipalities and/or counties to develop management plans for protecting raw water
                supply watersheds. These plans must meet minimum requirements which include the use of buffers, land
                use planning, and stormwater controls; however, kxal entities will be involved in making environmentally and
                economically.sound decisions regarding growth and development in their communities and counties.

                Other nonpoint source management initiatives have been implemented in the Albemarle-Pamlico region.
                Concentrated animal feedlot rules were amended in 1992 to establish procedures for properly managing and
                reusing animal wastes to prevent them from reaching the waters of the state. Since 1980, state stormwater
                rules have been in effect in the 20 coastal counties. DEM and the Department of Transportation (DOT)
                coordinate their efforts to address environmental concerns on highway projects providing for increased
                environmental protection. A result of this effort is the adoption of formal best management practices to
                control nonpoint source pollution from highway projects (DEM 1992b).

                Activities to control sedimentation from construction sites and mining projects are regulated by the
                Sedimentation Pollution Control Act and administered through the Division of Land Resources (DLR). The
                Land Quality Section is heavily involved in DEM's Section 319 Nonpoint Source Management Program. The
                Land Quality Section works closely with other agencies to address sedimentation and erosion concerns
                throughout the state. This agency has assisted DOT in developing their highway BMP program and also the
                Division of Forest Resources (DFR) in developing the forestry BMP manual. Educational efforts have


                                                                      12











                                                                                                                      INTRGOUC77ON


                    received international acclaim for environmental achievements. Recently published erosion and sediment
                    control field manuals and inspector's guides are focused to help contractors, while grants are awarded to
                    various institutions and facilities throughout North Carolina to fund erosion and sedimentation control projects
                    and educational exhibits. New rulings through the Sedimentation Control Commission have increased the,
                    amount of money reclaimed by the state for mining reclamation bonds, which will affect newly abandoned
                    mine sftes.

                    Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA) requires coasta]),' states
                    with approved coastal zone management programs to protect coastal waters from nonpoint source pollution.
                    Coordinating with other agencies, such as DEM's Nonpoint Source Management Program, the Division of
                    Coastal Management (DCM) is currently preparing plans to implement the required management measures
                    to achieve specified levels of control.

                    Due to enhanced levels of nutrients and chronic eutrophic conditions, the Chowan, Tar-Pamlioo, and Neuse
                    rivers are classified as Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) by the DEM. Nutrient reduction goals set in the
                    1980's for the North Carolina portion of the Chowan River,have been obtained. Innovative methods, such
                    as nutrient trading strategies, are reaching nutrient reductions in the Tar-Pamlico Basin. A statewide ban on
                    phosphorus detergents and limits to phosphorus discharge at NPDES facilities have lead to a reduction in,
                    total phosphorus inputs from 57% in 1986 to 21% in 1990 in the Neuse River.

                    The Tar-Pamlico Basin Association, a coalition of permitted dischargers with support from the Division of
                    Environmental Management, Environmental Defense Fund, and the Pamlico Tar River Foundation, is
                    implementing an experimental point/nonpoint nutrient trading strategy for the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The
                    Tar-Pamlico Nutrient Sensitive Waters Implementation Strategy allows. point source dischargers to meet
                    nutrient reduction goals by paying for agricultural nonpoint source controls rather than implementing
                    expensive nutrient removal technology in their wastewater treatment plants. This effort is a cost-eff ective and
                    flexible approach to reduce nutrient input into these waters. Members of the Association could provide up
                    to $11 million for agricultural BMP implementation and have contributed $400,000 to develop a basinwide
                    hydrodynamic model for determining nutrient target levels.


                    VITAL HABITATS

                    The Natural Heritage of the Albemarle-Pamlico Region

                    The Albemarle-Pamlico region embodies a wide expanse of intact natural areas (Figure 8) that endow the
                    region with a rich natural heritage. These areas provide habitat for wildlife, protection for rare plant and
                    animal species, and natural water quality buffers for streams and rivers. Wetlands habitats in the region
                    serve a Variety of important functions including: water quality protection, water storage, flood protection,
                    wildlife habitat, nursery areas for fisheries, aesthetics, and recreation. The region also has a great amount
                    of vital fisheries habitats-including nursery areas, spawning areas, shellfish beds, and submerged aquatic
                    vegetation beds, all of which support extensive commercial and recreational fisheries in North Carolina and
                    make a large contribution to supporting fish populations along the entire east coast.


                                                                           13











                   INTRODUCTION


                   This natural heritage is
                   t h r e a t e n e d  b y
                   potentially   extensive
                   alteration of natural
                   areas for human
                   activities    including
                   residential, commercial,
                   and industrial devel-
                   opment; transportation;
                   agriculture; and forest-
                   ry. For example, the
                   f unctions    of vital
                   fisheries habitats can
                   be jeopardized by
                   activities on the land as
                   well as by marine-
                   based activities such
                   as dredging and some
                   boating and fishing        FIGuRE 8 INVENTORY OF AREAS CONTAINING ECOLOGICALLY
                   practices.         These               SIGNIFICANT NATURAL COMMUNITIES OR RARE SPECIES
                   alterations aff ect the
                   ecological functions of natural communities through changes such as drainage, removal of vegetation, and
                   installation of surfaces while land conversions result in different levels of impairment. It is important to note
                   that "afteration" of habitat areas does not always result in the complete destruction of habitat functioning.
                   Instead, some natural functions may be retained. For example, wetlands which have been altered for pine
                   plantations have changed original hydrology and.vegetation patterns, but are still able to provide some wildlife
                   habitat, f lood control, groundwater recharge, nutrient removal, and aquatic habitat. Aftematively, some natural
                   areas are so extensively altered that they lose their important ecological functions.

                   Rare Plants, Animals, and Natural Communities

                   Maintaining the natural heritage of the APES region requires a special emphasis on the protection of rare
                   plants, animals, and natural communities. There are many land and aquatic habitats in the APES region
                   which are vital to the survival of rare plant and animal species. As of May 1992, 14 endangered species, five
                   threatened species, two proposed endangered species and one proposed threatened species of the APES
                   region were federally-listed. Several other species were candidates for listing. As of March 19,1992, North
                   Carolina cataloged 27 species as endangered, 24 species as threatened, and 21 species of special concern
                   in the APES region (LeGrand 1991, Weakley 1991, figures updated by the APES Staff 1992). In Virginia,
                   9 endangered species, 10 threatened species, and 1 candidate species are listed. The survival of threatened
                   and endangered species depends upon protection of their habitats.

                   In North Carolina, the state Natural Heritage Program (NHP) recognizes 100 natural communities, and 65
                   are located within the APES region. NHP designated rare plants, animals and natural communities are


                                                                              14











                                                                                                                        INTRODUC71ON


                   illustrated in Figure 9.
                   Of the 65 natural
                   communities in the
                   APES region, 25 are
                   considered impaired or
                   critically impaired
                   because     of     their
                   vulnerability and
                   potential   destruction.
                   Protection of these
                   natural    communities
                   from conversion        to                                Ic                             X_
                   other land uses is vital
                   to the maintenance of
                   the region's natural
                   heritage. Many natural
                   features in the APES
                   region are considered
                   rare nationally. Habitat  Fi(;uRE 9 RARE PLANTS, ANIMALS AND NATURAL COMMUNITIES
                   destruction and fire                                      IN THE APES REGION
                   suppression        have
                   resulted in the near loss of some forest habitat types. In some cases, wildlife habitat has been reduced to
                   nearly a functional minimum, threatening the survival of some species.

                   Historically, habitat changes have been caused largely by land clearing for agriculture and by some forestry
                   practices. But other uses, including road construction and urban development have also played a significant
                   role. Some improvements in habitat protection have been made in recent years, and many natural areas are
                   protected through government ownership and voluntary private protection agreements; however, many
                   important and rare natural areas remain unprotected. The maintenance of the natural heritage of the APES
                   region requires that future land use activities be carefully managed to protect rare natural communities
                   (Schafale and Weakley, 1990, Frost et al. 1990, LeGrand et al. 1992, Smith et al. 1993).

                   Wetlands

                   Wetland habitats in the Albemarle-Pamlico region include freshwater marshes, bottornland hardwood forests,
                   saft marshes, pocosins, pine savannas, nonalluvial wetland forests, and wet pine flats. Several different
                   studies have examined changes in wetlands habitats in North Carolina. In general, these studies indicate
                   a steady decline in wetland acreage.

                   A variety of studies have estimated wetlands 'losses" for North Carolina, the Southeast, and the United
                   States. Most studies have a different def inhion of "loss", and therefore, comparisons are diff icuft. Between
                   the mid 1950s and the mid 1970s, an estimated 9 million wetland acres were drained or otherwise convened
                   in the continental 48 states (Frayer et al. 1983). Of these 9 million acres, 8 million were in the southeast


                                                                           15








                 IArTR0DUC770N______ - -- - ---------------------- ------------------------------------- -------

                 (Hefner and Brown 1985).
                 During this time, there was a
                 7% loss of estuarine wetlands            100%_
                 and a 15% loss of freshwater
                                                          76%
                 related wetlands in the
                 southeast (Hefner and Brown
                 1985). Many of these wetlands
                 were converted to use for                 25%_
                 agriculture (Hefner and Brown             0%
                 1985).                                              NORTH @AROLINA              CONTINE@TAL USA

                                                                    OTHER          M URBAN                AGRICULTURE
                 In the 48 contiguous states, it                BE  FORESTRY       EM VOTER ACCESS        MILITARY
                 has been estimated that there
                 were 221 million acres of              OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (1984)
                 wetlands in colonial times
                 Over 200 years, the 48 state    's
                 lost an estimated 53% of their    FIGURE 10             CAUSES OF WETLAND LOSS IN
                 original wetland acreage.                     NORTH CAROLINA AND THE CONTINENTAL USA
                 Between 1780 and 1980, this      rate of loss equals more than 60 acres per hour. (Dahl 1990). Similar
                 estimates made for North Carolina estimate a decrease of 49% from 11.1 million acres of wetlands to 5.7
                 million acres over the same time period (Dahl 1990). Causes of wetlands losses in North Carolina and the
                 Continental United States are illustrated in Figure 10. Several studies have indicated that conversion of
                 wetlands to agricultural uses has caused the greatest amount of wetlands decline, particularly for freshwater
                 wetlands (Hefner and Brown 1985, Frayer et al. 1983).

                 Another study indicated similar results using diff erent estimates of the total original wetlands coverage. It has
                 been estimated that the state of North Carolina had 7.8 million acres of wetlands in presettlement times (DEM
                 APES Report #91-01). Of these wetlands, about      95% occurred in the coastal plain, 2% in the piedmont, and
                 3% in the mountains. In the coastal plain, wetlands covered about 52% of the land area@ (DEM 1991). The
                 most common wetiand types were pine savannas, bottomland hardwood forests, and pocosins. Salt marshes
                 represented a much smaller percentage of the original wetland area, although reports of the exact acreage
                 differ (DEM 1992). A large portion of these wetland areas was found in the Albemarle-Pamlico region.

                 The same study estimated that by the 1950s, 34% of the original wetland acreage in North Carolina had been
                 altered to other uses and that by the 1980s, another 15% of the original wetland acreage had been altered
                 (DEM 1992, Cashin 1990). Of these altered areas, about half continued to partially support some of their
                 wetland functions and retain their status as wetlands. Many of these areas were altered for forestry. The
                 other hag was altered to a level such that their wetlands functions were effectively lost. These areas were
                 commonly altered for agricultural and urban uses (DEM 1991). Wetlands alterations have had the greatest
                 impacts on pine savannas and pocosins. Since the 1950s, alteration rates have been higher for inland
                 wetland types (18%) than for estuarine marsh areas (10%) (DEM 1992). It has been estimated that forestry
                 caused 53% of post settlement wetlands alteration in North Carolina (DEM 1991, Cashin 1990). However,
                 as noted above, wetlands altered to forestry may retain some of their ecological functions. On the other


                                                                         16











                                                                                                                  INTRODUCTION


                 hand, alteration for agriculture and urban uses, which accounts for 44% of alterations since presettlement
                 times, usually result in the effective loss of wetland functions. The remaining 3% of wetlands altered have
                 been attributed to other causes such as military facilities (DEM 1991, Cashin 1990).


                 Fisheries Nursery Areas

                 Primary nursery areas for fisheries cover almost 25,000 acres, or 1.5%, of the Albemade-Pamlico estuarine
                 system's total water area (Steel 1991, updated by DMF data). Nursery areas are generally found in tributary
                 creeks and embayments, where shallow, mid to high salinity waters lay over muddy or grassy bottoms.
                 Distribution of primary, secondary and special secondary nursery areas are illustrated in Figure 11. These
                 areas are of critical importance* to the
                 propagation of over 75 species of fish and
                 shellfish in North Carolina and along the
                 east coast. The functioning of nursery areas
                 can be impaired by freshwater drainage,
                 land use changes, or eutrophication, but the
                 extent of that impairment is diff icult to
                 estimate (Stanley, 1992). Nursery areas
                 receive a special protective designation;
                 however,   no significant fluctuations in
                 juvenile abundance have been observed
                 since 1978. Nursery areas are generally
                 protected from potentially harmful water
                 uses including some commercial fishing
                 practices and development activities. The
                 functions of nursery areas are most
                 threatened by nonpoint sources of pollution
                 and development on land near nursery
                 areas (Stanley, 1992).                         RGURE 11 ALL MAPPED FISHERIES NURSERY
                                                                                AREAS IN THE APES REGION
                 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation

                 Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) provides important habitat for many estuarine species because the
                 vegetation helps to reduce current velocities, provides an attachment surface, reduces turbidity, and p@ovides
                 refuge and food. Information on the coverage of submerged aquatic vegetation is limited. The APES
                 program has initiated a SAV mapping project, administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                 Administration (NOAA), covering a limited area which is depicted in Figure 12. At this time there are no
                 baseline data available on the extent of SAV. Anecdotal information indicates that there may have been large
                 losses of SAV from historic levels, particularly in the rivers, creeks, and western sounds. Threats to SAV
                 habitat include direct physical disturbance such as dredging, mechanical clam harvesting, and changes in
                 water quality. Submerged aquatic vegetation is also sensitive to declines in water transparency (Kenworthy


                                                                       17








                 -IMTRODUCTION

                 and Haunert 1991). One species of -$AV,
                 eelgrass, may be declining rapidly as a
                 result of high levels of nitrate in the water
                 (Burkholder 1993).


                 Spawning Areas

                 The rivers of the APES system provide
                 spawning habitat for anadromous species
                 (Figure 13) such as striped bass, shad, and
                 herring. Anadromous fish live in the oceans
                 but migrate up freshwater rivers to spawn.
                 The spawning success of anadromous fish                (-'P
                 has declined as evidenced by reduced adult
                 landings (Steel 1991) and reduced juvenile
                 abundance (DMF). Recently, there has
                 been a high level of concern forstriped bass
                 which spawn in the Roanoke River. It has      FIGURE 12     MAPPED SUBMERGED AQUATIC
                 been established that the success of their                             VEGETATION
                 spawning is impaired
                 by changes in water
                 flows and the water
                 quality impacts that
                 result from discharges
                 f rom  the     Roanoke
                 Rapids dam (Rulffson
                 1990, Rulifson et al.
                 1990).  Throughout the
                 APES    region, access
                 to historical spawning
                 areas has frequently
                 been blocked by dams
                 and road crossing
                 culverts (Collier and
                 Odom 1989).




                                           FIGURE 13               ANADROMOUS FISH SPAWNING
                                                                      AREAS IN THE APES REGION





                                                                        18











                                                                                                                       INTRODUCTION


                   Shellfish Beds

                   Clams, oysters, and bay scallops have supported important fisheries throughout the history of North Carolina
                   commercial fishing. However, the productivity of these shellfish beds has declined as indicated by landings-
                   data. As filter feeders, shellfish contribute positively to water quality as they remove nutrients and suspended
                   particles from the water and convert them to a food supply for other bottom dwelling organisms. However,
                   this contribution is believed to be significantly reduced because of declines, particularly for oysters, over the
                   last 100 years. It has been proposed that restoring oyster stocks through careful management and
                   aquaculture will result in water quality improvement (Newell 1988, Ulanowicz and Tuttle 1992). Destruction
                   of shellfish habitat occurs as a result of direct physical disturbances (such as clam kicking, mechanical
                   dredging, and some trawling practices) and indirect disturbances that affect water quality. Oysters have been
                   severely impacted in recent years by the parasitic diseases Dermo and MSX (Morrison et al. 1990, Sherman
                   et al. 1991). In general, there is insufficient data to comment in detail on the trends in water quality and
                   substrate quality and their affect on the habitats of bay scallops, clams, and oysters.

                   Summary

                   All of the habitats described above provide vital ecological functions in the APES region. Damage to vital
                   habitat areas affect human uses of resources as well. For example, the disappearance of SAV beds may
                   cause declines in fish stocks which may in turn cause fishermen to lose jobs. People are attracted to North
                   Carolina in the first place because of its many treasured natural areas and wildlife. Maintaining the diversity
                   of species and the rich natural heritage of the APES region is dependent upon the careful management of
                   land and water uses.


                   FISHERIES

                   The APES region not only provides important habitat for the production of fishery resources, but also supports
                   several fishing industries. Recreational and commercial fishermen use an assortment of gear and methods
                   to pursue a variety of species (Cunningham et al. 1992b). The total annual value of North Carolina's coastal
                   fisheries, commercial and recreational, has been estimated to be approximately $1 billion (Street and
                   McClees 1981, modified by federal inflation figures). The recreational and commercial fishing industries also
                   provide thousands of full-time jobs for coastal residents (DMF data, Sport Fishing Institute 1988).
                   A greater demand for f isheries products and for'recreational fish ing opportunities has resulted in increased
                   fishing pressure. Downward trends in commercial landings of finfish species may indicate declining stocks.
                   The overall catch per unit effort is declining despite improvements in fishing gear and methods (Steel 1991).
                   Eight species of finfish and shellfish, important commercially and recreationally, are believed to be overfished
                   or severely @depleted: Atlantic croaker, Atlantic sturgeon, Eastern oyster, red drum, striped bass, summer
                   flounder, weakfish, and herring (DMF data). Fisheries declines may be attributed to a variety of factors:
                   habitat loss, physical damage, natural events and cycles, excessive harvest pressure,. changes in stream
                   flows, and water quality degradation. Table 1 lists the status of several important recreational and
                   commercial species of the region. In general, overfishing is believed to be. a major cause of declines.in catch.


                                                                           19








                       INTRODUCTION                         -------- ------ ------------ -    - --- -------
                       Compared to other states, North Carolina
                       allows a wide variety of fishing activities with
                       relatively little regulation. As a result, the
                                                                                                          SPECIES          HARVEST                   CONCERNS
                       Albemarle-Pamlico system is one of the most                                                         STATUS
                       intensively fished areas on the Atlantic coast.
                                                                                                    ATLANTIC                  SEVERELY             DISEASE, IMPACTS OF
                       Approximately one million recreational                STURGEON               DEPLETED                  DEPLETED             DREDGING ON HABITAT,
                       fishermen fish the North Carolina coastal                                                                                   OVERFISHING
                       waters annually (DMF data). These fishermen                                  OYSTERS                SEVERELY             BYCATCH, LACK OF
                                                                                                                           DEPLETED             INFORMATION FOR
                                                                                                                                                MANAGEMENT
                       pursue many of the same species as
                       commercial fishermen and often use                                           ATLANTIC CROAKER      OVER-FISHED           OVERFISHING, BYCATCH
                       commercial gear. Use conflicts between                                       RIVER HERRING         OVER-FISHED           OVERFISHING
                       commercial and recreational fishermen and                                    STRIPED BASS          OVER-FISHED           OVERFISHING, HYPOXIA,
                       between different sectors of commercial fishing                                                                          ALGAL BLOOMS, FISH
                                                                                                                                                KILLS, USER GROUP
                       seem to be increasing.                                                                                                   CONFLICTS

                                                                                                    BAY SCALLOPS           STRESSED            IMPACTS OF HARVESTING
                       The bycatch and waste of non-target organisms                                                                           ON HABITAT. EARLY
                                                                                                                                               OPENING OF SEASON
                       is also believed to have a significant impact on
                                                                                                    BLUEFISH               STRESSED            POTENTIAL FOR
                       important finfish stocks including spot, croaker,                                                                       OVERFISHING
                       weakfish, southern flounder, and summer                                      CATFISH                STRESSED            INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR
                                                                                                                                               MANAGEMENT
                       flounder. This impact is difficult to assess.
                       Fisheries which may present a bycatch problem                                HARD CLAM              STRESSED             POSSIBLE OVERFISHING,
                                                                                                                                                HARVEST AREA
                       include the shrimp fishery, menhaden purse                                                                               CLOSURES, USER GROUP
                                                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                
                       seine fishery, the gill net fishery, and the blue                      
                       crab fishery in the estuarine waters of North                                SPOT                   STRESSED             OVERFISHING, BYCATCH
                       Carolina (Skilleter, et. all 1993). It has been                                                                          DISEASE. IMPACTS OF
                                                                                                                                                CRAB TRAWLING ON
                       shown that shrimp trawls may take from a half                                                                            HABITAT, BYCATCH
                       pound to over 15 pounds of bycatch for each                            I
                       pound of shrimp caught (McKenna and Clark
                       1993). For weakfish, population modeling has
                       estimated a significant impact on the stock                            Table I               STATUS OF IMPORTANT
                       (Linda Mercer, DMF personal communication).                                  COMMERCIAL AND RECREATIONAL ESTUARINE
                       Research conducted by the Division of Marine                                                     SPECIES. APES REGION
                       Fisheries (DMF) and UNC Sea Grant College
                       Program has shown that for several fisheries,bycatch is controllable through modifications to fishing gear and                       practices.
                       practices.                                                                                                                                          


                                                                                                  
                                                                                                          CLAM





                                                                                                    SPOT


                                                                                                    BLUE  CRAM









































                                                                                                    20
 










                                                                                                                    IIVTRODUC77ON


                 FUTURE POPULATION, GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT












                              Total Persons
                            per Census Tract
                                    0 - 1,000
                                    1,001 - 2,000
                                    2,001 - 3,000
                                    3,001 & Over                                      ...



                   FIGURE 14                     1990 CENSUS POPULATION: APES REGION


                 The population of the APES region grew at double the national rate between 1980 and 1990, increasing by
                 19.4% (Holman 1992). Between 1990 and 2000, a 13.4% increase in population is expected. While this
                 projected rate is lower than the previous decade, it is still high compared to the national average. Projections
                 suggest that five counties will likely lose population over this period, while nine counties could grow at rates
                 of 20% or more (Holman 1992). In addition, coastal areas are experiencing high levels of seasonal
                 population growth which may have a greater relative impact on the estuarine resources of the region.
                 Changes in land uses are likely to result. Development activities that meet the housing, employment, and
                 service needs of the increasing population will likely result in decreased agricultural land area, forested land
                 area, and natural communities. Population increases may also lead to greater conflicts among resource user
                 groups in the region. Figure 14 illustrates the distribution of population in the region in 1990. As population
                 increases, a greater demand for public access will be made on the public trust areas of the region.
                 Environmental planning must consider the potential degradation of public trust resources.

                 Unplanned growth and development also has substantial impacts on the natural resources of the region and
                 results in increased conflicts over their use, either private or public. The cumulative impacts of growth and
                 development are difficult to observe on an individual project basis. Environmental planning will be essential
                 to conserve and protect the region's water quality, vital habitats, natural heritage, and fisheries.





                                                                        21











                  INTRODUC77ON




                  ADDRESSING ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE REGIONAL CONCERNS

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



                  Since 1987, estuarine and natural resource degradation in the.APES region have been the focus of the
                  Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study (APES). The Study is a cooperative effort jointly sponsored by the North
                  Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR) and the U.S. Environmental
                  Protection Agency (EPA). It is one of twenty-one estuary projects nationwide that are a pan of the EPA
                  National Estuary Program (NEP). The NEP aims to protect the local, state, and national interest in
                  maintaining the ecological integrity of the important estuaries through long-term planning and management.

                  Important components of the NEP and APES are the consideration of water quality, fisheries resources, land
                  and water habitats, and the interaction of humans with the natural resources of the estuarine system. The
                  objective of the research. end of the APES program was to look at this system as a whole and to consider
                  all aspects of its ecological integrity. The APES program has adopted a basinwide approach to management
                  in order to encompass all inputs to the estuarine system. As is apparent from Figure 1 page 4, the
                  Commonwealth of Virginia is an important pan of this system. Representatives from Virginia have therefore
                  been involved in the development of the management plan and will continue to be included in the plan's
                  implementation. Over the past six years, the APES program has generated research information and public
                  awareness to support the development of this Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP).
                  This plan is composed of recommendations for management strategies that address concerns in the APES
                  region and protect the system's estuarine resources,

                  The CCMP is the product of a collaborative, consensus-building effort involving numerous federal, state, and
                  local agencies, interest groups, organizations, and individuals. In the effort to develop a CCMP, APES has
                  been guided by a Management Conference, composed of 95 members who are divided into four committees:
                  a Policy Committee, a Technical Committee, an Albemarle Citizens Advisory Committee, and a Pamlico
                  Citizens Advisory Committee. The members of these committees represent government agencies, university
                  researchers, and the public. Public members represent a variety of interests: environmental groups,
                  agriculture, forestry, developers, industry, fishermen, and local elected officials--including representatives from
                  Virginia. The committees are responsible for identifying problems in the estuarine system, generating
                  research where gaps in knowledge existed, increasing public awareness of environmental issues, and finding
                  solutions to address those issues. As a result of these efforts, more is known about the Albemarle-Pamlico
                  estuary than ever before.

                  The Management Conference has determined the most pressing resource protection issues in the Albemarle-
                  Pamlico system and the most eff ective strategies to address them. While some recommended management
                  actions reflect the consensus of the numerous interests involved in the development process, other
                  management actions reflect compromises. The recommended actions presented herein are believed to be
                  the most effective, the most feasible, and the most urgent actions necessary to protect the health of the
                  Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system.

                                                                           22











                                                                                                                    lArTROUCTION


                 APES has supported research where there are gaps in scientif ic knowledge. For example, scientists are now
                 aware of a "phantom algae' that has been responsible for at least 25 percent of the fish kills in the Pamlico
                 and Neuse rivers over the past two years. Life supporting sea grasses have been identified and mapped so
                 that these important habitats can be protected. Ailso, a new computerized mapping system has been
                 developed to help local governments quickly assess the environmental impact of proposed projects.

                 APES has funded demonstration projects which illustrate new methods of protecting marshes, aquatic
                 habitats, and private property from erosion; control systems that p*rotect rivers and streams from stormwater
                 runoff; composting techniques that turn waste from agriculture and crab processing into fertile soil; and new
                 fishing gear that reduces the unintended capture of non-targeted species. Other projects include opening
                 historic spawning areas for shad and herring that had been blocked by dams and roads and replenishing
                 scallop beds that were decimated by the 1987 Red Tide.



                                           i                                      I .   - -... H.    I..

                                      STRUCTURE OF THE TECHNICAL DOCU NT




                 The CCMP contains general management plans to address regional concerns. They are as follows: the
                 Water Quality Plan, Vital Habitats Plan, Fisheries Plan, Stewardship Plan, and Implementation Plan. Each
                 plan begins with a goal statement, intended to outline the purpose of the plan itseff. Underneath the goal,
                 one will find the subheading "Objective." Objectives list the purposes of recommended actions. A general
                 description of how each objective is to be addressed follows under the subheading "strategy.' Strategies also
                 may describe existing programs and illustrate how they may be integrated with newer recommendations.
                 "Management Actions" are listed below each strategy. They describe what general action state agencies
                 would take to achieve the broader objectives of the plan. The implementation of each management action
                 is explained with "Critical Steps.' The critical steps specifically state which measures would need to be taken
                 to implement a management action. The potential economic costs and considerations of management
                 actions are also described here.

                 The recommendations contained in the CCMP may require redirecting existing authorities or funding sources
                 of state and federal agencies. The document includes discussion of funding strategies for how agencies
                 could meet the costs of the recommended management actions. As part of the CCMP d           *evelopment process,
                 a Financial Planning Committee met to discuss funding options. Although the document currently relies
                 pdmarily on existing authorities or expansions of current budgets to fund recommendations, options such as
                 those discussed by this Financial Planning Committee should be considered during the implementation phase.
                 Some of these strategies involve innovative approaches to generating revenue and may require establishment
                 of new programs. The most highly recommended funding options were the creation of local "Environmental
                 Improvement Funds;" the institution of saltwater fishing licenses; the institution of a license to sell saltwater
                 catches; and the institution of on-she sewage fees.



                                                                         23











              INTRODUCTION


              The f irst Appendix to the technical document contains summaries of the sub-regions of the Albemarle-Pamlico
              estuary. Sub-regions are characterized by their major river basins and sounds. The five sub-regions are as
              follows:


                 Chowan River Basin
                 Roanoke River Basin
                 Albemarle Sound - Currituck Sound - PasquotAnk River Drainage Basin
                 Tar-Pamlico River - Pamlico Sound Drainage Basin
                 Neuse River - Core Sound - Bogue Sound Drainage Basin.

              Each sub-region summary will describe specific local concerns and how they will be addressed by the CCMP.
              Additional appendices to the technical document contain the following information: 1) A review of public
              comments during the development of the CCMP; 2) a glossary and list of acronyms; 3) an administrative cost
              evaluation matrix; 4) a description of agricultural best management practices under the cost share program;
              5) a complete list of APES committee members; 6) a list of APES publications; and 7) a review of National
              Estuary Program CCMP content and approval requirements.




























                                                                    24










           WATER QUALITY PLAN

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











                         GOAL





         Restore., maintain or enhance water
       quality in the Albernorle-Parnlico region
           so that it is fit for fish., wildlife and
                      recreation.











                                                                                                                  WATER OUALITY




                   OBJECTIVE A: IMPLEMENT A COMPREHENSIVE
                      BASINWIDE APPROACH TO WATER QUALITY
                                                      MANAGEMENT.





                Strategy: Effective management of water resources
                ultimately relies on the consideration of system-wide
                processes and the cumulative impacts of activities      i
                                                                               BASIN                  MONTHIYEAR
                across a river basin. To this end, the Division of
                Environmental Management (DEM) is approaching
                                                                               Neuse                  April 7993
                water quality research, management, and discharge
                permitting from a basinwide scale. This approach        i      Tor Pamlico            January 7995
                allows for a balancing of point and nonpoint source            Roanoke                January 1997
                contributions and control strategies. The goal of the
                                                                               White Oak              June 1997
                Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
                                                                        i      (CorelBogue Sounds)
                Resources (DEHNR) is to protect the basin's
                                                                               Chowan                 January 7998
                surface waters while accommodating reasonable
                growth and development. Using this framework                   Posquotonk             January 1998
                requires the availability of river basin models.
                                                                                            yc/e)     April 1998
                                                                               Neuse (2nd C
                Several agencies are working to develop models          I
                that can be used to demonstrate how all these                  The APES study area includes portions of the
                                                                               White Oak River drainage basin. including Core
                factors affect water quality. The Water Quality
                                                                               and Bogue Sounds. See Appencfix A, Regional
                Section of DEM has recently initiated a basinwide              Summaries of Bogue and Core Sounds for more
                                                                               information.
                approach to water quality management. The Neuse
                River Basinwide Management Plan is the first of a
                series of basinwide plans that will be prepared by      Table 2 Basinwide Permitting Schedule
                DEM for all seventeen of the state's major river                for River Basins of the APES Region
                basins over the next f ive years. Table 2 represents
                the basinwide permitting schedule for the river
                basins located in the APES region, denoting when discharge permit issuance begins in each basin. The
                basinwide approach to water management considers the assimilative capacity of a river basin as well as the
                relationship between wetlands and water bodies.





                                                                        27








                WATER OUALIT Y                  ---------------------           ------------

                Figure 15 demonstrates the
                differential cdntribution of point
                and nonpoint sources to                            TOTAL IMPAIRED MILES
                impaired waters in each basin.              1200
                Water quality modeling at the                1000-
                basin and sub-basin scale
                enhances the ability to establish            800-
                realistic   pollutant      loading           600-
                estimates for development of                                                       . ........
                proper management strategies                 400-
                and will eventually assist in the            200-
                prediction of impacts to water
                quality and flows from land use                 0-  CHOWkN       NEUSE    PASQUOTANK    ROANOKE TAR-PAMLICO
                alterations including wetland
                loss and restorations.                                      NONPOINT SOURCES M POINT SOURCES

                                                          NC DEM 1902



                                                    FIGURE 15 MILES OF FRESHWATER STREAMS AND RIVERS
                                                                   IMPAIRED BY POINT AND NONPOINT SOURCES
                                                                   FOR EACH RIVER BASIN IN THE APES REGION




                         Management Action 1: Develop and begin implementing
                  basinwide plans to protect and restore water quality in each basin
                           according to the schedule established by the Division of
                     Environmental Management's Water Quality Section. The plans
                     would include provisions for basinwide wetland protection and
                                                                   restoration.

                            Explanation:               Bosinwide plans are comprehensive,
                            targeted strategies for managing water quality. They
                            assess the cumulative impact of individual projects on
                            water quality within a basin. They can identify and
                            manage pollutants in a way that protects water quality
                            while accommodating economic growth. Basinwide
                            protection and restoration also can help assess and
                            preserve wetlands functions.

                                             ------------------------------- NOW; MW - ----------- - - - - - --






                                                                          28











                                                                                                                WATER QUALITY


                                 Critical Steps:

                                 1 . The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) will continue to utilize
                                     the combined expertise of state and federal staff (U.S. Environmental
                                     Protection Agency-EPA, U.S. Geological Survey-USGS, National
                                     Oceanic and Atmospheric Association-NOAA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
                                     Service-USFWS, Division of Marine Fisheries- DMF, and Division of
                                     Coastal Management-DCM) to develop comprehensive basinwide plans
                                     that will provide mechanisms to characterize water quality and biological
                                     resources within basins, target problematic watersheds, and manage
                                     water resources to support long-term growth.

                                 2.  With input from the Regional Councils (see Implementation Plan), DEM
                                     will continue to establish total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for each
                                     targeted watershed, synchronize the National Pollution Discharge
                                     Elimination System (NPDES) permitting process, and include nonpoint
                                     source controls in each basinwide plan.

                                 3.  DEM with the assistance of other state and federal agencies (U.S. Army
                                     Corps of Engineers-USACE, DMF, DCM, EPA, and USFWS), would
                                     refine a wetlands evaluation system to better classify wetlands function
                                     on a basinwide scale.

                                 4.  The basinwide plans should include information (maps and graphics)
                                     that promotes an understanding of the importance of wetland types to
                                     overall water management.

                                 5.  DEM will use agricultural cost share and other non-regulatory programs
                                     to increase the restoration of degraded wetlands. The Division will
                                     incorporate effective best management practices such as the Forested
                                     Wetlands BMP document (Division of Forest Resources-DFR) into
                                     wetland management programs.

                                 6.  DEM would consider the efforts by DCM in wetlands identification and
                                     evaluation on a county level basis (See Vital Habitats Plan, Objective C,
                                     Management Action 3).

                                 7.  DEM would include the delineated wetlands information (maps and
                                     graphics) in basinwide plans that promotes an understanding of the
                                     importance of wetland types to overall water quality management.





                                                                       29









                 WATER QUALITY

                                    Evaluation Methods
                                    1. DEM will track the completion of each crftical step. The Division
                                    currently plans to review basinwide plans and management strategies every
                                    five years following implementation. At that time modifications and
                                    additions will be made as necessary in the plans to provide continued water
                                    quality improvement and maintenance. -
                                    2. The basinwide comprehensive baseline data set characterizing the water
                                    quality and biological resources would be used to evaluate the success of
                                    management strategies. Urnited degradation of the water quality and
                                    improvements in degraded waters would indicate successful management
                                    practices.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    Program costs of this action are estimated at $50,000 per year to fund an
                                    environmental planner with skills in modeling to work in DEM. This
                                    management action would result in an increase in water quality
                                    improvements achieved per dollar spent on the planning, administration,
                                    implementation, and monitoring of water quality programs. Improved
                                    coordination of activities to protect and restore water quality within each
                                    basin would allow geographical targeting of resources spent on
                                    environmental protection and identif ication of the most cost-effective control
                                    strategies, which in turn would result in cost savings to the public and
                                    private sectors. The development of a system for evaluating the impact of
                                    wetlands alterations on basinwide hydrology and water quality would allow
                                    those who administer wetlands permitting programs to consider the
                                    basinwide and cumulative impacts of permitting decisions. In addition, it
                                    would help decision makers to focus regulatory and mitigation efforts on
                                    those wetlands most important for water quality, and to channel and
                                    concentrate mitigation and protection efforts to areas where the need i's
                                    greatest. By incorporating wetlands impacts into basinwide planning,
                                    government agencies, private firms, and individual landowners can better
                                    tell where development will be most compatible with protecting water and
                                    wetland resources. This reduction in uncertainty should lower the overall
                                    costs of the permitting process over time for both the public and private
                                    sector. Other benefits of deliberate, coordinated, and scientifically based
                                    wetlands management on a basinwide scale could include avoided,
                                    reduced, or postponed expenditures on flood control structures and waste
                                    treatment facilities. Planning allows local governments to assess the
                                    physical capacity of land in their jurisdiction and to plan ahead for the
                                    highest quality growth possible within the constraints of the natural resource
                                    base. At a regional level, planning maximizes the effectiveness of efforts
                                    to identify and protect habitats vital to wildlife, rare species, rare natural                              41,
                                    communities, and fisheries (see the Vital Habitat Section).' Finally, this


                                                                          30











                                                                                                                 WATER QUALrrY


                                  approach would help local governments and landowners understand how
                                  land use decisions made elsewhere in their river basin affect the values of
                                  their land. For instance, a number of wetlands alterations which individually
                                  do not have a critical impact on water quality could cumulatively increase
                                  the intensity or periodicity of flooding for a downstream landowner or
                                  community. Understanding and measuring these eff acts is critical to sound
                                  basinwide management and to reducing future conflicts over land use.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  An environmental planner with modeling skills would require a $50,000
                                  appropriation by the General Assembly.




                 Management Action 2: Establish total maximum daily loo                                        'ds (TMDLS)
                     and associated control strategies for all impaired streams in the
                                            Albemarle-Pamlico region by 1999.

                            Explanation: Total maximum daily loads estimate the
                            amount of pollution that can safely enter a body of
                            water. To determine limits to these daily loads, current
                            and projected levels of pollution must be considered in
                            relation to what the system con absorb, Proper use of
                            TMDLs will allow development of management strategies
                            to ensure long-term sustainable growth that does not
                            harm the state's water resources.





                                  CrRical Steps:

                                   1 .The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) will continue to
                                      establish total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for targeted watersheds
                                      within a basin to be used in the development of water quality
                                      management plans. DEM will continue to evaluate physical, chemical,
                                      and biological parameters basinwide and amend management strategies
                                      as necessary to ensure limited degradation of water resources.



                                                                        31











                  WATER OUAUTY
                                                                                         -----------


                                    2. Using total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) as guidelines, and input from
                                      the Regional Councils (see Implementation Plan), the Division will target
                                      critical point and nonpoint source inputs for priority management efforts.

                                    Evaluation Methods
                                    1. Continued basinwide monitoring of water quality parameters will be used
                                    to assess ecosystem integrity within each river basin and determine N
                                    established TMDLs are effective in preventing degradation of water
                                    resources and improving impaired systems.
                                    2. The success of this management action can be determined by
                                    documented improvements in water quality.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    Under the Clean Water Act, the state is required to establish TMDLs to
                                    determine the total pollutant loadings that a degraded water body can
                                    assimilate while still maintaining its water quality classification and
                                    standards. DEM will require two modelers to establish TIVIDLs for the
                                    Albemarle-Pamlico region. An estimated $100,000 per year is needed to
                                    fund these positions. TMDLs are used as a tool in developing point source
                                    control strategies and targeting areas for nonpoint source management.
                                    When new permit levels are set, point source dischargers may have to pay
                                    increased costs of secondary treatment to comply with these new limits,
                                    and additional costs may be incurred by the private and public sector to
                                    reduce nonpoint source pollution. While TMDLs may require increased
                                    investments in pollution control, they can also facilitate cost savings by
                                    allowing DEM and the Division of Soil and Water Conservation (DSWC) to
                                    focus efforts and resources on geographically targeted areas of concern.
                                    This can help minimize governmental expenditures and better utilize
                                    taxpayers' dollars, while at the same time increasing environmental benefits
                                    per dollar spent on point and nonpoint source controls.

                                    Funding Strategy
                                    Two modelers. to develop TIVIDLs for each river basin in the APES region
                                    would require a $100,000 appropriation from the General Assembly.










                                                                          32











                                                                                                          WATER QUALITY





                                                                                 -----------



                Management Action 3: Renew all discharge permits in a river basin
                                                  simultaneously by 1999.

                          Explanation: Renewing permits simultaneously allows the
                          Division of Environmental Management (DEM) to consider
                          the total impact from all dischargers when determining
                          how much pollution each may release into the basin.




                                 Critical Steps:

                                 1. DEM will place expiration dates on all permits within a basin that expire
                                   in the same year.

                                 2. New or revised limits will be incorporated into permits, as appropriate,
                                   to meet safe wasteload allocations developed under the basinwide
                                   plans.

                                 Evaluation Methods
                                 1. DEM will cross-reference on a yearly basis the permit expiration date for
                                 each discharger with its basin location and the basinwide schedule to
                                 ensure synchronous renewal.
                                 2. The success of this management action can be determined by
                                 decreases in permit processing backlogs.

                                 Costs and Economic Considerations
                                 In the past,permits have been reissued   randomly as they came up for
                                 renewal. Synchronous renewal of NPDES permits is now a major pan of
                                 the basinwide initiative through the DEM. In 1990, to allow for better water
                                 quality management, the Water Quality Section of DEM began
                                 implementing a basinwide NPDES permitting schedule. In 1993, the Neuse
                                 River Basin became the first basin where all discharge permits expire and .
                                 are renewed in the same year. DEM's schedule will allow for synchronous
                                 renewal of discharge permits for the other river basins in the Albemarle-
                                 Pamlico region and across the state. Permits will be reviewed and reissued
                                 at 5 year intervals.   This is a cost effective measure of reducing


                                                                    33








               -WATER QUALITY

                                 administrative costs and averting some potential environmental costs.
                                 Synchronous renewal will facilitate data gathering for water quality and
                                 wasteload modelling, TMDL development, and basin plan development. It
                                 allows the Water Quality Section to allocate staff and resources more
                                 eff iciently.

                                 Funding Strategy
                                 No increased funding is necessary to continue' this initiative.




                Management Action 4: Consider the potential for long-term growth
                      and its impacts when determining how a basin's assimilative
                                                    capacity will be used.

                          Explanation: Assimilative capacity is the ability of a river
                          basin to safely absorb pollutants. Basinwide planning
                          should ensure that this capacity is used in a way that
                          sustains long-term growth. However, planning for long-
                          term growth also must consider how secondary impacts
                          such as runoff from new roads will offect water quality.




                                 Critical Steps

                                 1. The Division of Environmental Management (DEM), based on best
                                     available data, will establish a cap on wasteload allocations to point and
                                     nonpoint sources.

                                 2.  The Division will review existing permits to determine how much of the
                                     utilizable capacity has been distributed.

                                 3.  The Division will not issue a permit H it is determined that a discharge
                                     will result in loss of any existing use or result in violations of established
                                     water quality standards in receiving waters. DEM will consult with the
                                     Division of Coastal Management (DCM) during the permitting process
                                     to ensure all state resources-are conserved and secondary impacts are
                                     considered.


                                                                       34











                                                                                                                 WATER OUALITY


                                    Evaluation Method
                                    The success of. this action can be determined by documented
                                    improvements in water quality and continued environmentally sound
                                    economic growth in each of the basins.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    No new governmental costs are expected to be associated with this action.
                                    However, if managing assimilative capacity Involves setting new permit
                                    levels, then dischargers may have to pay increased costs of advanced
                                    treatment to comply with these new limits. The remaining assimilative
                                    capacity of water bodies could be increased by reducing the amount of
                                    allocated discharge as well as the pursuit and utilization of technology to
                                    improve secondary treatment. This would protect water bodies from
                                    unforeseen cumulative impacts and would establish a margin of safety.

                                    Funding Strategy
                                    No funding increases are required for this management action.





                            Management Action 5: Improve the scientific models for
                    understanding the estuarine system, the effects of human activities
                           on the system and the viability of alternative management
                                                                strategies.

                              Explanation: Scientists use models to understand how
                              systems work. Models for the Albemarle-Pamlico's river
                              basins have been developed, but further refinement and
                              calibration are needed to determine how much pollution
                              can be safely released into the estuary (i.e., total
                              maximum daily loads). This would allow regulators to
                              focus on the most critical sources of pollution, thereby
                              reducing the cost of regulation, monitoring and
                              enforcement, Increased knowledge gained from models
                              will help planners manage water resources to allow for
                              future growth.


                                                                    WIN




                                                                        35








                -WATER OUALITY

                                  Critical Steps

                                  1  A work group would be assembl      ed to coordinate current and future
                                     hydrologic and water quality modeling by responsible agencies, including
                                     the Division of Environmental Management (DEM), Division of Water
                                     Resources (DWR), U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Army Corps of
                                     Engineers, U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Water Resources Research
                                     Institute, and the state university system. -This group would choose
                                     specific models for each basin system. The models would consider
                                     terrestrial and airborne nutrient loadings; surface and ground water
                                     cycling; toxicant loadings, fate and transport; cumulative effects of
                                     ioadings of different constituents on water quality and biotic health;
                                     functions of wetlands, on a landscape level; the impact of drainage and
                                     other hydro-modifications; and the cumulative impacts of marina siting.
                                     The work group also would identify additional research that improves
                                     and integrates current area-wide databases, such as tracking hydrologic
                                     modif ications, stream channelization, ditching, and subsurface and/or
                                     control systems.

                                  2. The work group would determine which agenci    es will conduct monitoring
                                     and modeling efforts for each basin. The responsible agencies then
                                     would request suff icient funding to accomplish the work. DEM would be
                                     the lead agency in coordinating the modeling effort. All modeling would
                                     be accomplished in five years.

                                  3. Water quality and hydrodynamic models would then be used to make
                                     permitting decisions (such as point source discharges, dredge and fill of
                                     wetlands, channelization projects, and dams) to target nonpoint source
                                     control efforts and to support long-term comprehensive planning.

                                  Evaluation Method
                                  Agencies would report annually on their progress toward completing the
                                  models. Once these models have been incorporated into the basinwide
                                  plans, their success will be evaluated in accordance with DEM's basinwide
                                  schedule.


                                  Costs and Economic Considerations
                                  Average cost for this action is estimated at $400,000 per year for five years
                                  to refine and develop hydrodynamic and water quality models for the A-P
                                  region. A model that has already been developed for the Tar-Pamlico Basin
                                  will be refined and adapted as needed for use in the other river basins of
                                  the A-P region. The additional cost,for each basin is expected to be
                                  considerably less than the cost of developing the original model. Improved


                                                                       36











                                                                                                                WATER QUALfTY


                                  information on the effect of specific loadings, cumulative impacts, surface
                                  and ground water cycling, wetland functions, and the impacts of drainage
                                  and other hydromodifications would allow policy makers to set appropriate
                                  discharge limits and to target policy and implementation efforts at the most
                                  damaging discharges and loadings. This could reduce the cost of
                                  regulation, monitoring, enforcement, and compliance while at the same time
                                  reducing the most harmful loadings.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  Money to develop scientific models for four river basins in the APES area
                                  would be acquired from USGS Cooperative Funds. This program provides
                                  100% matching funds and would be available to DEM upon receipt of an
                                  expansion budget itern from the General Assembly. Another possibility for
                                  funding would be through federal Grants applications.




                       Management Action 6: Continue long-term, comprehensive
                   monitoring of water quality in the APES system, collecting data to
                        assess general system health and target regional problems.

                           Explanation: On a systern-wide, basis, water quality
                           monitoring allows managers to assess the effectiveness of
                           management strategies. In addition, monitoring data
                           may be used to develop scientific models or other
                           methods of evaluating water quality on a smaller scale.
                           Continued monitoring also would assess long-term trends.




                                  Critical Steps

                                  1 .The Division of Environmental Management          (DEM) and the U.S.
                                     Geological Survey (USGS) would continue monitoring water quality
                                     through the network of fixed stations throughout the system. This would
                                     help assess general and long-ten trends and identify possible
                                     problems. At these stations, DEM collects grab samples and the USGS
                                     monitors continuously.



                                                                       37











                  WATER QUAL ff Y
                                                   ---- --------- ------- - --------------  - ------------- -------

                                    2. The EPA Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program and the
                                       APES Citizens Water Quality Monitoring Network would collect grab
                                       samples to supplement data collected by USGS and DEM.

                                    3. DEM's basinwide planning initiative, along with USGS' National Water
                                       Quality Assessment Program, would make area-intensive assessments
                                       of water quality on a rotating basis. Data collected through these
                                       assessments would be used to revise management strategies in specific
                                       basins.

                                    4. DEM, USGS, the Citizen Water Quality Monitoring Network (CWQMN),
                                       and other appropriate agencies and organizations would collect water
                                       quality data as needed in response to possible concerns. This data
                                       would identity immediate problems, guide corrective management
                                       strategies, and measure the effectiveness of those strategies.

                                    5. Water quality data collected through the fixed station network would be
                                       expanded to include biological monitoring in estuarine waters and
                                       pesticide monitoring. Area intensive assessments would be used to
                                       characterize water quality inputs during high flow periods when loadings
                                       are greatest to target regional problems and to evaluate the effects of
                                       management actions.

                                    Evaluation Method
                                    DEM and USGS would annually review station locations in the monitoring
                                    network and change them as necessary to give a representative picture of
                                    system health.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    In addition to currently funded monitoring programs, annual costs to DEM
                                    would be $50,000 for an environmental field technician to perform water
                                    quality sampling and $100,000 to maintain the ambient water monitoring
                                    network in the APES region. The implementation of this management
                                    action is critical to the successful implementation of several other elements
                                    of the CCMP and to the protection of water quality in the APES region.
                                    Water quality monitoring allows agencies to assess the effectiveness of
                                    pollution control programs, land and water use planning, and other resource
                                    management programs.







                                                                         38











                                                                                                                                                               WATER OUALITY
                         --------- ------  ----------                 -- - -- ----------------- ---- --

                                                Funding Strategy
                                                Money to fund the expanded ambient water quality network in the APES
                                                area would be acquired from USGS Cooperative Funds. This program
                                                provides 100% matching funds and would be available to DEM upon receipt
                                                of an expansion budget Rem from the General Assembly.                                                  The
                                                environmental field technician position would require a $50,000
                                                appropriation from the General Assembly.






































                                                                                                     39












                                                                                                                           WATER QUALITY





                                                   -- ----  -----


                        OBJECTIVE B: REDUCE SEDIMENTS, NUTRIENTS
                       AND TOXICANTS FROM NONPOINT SOURCES.






                   StWeV: Nonpoint sources of
                   pollution are varied and are                      -
                   usually difficult to regulate.                        MILES
                   Targeted reductions can be                   1000-/
                   accomplished by building on                  600-                                     ... ..............
                   present programs and efforts.
                   A    three-pronged       approach            600-                                                   ..............
                                                                                                           ...............
                   consisting of research and                                                                   .... .............
                                                                400-                                                     ............
                   demonstration projects,
                                                                         .............. ...
                                                                                   ...............                     ...............
                   incentive-based programs, and                200-               ...............                     ::::::
                                                                                                                 ....  ......

                                                                                                                       ..............
                   regulatory action and
                                                                   0 . .......F ......
                   enforcement is necessary to                           CHOIARN    NEUSE    AWQU@TANK     ROANOKE lrAR-PAMLIGO
                   accomplish true reductions. As                    =1 FORESTRY         MD  URBAN RUNOFF     M AGRICULTURAL RUNOFF
                   part     of the        basinwide                  M   .MINING         10  LAND DISPOSAL = HYDROMODIFICATION
                   management plan, a nonpoint
                   source pollution control plan             NC DEM 11192
                   would be developed for each          I
                   river basin to address all           FIGURE 16              MILES OF FRESHWATER SIREAMS
                   sources of nonpoint source                            AND RIVERS IMPAIRED FROM NONPOINT
                   pollution. By characterizing                      SOURCES FOR EACH BASIN IN THE APES REGION
                   individual basins, this plan
                   would create management strategies that identify problem areas and implement control measures necessary
                   to reduce nonpoint source pollution. Figure 16 demonstrates the amount of freshwater miles from each river
                   basin impaired due to nonpoint sources. Research and demonstration of on-site control methods for nonpoint
                   sources, often referred to as best management practices, provide increased opportunities for the reduction
                   of nonpoint source loadings. Incentive programs, such as cost share programs, would be used whenever
                   possible to control existing sources of pollution. Regulatory enforcement action would be used as a tool
                   whenever water quality violations occur or when established minimum criteria are not met in spite of available
                   cost share assistance. Therefore, the nonpoint source pollution enforce          'ment program within the Division of
                                                                                                           ...............
                                                                                                           ...............
                                                                                                           ...............
                                                                                                           ...............
                                                                                                           ..............
                                                                                                           ...............
                                                                                                           ...............
                                                                                                           ...............
                                                                                                           ...............
                                                                         ...............                   .........
                                                                         ...............
                                                                         ...............                                  ......
                                                                         ...............
                                                                         ...............
                                                                         ...............
                                                                         .........7...... ..








                   Environmental Management (DEM) would be strengthened. Other efforts to reduce basinwide nonpoint


                                                                               41









                  WATER QUALITY - -- ----- -- --   ------------

                  sources of pollution would include changes in the management of marinas, stormwater runoff, wastewater
                  treatment,* and forestry practices. Additionally, the development and implementation of nonpoint source
                  control plans on a basinwide level will support future initiatives required by Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone
                  Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990.




                          Management Action 1: For each river basin, develop and
                  implement a plan to control nonpoint source pollution as part of the
                                               basinwide management plan&

                            Explanation: Plans would address all nonpoint sources of
                            pollution in each basin, targeting the most critical areas
                            for controls. These plans would identify the nonpoint
                            source pollution problems specific to each basin.
                            Implementation would vary according to each basin's
                            needs. Plans also would include strategies to control
                            nonpoint source pollution in accordance with the total
                            maximum daily loads (TMDLs) established for each basin.
                            Possible measures include targeted funds for
                            implementation of BMPs, buffer strips along waterways.,
                            ond continued use of BMPs for highway construction.




                                   Critical Steps

                                   1.  The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
                                       (DEHNR), in cooperation with state and federal agencies, the Regional
                                       Councils, universities, and other members of the public and private
                                       sector, will develop a comprehensive nonpoint source control plan
                                       specific to each river basin.

                                   2.  These basinwide plans will develop methods of controlling pollution f rorn
                                       land-disturbing activities, such as agriculture, forestry, and construction
                                       and other types of potential pollution sources, such as urban runoff and
                                       on-site wastewater disposal.



                                                                         42












                                                                                                                   WATER QUAL ff Y


                                   3. Highly degraded areas would be targeted for immediate nonpoint source
                                      pollution controls, while the entire river basin would be monitored by
                                      comprehensive measures. The plans will consider all control options
                                      including new regulations, incentive programs, and locally implemented
                                      programs as necessary.

                                   4. A central database compiling all available information about each river
                                      basin would be established to better characterize the nonpoint source
                                      pollution parameters on a basinwide scale. This data would be
                                      highlighted through the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
                                      capabilities.

                                   Evaluation Method
                                   Lead nonpoint source pollution control agencies, as identified in the
                                   Nonpoint Source Management Program (319 Report), would report on an
                                   annual basis the number of controls applied, the amount of acres treated,
                                   and provide a map of the areas treated. New controls applied to reduce
                                   nonpoint source pollution should be monitored to evaluate their
                                   effectiveness. Total load reductions for sediment and nutrients would be
                                   calculated based on performance expectations and actual data for each
                                   basin. This data could be used to compare data generated previous to the
                                   newly implemented controls. The success of this management action would
                                   be determined by documented improvements in water quality.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   A basinwide nonpoint source control plan would function as pad of an
                                   integrated point and nonpoint source control and management plan for each
                                   basin. A comprehensive plan for each basin utilizing incentive and
                                   regulatory based programs should help to lower the costs and increase the
                                   effectiveness of resources spent on reducing nonpoint source pollution.
                                   Planning would allow incentives for implementation of BMPs in
                                   geographically specific areas important for the protection of water quality in
                                   each basin.     In addition, it would focus resources on ensuring that
                                   measures are taken to control and reduce nonpoint source pollution in
                                   areas of the river basin where water quality is at greatest risk.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   Any additional costs of this management action are addressed under
                                   previous management actions.






                                                                         43












                 WATER QUALITY




                    Management Action 2: Expand funding to implement nonpoint
                 source pollution controls,, pafficularly agricultural best management
                 practices through the N.C. Agriculture Cost Share Program, and also
                   to develop a broader Water QuaW Cost Share Program. Expand
                  the cost share programs to include wetlands restoration. Increase
                                            cost share funds to problem areas.

                           Explanation: Economic incentives and technical
                           assistance hove been effective in promoting nonpoint
                           source pollution controls in agriculture.                                  Under this
                           initiative, the Agriculture Cost Shore Program would
                           expand and a new Water Quality Cost Shore Program,
                           modeled ofter the one for agriculture, would be created.
                           Cost-shoring would give farmers, marina owners, forestry
                           operations and individual land owners greater incentive
                           to reduce nonpoint source pollution.




                                  Crftlcal Steps

                                  1.  The General Assembly would be asked to increase appropriations to the
                                      Division of Soil and Water Conservation (DSWC) for the existing
                                      Agriculture Cost Share Program in the 1994 session. Funding is
                                      necessary for technical assistance and installation of best management
                                      practices.   A list of best management practices eligible for the
                                      Agriculture Cost Share Program and a description of practices as
                                      outlined in a detafli ed implementation plan for nonpoint source pollution
                                      control is presented in Appendix E.

                                  2.  DSWC would pursue avenues to target the increased funding and
                                      technical assistance to priority areas identified through the basinwide
                                      nonpoint source control plans.

                                  3.  The General Assembly would be asked to authorize and appropriate
                                      funding for a new Water Quality Cost Share Program in the 1995



                                                                        44












                                                                                                                     WATER OUAUTY


                                        session. Funding is necessary for technical assistance, administration,
                                        public outreach, and installation of best management practices.

                                    4.  The Water Quality Cost Share Program will be set up in DEHNR and
                                        administered by a division selected by the Department. Upon receipt of
                                        authorization and funding, DEHNR would hire technical and outreach
                                        staff to implement the programs. Technical assistance staff would be
                                        located in offices throughout the APES region.

                                    5.  Using technical experts from the Department as well as from other
                                        agencies and from private industry, DEHNR will develop a manual of
                                        acceptable controls for the land uses managed under the Water Quality
                                        Cost Share Program'. The Department will include effective best
                                        management practices that will protect wetlands. Information, such as
                                        the Forested Wetlands BMP document from the Division of Forest
                                        Resources (DFR), will be revised, updated, and incorporated.

                                    6.  DEHNR would target the most cost-effective controls on a case by case
                                        basis to achieve desired reductions of nonpoint source pollution in
                                        critical areas identified by the basinwide nonpoint source control plans
                                        based on water quality standards.

                                    7.  Using the existing Agriculture Cost Share Program as a model, land
                                        owners would share in the cost'of nonpoint source controls at a rate of
                                        25 percent of the total cost of the controls on their property. The
                                        program would supply the other 75 percent. Technical assistance is
                                        provided through funding from local districts widh matching funds from
                                        the state.


                                    Evaluation Methods
                                    1. Report on an annual basis the number of controls applied, the amount
                                    of acres treated, and map the areas treated.
                                    2. Conduct demonstration site monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of
                                    each type of practice.
                                    3. Calculate the total load reductions for sediment and nutrients based on
                                    performance expectations and actual data for each basin.
                                    4. Regulatory enforcement action would be used as a tool whenever water
                                    quality violations and rule infractions occur in spite of available cost share
                                    assistance.


                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    A total of $5,000,000 per year would be needed to implement this action.
                                    The Agriculture Cost Share program for the APES region requires an


                                                                          45









                 -WATER QUAL ffy

                                    additional estimated @25 million in fiscal year 1994-95 to hire additional
                                    technical outreach personnel and provide ample support for BMPs.
                                    Funding needs for the broader Water Quality Cost Share Program are
                                    estimated at $2.5 million per year. For each of the programs, $500,000
                                    would be used to fund administration and technical assistance, $2 million
                                    would be used to fund on-the-ground practices. The agricultural cost share
                                    program offers farmers not only strong economic incentives to implement
                                    BMPs (the program will pay 75 percent of implementation costs), but
                                    technical assistance to help them determine the most appropriate BMPs for
                                    each farming operation. In addition, technical assistance personnel who are
                                    familiar with local conditions would be located in each district office. These
                                    factors help control the cost of reducing nonpoint source pollution from
                                    agricultural operations. As is the case in the agricultural BMP program,
                                    BMP implementation through the broader Water Quality Cost Share
                                    Program is intended to improve water quality on the landowner's property
                                    as well as in adjacent areas and downstream. In the same way the
                                    agricultural program aims to improve the efficiency of farm operations, the
                                    same would be true for homeowners and foresters.               For example,
                                    upgrading obsolete and non-compliant septic systems would also improve
                                    the efficiency of the homeowner's septic system. Controlling soil erosion
                                    can save topsoil and increase the productivity of forester's soil. If pesticide
                                    use is reduced, pesticide costs for urban and suburban homeowners, as
                                    well as foresters, may be lowered. In addition to the above benefits, urban
                                    and suburban homeowners could benefitfrom an increase in land value due
                                    to upgrading obsolete and non-compliant septic systerns. Private foresters
                                    may benef it from an increase in land value through the use of BMPs which
                                    decrease erosion. BMPs that reduce erosion of construction site areas and
                                    of forestry logging and replanting sites could reduce turbidity caused by
                                    sediment loadings, and thus benefit fish and other aquatic life who are
                                    harmed by ft. Reduction of water pollution from suburban and urban
                                    nonpoint sources, which would lower bacteria and pathogen inputs, can
                                    lessen the threat of groundwater and drinking water contamination and algal
                                    blooms which result in fish kills and diseases thereby reducing the risk of
                                    harm to shellfish, finfish and human health.

                                    Funding Strategy
                                    The expansion of the Agriculture Cost Share Program in the APES region
                                    would require a $2.5 million increase to the present program by the General
                                    Assembly. Other potential funding sources would include the USDA
                                    Agriculture Conservation Program to restore wetlands. Additional funding
                                    may be obtained from the Tar-Pamlico Basin Association.                     The
                                    development of a Water Quality Cost Share Program would require an
                                    additional $2.5 million appropriation from the General Assembly.


                                                                          46












                                                                                                            WATER OUALfrY





                        Management Action 3: Continue to research and develop
                  alternative septic systems and new best management practices to
                                           reduce nonpoint source pollution.

                          Explanation: Altemative septic systems will help protect
                          the environment and support long-term growth by
                          providing effective waste treatment for eastern North
                          Carolina. BMPs improve septic system performance and
                          reduce costly repairs. Developing and demonstrating
                          additional BMPs for other sources of pollution, such as
                          runoff from agricultural lands, urban lands, and highways,
                          would provide proactive, cost-effective means to reduce
                          nonpoint source pollution.





                                 Crhical Steps

                                 1. The General Assembly would be asked to consider requests by the
                                    Division of Environmental Health (DEH) to establish a research center
                                    in the coastal plain of North Carolina. This would facilitate efforts by the
                                    On-site Wastewater Section to develop and demonstrate afternative
                                    septic systems for porous soils of this region.

                                 2. Demonstration projects would be set up in counties within the
                                    Albemarie-Pamlico region.     These projects would determine the
                                    effectiveness of alternative systems under a variety of site and soil
                                    conditions. The demonstration projects would be modelled after
                                    successful demonstration projects that already exist in Chatham and
                                    Craven counties.

                                 3. The demonstration projects would include outreach components to
                                    educate the public about alternative systems. These efforts would
                                    emphasize the importance of maintenance for effective system
                                    operation.



                                                                    47









                -WA-TER--QUALffY  --- ------------                         ---- - -          --- - -- --       -- - ----

                                  4. The Division of SO and Water Conservation (DSWC), would meet with
                                      the Cooperative Extension Service, North Carolina State University,
                                      Division of Water Resources (DWR), and others to determine priority
                                      research initiatives and to aid in securing funding to research the effects
                                      of best management practices on groundwater.

                                  5.  The federal Agricultural Research Service, North Carolina State
                                      University Agricultural Research Service, DSWC, Department of
                                      Agricutture (DA), Cooperative Extension Service, and farm organizations
                                      would provide information on, and help to develop, agricultural and non.
                                      -agricultural BMPs to reduce nonpoint source pollution caused by the
                                      leaching of nitrates, safts, and pesticides. Agricultural BMPs that can
                                      help reduce this pollution include: controlling the rate, method, and
                                      timing of manure, fertilizer, and pesticide applications; scheduling
                                      irrigation to minimize water use and excessive leaching, which alsomay
                                      .reduce runoff H infiltration capacity is not exceeded; and tilling
                                      conservatively for runoff and erosion control.

                                  6.  The Groundwater Section and Wellhead Protection Program of the
                                      Division of Environmental Management (DEM) would work with other
                                      relevant agencies and local governments to develop non-agricullural
                                      BMPs. Non-agricultural BMPs that can help to reduce groundwater
                                      pollution include improved siting, installation, and maintenance of septic
                                      systems. In addition, minimum lot size requirements reduce the risk of
                                      drinking water contamination by preventing the concentration of
                                      wastewater and sewage treatment near water supplies. Non-agricultural
                                      BMPs to protect surface water and groundwater resources also include
                                      the adequate management and maintenance of stormwater structures.

                                  7. Stream-side buffer strips would be promoted for both agricultural and
                                      non-agricultural land use practices to help minimize groundwater and
                                      surface water pollution. The transport of discharging waters through
                                      these buffer areas reduces nitrates, other nutrients, and sediments
                                      before they enter the surface waters.

                                  8.  The Environmental Management Commission (EMC), Wildlife Resources
                                      Commission (WRC), Coastal Resources Commission (CRC), Division of
                                      Forest Resources (DFR), Soil and Water Conservation Commission
                                      (SWCC), US Fish and Wildlife Service, and US Soil Conservation
                                      Service will form a task force to develop technical specifications for
                                      stream-side buffer strips. These specifications will include. buffer width
                                      and type of vegetation to be used while incorporating ecological function



                                                                        48












                                                                                                                        WATER QUALrrY


                                       as a primary design criterion. These specifications should also consider
                                       the amount and type of land disturbance allowed within the buffer zone.

                                    9. The task force will use Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
                                       technology to analyze the current extent of stream-side buff ers in critical
                                       sub-basins. This information would be used to target those areas that
                                       lack buffer strips for. outreach and technical assistance.

                                    Evaluation Methods
                                    1. Research would be evaluated to determine whether the alternative
                                    septic systems are effective in the soils of the Piedmont and in those soils
                                    of the coastal plain that are not suitable for conventional septic systems.
                                    2. The costs of the afternative systems would be compared to the costs of
                                    conventional systems to determine whether the systems are price
                                    competitive.
                                    3. Groundwater and well water would be monitored and tested for
                                    pollutants before, during and after experimental best management practices
                                    were implemented.
                                    4. Data collected on water quality and hydrologic research will be analyzed
                                    to determine the effectiveness of the best management practices in
                                    pollutant removal. The results will be provided to the public through
                                    technical assistance and education on the proper usage of best
                                    management practices.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    It is anticipated that $350,000 per year for f ive years will be needed to f und
                                    a research center for DEH in the coastal region of North Carolina. A portion
                                    of this total may be used to fund research on the development of aftemative
                                    septic systems.       BMPs such as improved siting, installation, and
                                    maintenance of septic systems, and proper construction, operation, and
                                    maintenance of stormwater structures offer ground and surface water
                                    protection as well as cost savings. These preventative BMPs not only
                                    improve the performance of septic systems and stormwater structures, they
                                    also are less costly than repairing or replacing -systems and structures.
                                    Many agricultural BMPs have been effective in increasing productivity as
                                    well as reducing nonpoint source pollution. For example, agricultural BMPs
                                    such as erosion control techniques that can retain fertile topsoil also help
                                    to maximize yield. Yield can also be improved by controlling the rate,
                                    method, and timing of fertilizer and pesticide application while reducing
                                    agricultural runoff  Demonstration of the eff ectiveness of best management





                                                                            49









               -WATER--CUALffY

                                 practices that offer ease of  integration into existing practices and that
                                 provide economic or labor     saving benefits can help to increase the
                                 understanding, acceptance, and use of these practices by local citizens.

                                 Funding Strategy
                                 To fund a research center and conduct research on alternative septic
                                 systems, a $350,000 appropriation would be needed from the General
                                 Assembly. An additional amount of money is necessary to research the
                                 effects of BMPs on groundwater. This funding would be sought as grant
                                 money opportunities become available.




                  Management Action 4: Strengthen current enforcement to detect
                      and correct ground and surface water quality violations from
                                                        nonpoint sources.

                          Explanation: Although current enforcement authority
                          exists, nonpoint sources of water quality violations are
                          difficult to identify because they are varied and often
                          widespread.                   The' Division of Environmental
                          Management's (DEM's) Water Quality and Groundwater
                          Sections would strengthen enforcement to ensure that
                          these violations are identified and corrected.





                                 Critical Steps

                                 1. The General Assembly would be asked to authorize increased funding
                                    to DEM to hire three additional staff members for the Washington
                                    regional office.

                                 2. The additional staff members would be responsible for addressing
                                    concerns related to nonpoint source pollution, including inspections and
                                    enforcement procedures.




                                                                     50












                                                                                                                  WATER QUALITY


                                   3. The additional staff members would use the basinwide monitoring data
                                      to evaluate water quality violations and prioritize these violations
                                      according to severity.

                                   4. The Division would respond with technical assistance and education
                                      initiatives to promote the use of best management practices by
                                      landowners.

                                   5. Notice of Violations (NOVs) and assessments would be issued
                                      according to the severity and frequency of water quality standard
                                      violations.


                                   6. Based on staff assessment of contaminated sites, DEM would
                                      recommend appropriate remedial action.

                                   Evaluation Method
                                   DEM would evaluate the number of exceedances of water quality standards
                                   to determine the effectiveness of best management practices and overall
                                   enforcement efforts. The success of this strategy can be measured by
                                   documented water quality improvement due to remediation and enforcement
                                   efforts.


                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   Funding needs are estimated at $200,000 per year for staffing,
                                   administration, and implementation. This would include three additional
                                   staff members to be hired by DEM, as well as equipment and supplies. The
                                   staff would be stationed in the regional off ice in Washington, NC and
                                   provided with continuous monitoring equipment. Enforcing regulations
                                   would protect the public's drinking water and water resources from nonpoint
                                   source violations that otherwise could threaten human and environmental
                                   health, with associated health, environmental, and economic costs.
                                   Enforcement that begins by identifying nonpoint source pollution violations
                                   and is solution-oriented can help reduce future violations. By doing so, the
                                   future costs of enforcement and pollution are reduced.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   To f und three additional staff members and operational support, a $200,000
                                   appropriation would be required from the General Assembly.







                                                                        51












                  WATER OUALITY






                   Management Action 5: Strengthen implementation of forestry best
                       management practices through training, education, technical
                                                 assistance and enforcomenL

                            Explanation: Proper use of forestry best management
                            practices is critical for water quality protection in the
                            APES region. Additional professional foresters would
                            provide needed outreach and technical assistance to
                            forestry operators and landowners regarding
                            implementation of BMPs- Enhanced enforcement would
                            ensure proper use of forestry BMPs and help to eliminate
                            improper forestry practices. Participation by loggers and
                            landowners in education programs, such as th, e
                            Professional Loggers Program, is vital to the expanding
                            goals of the forest products industry. Forestry workshops
                            create an opportunity for landowners to leam about
                            forestry management and the use of acceptable forestry
                            BMPs,



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




                                   Critical Steps

                                   1. The General Assembly would be asked to authorize increased funding
                                       to the Division of Forest Resources (DFR) to hire five professional
                                       foresters, one for each district in the APES region, to provide outreach
                                       and technical assistance on forestry best management practices.

                                   2.  The General Assembly would be asked to authorize increased funding
                                       to the Division of Land Resources (DLR) to hire two additional staff
                                       members to enforce the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution
                                       Control Act as it relates to forestry requirements.

                                   3.  DFR, the Forestry Association, and the Cooperative Forest Extension
                                       Service would continue to promote and conduct educational wortshops,
                                       such as the Professional Loggers Program, to expand knowledge and

                                                                       52












                                                                                                               WATER QUAL17Y


                                    encourage industry to continue promoting activities that ensure
                                    environmentally sound forestry practices.      The intention of these
                                    educational workshops is to '"pull together' the broad interest of the
                                    forest products industry while expanding upon the necessity for
                                    compliance with forestry perlormance standards. Previous workshops
                                    have focused on sediment control, wetland issues, wildlife
                                    cons iderations, preharvest planning, and critical habitat protection.

                                 Evaluation Method
                                 To determine the rate of noncompliance, the DFR and the DLR would
                                 compile enforcement data through their inspection process to determine the
                                 number of sites penalized for not following best management practices or
                                 found in violation of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act. A best
                                 management practice noncompliance rate would demonstrate the success
                                 of this action. The effectiveness of education workshops would also be
                                 reflected by this rate.

                                 Costs and Economic Considerations
                                 The DFR would require $250,000 to hire five professional foresters. The
                                 DLR would need $100,000 to hire two additional staff members for
                                 enforcement activities. Possible benefits may include more profitable
                                 logging operations H operators learn techniques that make their operations
                                 more economically efficient. As a result of best management practices
                                 being implemented, landowners may benefit from a decrease of soil loss
                                 and erosion on their property. The benefits to water quality from the
                                 implementation of forestry best management practices include decreased
                                 sediment pollution of estuarine waters as a result of BIVIP implementation,
                                 with a resulting decrease in damage to aquatic Ile, including ecologically,
                                 commercially, and recreationally valuable fish.

                                 Funding Strategy
                                 The hiring of additional staff members by DLR and DFR would require a
                                 $350,000 appropriation from the General Assembly.












                                                                      53









               WATER QUALITY





                    Management Action 6: Enhance stormwater runoff control by
                   strengthening existing regulations and developing new ones, ff
                needed, by 1995. Improve enforcement to ensure that stormwater
                       management systems are property installed and regularly
                                                        maintained.

                         Explanation: At present, the North Carolina Stormwater
                         Management Program targets priority areas and high risk
                         pollutant sources. Additional benefits from this program
                         may be realized by evaluating expansion of the areas of
                         coverage to target more - or potentially all -- waters.
                         Under this initiative, various regulating agencies would
                         coordinate their efforts to protect all state waters. The
                         Division of Environmental Management (DEM) would
                         dedicate more staff time to monitoring the installation,
                         operation and maintenance of stormwater systems. A
                         critical port of enforcement would be providing
                         education and technical assistance to private land
                         owners, industries, municipalities and others required to
                         comply with these regulations.



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




                               Crftical Steps

                               1 .DEM will evaluate current stormwater management rules for
                                  comprehensive coverage of all state waters and to ensure that all
                                  current stormwater programs are integrated.

                               2. The Division of Coastal Management (DCM) will evaluate current
                                  enforcement of its rules for Outstanding Resource Waters as they apply
                                  to stormwater management within the CAMA permitting process.

                               3. DEM will evaluate the effectiveness of management practices in
                                  protection of water quality in coastal areas.


                                                                54









                                                                                          - ----- ----------   _-WATER QUAUTY

                                   4. DEM would hire more staff to monitor the construction, operation, and
                                      maintenance of stormwater control facilities. In addition, the state
                                      stormwater control program would dedicate more staff to education and
                                      technical assistance of private land owners, industries, municipalities,
                                      and regions required to comply with the state or federal stormwater
                                      control regulations, so that these parties understand the reasons for the
                                      regulations and how to improve maintenance.

                                   Evaluation Method
                                   The state would hold biannual meetings between the regulating agencies
                                   to discuss goals and strategies and to determine K the stormwater runoff
                                   program is being implemented property. At this time, changes may be
                                   made as necessary to meet the goals of the program. Changes in water
                                   quality within significant water body classifications will be analyzed using
                                   trend analysis to determine whether pollutant loads have been reduced or
                                   water quality improved.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   DEM would require $150,000 per year for three staff persons to evaluate
                                   current stormwater management rules; monitor coastal and inland
                                   stormwater control facilities to ensure proper construction, operation, and
                                   maintenance; and to provide outreach education and technical assistance
                                   to private landowners, industries, municipalities, and counties to ensure
                                   proper maintenance of stormwater management facilities. Improvement of
                                   stormwater management through education, technical assistance,
                                   monitoring, and certification could reduce loadings of sediment and
                                   toxicants from stormwater runoff from inland as well as coastal sources.
                                   This could provide more comprehensive water quality protection for
                                   estuarine and coastal waters, and would also benefit inland waters. Proper
                                   maintenance of stormwater systems such as wet detention ponds provides
                                   for continued flood control and retention of sediment and other pollutants
                                   associated with particulates that settle in the ponds.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   The hiring of additional staff members by DEM would require a $150,000
                                   appropriation from the General Assembly.









                                                                        55







                -WATER QUALITY ----- - -- -------- - -- -



                Management Action 7: Implement an inter-agency state policy that
                addresses marina siting and integrates best management practices
                                through permitting and better public education.

                          Explanation: There is no consensus on the cumulative
                          impact of marinas on the estuary or on how to manage
                          marina development. A state marinas policy would
                          coordinate agencies concerned with regulating and
                          planning for marinas. It would address such issues as
                          public trust rights and siting, and would integrate new
                          best management practices.                             New BMPs include
                          designing marinas to contain oil spills and pollution,
                          minimizing the impact of turbulence from boating outside
                          marinas, and controlling pollution from fish wastes and
                          boat cleansers. A. marinas policy, along with the
                          appropriate regulations, would be a guide for local
                          government planning. Public education, particularly
                          boater education, plays an integral role in encouraging
                          best management practices.


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




                                 Critical Steps

                                 1  The current permitting process allows for interagency coordination for
                                    the review of new manna permits; however, consensus between the
                                    agencies has not been achieved regarding the cumulative impacts of
                                    marinas on the coastal zone. Therefore, the Division of Coastal
                                    Management (DCM), Division of Environmental Management (DEM),
                                    Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), and Division of Environmental
                                    Health's Shellfish Sanitation Branch (SSB) (forming a marina policy
                                    committee) would address cumulative impacts of marina siting by: a)
                                    defining potential impacts of marina development, b) assessing the
                                    impact of multiple marinas in terms of conflicting public trust issues,
                                    eff ects on water quality, nursery areas, degradation of. habitat, coastal



                                                                     56












                                                                                                                        WATER QUALfFY


                                        erosion, and coastal land use planning, and c) defining the difference in
                                        impacts of existing marinas on the marine environment from the impacts
                                        of new marinas.


                                     2. The marina policy committee would create a comprehensive state
                                        marina policy, outlining its goals, scope, and the role of each agency in
                                        its implementation.

                                     3. The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC), Environmental Management
                                        Commission (EMC), and Marine Fisheries Commission (MFC) would
                                        expand current permit requirements or develop supporting regulations
                                        to meet the goals of the aforementioned policy.

                                     4. To define a state marina policy, the marina policy committee would
                                        outline specific criteria for evaluating the implementation of policy goals.

                                     5. In defining a comprehensive marinas policy, the staff of DCM, DEM,
                                        DMF, and SSB would require permits to include best management
                                        practices. Some best management practices which have not yet been
                                        addressed in permitting procedures include, for example: marina design
                                        to include oil spill and pollution containment; the impacts of turbulence
                                        from boating outside the marina; and control over pollutants such as
                                        boat sewage, fish wastes, and boat cleansers.

                                     6. The comprehensive state marinas policy would promote addit                ional
                                        programs to broaden public understanding of what individuals can do to
                                        assist in marina management (such as proper disposal of fish wastes,
                                        boat sewage disposal, or the use of safe cleansing agents). Current
                                        approaches for educating the public would be assessed in terms of its
                                        eff ectiveness and scope. DCM would continue this process by providing
                                        information on pump-out stations within marinas.

                                     Evaluation Method
                                     Information collected from the evaluation of permit compliance would be
                                     used to determine whether best management practices have been
                                     implemented, operated, and maintained properly at marinas. The marina
                                     policy committee would meet annually using pre-established evaluation
                                     criteria to assess the implementation of the program. Any changes in policy
                                     or management practices could be added at this time. Enforcement
                                     mechanisms may be discussed and assessed for their effectiveness.





                                                                            57







                 -WATER-QUALITY                                                                                 - - ---- ---- - - -----------

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   No additional program costs for this coordinating action are anticipated. A
                                   comprehensive, interagency, statewide approach to marina siting and
                                   management can help reduce user conflicts, increase total economic
                                   benefits, and preserve and enhance the natural resources of the area for
                                   future production of goods and services. In addition, implementation of the
                                   marinas policy could serve to enhance the economic vitality of coastal,
                                   estuarine, river and lakeside areas of the state by contributing to the quality
                                   of the region's amenities, providing an attractive inducement for continued
                                   growth of tourism and water related recreation. Although marinas would
                                   incur some additional short-term costs to implement additional best
                                   management practices, most of these measures are preventative, and can
                                   actually reduce costs in the long-term. For example, design criteria for
                                   marina I ueling stations protect the public and the environment f rom serious
                                   health risks and costs when they require that design allows for the
                                   containment of spills in a limited area.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   Not applicable.



























                                                                         58











                                                                                                                       WATER OUALITY





                   OBJECTIVE C.- REDUCE POLLUTION FROM POINT
                      SOURCES, SUCH AS WASTEWATER TREATMENT
                                             FACILITIES AND INDUSTRY.





                 Strategy: In addition to the
                 reduction of point source
                 impacts gained through the
                 utilization of basinwide
                 management planning (see
                 Objective A), further gains
                 can be made through the
                 use of proactive manage-
                 ment strategies such as
                 pollution   prevention and
                 increased     emphasis       on
                 facility inspections and
                 monitoring.       In general,
                 focus would be placed on
                 reducing waste at the
                 source. Figure 17 shows all
                 permitted     point     source
                 dischargers in the APES
                 region. Pollution Prevention     FIGURE 17 NATIONAL POLLUTA                T DISCHARGE ELIMINATIO
                 Program are an excellent                   SYSrEMS (NPDES) PERMIT LOCATIONS IN THE APES REGION
                 means of achieving waste
                 reductions and, in some cases, production cost reductions. The Department of Environment, Health, and
                 Natural Resources' (DEHNR) Office of Waste Reduction's (OWR) Pollution Prevention Program provides
                   uhi-media waste reduction technical assistance to industries. The Division of Environmental Management's
                 (DEM) Pretreatment Program works to protect municipal or publicly owned wastewater treatment works and
                 m

                 their receiving waters from the detrimental impacts of industrial users. Locations of wastewater treatment
                 systems in the region are illustrated in Figure 18. Better use of these programs would be instrumental in
                 helping reduce inputs to all systems operating under regulatory water quality control. The Department's goal
                 is to incorporate pollution prevention into all aspects of environmental protection programs. A 1991 grant


                                                                          59









                 WATER QUAUTY
















                                                                            tl*





                              FIGURE 18             WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS
                                                            IN THE APES REGION


                 from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is supporting pollution prevention projects in
                 Winston-Salem and Troy. According to records maintained in the DEM's Compliance Monitoring System, the
                 percentage of dischargers found operating in violation of their permit (out-of-compliance) has decreased over
                 the years. Increased computerization of DEM's compliance monitoring activities have assisted in an increase
                 in administrative assessments and civil penalty cases. However, in order to be more proactive in preventing
                 permit violations and resulting water quality degradation, the Division requires more staff for review of
                 monitoring data and for conducting inspections. Increased inspections provide the benefit of improved
                 communication between the Division and dischargers and early detection of potential problems which
                 prevents some violations before they occur.
















                                                                      60












                                                                                                               WATER MAUTY




                  Management Action 1: Promote pollution prevention planning and'
                    altematives to discharge, where feasible, for all point sources to
                                  reduce the volume and toxicity of discharges.

                           Explanation: Environmental problems surface when
                           inadequately controlled or treated wastewater is
                           discharged into the system.                            Pollution prevention
                           programs are a proactive measure aimed at reducing
                           waste at its source. These programs make treatment
                           more efficient, reduce pollutants in the waste stream,
                           and lower cleanup costs for industry and government.
                           When appropriate, alternatives to discharge should be
                           encouraged.



                                  CrItical Steps

                                  1 . OWR's Pollution Prevention Program and DEM's Facility Assessment
                                      Unit would strengthen coordination to provide technical and regulatory
                                      assistance.


                                  2.  With assistance from DEM, OWR would prioritize and target those
                                      facilities found in violation of their NPDES permit or municipal
                                      pretreatment permit.

                                  3.  OWR would coordinate with all permitted facilities concerning the
                                      implementation of pollution prevention planning.

                                  4.  To establish compliance with NPDES and municipal pretreatment
                                      permits and to reduce waste generation, industries would seek technical
                                      assistance and policy support from DEM and OWR.

                                  5.  Municipal wastewater treatment plants, with state approved pretreatment
                                      programs, would be encouraged to develop pollution prevention
                                      programs to assist indirect dischargers with implementing industrial
                                      pollution prevention programs.


                                                                      61









                  -WATER QUALITY

                                    6. DEM would require the use of non-discharge alternatives where feasible.

                                    Evaluation Methods
                                    1. Once a pollution prevention program has been established at a facility,
                                    periodic inspections by DEM would document the status (improvement) of
                                    that facifily's compliance record.
                                    2. Comparisons can be made of previous compliance records versus
                                    present status. Documentation of improvement in plant performance could
                                    be the result.
                                    3. Timely reports would be prepared by DEM and OWR including updated
                                    compliance information.

                                    Economic Costs and Considerations
                                    With recent increases in staffing, this action is not anticipated to require an
                                    additional increase in staff or funding in OWR or in DEM's Facility
                                    Assessment Unit. Better inter-governmentall coordination and cooperation
                                    can help reduce the costs of ensuring compliance with environmental
                                    regulations. In addition, coordinating DEM's Compliance Group and OWR
                                    is a cost-effective method that uses existing government programs to target
                                    firms that may need technical assistance and training to establish pollution
                                    prevention methods and technology in their plants. Although costs may be
                                    incurred to establish pollution prevention programs in industrial plants, many
                                    firms have found that waste. reduction often results in savings in operating
                                    costs that more than offset the costs of implementing the plan.

                                    Funding Strategy
                                    No additional funding is necessary to implement this management action.




                      Management Action 2: Expand and strengthen enforcement of
                     National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits.
                       Increase site inspections and review of self-monitoring data to
                                           improve facility compliance by 1995.

                             Explanation: Increasing the staff of the Division of
                             Environmental Management's (DEM) Compliance Group
                             would allow for more frequent site inspections and would
                             enhance enforcement. More frequent inspections would
                             improve communication between' the Division and


                                                                          62












                                                                                                           WATER QUALITY


                          dischargers, and would help prevent some violations
                          before they occur.                    Stronger enforcement would
                          dampen incentives for dischargers to violate their
                          permits.



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




                                 Critical Steps

                                 1 .The General Assembly would be asked to increase permit fees for DEM
                                    in order to hire additional personnel for their compliance program.

                                 2. DEM would increase personnel in their central and regional offices to
                                    provide for more frequent and comprehensive inspections of permitted
                                    dischargers and provide more staff time to the Notice of Violation and
                                    assessment process.

                                 3. As required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DEM
                                    would maintain its Enforcement Management System, which is a
                                    complete set of written enforcement policies ensuring consistent and
                                    adequate enforcement procedures.

                                 4. When a facility is found in violation of its discharge permit, DEM's
                                    Facility Assessment Unit would investigate approp6ate enforcement
                                    actions to achieve compliance as quickly as feasible.

                                 5. DEM would review the permits and effluent data for all facilities identified
                                    whose effluent concentrations could result in potential water quality
                                    exceedances.

                                 6. DEM would continue to investigate and propose innovative methods of
                                    enforcement to increase efficiency.

                                 Evaluation Methods
                                 DEM would continue to track on a quarterly basis the percentage of NPDES
                                 dischargers operating in violation of their permit. A decrease in permit
                                 violations would be considered successful implementation of this
                                 management action.





                                                                    63









                WATER CUALITY

                                 Economic Costs and Considerations
                                 DEM would require $300,000 per year to hire six additional personnel and
                                 to purchase additional monitoring equipment. If facilities were aware that
                                 more frequent and comprehensive inspections of permitted dischargers
                                 were taking place, higher rates of compliance could be expected, which
                                 would result in lower governmental costs of pollution clean-up.

                                 Funding Strategy
                                 The hiring of six staff members by DEM would require a $300,000
                                 appropriation from the General Assembly. Another possible source of
                                 funding for this action would be revenues generated from permit fees.

































                                                                     64











                                                                                                                         WATER QUALff Y





                           OBJECTIVE D: REDUCE THE RISK OF TOXIC
                            CONTAMINATION TO AQUATIC LIFE AND
                                                         HUMAN HEALTH.






                  Strategy:     Several sites within the
                  APES area were identified as exceeding
                  levels of concern for toxic contaminants
                  in ambient water, sediment, and/or fish
                  tissue using protocols suggested by
                  Cunningham, et al.         (1 992a).     For
                  example, concentrations of mercury                                                         + +
                  exceeding 0. 15 ppm in sediments of the                                            ++
                  Albemarle sound and its tributaries are
                  illustrated in. Figure 19. The Division of
                  Environmental Management (DEM),
                  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS),
                  and other state or federal agencies
                  should coordinate monitoring efforts for
                  these environmental media to provide
                  the maximum geographic and most
                  cost-effective monitoring coverage.
                  Resources should be concentrated to
                  evaluate the potential impact to aquatic      XG@URE 119 BOTTOM SEDIMENT SAMPLING SITES
                  life, wildlife, and human health, and to             WITH MERCURY CONCENMA77ONS EXCEEDING
                  identify additional contaminated sites.         0. 15 PPM IN THE ALBEMARLE SOUND DRAINAGE REGION







 MW
                                                                            65












                WATER QUAL ff Y





                  Management Action 7: Increase efforts to assess and monitor the
                 extent of estuarine sediment contamination, fish and shelifish tissue
                  contamination, water quality violations, and to identffy the causes
                                           and sources of these problems.

                          Explanation: Several areas within the Albemarie-Pamlico
                          region have been identified as exceeding levels of
                          concern for toxicity in water, sediment and fish tissue.
                          Any additional contaminated sites should be identified.
                          Existing contaminated sites would be evaluated to
                          determine the extent of the problem and its impact on
                          aquatic life, wildlife and human health. Management
                          actions should focus on reducing or eliminating further
                          contamination in areas of concem.





                                CrIltical Steps

                                1 . DEM will remain current on developing U.S. Environmen   tal Protection
                                    Agency (EPA) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                                    (NOAA) protocols for collection, analyses, and criteria for sediment
                                    toxicity; and incorporate EPA approved protocols into existing programs.

                                2.  Once EPA protocols are approved and adopted, DEM would conduct
                                    sediment toxicity testing at sites identified as being most contaminated
                                    or where specific pollutants (e.g., mercury) repeatedly occur at toxic
                                    levels.

                                3.  DEM will continue ambient water quality monitoring at those sites
                                    identified as being most contaminated.

                                4.  DEM, using products produced by the Centerior Geographic Information
                                    and Analysis (CGIA), would analyze data concerning water quality
                                    standards exceedances and their proximity to known point and nonpoint
                                    source pollution and enter this information into a geographic database


                                                                   66












                                                                                                                    WATER QUALrrY


                                       using quality assured layers. DEM would review this information and
                                       attempt to determine the potential sources and causes.

                                    5. DEM would utilize the information in the geographic database
                                       concerning sftes identified as exceeding water quality standards and
                                       target them for sediment toxicity analyses (once sediment criteria are
                                       adopted).

                                    6. DEM, with assistance from the Office of Waste Reduction (OWR), would
                                       initiate action to reduce or eliminate further pollutant loading to the
                                       identified contaminated sediment and ambient water quality sites;
                                       considering possible remedial efforts of the contaminated area. (Refer
                                       to Objective D, Management Action 3)

                                    7. To determine the extent of fish and shellfish contamination, DEM and
                                       USFWS would increase efforts to monitorthe concentrations of chemical
                                       contaminants in fish and shellfish tissues to identify additional areas
                                       where fisheries resources are contaminated. The Division would target
                                       areas where contaminant loadings are most likely to occur (e.g., areas
                                       where sediment or ambient water quality exceedances have been
                                       identified or where point source loadings or nonpoint sources of
                                       pollutants are greatest).

                                    8. The Environmental Epidemiology Section (EES) will continue to evaluate
                                       fish data and develop criteria for appropriate action to protect public
                                       health.

                                    9. DEM will continue to conduct intensive monitoring of fish and shellfish
                                       at those sites where tissue concentrations are a human health concern
                                       based on criteria developed by EES.

                                    Evaluation Methods
                                    1. Upon adoption of EPA and NOAA protocol currently under development,
                                    DEM would utilize the EPA and NOAA methodology and draft guidance to
                                    evaluate analytical techniques and sediment criteria relative to the character
                                    of North Carolina sediment and make appropriate amendments to its
                                    methodology.
                                    2. Map reports would be generated annually from Geographic Information
                                    Systems (GIS) data layers of contaminated sediment and ambient water
                                    quality sites to track the extent of point and nonpoint source pollution
                                    throughout each basin.
                                    3. DEM would report on a periodic basis (e.g., as pan of the State of North
                                    Carolina biennial 305(b) Water Quality Report or according to the five year


                                                                          67











                 WATER QUAUTY


                                  basinwide review schedule), the number of sites where exceedances of
                                  sediment (once adopted) and ambient water quality standards were
                                  detected. Documented improvements in overall water quality would indicate
                                  successful management practices.

                                  Costs and Economic Considerations
                                  This action would require an additional $150,000 to fund contract analysis
                                  for toxic contamination evaluation and risk assessment. Monitoring and
                                  GIS mapping of sediment toxicity, point source dischargers, marinas,
                                  treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs), Superfund sites and
                                  landfills may be a cost-effective- method to assist DEM in identifying
                                  possible sources of pollutants near contaminated sites, and in beginning
                                  actions to reduce or eliminate pollutant emissions from those sites.
                                  Enhanced inter-govemmental coordination and cooperation can help reduce
                                  the costs of monitoring fish contamination and issuing public health
                                  advisories. In addition, coordination among DEM, CGIA, SSB, DIVIF, DWR,
                                  EPA, and the Research Triangle Institute is a cost-effective method that
                                  uses existing government programs and research institutions to target areas
                                  and populations of concern.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  To fund additional water quality analyses, a $150,000 appropriation would
                                  be needed from the General Assembly.




                        Management Action 2.- Continue to issue fish advisories as
                   necessary to protect public health. Improve communication and
                  education about the risks associated with eating contaminated fish
                                                             and shellfish.

                           Explanation: Regional fish advisories alert the public to
                           the potential health hazards of eating contaminated fish.
                           The Environmental Epidemiology Section (EES) would
                           continue to review fish tissue analyses and issue
                           advisories as necessary.





                                                                      68












                                                                                                                     WATER OUAL17Y


                           Public outreach and education should stress the risks
                           associated with eating contaminated seafood to the
                           general population and sensitive populations (e.g.,
                           women of child-bearing age and children).




                                   CrIltical Steps

                                   1 . The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) will continue to
                                       conduct intensive monitoring of fish and shellfish at those sites where
                                       tissue concentrations are of concern to human health based on criteria
                                       developed by EES.

                                   2.  EES will continue to evaluate the Environmental Protection Agency
                                       (EPA) risk assessment approach for issuing fish consumption advisories
                                       and adopt as appropriate. It affords the state flexibility to adjust various
                                       parameters (e.g., consumption rate, body weight, risk level).

                                   3.  The Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) and/or Division of Marine
                                       Fisheries (DMF) would conduct creel surveys of fishermen at sites
                                       where elevated concentrations o   f contaminants have exceeded levels of
                                       concern to determine the consumption rate of recreational and
                                       subsistence fishermen, the fish species most often consumed, and the
                                       method of cleaning and cooking used to prepare the fish. Participation
                                       from citizen groups, such as the APES Citizens Water Quality Monitoring
                                       Network, would be considered in this effort.

                                   4.  EES will continue to conduct a risk assessment for consumption of fish
                                       and shellfish at sites where contaminated fish are identified and
                                       disseminate information on fish consumption advisories to reach the
                                       widest audience of the fish-consuming public. Fish consumption
                                       advisories Will be posted at affected water body sites. Information
                                       regarding advisories would be disseminated to purchasers of fishing
                                       licenses.   The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
                                       Resources (DEHNR) will arrange public meetings, issue press releases,
                                       and public information announcements and will notify the local health
                                       department of the fish consumption advisory.

                                   Evaluation Methods
                                   1. DEM will report results of fish tissue analyses to EES to evaluate human
                                       health risks associated with consumption of contaminated fish.


                                                                          69












                 WATER MALITY


                                  2. Additional contaminated sites (those sites where fish tissue samples
                                     exceed human screening values) would be added to the existing
                                     Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data layer of contaminated fish
                                     sftes by CGIA as they are identified by DEM. Map reports would be
                                     generated annually to track the extent of waters with fishing advisories
                                     or potentially needing advisories.
                                  3. EES will report on a periodic basis the issuance of any now fish
                                     consumption advisories to DEM. DEM would include this data as part
                                     of the State of North Carolina biennial 305(b) Report. EES will also
                                     report new advisories to the National Fish Advisory Database maintained
                                     by the EPA Office of Science and Technology and the Research
                                     Triangle Institute.

                                  Costs and Economic Considerations
                                  No additional program costs are anticipated for this action. Protecting
                                  public health through the activities mentioned in this recommendation could
                                  result in preventing or lowering the incidence of illness due to ingestion of
                                  chernically contaminated fish and shellfish, and consequently lowering the
                                  costs of health care for those individuals who might otherwise require
                                  treatment for chemical poisoning.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  This action will not require additional costs to implement.




                     Management Action 3: Remediate toxic contamination where
                                                     necessary and feasible.

                           Explanation: Considerable efforts should be made to
                           remedy contamination that is on immediate threat to
                           human health and aquatic life.                                   The Division of
                           Environmental Management (DEM) would proceed with
                           sediment cleanup only where necessary and where
                           remediotion activities would not cause further damage
                           to ecological communities.



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








                                                                       70









                                   - -- - -------     11 IM I-----------                                           WATER QUAUTY

                                   Critical Steps

                                   1 .DEM, in conjunction with the Division of Solid Waste Management
                                      (DSWM), would evaluate remediation actions, including containment or
                                      removal options for those sites deemed to be contaminated at levels
                                      hazardous to aquatic life or of human health concern.

                                   2. DEM and DSWM would identify responsible parties, where possible, and
                                      proceed with sediment cleanup only where necessary and where
                                      remediation activities would not cause f urther impacts. Remediation can
                                      have a greater impact on ecological communities than allowing the
                                      system to assimilate and detoxdy in-place contaminants.

                                   3. If responsible parties are not identified for sediment contamination, then
                                      the Superfund Program of DSWM would consider placement of that site
                                      on the National Priority List (NPL).

                                   Evaluation Method
                                   DEM would require responsible parties to implement an environmental
                                   impact assessment at priority sites before conducting any remediation
                                   activities. Continued monitoring of remediated sites will provide DEM with
                                   important data that can be used in evaluating future sites for clean-up.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   Costs of remediation will be determined by monitoring and evaluation efforts
                                   (see Objective D, Management Action 1).             Where sediments are
                                   contaminated with toxic pollutants, one method of remediation is the
                                   removal of the contaminated sediment. This can be extremely costly, both
                                   in terms of the environment and the economy. The overall cost of
                                   remediation could be reduced by using feasibility studies to determine
                                   whether sediment cleanup is necessary and whether the cleanup will cause
                                   further damage.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   The cost of remediation of contaminated sites would be sought from those
                                   parties found responsible for the contamination.









                                                                        71













                                                                                                                    WATER QUAL ff Y





                            OBJECTIVE E.- EVALUATE INDICATORS OF
                      ENVIRONMENTAL STRESS IN THE ESTUARY AND
                      DEVELOP NEW TECHNIQUES TO BETTER ASSESS
                                      WATER QUALITY DEGRADATION.





                  Strategy: Several highly visible indicators of environmental stress include chronic algal blooms, fish and
                  shellfish kills, and fish and shellf ish diseases. The Division of Environmental Management (DEM), Division
                  of Marine Fisheries (DMF), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Shellfish Sanitation Branch (SSB),
                  various academic and private sector researchers, and citizen monitoring groups would coordinate monitoring
                  efforts to track these indicators of environmental stress to provide the widest geographic and most cost-
                  effective monitodng coverage of the APES area. Resources should be concentrated to establish a response
                  network to identify and collect data on algal blooms, fish and shellf ish kills, and fish and shellfish disease
                  outbreaks; improve management tools to address shellf ish contamination; and accelerate the development
                  and application of new bio-assessment techniques to evaluate cumulative environmental impacts in estuarine
                  waters. Algal blooms and fish and shellfish kills and disease outbreaks have been monitored by vadous
                  groups including DEM, DMF, Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                  (USFWS), NMFS, Pamlico Environmental Response Team (PER1), and academic and private researchers.
                  However, this effort has not been f ully coordinated to cover all waters of the APES area. SSB has monitored
                  the extent of bacterial contamination in shellfish harvest areas, identifying potential sources of contamination
                  and issuing shellfish harvest area closures as necessary to protect the public health. Bio-assessment
                  techniques have the advantage of detecting water quality problems that chemical or toxicological monitoring
                  may miss or underestimate. The resident estuarine biota act as continuous monitors of environmental quality,
                  increasing the likelihood of detecting episodic events (e.g., spills), nonpoint sources, or other highly variable
                  impacts that chemical sampling often misses. Bio-assessments also provide a means of directly assessing
                  the biological integrity of the estuarine community. This assessment can serve as a basis for identifying high
                  quality water deserving special protection, implementing state anti-degradation policies, confirming in-stream
                  impacts predicted by fate and transport modeling (e.g., waste load allocation), and toxicity testing. The
                  advantage of bio-assessments is their ability to assess ecosystem health -- one of the principal goals of the
                  Clean Water Act.






                                                                         73










                 -WA-TER- QUALITY





                   Management Action 1:                  Continue to track and evaluate indicators
                    of environmental stress., including algal blooms., fish kills, and fish
                                                    and shellfish diseases.

                           Explanation:             Biological assessments are useful in
                           evaluating the integrity of the estuarine system.
                           Traditional biological indicators such as algal blooms and
                           fish kills con signify water quality problems that chemical
                           and toxicological monitoring may hove missed or
                           underestimated.



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




                                  Critical Steps

                                  1. DMF, DEM, NMFS, USFWS, and other researchers would establish an
                                     environmental stress indicators response network to collect the data
                                     necessary to determine the sources and causes of these events. DMF
                                     would be the lead agency responsible for developing and maintaining
                                     the response network.

                                  2. The information collected would be used to establish a database to help
                                     develop management strategies concerning algal blooms, fish and
                                     shellfish kills, and outbreaks of fish and shellfish diseases.

                                  3. The response network program would incorporate relevant experts with
                                     the technical expertise necessary to collect appropriate data for studying
                                     each type of environmental stress indicator.

                                  4. The network would standardize the investigation and reporting of these
                                     environmental stress indicator events by preparing protocols and
                                     standardized reporting sheets so that causes and trends are reliably
                                     documented. Investigations also. would sample a standard set of water
                                     quality parameters and collect biological samples for examination and/or
                                     autopsy.




                                                                     74













                                                                                                                   WATER QUAL ff Y


                                   5. The environmental stress indicators network would consider the role of
                                      private citizens, such as the APES Citizen Water Quality Monitoring
                                      Network (CWQMN), in acquiring data for algal blooms, fish and shellfish
                                      kills, and fish and shellfish diseases.

                                   6. The response network will continue necessary research to determine the
                                      causes of algal blooms, fish and shellfish kills, and fish and shellfish
                                      diseases, and to determine the role of anthropogenic activities in the
                                      occurrence of these events.


                                   7. The information on geographic location and other environmental
                                      attributes for each event would be sent to the Center for Geographic
                                      Information and Analysis (CGIA). CGIA staff would create maps for
                                      each of the environmental stress indicators (only algal blooms currently
                                      have been mapped). As the database evolves, DEM with CGIA
                                      assistance, would conduct Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
                                      evaluations to assess potential pollutant sources in proximity to the
                                      event site that could have tdggered an event.

                                   8. Additional event sites periodically would be added to the existing GIS
                                      data layer of environmental stress indicators as they are identif ied. Map
                                      reports would be generated periodically to track the extent and
                                      occurrence of the appropriate environmental stress indicators.

                                   Evaluation Method
                                   CGIA would oversee the database. The divisions conducting the monitoring
                                   would update network data at least annually. Data would be analyzed and
                                   reported in the biennial 305(b) report.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   $125,000 per year would be allocated to DEM and DMF for two additional
                                   staff members for regional offices, equipment, and data base establishment.
                                   Costs would include sampling costs and contracts to.research institutions.
                                   Using a response network that includes and promotes information sharing,
                                   skills and management tools can help reduce the cost of monitodng,
                                   evaluation, and source identification, as well as reduce response time. The
                                   network and database would document the magnitude and probable cause
                                   of a kill so an attempt to recover costs associated with the resource injury
                                   can be made. Major data elements for each event can include location,
                                   land use cause, source, incident, direct cause, and specific pollutant. The
                                   data can provide useful insights to analysts and decision makers regarding




                                                                        75










                  W4TER- QUALRY                              -------------

                                   problem areas and sources. For example, fish kill data can be used to
                                   identify and correct discharge problems from single sources, or can lead to
                                   more in-depth investigations of water quality problems.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   To fund two additional staff members for DEM and DMF, a $100,000
                                   appropriation would be needed from the General Assembly. An additional
                                   $25,000 for equipment, sampling, and research contracts would also be
                                   needed.





                    Management Action 2: Improve the techniques for evaluating the
                                  overall environmental health of estuarine waters.

                            Explanation: The sensitivity and diversity of organisms
                            inhabiting on area con be an indication of the system's
                            overallenvironmentalhealth. Further research is needed
                            to target these "indicator species" in the estuary. Once
                            found, these organisms could be used to monitor the
                            general state of the system and indicate areas that
                            warrant further attention.





                                   Critical Steps

                                   1 .The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) would conduct a
                                      comprehensive survey and evaluate the current extent of development
                                      and application of bio-assessment techniques in estuarine waters.
                                      Bioassessment techniques often are based on the use of biotic
                                      community indices for a given water body to establish a baseline for'
                                      such properties as species richness, abundance, and composition as
                                      well as trophic structure.

                                   2. DEM would select appropriate bio-assessment techniques for the area
                                      based on best professional judgement and would prepare standardized
                                      protocols for the bio-assessment technique chosen.


                                                                       76













                                                                                                                  WATER QUAL ff Y
                ------------              - -----                     .......

                                  3. DEM would continue to develop standard protocols for selecting
                                     unpolluted reference sites with similar hydrologic, physical, and chemical
                                     characteristics, and for calculating norms for these reference sites
                                     against which potentially degraded sites may be compared.

                                  4. DEM would continue to develop statistical procedures and biocriteria (if
                                     data warranted) for evaluating whether sites differed significantly from
                                     the norm or showed. indications of biological impairment. DEM and
                                     Environmental Management Commission (EMC) would establish
                                     narrative or numerical criteria for bio-assessment techniques in estuarine
                                     waters.


                                  Evaluation Method
                                  DEM would report periodically (e.g., as pan of the State of Nonh Carolina
                                  305(b) Water Quality Report) the results of the application and evaluation
                                  of bio-assessment techniques in estuarine waters.

                                  Costs and Economic Considerations
                                  Program costs for this action are estimated at $100,000 per year to improve
                                  DEM's techniques for evaluating cumulative environmental impacts in
                                  estuarine waters. This action would help researchers, planners and
                                  regulators understand and monitor health indicators and water quality in the
                                  APES region, and would provide better protection for special communities
                                  from chronic and acute to)(icity and general cumulative degradation. These
                                  efforts may help focus efforts to protect water quality, which could reduce
                                  the costs of regulation and compliance.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  To fund research within DEM, a $100,000 appropriation would be needed
                                  from the General Assembly. Funds required by CGIA relating to this
                                  management action are addressed in the Stewardship Plan, Objective A,
                                  Management Action 2.




                    Management Action 3: Develop and adopt better indicators of.
                                     shellfish contamination as soon as possible.

                           Explanation: The presence of fecal coliform bacteria
                           currently is used to detect sewage contamination in
                           shellfish beds. This practice has been criticized, however,

                                                                       77













                  WATER QUALITY


                            and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                            Administration's (NOAA) National Indicator Study is
                            investigating better indicator tests. These tests, which
                            assess both bacterial and viral contamination, better
                            indicate the health risk from eating contaminated
                            shellfish, They also would establish more reliable criteria
                            for closing shellfish areas or re-opening previously closed
                            areas.






                                   Critical Steps

                                   1 .The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
                                      (DEHNR) would f ully adopt appropriate new indicator tests for assessing
                                      bacterial or viral contarnination currently under evaluation and
                                      development by NOAA's National Indicator Study after these tests
                                      receive approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and
                                      the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference.

                                   2. The Division of Environmental Health's Shellfish Sanitation Branch
                                      (SSB) will continue to monitor bacterial contamination levels in water
                                      and shellf ish to identify areas where these resources are contaminated
                                      at levels of concern to public health. SSB would adopt, upon FDA
                                      approval, indicators to replace or be used in conjunction with the existing
                                      broad-spectrum fecal coliform test.

                                   3. SSB, in conjunction with the Center for Geographic Information Analysis
                                      (CGIA) would continue to develop Geographic Information Systems
                                      (GIS) maps of shellf ish closure areas for all shellfish harvesting waters
                                      in the region.

                                   Evaluation Methods
                                   1. Map reports would be generated annually to track the extent of shellfish
                                   producing waters closed to harvesting and evaluate trends in the amount
                                   of acreage closed to harvesting.
                                   2. SSB would continue to report on a periodic basis (e.g., in the State of
                                   North Carolina biennial 305(b) Water Quality Report) the closure of any new.
                                   areas, reopening of previously closed'areas or other change's in status of



                                                                         78













                                                                                                                     WATER QUAL ff Y


                                   harvestable shellf ish waters. Sanitary survey reports containing information
                                   on shoreline surveys of septic tanks, municipal facilities, and livestock
                                   operations would continue to be prepared triennially.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   Economic, as well as public health benefits, would be provided by the
                                   establishment of more reliable criteria for the closure of shellfish areas
                                   and/or the re-opening of previously closed areas. Development of more
                                   precise indicators to test for sewage contamination in shellfish beds and to
                                   assess the risk to human health from the consumption of shellfish from
                                   these beds would help researchers, planners, and regulators understand
                                   and monitor health indicators and water quality for better protection.
                                   Economic benefits would result if tests using an improved indicator found
                                   that shelfth from formerly closed beds are safe for public consumption.
                                   In addition, better indicators may help focus efforts to protect water quality,
                                   which could reduce the costs of regulation and compliance. If indicators
                                   demonstrate that formerly opened beds should be closed, public health
                                   benefits would result in terms of reduced health care expenses.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   Funds required by CGIA relating to this management action are addressed
                                   in the Stewardship Plan, Objective A, Management Action 2.























                                                                          79










          VITAL HABITATS PLAN






                      GOAL



        Conserve and protect vital fish and
         wildlife habitats and maintain the
        natural heritage of the Albemarle-
                 Pamlico region.













                                                                                                                    MAL HABITATS
                                                                            ------                        ------- ----





                   OBJECTIVE A: PROMOTE REGIONAL PLANNING
                            TO PROTECT AND RESTORE THE NATURAL
                                     HERITAGE OF THE APES REGION.





                 Strategy: Regional planning would guide the acquisition, protection and restoration of vital habitats. Plans
                 would include goals for ensuring that protection efforts do not become fragmented but are consolidated and
                 targeted toward regional needs for the survival of wildlife and f ishedes and the protection of natural heritage.
                 Ecosystem plans would be developed for each major drainage basin in the region. This approach would
                 consider the value of each site proposed for protection at the watershed and regional levels. Plans would
                 consider important ecological processes as well as regional economic activities which rely on those processes
                 at the landscape scale. Plans would also consider broader watershed protection goals, management
                 strategies such as protected corridors and buffers, and basinwide water quality planning initiatives. Maps of
                 the region's vital habitats and land uses, such as Figure 20 showing ecologically significant natural
                 communities rare species, would be completed and updated in order to develop basin-specific ecosystem
                 plans.





                         Management Action 1: Develop ecosystem protection and
                   restoration plans (basinwide ecosystem plans) for each river basin
                         in the region. Individual basinwide ecosystem plans will be
                           completed and implemented according to the schedule
                    established for basinwide water quality management plans. (See
                       Objective A in the Water Quality Plan.) Plans should establish
                     coordinated priorities for protecting habitats and critical areas in
                     each basin, and should target areas most vital to the survival of
                          wildlife and fisheries and the protection of natural heritage.




                                                                         83













                  WX PABITATS
                                      --- -------- -------

                           Explanation: Protecting vital habitats involves a great
                           number of agencies and organizations. The coordination
                           of their efforts with strategies that target management at
                           the most critical areas would be best accomplished
                           through basinwide ecosystem planning, Planning on a
                           river basin level encompasses Important ecological
                           habitats that do not correspond to local jurisdictional
                           boundaries. Restoration plans for river basins would
                           provide a means for assessing the sources and causes of
                           habitat damage and enable the appropriate agencies
                           and organizations to coordinate priorities within the entire
                           basin.



                                                                                    - ---- ------



                                  Critical Steps

                                  1. The primary agencies involved with vital habitat protection in the APES
                                     region include: the Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC); the Division
                                     of Marine Fisheries PMF); the Division of Parks and Recreation (DPR);
                                     the Division of Coastal Management (DCM); the Division of Forest
                                     Resources (DFR); the Forestry Advisory Council; the U.S. Fish and
                                     Wildlif e Service (USFWS); and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                                     Administration (NOAA). These agencies would form an inter-agency
                                     committee to develop ecosystem protection plans for each drainage
                                     basin. This committee would work closely with the Regional Councils
                                     (See Implementation Plan Objective A Management Action 1).

                                  2. Under the auspices of The Nature Conservancy (TNC), USFWS, WRC,
                                     U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and DPR, in coordination with
                                     local governments, a vital habitat plan is being developed for the
                                     Roanoke basin. This plan should serve as a model for the development
                                     of plans for each of the remaining basins.

                                  3. Basinwide ecosystem plans would be developed consecutively, working
                                     as closely as possible With water quality basinwide plans, with all five to
                                     be developed by 1999.      Ecosystem plans would include a formal
                                     endorsement and agreement by all management agencies to implement
                                     the plans.



                                                                     84













                                                                                                                     KAL WMATS


                                    4. The interagency committee would consider basinwide and regional
                                       needs for protecting wildlife, fisheries and natural heritage.      Issues,
                                       such as developing processes that address old-growth, biodiversity, and
                                       water quality forestry issues; providing protective buffers and corridors;
                                       and managing in-holdings, will be evaluated. Buffers protect particularly
                                       sensitive natural communities or rare species habitat.            Protected
                                       corridors link natural areas and allow wildlife to move safely within a
                                       landscape. Corridors also protect the health of whole populations within
                                       a landscape by reducing inbreeding or allowing species exterminated in
                                       one area to recolonize in another. Incorporating in-holdings, or 'holes"
                                       into protected- areas, can reduce threats to species that are particularly
                                       sensitive to habitat fragmentation.

                                    5. A Forestry, Fish and Wildlife (FFW) Coordinating Committee would be
                                       created to promote the availability and distribution of forestry resource
                                       information and management to maximize silvicultural production and
                                       fish and wildlife habitat value. The FFW would also provide technical
                                       assistance to the interagency committee for considering local site-
                                       specific needs for protecting rare species habitat as described in the
                                       USFWS Endangered Species Recovery Plans forfederally listed species
                                       and equivalent plans for state listed species.

                                    6. Plans would include crfteda for setting priorities and assessing protection
                                       and restoration efforts and would detail the types and amounts of
                                       habitats in the region requiring protection (See Objective B,
                                       Management Action 6 for details of a fishery habitat restoration and a
                                       wetlands habitat restoration program.)

                                    7. Involved agencies would make every effort to coordinate basinwide
                                       ecosystem plans with basinwide water quality plans developed by the
                                       Division of Environmental Management (DEM).

                                    8. The interagency committee wo,    uld also consider the purchase of lands
                                       adjacent to waters designated as vital fisheries habitats as a means of
                                       habitat conservation.


                                    Evaluation Method
                                    This Management Action would be evaluated by assessing the progress of
                                    the interagency committee in completing each ecosystem plan. The degree
                                    to which regional goals are met and outlined in each individual basin plan
                                    will also be considered.





                                                                          85










                  VTTAL HABITATS

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    In general, better coordination and planning focused on the APES region
                                    will not result in significant incremental costs to the existing agencies and
                                    programs involved. D.PR will be considered the lead agency for this
                                    management action and one additional staff member would be needed at
                                    an annual cost of $50,000 to coordinate planning activities. Additional costs
                                    to state and federal agencies from planning and coordinating activities
                                    would be met with existing resources. Costs of materials, data acquisition,
                                    mapping, and other miscellaneous resources are covered in the other
                                    management actions in the Vital Habitat Plan. These activities have the
                                    potential to generate savings andfor greater efficiency by redirecting and
                                    sharing agency resources to achieve common        goals. Because of these
                                    factors, the net impact on the costs of actual management and
                                    administration cannot be determined. The most likely impact is improved
                                    eff iciency or productivity rather than a change in overall spending. The goal
                                    of this Management Action, like that of the CCMP as a whole, is to better
                                    manage government in order to achieve the greatest environmental benefit
                                    for a given level of public spending. Ecosystem planning in and of itself
                                    would not be expected to affect land values. All acquisitions of natural
                                    areas discussed in this plan (see Management Actions 1 and 2 of Objective
                                    B) would be obtained through voluntary sales or donations of land and
                                    easements. Ecosystem plans could help direct the focus of regulatory
                                    programs, but they would not necessarily change the overall economic
                                    impact of regulations or lead to more stringent regulations. The main
                                    economic impact of this Management. Action is likely to be more off iciently
                                    used public funds. Making habitat protection goals and priorities a better
                                    focus in the public eye would make people more aware of the value of
                                    surrounding ecological resources. Basinwide ecosystem plans, for instance,
                                    could serve as guides to landowners, communities, local governments and
                                    others wishing to protect these resources in their areas. Basinwide
                                    ecosystem plans could also help in the development of more detailed
                                    environmental impact analyses, species protection plans, etc., which need
                                    to be developed by government agencies, developers, and others. A better
                                    planning process and clear plans for the future would tend to reduce
                                    uncertainties regarding major habitat protection projects, allowing
                                    communities to avoid unexpected negative impacts and to capitalize as
                                    much as possible on the opportunities these projects present, such as
                                    nature-based tourism, recreation, and sustainable forestry and agriculture.

                                    Funding Strategy
                                    The DPR would apply for funds from theNational Park Service's Statewide
                                    Outdoor Recreational Planning Grants. If grants are unavailable, a $50,000
                                    appropriation would be needed from the General Assembly.


                                                                          86













                                                                                                          WAL HAWATS






                 Management Action 2: Develop and maintain accurate maps and
                          records of wetlands, fisheries habitats, federal and state
                  endangered species and their habltats,, natural areas, and natural
                                                          communities.

                          Explanation: Accurate maps of natural areas are
                          essential to the development of basinwide ecosystem
                          plans.        They allow for more accurate analysis of
                          protection and enhancement priorities for various habitat
                          types. A biological inventory of the region was part of
                          the Albemarle-Pamlico Study and additional detailed
                          inventory and monitoring projects would be completed
                          for individual counties and for the most significant
                          natural areas, This information would be kept current
                          and accurate. Up-to-date, readily available biological
                          inventories, maps, and data would provide local
                          governments, planners, land managers, and private
                          citizens with the information they need to protect
                          habitats.





                                 Critical Steps

                                 1. The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
                                    (DEHNR) would develop coordinated policies and definitions for habitat
                                    mapping to ensure the compatibility of data sets.

                                 2. The Division of Marine Fisheries (DIVIF) would complete maps of
                                    shellfish beds and update them at least every 10 years, or sooner if
                                    appropriate, to analyze changes in their status.

                                 3. DIVIF would update maps of nurseries and anadromous fish spawning
                                    areas at least every 10 years, or sooner if appropriate, to assess trends
                                    and analyze threats.


                                                                   87









                 -WAL HAKTATS                                                                                        -- --- ------

                                  4. DMF, with the assi@tance of the Division of Coastal Management (DCM),
                                     would continue efforts made by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                                     Administration (NOAA) to map submerged aquatic vegetation throughout
                                     the APES region and update the maps as necessary to be useful for
                                     tracking changes.

                                  5. The Division of Parks and Recreation's (DPR) Natural Heritage Program
                                     (NHP) would continue to maintain regional maps of ecologically
                                     significant areas, known as Natural Heritage Priority Areas, including
                                     rare plant and animal habitat and rare or representative natural
                                     communities and continue to maintain updated Geographic Information
                                     Systems (GIS) database layers indicating areas that are managed by
                                     the public or private sector for preservation. The regional maps would
                                     be continuously revised as information becomes available. This
                                     information would allow for a regional assessment of ecological change.

                                  6. To complement the existing regional survey of natural communities, and
                                     to allow for a closer assessment of important habitats, the NHP would
                                     work with the region's 36 counties to complete local natural heritage
                                     surveys. These surveys would be completed by 2005.

                                  7. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) would complete National
                                     Wetland Inventory maps for the APES region. National Wetlands
                                     Inventory maps would be updated regularly to analyze changes in
                                     habitat status and trends. Other federal and state programs that map
                                     wetlands - including the NOAA Coastal Ocean Program, Environmental
                                     Protection Agency (EPA) and DCM's Advanced Identification (ADID)
                                     program, U.S. Forestry Service's (USFS) Forest Inventory and Analysis
                                     Database, U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Swampbuster maps
                                     and Landsat Thematic Mapper - would continue to complement USFWS
                                     efforts and make available additional region-specific analyses of the
                                     status and trends of wetland habitats.

                                  8. SCS would complete and digitize soil survey maps for any remaining
                                     unmapped county in the APES region.

                                  9. DEM and the Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA)
                                     would work toward completing an updated land use and land cover
                                     database that would aid in protecting wetlands and other habitats
                                     throughout the watershed. CGIA would update the database at least
                                     every 10 years, and every five years 9 feasible.




                                                                      88













                                                                                                                 MAL HABITATS


                                  1O.The Nature    Conservancy (TNC) would aid in mapping ecologically
                                      significant areas on lands they own or help manage.                  The
                                      Conservancy's efforts to map ecologically significant areas in the lower
                                      Roanoke River basin will enhance the natural areas database by
                                      providing more intensive survey information for this important region.

                                  1 1.DMF, Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC), DPR, and USFWS would
                                      identify and list by 1995 the essential habitats of all endangered and
                                      threatened species.

                                  12.DEM and DCM, with assistance form the Army Corps of Engineers
                                      (USACE), would map and track permits to assess the impact of coastal
                                      land use on vital habitats by 1995.

                                  13.The maps and mapping updates described in this management action
                                      would be stored in CGIAs Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to
                                      promote availability for conservation planning.

                                  14.CGIA would build coordinated databases to strengthen the flow of
                                      information between agencies and between government and non-
                                      government organizations interested in habitat protection.

                                  Evaluation Method
                                  Relevant agencies Will monitor their respective maps in the CGIA GIS
                                  database to ensure that they are completed and regularly updated.

                                  Costs and Economic Considerations
                                  The NHP would require approximately $85,000 per year in order to
                                  complete inventories for all counties in the APES region on a 10 yearcycle.
                                  CGIA would require $50,000 per year to support a technical staff member
                                  responsible for producing necessary maps. SCS would require funding,
                                  based on the average cost of $125 per acre, to complete soil survey maps.
                                  Most other elements of this action are expected to be funded through
                                  existing authorizations (for instance, by redirecting budget pdorfties). The
                                  information and data processing capability generated by this strategy will
                                  improve the productivity of resource management agencies and others who
                                  use geographic data. GIS can provide an efficient way to track and analyze
                                  complex environmental data from thousands of geographic points in an area
                                  over time.      This capability can facilitate management, planning,
                                  enforcement, and research.






                                                                       89








                 MAL HABITATS    ----- - ----- ------ -            --- -----
                                  Funding Strategy
                                  DPR would apply for funds from the State Recreation and Natural Heritage
                                  Trust Fund. If funds are unavailable, an $85,000 appropriation would be
                                  needed from the General Assembly. CGIA would acquire funding from
                                  EPA's State Development Fund for Wetlands Protection and through
                                  existing cost-recovery based agreements. SCS would acquire funding from
                                  existing federal sources and from the state Division of Soil and Water
                                  Conservation (DSWC). Additional funding would be provided by the
                                  individual counties in which mapping was performed.




                 Management Action 3: Expand programs to identify wetlands on a
                        regional scale and to evaluate and rank wettand function.

                           Explanation: An accurate identification and evaluation
                           of wetlands, in advance of proposed activities that
                           disturb wetlands, improves our ability to protect the most
                           critical wetlands and to make wetlands permitting more
                           predictable for developers and local governments. An
                           Advanced Identification (ADID) program is                                   a multi-
                           agency effort that tests a variety of methods to evaluate
                           wetlands. Under this program, wetlands regulations
                           would not be expanded.                             Instead, the wetlands
                           permitting process would become more efficient.



                                  Critical Steps

                                  1  Expand programs that 1) develop wetlands mapping methods a         nd 2)
                                     assess wetlands functions. An ADID program is currently evaluating,
                                     wetlands in Carteret County. Results from this ADID can be Used to
                                     determine wetlands with the highest functional significance which should
                                     be avoided and those with lower functional significance which may be
                                     altered, with appropriate mitigation strategies, resulting in minimal
                                     regional impacts on water quality, hydrology and habitat. Federal and
                                     state agencies involved in the current ADID project include the Division
                                     of Coastal Management (DCM), the Division of Environmental


                                                                      90













                                                                                                              MAL HAMM


                                    Management (DEM), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
                                    the U.S.- Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the U.S. Fish and
                                    Wildlife Service (USFWS).

                                 2. DCM is planning to use ADID wetland evaluation methods in all coastal
                                    counties. The appropriate agencies would expand this methodology in
                                    the remaining counties in the APES region.

                                 3. Other methods that comprehensively identify and evaluate wetlands
                                    should be considered.


                                 Evaluation Method
                                 Effectiveness of ADID or other wetland identification and evaluation
                                 programs would be assessed to determine the following: 1) whether all
                                 wetlands in the region were accurately mapped and 2) whether all wetland
                                 functions were considered.


                                 Costs and Economic Considerations
                                 The cost to DCM and DEM for evaluating the ADID project in Carteret
                                 County is estimated to be $50,000. Expanded ADID efforts would be
                                 funded through federal grants. The economic impact of implementing ADID
                                 region-wide is contingent on how the ADID program is designed and how
                                 resulting data and maps are used by state, federal, and local governments.
                                 As a general statement, wetlands identification and mapping at the county
                                 and regional scale can help reduce landowners' uncertainty about the
                                 likelihood of receiving permits for development and would allow local
                                 governments more latitude in planning for growth that does not degrade
                                 important ecological resources.

                                 Funding Strategy
                                 To evaluate the existing ADID project, DCM would acquire funding from
                                 Section 309 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) supplied
                                 by NOAA. DCM would also apply for an additional $70,000 from CZMA
                                 Section 309 to fund expected local projects within Carteret County.











                                                                     91













                                                                                                                  MAL HABffATS





                         OBJECTIVE B: PROMOTE THE RESPONSIBLE,
                                   STEWARDSHIP, PROTECTION, AND
                       ONSERVATION OF VALUABLE NATURAL AREAS
                                                 IN THE APES REGION.






                 Strategy: Protecting habitats that are vital to the survival of fish and wildlife has been successful in North
                 Carolina. Preserving natural areas also enhancesenvironmental quality and provides socioeconomic benefits.
                 A cooperative effort among many federal and state agencies, private resource and conservation groups, and
                 local land trusts has provided a variety of regulatory and nonregulatory measures that protect habitats.
                 Nonregulatory measures include acquisition, conservation easements, registry and dedication of land as
                 natural areas, technical assistance for conservation, cooperative management agreements and incentives
                 to landowners to maintain, restore, and enhance important natural resources. Impacts of land acquisition on
                 the local tax base should be considered when preserving natural areas. Stewardship and cost share
                 programs would be expanded with assistance from the Forest Stewardship Program, the Department of
                 Agriculture (DA), USDA Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, and local U.S. Soil and Water
                 Conservation Districts. Public education and technical assistance would be provided to assist public and
                 private landowners with responsible management of natural resources.




                  Management Action 1: Bring areas identified as having the highest
                    priority for protection into public ownership andlor management.
                     Expand funding for public acquisition of park lands, gamelands,
                                      coastal reserves, and other natural areas.

                            Explanation: Natural areas that are most vital to
                            maintaining the region's natural heritage have been
                            identified. Further priorities will be determined through
                            basinwide ecosystem planning.                                 -Where possible,


                                                                        93










                 VUAL HABITATS
                                                                     ------------------------------
                           voluntary acquisition is on important tool@fdr protecting
                           these areas. In addition to preserving rare speciesand
                           natural communities, public areas that ore managed by
                           different agencies can serve a variety of purposes such
                           as recreation, education, or hunting,





                                 Crhlcal Steps

                                 1.  The basinwide ecosystem plans would identify priority areas for the
                                     protection of rare species habitat and rare or representative natural
                                     communities. Public agencies and private conservation organizations
                                     would target these priority areas for voluntary     acquisition and
                                     conservation easements. While voluntary acquisition involves willing
                                     sellers or donors, the impacts of land acquisition on the local tax base
                                     should always be considered when preserving natural areas. Acquired
                                     lands would be dedicated and managed as protected natural areas.

                                 2.  The- Division of Parks and. Recreation's (DPR) Natural Heritage Program
                                     (NHP) has surveyed the APES region's natural areas and identified
                                     specific rare species habitat and rare or representative natural
                                     communities warranting the fullest protection possible (Frost et al. 1990,
                                     LeGrandetal. 1992,Smithetal. 1993). The surveys identifiedat least
                                     23,000 acres of habitat that would be considered as top priority for
                                     protection in basinwide ecosystem plans.

                                     7hese areas include the following natural communities:

                                 basic mesic forest (coastal plain subtype)  coastal fringe sandhill
                                 basic mesic forest (piedmont subtype)       coastal plain mad outcrop
                                 coastal fringe evergreen forest             diAbase glade
                                 hon-rivedne swamp forest                    floodplain pool
                                 non-riverine wet hardwood forest            granitic flatrock
                                 peatland Atlantic white cedar forest        piedmont/mountain swamp forest
                                 pine savanna                                small depression pocosin
                                 small depression pond                       ultramafic outcrop barren
                                 tidal freshwater marsh (freshwater variant) upland depression swamp forest




                                                                    94













                                                                                                                         MAL HABITATS


                                     and maritime forest      and other high-priorfty barrier island natural
                                     communities, including.

                                     interdune pond                                   maritime deciduous forest
                                     maritime dry grassland                           maritime evergreen forest
                                     maritime shrub swamp                             maritime swamp forest
                                     maritime wet grassland

                                     3. Additional areas to   target for voluntary    acquisition and conservation
                                        easements in the basinwide ecosystem plans have been identified in the
                                        National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan (NWPCP). This plan was
                                        developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with input
                                        from more than 70 state and federal agencies, organizations and
                                        individuals knowledgeable of the state's wetlands. The primary purpose
                                        of the NWPCP is to aid decision makers in the identification of the types
                                        and locations of wetlands that warrant consideration for acquisition using
                                        Land and Water Conservation Fund appropriations. In the APES region,
                                        it identifies 13 areas that include the region's best examples of wetlands.
                                        These areas include approximately 164,000 acres that were privately
                                        owned as of December 1992. Some of these areas include rare species
                                        habitat or rare or representative natural communities listed in Critical
                                        Step 2 above. These areas would be targeted for voluntary acquisition
                                        and conservation easements. Purchases made in these targeted areas
                                        would be preceded by consideration of the impacts of that purchase to
                                        the local community.

                                     4. The voluntary sale or donation of conservation easements would be
                                        encouraged in circumstances where acquiring full title to a tract of land
                                        is less critical f rorn a conservation standpoint. Acquiring easements also
                                        would be appropriate when the current owner wishes to retain at least
                                        partial interest in the property. A conservation easement is a voluntary,
                                        binding legal agreement in which the land owner sells or donates some
                                        or all of her or his rights to develop or use the land, while still
                                        maintaining ownership. Conservation easements prohibit development
                                        or limit certain activities in order to protect important natural, cultural or
                                        open-space resources.

                                     5. Vital habitats owned by the state, as identified through basinwide
                                        ecosystem plans, would be dedicated under the North Carolina Nature
                                        Preserves Act, the State Nature and Historic Preserve Dedication Act or
                                        other appropriate mechanism as soon as possible to ensure their
                                        permanent protection.



                                                                            95









                 MAL HAWATS

                                  6. Federally-owned vital habitats identified through the basinwide
                                      ecosystem plans would be given similar protective status.

                                  7. Once a dedicated natural area has been placed in public ownership, the
                                      responsible agency would develop and implement a management plan
                                      as soon as possible.

                                  Evaluation Method
                                  These steps would be evaluated by monitoring changes in acreage as
                                  classified by habitat type, current use and management, functional status
                                  and owner type. Priorities would be reevaluated periodically, taking into
                                  consideration new research as well as changes in habitat threats, policy
                                  goals and market conditions.

                                  Costs and Economic Considerations
                                  Funding for administrative costs of acquisition and management activities
                                  would continue to come from existing sources.            Cost estimates for
                                  acquisitions and management of acquired land will depend on the priorities
                                  set through the basinwide ecosystem planning process. Using current
                                  estimates of the types and amounts of natural areas that are likely to be
                                  recommended for protection, acquisition costs to acquire approximately
                                  25,000 acres over the next ten years would fall between $35 million and
                                  $55 million. However, the actual numbers are likely to change as the
                                  ecosystem plans are developed. Some acquisitions could initially be made
                                  by private non-prof it organizations rather than by government agencies, but
                                  nearly all lands are typically sold to government agencies over the long
                                  term.    Areas of regional importance might be protected by local
                                  governments, but in terms of overall acreage these land areas are likely to
                                  be relatively small. Because these acquisitions would be entirely voluntary,
                                  any willing sale or donation would result in some positive benefit (monetary
                                  and/or non-monetary) to participating landowners. Large-scale acquisitions
                                  would need to consider any potential negative economic impacts H
                                  important economic opportunities are reduced. In areas where a large
                                  proportion of the land base is unsuitable or is already restricted from such
                                  uses, removing land from potential commercial use could in turn reduce
                                  potential local employment as well as reduce the local tax base. These
                                  impacts would have to be considered in any decision to purchase large
                                  tracts of land in any one area. When considered from a regional
                                  perspective, the impacts of these acquisitions on employment and local tax
                                  bases would not be large. This is because the overall acreage being
                                  acquired is small relative to other available tracts of land in most counties
                                  and since, in most cases, expected levels of development could be
                                  accommodated on these other available tracts. The- value of (and tax


                                                                        96













                                                                                                               MAL HABITATS


                                  revenues from) some properties adjacent to those protected could rise.
                                  However, in some cases farmland adjacent to protected natural areas could
                                  decrease in value due to pest problems, potential fire hazards, extensive
                                  public use of adjacent lands or the loss of customary uses such as hunting
                                  or fishing. In addition to providing many environmental benefits, this
                                  Management Action would likely boost economic activity related to
                                  recreation and tourism. Facilities such as public access boat ramps,
                                  beaches, visitor and interpretive centers, etc. would generate revenue for
                                  local economies and could improve recreational opportunities for nearby
                                  residents.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  To cover any additional administrative costs of public acquisition and
                                  management of important natural areas, funding may be acquired from the
                                  following potential sources:
                                     Conservation land trusts
                                     USDA - Agricultural Conservation Program, Conservation Reserve
                                     Program, Wetlands Reserve Program, Small Watersheds and Flood
                                     Protection Program
                                     NOAA - Coastal Reserve Program, National Estuarine Research
                                     Reserve Program (NOAA has provided matching funds for both the
                                     Coastal Reserve System and the National Estuarine Research
                                     Reserve. Matching funds have come from state appropriations, the
                                     N.C. Recreation and Natural Area Trust Fund, and donations)
                                     US Fish and Wildlife Service - Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration
                                     (Pittman-Robinson), Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation
                                     Fund, North American Wetland Grant, Land and Water Conservation
                                     Fund
                                     NC Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Fund
                                     NC Recreation and Natural Heritage Trust Fund
                                     NC Wildlife Resources Commission gamelands acquisitions
                                     Special state appropdationstbmd issues for natural areas and parks

                                  Sources of funding for acquisitions should be identified as pan of the
                                  planning process.










                                                                      97












               VITAL HABITATS
                                                 -------- -------------                      ------






               Management Action 2: Provide incentives and technical assistance
                          for the protection of privately owned vital habitats.

                       Explanation: High-priority natural areas that are not
                       brought into public ownership can be targeted for
                       private conservation. Efforts would be expanded to
                       inform private land owners of the ecological values of
                       their land, to advise them on appropriate management
                       strategies, and to help them explore options for voluntary
                       protection. Where possible, conservation organizations
                       could acquire vital habitats in order to consolidate
                       management and protection efforts.




                             Crftlcal Steps

                             1. Important natural areas would be obtained and managed by private
                                conservation groups such as the National Audubon Society (NAS), The
                                Nature Conservancy JNC), the Conservation Trust of North Carolina,
                                the Coastal Land Trust, local land trusts, and individual landowners.

                             2. Lead agencies would expand existing stewardship programs and other
                                conservation and incentive programs in the region. These programs
                                would focus on vital habitats identified through the basinwide ecosystem
                                plans described under Objective A. Programs include:

                                      Forest Stewardship Program (lead agency - Division of Forest
                                      Resources-DFR)
                                      Wetlands Reserve Program and Conservation Reserve Program'
                                      (lead agencies - Department of     Agriculture-DA, USDA
                                      Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, and local Soil
                                      and Water Conservation Districts)
                                      Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Registry and Dedication of
                                      private land under the Nature Preserves Act (lead agency -
                                      Division of Parks and Recreation-DPR)
                                      Partners for Wildlife (lead agency - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-

                                                            98













                                                                                                                  VIIAL HABITATS


                                            USFWS)
                                            Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC)

                                  3. DPR   would need two staff persons for the NHP to coordinate private
                                     outreach and incentive programs that would assist land owners in
                                     registering or dedicating their land.

                                  4. The Division of Coastal Management (DCM) will continue to develop a
                                     guide for managing privately-owned wetlands. Funding will be provided
                                     through NOAA Coastal Zone Management Act Section 306 and 309
                                     Grants.


                                  Evaluation Method
                                  The NHP would monitor changes in protected acreage as classified by
                                  habitat and owner type, current use and management, functional status,
                                  and by tracking landowner participation in habitat protection programs.

                                  Costs and Economic Considerations
                                  The cost of this Management Action to state and federal agencies is
                                  estimated to be $524,000 per year and would include the hiring of
                                  personnel, site visits, mapping, manuals, plan preparation and certification,
                                  and other administrative costs. This figure is based solely on the following
                                  anticipated activities: expansion of the Forest Stewardship Program (cost=
                                  $370,000); development of the USFWS' private land stewardship plan
                                  (cost=$50,000); increased staff for the NHP (cost=$100,000); and
                                  publication by DCM of a land use guide for private. land owners
                                  (cost=$4,000). Private landowners would incur the costs of planning and
                                  implementing conservation measures on their land. However, because their
                                  participation is voluntary, landowners presumaNy get at least enough
                                  benefits to induce them to participate. These benefits could be monetary
                                  (tax advantages, cost share reimbursements) and/or non-monetary (the
                                  satisfaction of helping to conserve resources for future generations). At the
                                  same time, the general public derives several environmental benef its from
                                  these efforts, particularly when public conservation and stewardship
                                  programs are targeted at high priority natural areas. When this occurs, the
                                  public gets the greatest level of environmental benefit per dollar spent on,
                                  technical assistance and incentives to private landowners.








                                                                        99









                 -VITAL-HABITATS

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  The expansion of    the Forestry Stewardship Program would require an
                                  expansion appropriation from the General Assembly. The USFWS would
                                  provide funding from their 'Partners for Wildlife" program for private land
                                  stewardship plan development. Two additional staff positions in the NHP
                                  would require an expansion appropriation from the General Assembly. The
                                  National Wetlands Reserve Program is currently not funded. There is,
                                  however, strong support for this program from the Soil Conservation
                                  Service, as well as private landowners, and funding should be considered
                                  for developing this program.


































                                                                      100













                                                                                                                  VRAL HABITATS





                           OBJECTIVE C.- MAINTAIN, RESTORE, AND
                  ENHANCE VITAL HABITAT FUNCTIONS TO ENSURE
                         THE SURVIVAL OF WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES.





                     Strategy: Better coordination among public agencies including the Division of Parks and Recreation
                     (DPR), the Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC), the Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), the Division
                     of Coastal Management (DCM), and the Division of Forest Resources (DFR), along with priority-setting
                     objectives included in basinwide ecosystem plans, would improve the effectiveness of future restoration
                     and enhancement projects. Attempts at protecting a region's vital fisheries, rare species habitat, rare or
                     representative natural communities, and other vital wildlife habitat would be directed to where it is most
                     needed and cost-effective. Protection of fisheries habitats, including submerged aquatic vegetation,
                     shellfish beds, and spawning areas, would be modeled after existing protection given to nurseries. Efforts
                     to develop eff ective restoration and protection technologies would continue. The Wetlands Enhancement,
                     Restoration and Creation (WERC) program sets priorities for type- and site-specific wetlands restoration
                     projects and would help focus the highest level of protection on those wetlands most vital to water quality
                     and habitat. The feasibility of a mitigation bank and other mechanisms for coordinating and consolidating
                     mitigation efforts would be evaluated.




                     Management Action 1: Enhance the ability of state and federal
                          agencies to enforce existing wetlands regulations by 1995.

                            Explanation: Strengthening enforcement of current
                            wetlands regulations and ensuring compliance with the
                            existing permitting process are essential to minimizing
                            inappropriate development in wetlands areas.





                                                                       101










                  -VRAL HABITATS                --- ----- --

                             Aerial monitoring would be expanded to increase
                             coverage and ensure efficient enforcement. Enhanced
                             enforcement would preventsome actors from gaining an
                             unfair advantage through their failure to comply with
                             wetlands regulations.





                                    Critical Steps

                                    1 .In coastal are-as, aerial compliance monitoring allows for the sighting of
                                       wetlands permit violations in an efficient and comprehensive manner.
                                       This technique could improve monitoring statewide K expanded in
                                       coverage. Enhanced wetlands data collection and mapping efforts
                                       including overflights and aerial photography would be performed by DEM
                                       and DCM. Technical assistance would also be provided by the Center
                                       for Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA) and the Soil
                                       Conservation Service (SCS).

                                    2. The General Assembly would be asked to provide funds to increase staff
                                       in DEM to enhance and coordinate enforcement efforts of the 401 Water
                                       Quality Certification Program with the Army Corps of Engineers
                                       (USACE).

                                    Evaluation Method
                                    Wetlands trend analysis, conducted on regular intervals by DEM, will help
                                    to identify significant wetland changes and to evaluate and revise permitting
                                    and monitoring activities.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    In order to develop a more effective 401 Certification Program under the
                                    auspices of a General Permit, three new positions in DEM would be created
                                    to review and enforce wetlands regulations. One staff member would be
                                    stationed in a regional off ice for enforcement through groundtruthing efforts,
                                    and the remaining two staff members.would be involved in enforcement
                                    efforts in Raleigh. The annual cost of these now positions, will be
                                    $150,000. This action would accelerate wetland permitting decisions,
                                    improve water quality, and focus regulatory and mitigative efforts on
                                    valuable wetlands. Costs are associated with compliance, yet the failure of
                                    individuals to correct regulatory violations incurs costs to those already in
                                    compliance.. Enhanced enforcement ensures that all actors are affected

                                                                         102













                                                                                                                     VITAL HABITATS


                                   equally. The benefits of enhanced enforcement efforts are improvements
                                   in wildlife habitat, water quality, and overall river basin functioning arising
                                   from retarding or halting the degradation of. wetlands. The magnitude of
                                   these benefits would depend on the success of enforcement efforts and the
                                   cumulative negative environmental impacts that are avoided because of
                                   better compliance. It is important to note that these benefits should be
                                   judged not in comparison to the current state of wetlands, but to the level
                                   of degradation that would be expected in the absence of improved
                                   enforcement efforts.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   DEM would request an. expansion budget from the General Assembly for
                                   the fiscal year 1994-1995.



                   Management Action Z Strengthen regulatory programs to protect
                           vital fisheries habitats., which include submerged aquatic
                           vegetation, shellfish beds, and spawning areas by 1995.

                            Explanation: Vital fisheries habitats are threatened by
                            water quality degradation, physical destruction and the
                            cumulative impacts of development in the region.
                            Protecting areas in which aquatic organisms breed, five,
                            and feed is essential to the successful propagation of
                            many finfish and shellfish species. Increased protection
                            for vital fisheries habitats will help maintain healthy fish
                            populations for abundant commercial and recreational
                            harvests.





                                   CrUical Steps

                                   1. The Marine Fishedes Commission (MFC) would designate submerged
                                       aquatic vegetation and shelffish beds as vital fisheries habitats. MFC
                                       and the Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) jointly would designate
                                       anadromous fish spawning areas, also as vital fisheries habitats. MFC
                                       recently has taken initial steps toward this action.


                                                                         103













                   VITAL HABITATS


                                    2. The Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) would delineate these vital
                                       fisheries habitats with assistance from the WRC and approval from the
                                       MFC. Delineation would be accomplished through intensive, site-
                                       specific evaluations as currently is the procedure for primary and
                                       secondary nurseries. To suff iciently protect vital fisheries, delineation
                                       boundaries would include adequate aquatic buffers.

                                    3. After vital fisheries habitats have been designated, appropriate use
                                       standards would be applied by regulatory commissions. Several
                                       practices already are restricted in these areas. For example, the
                                       Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) protects nurseries, shellfish beds
                                       and submerged aquatic vegetation from navigation channels and
                                       dredging for boat basins. The following practices would be considered
                                       for restriction by regulatory commissions in and near designated
                                       spawning areas, shellfish beds and submerged aquatic vegetation beds:
                                       long haul seine fishing, trawling, clam kicking, dredging, and boating
                                       practices that disturb habitats. These policies would build on a
                                       protection base provided by existing CAMA and MFC rules.

                                    4. The Environmental Management Commission (EMC ) would consider
                                       specific water quality protection for vital fisheries habitats.          A
                                       supplemental water quality classfttion such as High Quality Water
                                       (HQW) could be used for designated spawning, shellfish and submerged
                                       aquatic vegetation areas,  as is done for primary nurseries. In applying
                                       specific criteria or classifications, the EMC would consider maintaining
                                       appropriate levels for the following parameters:

                                       a. In anadromous spawning areas - dissolved oxygen, nutrients, pH,
                                       suspended sediment, water flows, temperature, inorganic solids, salinity,
                                       lead, chlorine and aluminum.

                                       b. For submerged aquatic vegetation - light transparency, salinity and
                                       nitrate levels.

                                       c. For submerged aquatic vegetation and shellfish areas - c         oncen-
                                       trations of inorganic suspended solids and nutrients.

                                    5. The CRC, EMC and MFC would coordinate policies and rules regarding
                                       vital fisheries habitats. The DCM, DEM, DMF, and the Department of
                                       Transportation (DOT) would enhance and coordinate research,
                                       monitoring, permitting and enforcement.




                                                                        104













                                                                                                                  VITAL WIIATS


                                  6. Vital fisheries habitats would be considered and protected during the
                                     design and siting of agricultural, forestry and other best management
                                     practices. Point source dischargers would -be located to minimize
                                     impacts on vital fisheries habitats.

                                  7. The DCM would consider and address potential cumulative impacts to
                                     designated vital fisheries in its Coastal Area Management Act permit
                                     review process.

                                  8. The cumulative impacts of fishing, boating and development on vital
                                     fisheries habitats would continue to be investigated by DCM, DEM,
                                     WRC, DMF, and appropriate federal agencies.

                                  9. DOT would aim to minimize the effects of its construction projects on
                                     designated vital fisheries habitats in the design phase.

                                  Evaluation Method
                                  Inventories of designated areas, including acreage and assessments of
                                  habitat health, would be necessary to evaluate success of protection
                                  measures. Juvenile abundance, shellfish closures, and landings data would
                                  aid in habitat protection evaluation.

                                  Costs and Economic Considerations
                                  Delineation and designation of vital fisheries habitats will cost state and
                                  federal agencies an estimated $200,000 per year. This figure is equivalent
                                  to four additional staff members and includes the study of cumulative
                                  impacts from various sources of disturbance and other research, mapping,
                                  and development of specific rules. The main economic impacts of this
                                  Management Action will come from any restrictions on the siting or
                                  operation of point source pollution generators, from requirements for best
                                  management practices in agriculture, forestry and urban development, and
                                  from restrictions on fishing practices. Such restrictions or requirements
                                  might be recommended in areas likely to impact vital fisheries resources,
                                  but any recommendations could only be developed after the study of
                                  potential sources of disturbance are completed. In some areas, a large
                                  number of restrictions could potentially restrict development, reduce land,
                                  values, make fishing, farming or forestry more expensive and therefore less
                                  prof itable, or have other impacts. The potential for these impacts should be
                                  f ully considered as any new rules are developed and applied. The potential
                                  economic costs of vital fisheries habitat protection are offset by many
                                  potential environmental and economic benefits. Higher quality fisheries
                                  habitats could help generate larger harvests or lower harvest costs over the
                                  long run throughout the APES region and perhaps beyond. Recreational


                                                                       105









                   -WAL HAWATS

                                     fishing could also benefit to the extent that protection leads to improved fish
                                     stocks which may then lead to increased revenues from recreational
                                     fishermen. Finally, protected vital fisheries habitats could help provide
                                     important habitats for many other plants and animals as well as significant
                                     water quality benefits. Increases in environmental quality can also provide
                                     incentives that promote natural resource-based tourism. In weighing the
                                     costs and benefits, it is critical to consider the cost of delaying
                                     improvements to vital fisheries habitat protection. It destroyed, habitats may
                                     not be replaceable. Efforts to replace lost habitats in the future may be
                                     much more costly than efforts to protect them now. The effectiveness of
                                     this strategy depends on the successful implementation of other strategies
                                     in the CCMP. To achieve the long-term benefit of an increase in fish and
                                     shellfish populations, habitat protection needs to be complemented by
                                     strategies that protect from the overharvest of future surplus and protect
                                     water q uality in general.

                                     Funding Strategy
                                     DMF would apply for funding from the Sport Fish Restoration Fund inorder
                                     to support habitat mapping. Additional funding may be needed from the
                                     General Assembly.




                        Management Action 3: Enhance existing efforts to restore the
                         functions and values of degraded wetlands and vital fisheries
                    habitats. Develop and begin implementing an expanded program
                                                            to restore wetlands.

                              Explanation: Natural areas that have been slightly or
                              moderately damaged may be restored by means such
                              as replanting vegetation, repairing hydrological systems
                              and improving water quality, Expanding restoration will
                              increase the region's acreage of valuable, functioning
                              vital habitats, Research and development of successful
                              restoration techniques will ensure that these efforts are
                              cost-effective.






                                                                           106













                                                                                                                  VRAL HABITATS


                                   CrIftical Steps

                                   1. Mapping data collected through Objective A, Management Action 2
                                      would be used to determine sites for restoration projects. As they are
                                      developed, basinwide ecosystem plans would guide restoration toward
                                      those areas that are most vital to the watershed or region.

                                   2. Agencies such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Wildlife
                                      Resources Commission (WRC), Division of Forest Resources (DFR),
                                      and Division of Environmental Management (DEM), and the Division of
                                      Coastal Management (DCM), among others, would seek funds to
                                      develop and demonstrate restoration technology.               Restoration
                                      demonstration projects should emphasize endemic species such as
                                      Atlantic white cedar and longleaf pine. For example, the USFWS is now
                                      planning to use a two-year EPA 319 Clean Water Fund grant to develop
                                      and conduct restoration projects in the Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife
                                      Refuge.

                                   3. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) would evaluate the
                                      potential for expanding efforts to restore submerged aquatic vegetation
                                      (SAV) beds, taking into consideration whether sources of degradation
                                      have been reduced enough to allow for successful restoration.

                                   4. Cooperative efforts to restore impeded migration routes of anadromous
                                      fish (particulady American shad, river herring and striped bass) would
                                      continue. An APES-funded research project identified certain dams,
                                      culverts, stream channelizations and artificial drainages as obstructing
                                      the migration of these species.        Through a mufti-agency effort
                                      coordinated by APES with funding from the federal Coastal America
                                      prograni and technical assistance and hydrologic 'support f rom the Army
                                      Corps of Engineers (USACE), plans have been made to remove two
                                      obstructions. USFWS, WRC and DMF would set priorities for future
                                      restorations, taking into consideration the amount, quality and potential
                                      use of the habitat.

                                   5. Results and data obtained f rom the Wetlands Enhancement, Restoration
                                      and Creation (WERC) Program [current@ being developed by DCM and
                                      DEM, with funding from the EPA] for restoration feasibility studies and
                                      demonstration projects will be used to establish effective wetlands
                                      restoration strategies.    WERC is being created to develop and
                                      implement a comprehensive wetlands restoration plan for the state and
                                      to sponsor wetlands restoration research. Under this management
                                      action, implementing the WERC program would allow state priorities to


                                                                       107












                   MAL HABITATS
                   - ---------- -------------

                                        be set for type- and site-specific restoration under existing state
                                        regulatory jurisdiction. WERC would direct restoration spending to
                                        where it would generate the greatest environmental benefit. DCM has
                                        already budgeted $21,550 for fiscal year 1993-1994 to continue the
                                        WERC program. Funding will come from NOAA federal Coastal Zone
                                        Management Act Section 309 grants.

                                     Evaluation Method
                                     Restoration goals and priorities would be incorporated into the basinwide
                                     ecosystem plans as they are developed. . The feasibility and potential
                                     effectiveness of restoring submerged aquatic vegetation in the region would
                                     be evaluated. The success of these steps also would be evaluated by
                                     monitoring the number of landowners participating in habitat restoration or
                                     enhancement. Voluntary restoration would be evaluated based on the
                                     number of acres, by habitat type, enrolled and successfully restored. An
                                     overall evaluation of the effectiveness of these programs in meeting
                                     regional goals would be needed.

                                     Costs and Economic Considerations
                                     USFWS would need an additional $100,000 in order to f urther develop and
                                     demonstrate restoration technology in the APES region. Coordination and
                                     planning considered in Objective A would help assure that public funds are
                                     used where the benefits of restoration would be greatest. Costs of
                                     restoration can vary greatly depending on the type of habitat and restoration
                                     needed.    For instance, a recent review of representative wetlands
                                     restoration projects revealed a range from $40 per acre for seeding in a
                                     bottomland forest to over $2,500 per acre for restoring a major riparian
                                     welland, including extensive grading, riprap installations and plantings. To
                                     evaluate the feasibility of any specific restoration project or program,
                                     information would be needed on the effectiveness of different technologies
                                     in specific applications, on potential restoration sites and on the question of
                                     whether restoration would be successful based on the level of original
                                     damage. Because the costs and benefits of restoration vary greatly, the
                                     additional expense of careful feasibility studies is-justified. Enhancing vital
                                     wetlands also can play a crftical role in regulating the storage and
                                     movement of water in a river basin, and restoring wetlands as pan of
                                     basinwide water quality initiatives could generate large savings by reducing
                                     the costs for flood and wave control structures, stormwater control and
                                     treatment, water quality maintenance and vital fisheries habitat protection.






                                                                          108













                                                                                                        VITAL HABITATS


                               Funding Strategy
                               USFWS would acquire funding through an expanded budget request to the
                               U.S. Congress and through the creation of partnerships with private
                               industry.




               Management Action 4: Establish by 1995 a consistent and effective
                    mitigation program to compensate for unavoidable permitted
                                                      wetlands losses.

                        Explanation: Mitigation compensates for the loss of
                        smaller, fragmented wetlands with the acquisition,
                        enhancement or restoration of larger, contiguous
                        wetlands. A practical and coordinated system of
                        mitigating wetlands damage, that is permitted only after
                        all efforts to avoid and minimize alteration of wetlands
                        have been considered, would ensure the greatest
                        possible long-term benefit to vital habitats. Mitigation
                        banking is a mechanism that allows land developers to
                        alter wetlands in exchange for financial contributions
                        toward the acquisition, enhancement, restoration, or
                        creation of wetlands with similar value. This practice
                        would be evaluated for expanded use in the region.


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




                               Critical Steps

                               1  The Division of Environmental Management (DEM), in conjunction with
                                  the Division of Coastal Management (DCM), the Army Corps of
                                  Engineers (USACE), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
                                  the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and other involved
                                  agencies would continue to develop effective wetland mitigation
                                  procedures.    State level research and development of nursery
                                  techniques for wetland tree species would be encouraged.



                                                                109












                  VITAL HABRATS
                  -------------------- ---------           --------- -- -----------

                                    2. New mechanisms that coordinate and consolidate wetlands mitigation
                                       efforts would be pursued.

                                    3. DEM would explore the feasibility of a mitigation bank in consultation, as
                                       appropriate, with agencies, potential mitigation bank users, wetlands
                                       restoration specialists and others. If a bank is determined to be feasible,
                                       efficient, and effective, wetlands mitigation banks would be created on
                                       a manageable scale to compensate for unavoidable losses of wetlands
                                       resulting from economic development projects. R mitigation banks are
                                       created, DEM, DCM, USACE, EPA, USFWS and other involved
                                       agencies would form an interagency team to evaluate wetlands sites and
                                       potential bank sites within each basin. Bank sites would be acquired by
                                       public or private means. The interagency team would review all
                                       proposed projects with anticipated impacts on identified wetlands for
                                       compliance and permit authorization. Mitigation of wetlands sites would
                                       be completed pdor to commencement of a proposed wetlands-disturbing
                                       project. The interagency team would identity and incorporate an
                                       evaluation methodology for classifying disrupted and mitigated shes to
                                       determine mitigation credits and debits. All involved parties would agree
                                       to credit and debit procedures as well as restrictions on use of bank
                                       credits.

                                    4. Education and public awareness of new state wetland mitigation
                                       procedures would be undertaken by DEM and DCM.

                                    Evaluation Method
                                    Individual projects would be evaluated through site inspections and tracked
                                    by the interagency team to insure compliance with the mitigation bank
                                    agreement. Basinwide wetlands inventodes (Objective A, Management
                                    Action 2) Would be updated on a regular basis to identify trends in wetland
                                    type, extent, and function.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    In support of this option approximately $500,000 would be needed by DEM
                                    to establish a coordinated, statewide mitigation program. One third of this
                                    amount, $170,000, would allow the development of a well-managed
                                    mitigation program that would coordinate wetland restoration activities
                                    associated with both regulatory and non-regulatory programs as well as
                                    provide a full accounting of wetlands losses in the APES region. While
                                    wetlands regulations can have important economic impacts that should be
                                    carefully considered by policy makers, this Management Action does not
                                    change current wetlands regulations. It is instead focused on'encouraging
                                    the most cost-effective use of public and private f unds. spent on wetlands


                                                                         110













                                                                                                                  VITAL HABITATS


                                  mitigation. It would not, in and of itself, change the amount of mitigation
                                  that would be required under existing or future regulations. To the extent
                                  that consolidation and careful planning of mitigation-driven restoration
                                  efforts (such as using some form of,mitigation bank) make restoration,
                                  management and monitoring more efficient, this Action would yield benefits
                                  in the form of more effective public administration and greater water quality
                                  from each restoration undertaken. For instance, enhanced water quality
                                  supports recreational and commercial activity associated with wetlands,
                                  especially recreational fishing and downstream commercial fishing.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  The development of a mitigation program by DEM would require an
                                  expansion budget    from the General Assembly. Once established, any
                                  mitigation program would be partially funded by entities (public or private)
                                  that are required to compensate for the development or alteration of
                                  wetlands.





























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



               FISHERIES PLAN






                       GOAL





          Restore or maintain fisheries and
      provide for their long-term.. sustainable
            use.. both commercial and
                   recreational.













                                                                                                                   FISHERIES





                        OBJECTIVE A: CONTROL OVER-FISHING BY
                        DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING FISHERY
                       MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR ALL IMPORTANT
                                                ESTUARINE SPECIES.




                                           M .ILLION POUNDS         SHELLFISH        EDIBLE FINFISH

                                        So-


                                        W -


                                        40-            . . . . . ... ................. . .... .. . . ........ .


                                        20 -


                                          0-
                                           1885     1905       1925       S"         1965       1985
                                        NC DMF IN7
                                     FIGURE 20 TRENDS IN COMMERCIAL LANDINGS
                                               FOR EDIBLE FINFISH & SHELLFISH IN THE APES REGION


                Stmteff: The Marine Fisheries Commission (MFC) and Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) would
                develop management plans, modeled after those currently used at the federal level, to help ensure the long-
                term availability of important commercial and recreational species. Figures 21 and 22 illustrate commercial
                and recreational fishing effort which will be considered in the development of fishery management plans.
                Where necessary, additional management controls would be recommended to conserve the resource. Recent
                efforts by the Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) to develop a state strategic plan lay a good foundation.
                However, improved and expanded data collection and analysis are necessary. These could be provided in
                part by modifying the existing marine fisheries license structure.





                                                                    115












                    FISHERIES
                        ------- --                                ----------------------- - ---------






                                                                     FISHING TRIPS EM FISH CAUGHWHOUR


                                                 1980

                                                 1981
                                                                                              T
                                                 1982

                                                 1983

                                                 1984

                                                 1986

                                                 1986

                                                 1987

                                                 1988

                                                 1989

                                                       8   7   6 5 4 3         2                          6           10
                                             NMF8                  MILLIONS                         TOTAL



                                       FIGURE 21              MARINE RECREATIONAL FISHING
                                                                STATISTICS. NORTH CAROLINA






                         Management Action 1: Develop and implement management
                                plans for fisheries that are important to recreational and
                               commercial fishing interests. These plans would include
                              recovery objectives for severely depleted stocks by 1999.

                                Explanation: State fishery management plans will allow
                                the Marine Fisheries Commission (MFC) and Wildlife
                                Resources Commission (WRC) to identify and maintain
                                healthy stocks of important commercial and recreational
                                fish. The plans will enhance depleted and declining
                                stocks and restore economically important species for
                                future harvest.,









                                                                                 116













                                                                                                                             FISHERIES


                                     Critical Steps

                                     1  DMF has been working to establish a strategic plan to manage important
                                        North Carolina fisheries. A comprehensive state framework for fisheries
                                        management would be developed in accordance to the Magnuson
                                        Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 (Magnuson Act
                                        1976) to include both marine and estuarine species, These plans,
                                        developed by DMF and WRC, would set objectives for management of
                                        each important species or group of species and recommend
                                        management measures to achieve those objectives.                        Some
                                        management plans are currently under development or have been
                                        developed. Those Mich have not been developed will be completed by
                                        1998.


                                     2. The General Assembly would be asked to support financially and in
                                        principle the development of additional fishery management plans,
                                        including the support staff necessary to develop,plans.

                                     3. A Memorandum of Agreement would be considered between DMF,
                                        WRC, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
                                        Service (USFWS), and National Wildlif e Service (NWS) to ensure long
                                        term cooperation and coordination on sustainable fisheries management
                                        plans within the APES region. In accordance with this agreement, state
                                        fishery management plans would agree to achieve the objectives of
                                        federal inter-jurisdictional fisheries management plans.

                                     4. DMF would collect and analyze data as necessary to conduct stock
                                        assessments for the preparation of each management plan. Adequate
                                        data exists for several species. But for others, data gaps hinder
                                        management decisions. For an analysis of data needs, see the APES
                                        report, 'Scoping Study of Data Requirements for Fisheries Stock
                                        Assessments in North Carolina," by Street and Phalen (1989).

                                     5. Fishery management plans would include goals and recommendations
                                        for each fishery. These strategies may include effort control measures
                                        such as individual vessel limits, annual trip limits, vessel quotas,
                                        individual transferable quotas, time restrictions, area restrictions, various
                                        gear restrictions, and limited entry. Strategies would also include habitat
                                        protection or bycatch reduction measures. MFC and WRC would adopt
                                        and develop rules for each state fishery management plan.





                                                                           117











                        FISHERIES

                                              6. The state fishery management plans would guide rule making for the
                                                  following important commercial and recreational species:

                                              American eel (Anguilla rostrata)                     Red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus)
                                              American shad (Alosa sapidissima)                    River herring(Alosa sp.)
                                              Atlantic croaker (Micropogonias undulatus)           Shrimp (Penaeus sp.)
                                              Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus)              Southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma)
                                              Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus)            Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus maculatus)
                                              Bay scallops (Argopectan irradians)                  Spot (Leiostomus xanthurus)
                                              Blue crabs (callinectes sapidus)                     Spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus)
                                              Bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix)                       Striped bass (Morone saxatilis)
                                              Catfish (ictalurus sp.)                              Summer flounder (Paralichthys entatus)
                                              Hard dam (Mercenaria mercenaria)                     Weakfish (Cynoscion regalis)
                                              Mullet (Mugil cephalus)                              White perch (Morone americana)
                                              Oysters (Crassostrea virginica)                      Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides)

                                              The MFC and WRC would establish requirements and schedules for
                                              preparing, updating and evaluating fishery management plans.

                                              7. The WRC would work closely with the MFC in developing and
                                                  implementing rules for managing estuarine species which overlap in
                                                  jurisdiction.

                                              8.  Where appropriate, management plans would consider restocking
                                                  severely depleted native species such as Atlantic and shortnose
                                                  sturgeon. The DMF, WRC, and USFWS would conduct these efforts.

                                              9.  The General Assembly would be asked to require fisheries managers to
                                                  consider the economic and social impact of effort control measures in
                                                  a manner similar to that required in and consistent with the federal
                                                  Magnuson Act (1976). Members of the coastal fishing industry                                                                   (commercial and recreational) would be involved in planning and
                                                  evaluating these measures. Careful attention would be given to the
                                                  nature of existing fisheries, with special consideration given to those
                                                  small-scale fishermen who depend on a variety of seasonal fisheries
                                                  over the course of a year.

                                              10. The General Assembly would be asked to grant MFC and WRC
                                                  authority to limit entry in fisheries as necessary to prevent over-fishing.

                                              11. DMF would consider and recommend measures to restore shellfish
                                                  populations (hard clan, oysters and bay scallops) within fishery
                                                  management plans. Currently, shellfish population enhancement is done
                                                  through a seeding program at the University of North Carolina Institute
                                                  of Marine Sciences (funded by the General Assembly and APES) and


                                                                                             118
 












                                                                                                                               FISHERIES
                                                                                         W.1
                                        the Oyster Rehabilitation program of DMF. Oyster seeding projects
                                        would target historical oyster beds and would include potential high-
                                        growth sites as identified by Ortega and Sutherland (1990) in an APES
                                        funded project. Oyster aquaculture (intensive production on rafts or
                                        other arlif icial structures) would be promoted as another way to increase
                                        oyster populations. The state would evaluate the feasibility of an oyster
                                        hatchery to enhance populations.

                                     12. Management planning for striped bass would address recommendations
                                        made in the Striped Bass Management Board report on species
                                        recovery in the region. These recommendations would be evaluated
                                        and implemented as necessary. This is a complex issue that demands
                                        the continued cooperation of North Carolina, Virginia, and federal
                                        agencies.

                                     13.Management plans would be subject to external peer review to provide
                                        for a high level of scientific quality.

                                     U.Management plans would be subject to public review in public meetings
                                        to consider the effectiveness and impact of proposed strategies, as well
                                        as possible alternative strategies.

                                     15. A schedule would be set for future updates of management plans.

                                     Evaluation Method
                                     Evaluation of fishery management plans would occur during the annual
                                     development of management rules by the MFC and WRC.                            The
                                     effectiveness of regulatory methods to limit entry would be assessed in
                                     terms of social and economic costs to the fishing community and impact on
                                     fish stocks. For severely depleted stocks, or those for which replenishment
                                     has been recommended, evaluation should be based upon the status of the
                                     stock. Plans for the above listed species should be completed by 1998.

                                     Costs and Economic Considerations
                                     Administrative costs for developing a fishery management planning process
                                     have been estimated at $300,000 per year for five years.                      Staff
                                     requirements to implement planning include at least one biologist, one
                                     economist, one population dynamics specialist and three data collection
                                     technicians. Fishery management would result in long-term benefits
                                     through improved stocks. These benefits could include larger harvests,
                                     greater prof its for commercial fishermen, lower prices for consumers, better
                                     trips for recreational fishermen, and economic benefits to -communities with
                                     ties to commercial and recreational fishing. Shellfish enhancement, for


                                                                            119












                 FISHERIES
                          --------------------           ----- ----------------- ----- -- ---- --

                                  example, would benefit not only the fishery but potentially benefit water
                                  quality.through increased filter feeding. Where management plans result
                                  in greater restdctions, some f ishermen may experience short-term economic
                                  losses. Consideration of socioeconomic characteristics can help address
                                  the equity of such regulations.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  Although the federal sources of grant money are appropriate for the
                                  development of fishery management plans, much of this action would need
                                  to be funded by expanding DMF's budget. If modifications in the fishing
                                  license structure are made and revenues are generated, money collected
                                  from license fees could be used in lieu of state appropriations. WRC would
                                  use existing resources to complete the development of freshwater and
                                  interjurisdictional fishery management plans.




                  Management Action 2.- Modify the existing marine fisheries license
                       structure to improve data collection with respect to landings,
                        demographics and fishing effort, and to generate increased
                                            revenues for fisheries management.

                               Explanation: A license system that enhances fisheries
                               data collection is critical to developing and
                               implementing state fishery management plans. The
                               data collected is necessary for additional research on
                               how regulations impact the fisheries. License revenues
                               can support fisheries research, habitat restoration and
                               other management improvements.




                                  Critical Steps

                                  1. The General Assembly would continue efforts by a legislative study
                                      committee to determine how to, modify the marine fisheries license
                                      structure to improve data collection and generate additional revenues.
                                      Options include establishing a saltwater recreational fishing license,
                                      expanding or modifying existing gear license fees (such as modifying the

                                                                      120













                                                                                                                         FISHERIES
                 ------------       --------------------------                                                                 ---------

                                       license fees to account for differences in fishing effort), integrating new
                                       license requirements with existing ones, and simplifying the overall
                                       licensing process and structure.

                                    2. The Marine Fisheries Commission (MFC) would consider using its
                                       existing authority to issue gear licenses.         Other new licensing
                                       procedures may be flexible, considering allocation and equity issues and
                                       be implemented as necessary to conform to new fishery management
                                       plans.

                                    3. Revenues generated by the new license sales would be directed toward
                                       fisheries management and enhancement.

                                    Evaluation Method
                                    Modifications to the license structure would be completed by 1995. DMF
                                    would evaluate the new structure's ability to collect data and the simplicity
                                    of license requirements.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    The costs of modifying the existing marine fisheries license structure will
                                    depend on how data gathering is improved and whether new licenses are
                                    implemented. A bill to establish a license to sell fish has already been
                                    passed by the legislature. If a recreational saft water fishing license is
                                    implemented, start up funds may be needed, however, the amount of funds
                                    required will depend on how the license structure is modified. Once the
                                    license is implemented, revenues from license fees should more than offset
                                    government costs of operating and enforcing new license programs and
                                    managing data.      In fact, in other states 4that have implemented a
                                    recreational saft water fishing license, revenues have far exceeded the cost
                                    of admini@tering the license, and have funded data collection and research
                                    to improve recreational fishing. For example, in South Carolina, Virginia,
                                    and Florida, 5 to 10 percent of the revenues from marine recreational
                                    fishing license fees go to administration. The rest are earmarked for
                                    fisheries research, public education, enforcement, habitat protection,
                                    acquisition and other programs to benefit recreational fishing. In addition
                                    to facilitating better data collection and generating revenue to fund marine
                                    recreational fishing enhancement, revenues from the implementation of a
                                    marine recreational fishing license would help the state secure more federal
                                    Sport Fish Restoration matching funds for fisheries management
                                    enhancement.







                                                                         121










                 _RSHERIES

                                 License fees would have some impact on fishermen; the effect depends on
                                 which licenses are implemented and what fees are established. Setting
                                 reasonable fees would minimize the impact on tourism. Modifying the
                                 license structure would benefit the public by supporting fisheries
                                 management that is both biologically and socioeconomically sound.

                                 Funding Strategy
                                 No additional state agency program costs are anticipated to modify the
                                 existing marine fisheries license structure. Establishing a new marine
                                 recreational fishing license would entail first-year start-up costs. These
                                 costs could be offset by revenues from the license program. After the first
                                 year, revenues from license fees would cover administration of the licenses
                                 as well as research and other initiatives to enhance marine recreational
                                 fishing.































                                                                    122













                                                                                                                FISHERIES





                        OBJECTIVE B: PROMOTE THE USE OF BEST
                     FISHING PRA CTICES THA T RED UCE B YCA TCH
                           AND IMPACTS ON FISHERIES HABITATS.






                Strategy: The Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) and the UNC Sea Grant Program would continue to
                develop effective methods to reduce bycatch. New measures would be considered as they are proven
                effective. Commercial and recreational fishermen would be closely involved in developing byeatch reduction
                measures. DMF would develop best fishing practices, similar to agricultural best management practices, to
                preserve f isheries stocks and habitats. The model of cost sharing for agricultural best management practices
                would be employed for developing a similar program for best fishing practices.




                 Management Action 1: Continue and expand the development of
                    bycatch reduction gear and practices, and require their use as
                 practicality is demonstrated Alm to reduce inside trawl, long haul
                   seine, pound net, and gill net bycatch by at least 50 percent by
                                                                 1995.

                          Explanation:              Minimizing non-targeted harvests will
                          preserve the diversity of fish populations and support the
                          long-term use of fisheries resources.                             Implementing
                          efficient and effective measures to reduce bycatch
                          eventually may result in lower costs to commercial
                          fishermon.



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








                                                                   123










                 FISHERIES                 ------------

                                   Critical Steps

                                   1. The General Assembly would be asked to provide stable, long-term
                                      funding for a bycatch reduction program in DMF.

                                   2. DMF would use this funding to create a bycatch reduction program and
                                      achieve the above bycatch reduction objective. The program especially
                                      would pursue methods that minimize capture of non-target organisms
                                      and loss of the target catch. (These measures also may improve the
                                      eff iciency of some commercial fishing practices by reducing unnecessary
                                      weight in hauls and time required for sorting catches.)

                                   3. The DMF would improve bycatch estimates so that progress toward the
                                      above objective can be accurately assessed.

                                   4. Commercial fishermen would be closely involved in developing bycatch
                                      reduction methods, since they can provide valuable information. Their
                                      involvement also provides an opportunity to evaluate the social and
                                      economic impacts of now measures. (The cost share program
                                      discussed in the next management action would compensate fishermen
                                      for their time and effort.)

                                   5. When a bycatch reduction practice is demonstrated to be practical and
                                      eff ective, the Marine Fisheries Commission (MFC) would require its use.
                                      (The cost share program discussed also would help implement such
                                      requirements.)

                                   6. MFC would evaluate the need to reduce current byeatch allowances or
                                      would enhance enforcement efforts to achieve the above objective.
                                      (Currenfly, estuarine trawl fisheries are allowed to take 1,000 pounds of
                                      finfish per vessel, plus an unlimited quantity of flounder of legal size.
                                      Pound net and long haul seine operations may land 5,000 pounds of
                                      scrap fish per vessel per day.)

                                   Evaluation Method
                                   The program would use gear and fishing practice testing results, as well as
                                   bycatch estimates, to calculate the projected reduction of each new required
                                   practice.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   An average of $200,000 per year for five years is needed to establish a
                                   gear development program in'the DMF and to fund gear research in the
                                   trawl, long haul seine, pound net and gill net fisheries., Fishermen would


                                                                       124













                                                                                                                       FISHERIES


                                  have to pay for equipment to comply with new restrictions, although much
                                  of these costs would be offset by the cost share program described below.
                                  A greater ability to target the catch may result in lower culling and towing
                                  costs. Possible increased catches may mean lower overall fuel and
                                  equipment costs although reduced catches may result in some cases if new
                                  gear results in increased f ishing time. Stock increases may mean lower f ish
                                  prices for consumers, and better trips and increased spending by
                                  recreational fishermen.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  Some federal funding sources are eligible for this action but are largely
                                  unavailable. Costs of this action would need to be covered through an
                                  expansion of the DMFs budget. License fees may contribute to funding
                                  research of bycatch reduction gear if available.




                      Management Action 2.- Institute a cost share program for best
                             fishing practices for commercial fishing gear by 1995.

                           Explanation: A cost share program would help alleviate
                           the financial burden and encourage commercial
                           fishermen to implement best fishing practices.



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




                                  Critical Steps

                                  1. The General Assembly would be asked to establish and fund a Best
                                      Fishing Practices Cost Share Program, using the N.C. Agriculture Cost
                                      Share Program as a model.

                                  2.  The Best Fishing Practices Cost Share Program would:

                                      a.     make funds available to develop best fishing practices. These
                                             funds would encourage fishermen to become involved in
                                             experiments with new fishing gear or methods by compensating
                                             them for their time, effort and the use of equipment;



                                                                       125













                  RSHERIES
                                                                              --------- - -------

                                      b.     share costs with fishermen who voluntarily use approved best
                                             fishing practices; and

                                      C.     share costs with fishermen to implement new requirements for the
                                             use of best fishing practices. In the second and third tiers, cost
                                             share funding would be available to existing fishermen only, since
                                             the program is intended to mitigate the costs of modifying existing
                                             gear and practices. New fishermen can adopt these measures
                                             as they begin fishing.

                                   3. Where cost sharing involves purchasing new gear, fishermen receiving
                                      funds would trade in their old gear to remove it from use.

                                   4. For practices in the third tier, funding should be fair and equal, rather
                                      than on a first-come, first-served basis.

                                   5. The Marine Fisheries Commission (MFC) would develop a policy for
                                      implementing the Best Fishing Practices program. The Commission
                                      would approve practices as eligible for cost sharing, determine levels of
                                      f unding for each approved practice and compensate fishermen who help
                                      develop these practices. In making such policy decisions, the MFC
                                      would consult its regional advisory committees.

                                   6. In the establishment of this program, the use of afternatives to direct
                                      cost sharing, such as income or property tax breaks, would be
                                      considered.


                                   Evaluation Method
                                   The cost share program should be established by the end of 1995. The
                                   program's effectiveness could be evaluated by assessing compliance with
                                   regulatory best fishing practices and by estimating use of voluntary
                                   practices.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   An average of $200,000 per year for five years is needed to establish and
                                   implement a cost share program for best fishing practices for commercial
                                   fishermen through the Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF). Program costs
                                   include start up costs, yearly administrative costs, leasing of commercial
                                   fishermen's boats and payment for their participation in gear research
                                   projects, technical assistance and the provision of cost share funding to
                                   commercial fishermen to phase in gear changes and modifications for their
                                   trawls, long haul seines, and pound nets. The 25 percent share bome by
                                   fishermen has been estimated at $5 to $10 per net for installing revised


                                                                        126













                                                                                                                  FISHERIES


                                 finfish excluder devices on trawls, $37.50 per rig for long haul seine
                                 modifications, and $12.50 per net for pound net modifications (RAI 1993,
                                 draft).

                                 Funding Strategy
                                 Establishing a cost share program would require an appropriation from the
                                 General Assembly to cover start-up costs, annual administrative costs, and
                                 the costs of gear changes and modifications.




































                                                                     127






























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



           STEWARDSHIP PLAN


                                   mom




                      GOAL





      Promote responsib /e stewardship of the
        notural resources of the Albemarle-
                 Pomlico region,













                                                                                                                   STEWARDSHIP





                   OBJECTIVE A: PROMOTE LOCAL AND REGIONAL
                     PLANNING THAT PROTECTS THE ENVIRONMENT
                          AND ALLOWS FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH.






                  Strategy: Different planning requirements affect the cities, towns and counties of the APES region. In North
                  Carolina, coastal communities must prepare land use plans. Counties that provide public water service must
                  prepare water supply plans. And counties with water supply watersheds must plan for protecting those areas.
                  Virginia requires comprehensive planning for all counties, and tidewater counties have specific environmental
                  standards. While these requirements result in environmental planning for many parts of the region, many
                  local communities -- as well as local natural resources -- would benefit from expanded comprehensive
                  planning aimed at meeting both environmental and economic goals. To accommodate future growth and
                  change while preserving the quality of life within the estuarine area, North Carolina would augment existing
                  regulations with a proactive, voluntary planning initiative. Specifically, in the APES region, the state would
                  fund local plans that address the combined goals of economic growth and environmental protection. The
                  state would provide six planners proficient with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) who would provide
                  technical assistance for local economic and environmental planning. As an incentive, the state would give
                  localities with approved environmental plans higher priority for construction funds from the State Revolving
                  Fund. To support local environmental and economic planning, the state GIS in the Center for Geographic
                  Information and Analysis (CGIA) would be more accessible and affordable. The APES program has funded
                  the development of numerous data layers on this system. Within the region, a few coun     'cils of government,
                  counties, and municipalities already have GIS systems in place. Local government planning would benefit
                  from. affordable and up-to-date GIS data. The state would fund CGIA sufficiently to provide access to the
                  standardized GIS database at affordable rates. CGIA would update GIS data layers as needed. (See
                  Management Action 2 under Objective A in the Vital Habitats Plan.) Providing GIS work stations at the three
                  DEHNR regional offices that serve the APES region would make the system even more accessible.








                                                                       131













                   STEWARDSHIP





                         Management Action 1: Support local planning by providing
                   funding and economic incentives to local governments to integrate
                                    environmental and economic planning by 1999.

                             Explanation: Local planning gives governments the
                             opportunity to direct their own growth and enables
                             private investors and local citizens to make informed
                             decisions.           Comprehensive planning also promotes
                             economic development and environmental protection
                             that are compatible. Financial assistance to local
                             communities would encourage land and water uses that
                             have the least impact on natural resources while
                             promoting sound economic growth, including increased
                             opportunities for nature-based tourism.




                                    Crftical Steps

                                    1 .DEHNR would work with the Department of Commerce (DOC) to
                                       introduce legislation in support of a local government planning program.
                                       This legislation would include the addition of six now staff members to
                                       the Division of Community Assistance (DCA) within the DOC to provide
                                       technical assistance to local planners and establish a grant program to
                                       f und 80 percent of the cost to local governments for the development of
                                       local economic and environmental plans.

                                    2. In the 1995-1996 legislative planning year, the General Assembly would
                                       be asked to approve funding for this proactive planning initiative for the
                                       APES region, covering costs of grants to support local environmental
                                       and economic planning and regional planners to assist local
                                       governments.

                                    3. Once legislation is approved, DCA would hire six regional planners to
                                       provide technical assistance to local governments in the APES region.
                                       These planners would be GIS-prof icient so that they could aid in the use


                                                                         132













                                                                                                                    STEWARDSHIP


                                           of the APES GIS data base. Planners would be located in the
                                           DCA regional offices in Washington, Raleigh and Wilmington. They
                                           would provide local governments with GIS and planning expertise,
                                           and would act as liaisons for the state while supporting local
                                           governments in environmental planning.

                                   4.      Funding for local plans would be available through DCA grants. In
                                           exchange for grant funds, local governments would agree to
                                           prepare integrated environmental and economic plans in
                                           accordance with planning guidelines. DCA grants would cover 80
                                           percent of the cost of developing plans. Coastal counties and
                                           municipalities would be eligible for funding to augment existing
                                           Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) land use plans. Coastal
                                           counties could use funding for additional maps (such as
                                           standardized land classification maps), additional implementation
                                           strategies and/or water use plans.

                                   5.      DCA would form a Joint Committee with the Division of Coastal
                                           Management (DCM) and the Division of Environmental
                                           Management (DEM). This committee would oversee the grant
                                           process and develop planning and implementation guidelines. The
                                           planning liaisons would act as staff for the Joint Committee.

                                   6.      By 1996, the Joint Committee would develop a targeting strategy
                                           for funding local plans, via a grant application and approval process
                                           that considers such factors as special regional environmental and
                                           economic concerns, population and development trends, land use
                                           conversion trends, and innovative planning and implementation
                                           strategies.

                                   7.      By 1996, the Joint Committee would develop an incentive strategy,
                                           based on giving localities with approved environmental plans higher
                                           priority for construction moneys from the State Revolving Fund.

                                   8.      By 1996, the Joint Committee would design and implement a
                                           review process for local plans, implementation strategies, and
                                           updates.     This process would review local implementation'
                                           strategies for consistency with local environmental plans. The
                                           following agencies would be included in the review process: DCA
                                           (to consider commerce-related issues), DCM (to review plans from
                                           coastal counties and municipalities), and DEM (to review plans for
                                           compliance with environmental guidelines).



                                                                        133













                  STEWARDSHIP


                                    9. Planning and implementation guidelines would be developed by the
                                       regional planners. under the Joint Committee oversight. Guidelines for
                                       development would include frequent opportunities for input from local
                                       officials and planners. Guidelines would ensure that participating local
                                       governments address issues vital to protecting the natural and economic
                                       values of the estuarine area. General planning guidelines would
                                       incorporate requirements for data collection and analysis, community
                                       participation, policy development, implementation and evaluation, and
                                       land classif ication maps based on the State Land Use Classification
                                       System. To receive full funding, environmental plans would be required
                                       to incorporate land use, public water supply, and water disposal
                                       elements. Where environmental plans have already been developed,
                                       some funding may be available for the implementation of the plans.
                                       Availability and distribution of grant money would be determined by the
                                       Joint Committee. Plans also would be required to explore options for
                                       balancing public access to public trust areas with the preservation of
                                       public resources (in conjunction with 15A NCAC 7M 0300. G.S. 113A-
                                       1334.1 et seq; and Section 315 of the federal Coastal Zone
                                       Management Act of 1972). Water use planning, including public access
                                       planning for the ocean, estuarine, and riverine shoreline would be
                                       encouraged. (see APES Publication Number 90-10, Clark, 'A Pilot
                                       Study for Managing Multiple Use in the State's Public Trust Waters'.)
                                       Guidelines would address concerns for vital area and water quality
                                       protection described elsewhere in this document (see Vital Habitats
                                       Plan, Fisheries Plan and Water Quality Plan). Plans would address
                                       potential water use conflicts and access to public trust areas. Guidelines
                                       would be flexible enough to allow for innovative planning and
                                       implementation strategies, such as eco-tourism designs and land-use-
                                       guidance systems (LUGS). (For model Land Use Guidance Systems,
                                       see Burke County, N.C. 'Land Use Management Ordinance" or Bedford
                                       County, Virginia LUGS plan; for eco-tourism designs, see 'Eco-Tourism
                                       in Tyrrell Countyu, Chapel Hill, N.C.,1993; or Coastal Initiative
                                       Committee, OA Guide for the Development and Revitalization of the
                                       Waterfront", Columbia, N.C., 1992.) Planning guidelines would require
                                       consistency between implementation strategies and environmental plans.
                                       Implementation strategies could include infrastructure investment
                                       designs, subdivision ordinances, zoning, land use guidance systems
                                       (LUGS), and/or other devices.

                                    10. Because environmental planning must consider entire water bodies and
                                       drainage basins to eff ectively protect natural resources, the six planners
                                       would encourage local jurisdictions to coordinate with adjacent counties
                                       and municipalities and other agencies to promote regional planning


                                                                         134





                                       efforts. Guidelines would be designed to allow for the possibility of           STEWARWHP
                                       eventual coordination with a state-wide planning effon (such as revival
                                       of the Land Policy Act or legislative action on the Partnership for
                                       Growth).

                                    1 1.The regional planners would encourage local governments to coordinate
                                       other local planning efforts (such as economic development plans, land
                                       development plans, policy development plans, and strategic plans) with
                                       environmental plans.

                                    12.The state of Virginia would work with the state of North Carolina to
                                       ensure a similar level of local planning in the Virginia portion of the
                                       APES watershed.


                                    Evaluation Method
                                    DCA would maintain an ongoing count and inventory of local planning
                                    documents and implementation strategies funded by this program to
                                    determine the extent to which funding is -being used to develop and
                                    implement local environmental plans. DCA would perform a periodic survey
                                    of local governments and the public to assess local government perception
                                    of the effectiveness of environmental planning liaisons, determine the
                                    perceived value of services provided, and to estimate unmet demands for
                                    local environmental planning. DCA would examine each Albemade-Pamlico
                                    river basin in five-year increments to determine whether population,
                                    development, and land use conversion pressures and public access needs
                                    have been managed effectively by local planning and implementation
                                    strategies. In determining the effectiveness of local growth management on
                                    environmental protection, DCA would use relevant DEM indicators (from
                                    water quality monitoring data) to determine the effect of local environmental
                                    plans on water quality in the region.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    Twenty North Carolina counties would need full funding for planning.
                                    Sixteen coastal North Carolina counties would need partial funding to
                                    augment existing plans. Local plans and implementation strategies would
                                    receive funding for 80% of the cost of developing plans. Assuming that
                                    municipalities are covered under county plans, and that there is full
                                    participation by all counties that are eligible, it would cost state government
                                    an estimated $450,000 per year to implement this Management Action. It
                                    would cost local governments an additional $38,000 per year per county to
                                    develop individual plans. Other local government costs would be incurred
                                    for ordinance updates, enforcement, and other administrative costs. (Note
                                    that the costs of planning in Virginia communities have not been included


                                                                          135








                    STEWARDSHIP              - -- -----          I M MN --- I I @--- --- - ------------------
                                      here.) Local planning serves the local economy by helping government and
                                      private citizens predict and guide future development patterns in their
                                      community, making it a more desirable place to live. Guiding growth is also
                                      important to local fiscal stability - rapid development can, in many cases,
                                      lead to higher infrastructure and public service costs, and in turn, to higher
                                      taxes. Effective local environmental planning can provide for such public
                                      amenities as resource preservation, open space, park land, and public
                                      access to public trust areas. Planning can give local citizens more control
                                      over resources and activities within their government's jurisdiction.
                                      Environmental planning can help preserve and enhance the value of land
                                      and other resources for the future production of both market and non-
                                      market goods and services desired by the community. In addition, local
                                      planning enhances total economic benefits of land by reducing conflicts
                                      between incompatible land uses. For each plan that is developed, these
                                      benefits should be estimated and weighed against the economic impacts of
                                      the plan. In certain circumstances, land use controls (such as zoning) that
                                      could result from the environmental planning process can reduce the
                                      relative value of regulated land. In some cases, housing costs could
                                      increase and the availability of low-cost housing could decrease if
                                      restrictions on land or water use are very broadly applied (for instance, if
                                      they do not allow for construction demand to be f ully shifted from regulated
                                      areas to unregulated areas). Typically, land use controls related to
                                      environmental protection would not have this impact since development
                                      demand can usually be met on less environmentally sensitive lands in the
                                      same area. Water use controls, 9 needed, would similarly reduce the
                                      options for development for landowners. This would need to be judged in
                                      comparison to the benefits to the community that any water use controls
                                      would generate in terms of water quality. Another important consideration
                                      in environmental planning is the need to ensure that land and water use
                                      plans are as fair and equitable as possible, balancing the rights of individual
                                      landowners, public trust users, and others with the public!s interest in
                                      maintaining environmental quaI4.

                                      Funding Strategy
                                      DEHNR would take the initiative to develop legislation for an economic and
                                      environmental management program. State appropriations would be
                                      needed to cover the costs of hiring 6 regional planners and the money
                                      necessary to fund grants to local governments. Although at this time
                                      federail grants are not available to fund this action, DCA would seek out and
                                      use any appropriate federal funds to augment state appropriations. The
                                      cost of GIS regional workstations and maintenance will be discussed in the
                                      following management action. The Joint Committee, includino DCA, DCM,
                                      and DEM will be formed using existing staff and resources..


                                                                            136













                                                                                                            STEWAROSHIP






                  Management Action 2.- Provide to local governments affordable
                and accessible data from the state Geographic Information System
                 (GIS) for use in planning and public education within the region by
                                                                1996.

                          Explanation: Local comprehensive plans influence private
                          and public development and management decisions,
                          and should be supported with accurate and timely
                          geographic information. Increasing the availability of
                          state GIS data to local governments will help in
                          environmental and economic planning,





                                Wical Steps

                                1 .The General Assembly would be asked to authorize and appropriate
                                   funding for the Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA)
                                   sufficient to allow the Center to provide easy and inexpensive access to
                                   APES' GIS database. Using these funds, CGIA would provide an
                                   accessible, affordable GIS database to local, regional, and state
                                   agencies by 1996.      CGIA would continue as the state agency
                                   responsible for the APES GIS database and would oversee regular
                                   updates of land use, land cover, and other relevant databases.

                                2. The General Assembly would be asked to authorize and appropriate
                                   funding for CGIA to maintain new GIS systems for use in the study area
                                   and to hire three additional staff members: one in the central off ice to
                                   provide assistance to local, regional, and state agencies and two in
                                   regional off ices to train and assist the six planners from the Division of
                                   Community Assistance (DCA) with GIS systems.

                                3. CGIA would develop and implement a reasonable pricing system for
                                   access and use of the CGIA database by 1995.




                                                                  137










                  STEWARDSHIP        - ---- -------                                                    -- ----- - -- -- ---

                                   4.  CGIA would establish three GIS work stations in the regional offices of
                                       the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
                                       (DEHNR), by 1995. The six planners from the DCA (described in Step
                                       4, Management Action 1) would provide GIS assistance to local
                                       governments in accessing GIS planning information. For example, the
                                       planners would work with local governments, upon request, to perform
                                       GIS suitability analyses, environmental assessments, demographic
                                       characterizations, and other environmental and economic planning
                                       functions, (Refer to Vital. Habitats, Objective A, of this document for
                                       more information on GIS data base updates that would be available for
                                       use at the regional work stations.)

                                   5.  The two new regional CGIA staff members would work with the six DCA
                                       planners to provide outreach into the APES study area. CGIA would
                                       coordinate with the six planners to provide technical assistance,
                                       including workshops, in the use of GIS and the APES database, by
                                       1995. The planners would travel, as needed, to municipal, county,
                                       Council of Governments (COG), or state off ices to provide workshops
                                       and ongoing GIS assistance to government staff for use in developing
                                       environmental plans.

                                   6.  To educate the public on the potential values of GIS technology relative
                                       to environmental and economic considerations (soil suitability, inventory
                                       of existing land uses and so forth), CGIA would provide public displays
                                       and demonstrations of GIS systems at a pilot 'education stationo in an
                                       aquarium or other eco-tourism IoWion within the region by 1995.

                                   7.  CGIA would develop a dat    abase plan for geographic information that
                                       scales maps with greater resolutions.

                                   8.  Beginni ng in 1996, CGIA would oversee the       process of updating all
                                       existing and new databases as needed, including a periodic statewide
                                       land usefiand cover inventory. CGIA would oversee updating Land
                                       Cover maps every five years. (See Vital Habitats, Objective A)

                                   Evaluation Method
                                   During review of local plans, DCA would evaluate the effectiveness of the
                                   GIS system in providing relevant, useful, accurate and timely information for
                                   local environmental planning and implementation. DCA would conduct a
                                   periodic survey of local governments to assess the accessibility,
                                   affordability, and usefulness of the GIS system in plan development.




                                                                        138













                                                                                                                   STEWARDSHIP


                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   CGIA is not currently funded directly through state appropriations. Instead,
                                   CGIA supports the state's geographic information management program
                                   through cost-recovery based agreements. This project calls for ongoing
                                   funding to ensure long-term maintenance and operation of the APES GIS
                                   database and to support a training and education program that promotes
                                   the APES geographic information system capabilities. Additional annual
                                   funding would support the universal needs of the state's geographic
                                   information system user community and enhance communication links
                                   among government agencies. Initial costs of implementing this action would
                                   be $200,000 for equipment and installation of GIS systems.. Annual
                                   administrative costs to implement this action would be $460,000. This
                                   figure includes $180,000 annually to fund three additional staff members,
                                   $200,000 annually to oversee and update all existing and new databases
                                   under the land use/land cover initiative, $30,000 annually for maintenance
                                   of three new regional GIS workstations, and $50,000 in support and
                                   operations fees for other database layers. Local governments wishing to
                                   use CGIA services and data would incur some costs, but the rates would
                                   be lower than at present. Providing to local governments affordable,
                                   accessible GIS data would reduce local costs of data gathering, storage,
                                   analysis, and presentation. GIS technology has the potential to greatly
                                   improve efficiency in the provision of many public services, including land
                                   use planning and natural resource management. For instance, GIS has
                                   been successfully used to improve fire and police protection, as well as
                                   public works planning and maintenance. With respect to environmental
                                   protection, local governments would have access to a vast library of reliable
                                   GIS data. Local officials could use the system to analyze the potential
                                   impacts of now development proposals, new regulations, or new land use
                                   ordinances on the local economy and tax base, thereby identifying potential
                                   opportunities, problems, costs and benefits of various scenarios.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   CGIA activities has been funded by fees for the services they provide. In
                                   order to expand the program to meet the planning needs of the Albemarle-
                                   Pamlico region, additional staff members would have to be funded by state
                                   appropriations. The USGS Innovative Partnerships Program and the
                                   federal Geographic Data Commission's competitive grants for Coordination
                                   of state-wide uses may be possible funding sources for the maintenance of
                                   data, but the amount actually available will vary. State appropriations would
                                   have to cover additional operation costs in order to keep costs low to local
                                   governments.




                                                                        139













                 STEWARDSHIP





                  Management Action 3: Implement a comprehensive, coordinated
                  and proactive approach to managing the state's public trust waters
                                                               by 1996.

                           Explanation: North Carolina holds the waters, the lands
                           beneath them and the resources living in them in trust for
                           its citizens. The state has the authority and responsibility
                           to preserve their natural value as a part of our common
                           heritage. Several state agencies are responsible for the
                           stewardship of this public trust.                            As the region's
                           population continues to grow, public use of the sounds
                           and waterways will increase as well. Greater confficts
                           are likely between various groups, including those who
                           use the resources of public trust areas for profit.
                           Therefore, closer coordination is necessary between the
                           agencies that manage these resources. Public trust
                           policy should be proactive and should consider issues
                           related to future population growth, including public
                           access and compensation for uses of public trust
                           resources.





                                  crRical Steps

                                  I  A management committee consisting of state government departments
                                     and agencies involved in managing public trust waters would be formed.
                                     This committee would be comprised of the Department of Environment,
                                     Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR), Department of Administration.
                                     (DOA), and Department of Justice (DOJ). In DEHNR, the following
                                     divisions would participate: the Division of Environmental Management
                                     (DEM), the Division of Coastal Management PCM), Wildlife Resources
                                     Commission (WRC), and the Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF).
                                     Coordination with private conservation groups as well as other involved
                                     state agencies such as the Division of Water Resources (DWR) and the
                                     Division of Parks and Recreation (DPR) would be important.


                                                                      140













                                                                                                                        STEWARDSHIP


                                    2.  The committee would ensure that there is coordination in the
                                        development of state policies for public trust waters.
                                    3.  'The committee would evaluate the feasibility and practicality of
                                        establishing a system that provides compensation for activities which
                                        affect and use public trust resources. For example, fees might be
                                        charged for marinas and piers and license fees might be paid by
                                        recreational saltwater fishermen.


                                    4. The committee would promote and balance efforts to balance access
                                        and use with public resource preservation.

                                    Evaluation Method
                                    Implementation would be indicated by the development of policies which
                                    consider and improve management of public trust issues.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    This Management Action would cost the state agencies involved an
                                    estimated additional $75,000 over the next two years for feasibility studies
                                    of compensation mechanisms for the private use of public trust resources.
                                    Other components of this Management Action would incur no incremental
                                    costs to government unless some compensation mechanism is established.
                                    If so, a fee system would incur additional administrative costs that would be
                                    determined by the complexity of the system. Fees or other forms of
                                    compensation that the interagency committee might recommend could have
                                    a significant economic impact on the most directly affected users. The
                                    magnitude of this impact is entirely dependent on the fees that could be
                                    proposed; they might be nominal or they might be large enough to
                                    significantly reduce profitability of private operations or inhibit new
                                    development in public trust areas. These impacts are unlikely to be large
                                    f rom a regional perspective but could be important locally if there is a strong
                                    likelihood of marina development, commercial oyster bed development, or
                                    other public trust use development and if there are only a limited number
                                    of afternative sites for this development. Balancing this economic cost is
                                    the fact that f unds raised by compensation mechanisms could be reinvested
                                    by the state into improving public access to estuarine areas and othe           ,r
                                    improvements in public trust management. Any compensation mechanism
                                    should be designed to assure that the economic and environmental benefits
                                    outweigh the expected economic costs. This would include taking into
                                    consideration the impact on local communities as well as on vital estuarine
                                    resources. For instance, a fee system could be used to minimize the
                                    impacts of new development on vital fisheries habitats that would be
                                    affected (see Management Action 4, Objective B of the Vital Habitats Plan).


                                                                           141












                   STEWARDSHIP


                                    Reduced threats to these habitats could help commercial and 'recreational
                                    fishing.

                                    Funding Strategy
                                    The coordinating function of this management committee should not impose
                                    additional agency costs. If incremental costs arise, the agencies involved
                                    will absorb those costs into existing authorities.      The management
                                    committee will determine which agencies are to conduct feasibility studies.
                                    Feasibility studies would require state appropriations for some of the
                                    administering agencies. Where possible, federal grants, such as the U.S.
                                    National Park Service's Land and Water Conservation Fund, will be used.




                         Management Action 4: Provide support to organizations that
                    promote nature-based tourism and environmental education as a
                    way of fostering environmentally sound economic development in
                                                                 the region.

                             Explanation:             The mission of the recently formed
                             Partnership for the Sounds is to promote economic
                             development through environmental conservation,
                             education and nature-based tourism. The Partnership
                             seeks to educate people who come to the Albemarle-
                             Pamlico region to enjoy its natural environment. The
                             more people know about the ecological balance of a
                             region where they vacation or earn a living, the more
                             invested they will be in the stewardship of its resources,


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


                                    CrRical Steps

                                    I .The General Assembly would be asked      to support, both financially and
                                       in principle, the development of the Partnership for the Sounds. The
                                       Partnership would pursue a mission of regional economic development
                                       through nature-based tourism, as well as provide administrative
                                       oversight for three new environmental education centers which will be
                                       built in the Albemarle-Pamlico watershed. A non-profit, non-advocacy


                                                                        142













                                                                                                                       STEWARDSHIP


                                        Board of Directors comprised of representatives from local government,
                                        non-profit organizations, businesses, and resource managers would
                                        direct the Partnership.

                                    2.  The General Assembly would be asked to support the establishment of
                                        new environmental education/interpretive centers in the APES region by
                                        appropriating funds to help staff and operate these centers. Local,
                                        federal, and privatelphilanthropic funds would also be utilized in this
                                        effort. Three new environmental education facilities that are already in
                                        planning stages and have funding efforts underway are:

                                        1     An Estuarine Education Center - Where the Rivers Meet the Sea
                                              (located in Washington, NC) - whose prototype originated in an
                                              APES-funded project and is envisioned to include interactive
                                              displays that would attract and educate regional residents,
                                              students, and tourists;

                                        2.    The Walter B. Jones Sr. Center for the Sounds (located in
                                              Columbia, NC), which will be a visitors center focusing on the
                                              Pocosin Lakes-Alligator River national wildlife refuge area;

                                        3.    Refurbishment of the old pumping station at Lake Mattamuskeet
                                              (in Hyde County) to serve as a university field research station
                                              and retreat for conferences.


                                        These centers, and the numerous other local, state, and national
                                        parks, refuges, forests, and natural areas in the region would be the
                                        main attractions for the ecotourism initiative. Educational centers
                                        and activities taking place in natural areas would stimulate economic
                                        opportunities in the regi6n, thus creating an economic reason for
                                        conserving and protecting the natural systems. At the same time,
                                        broader knowiedge of the systems' ecological value would promote
                                        a greater sense of stewardship among the public.

                                    Evaluation Method
                                    The establishment and long-term existence oi the Partnership and the,
                                    educational centers are easily measurable and would reflect the relative
                                    success of the effort.


                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    A state appropriation of $846,000 has been allocated for design work on the
                                    three proposed facilities and initial staff ing for the Partnership. Federal and
                                    philanthropic grants have supplemented this appropriation and funded the


                                                                          143













                  STEWARDSHIP


                                   development of a regional strategy for nature-based tourism. The strategy
                                   will include environmental education and marketing plans for the region.
                                   State, federal, local, and philanthropic/non-profit support would continue to
                                   be needed in the future. The intent of the Partnership is to stimulate
                                   economic opportunities in the private sector related to nature-based tourism
                                   and associated activities. Also, numerous job opportunities would be
                                   created through staffing for the Partnership and the educational centers.
                                   Economic benefits should accrue in the region due to this effort.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   Long-term funding for the Partnership and the educational centers will
                                   require a diverse funding strategy. In addition to the anticipated state and
                                   federal assistance, allocations from some local governments, businesses,
                                   individuals, and philanthropic foundations would be required. Federal
                                   granting programs under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
                                   National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and U.S. Fish
                                   and WildIde Service (USFWS) are likely sources for federal funding. Private
                                   foundations, including the Bryan Family Foundation and the Z. Smith
                                   Reynolds Foundation, have.been supportive of planning efforts for the
                                   educational facilities. Other broad-based fund-raising efforts among citizens
                                   in the region would need to be pursued by the Partnership's Director and
                                   board.






























                                                                        144













                                                                                                                    STEWARDSHIP





                                     OBJECTIVE B: INCREASE PUBLIC
                     UNDERSTANDING OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
                 AND CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT IN ENVIRONMENTAL
                                                     POLICY MAKING.






















                              FIGURE 22         C17ZZEN WATER QUALITY MONITORING SITES
                                                             IN THE APES REGION

                 Strategy: A combination of state, federal, and local efforts would be undertaken to broaden opportunities for
                 the public to learn about the Albemarle-Pamlico estuary and management issues surrounding ft. APES has
                 been the stimulus for a variety of recent proposals and initiatives involving estuadne education, some of which
                 are already underway, like the Citizen's Water Quality Monitoring Program (CWQMP). Figure 23 shows
                 CWQMP sites in the region. Continuation of these initiatives beyond the Study, in addition to several new
                 efforts, would form the basis of a long-term program of public involvement and education. Information about
                 economic and cultural issues as they relate to estuarine protection would be integral to this undertaking.
                 Efforts should be made to coordinate programs as much as possible with the Coastal Futures Committee and
                 Year of the Coast activities which will occur during 1994 and will focus public attention on coastal issues.


                                                                       145













                 STEWARDSHIP





                  Management Action 1: Expand and coordinate education projects
                           about the Albemarle-Pamlico estuary, focusing on both
                                         environmental and economic issues.

                           Explanation: The future. security of the estuary depends
                           on whether people who live, work, and vacation there
                           understand its environmental challenges, These educ-
                                                                                                           sas
                           ation efforts must be innovative, must include adult
                           well as children, and must take place outside of
                           traditional school settings as well in the classroom.


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




                                 Critical Steps

                                 1. The Department    of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
                                    (DEHNR) Office of Environmental Education (OEE) would expand its
                                    function to work with environmental education programs both within
                                    DEHNR and extemal groups (community colleges, educational centers,
                                    non-prolit and citizen groups, and other interested organizations) to
                                    provide accurate and unbiased education about the estuadne region.
                                    Much of OEE's efforts would be directed toward coordinating and
                                    distdbuting materials which have already been produced through APES
                                    and many other programs, but are not reaching a wide enough
                                    audience. Seminars, classes, public forums, and similar activities would
                                    be other ways of providing necessary public education. The best way
                                    to administer this expanded effort would be to locate an OEE staff
                                    position in each of the two DEHNR regional offices (Washington and
                                    Raleigh), as well as an additional staff person in the central OEE office.

                                 2. OEE would promote and coordinate partnerships between govemment,
                                    user groups, interest groups, and the public to provide environmental
                                    education expenences for people of all ages. Too often there is a lack
                                    of knowledge among groups as to the vadety of efforts to protect the
                                    estuary being undertaken by other groups.



                                                                   146








                                          M . 11                                                                  STEWARDSHIP

                                     Fostering partnerships and more interaction between differing interests
                                     would lessen the tension caused by this lack of knowledge, as well as
                                     open up avenues of greater cooperation and understanding in the future.

                                  3. In addition to expanded environmental education programs, published
                                     information about the estuarine environment, including related economic
                                     and cultural concerns, would continue to be produced and distributed to
                                     the public on a regular basis. This would include a newsletter that would
                                     contain articles on estuarine functions and on estuarine management
                                     and opportunities for citizen input into that management. There is
                                     currently no publication devoted to providing an overview of all agencies
                                     involved in estuarine management. This newsletter could be mailed to
                                     the mailing list of the APES newsletter, which now reaches nearly
                                     16,000 people. Any interested citizen could request to be placed on the
                                     mailing list.

                                  Evaluation Method
                                  There is no simple way to determine if education efforts are successful.
                                  Conducting a baseline survey of public attitudes and knowledge now and
                                  reassessing those at a later date would be one potential method of
                                  quantifying the success of educational efforts. Greater participation at
                                  hearings and other windows for public input in the policy-making process
                                  would be another way to gauge effectiveness, but cannot be considered a
                                  sure measure.


                                  Costs and Economic Considerations
                                  The addition of an OEE position in the two APES-area regional offices, as
                                  well as a new position in the main office to coordinate the newsletter and
                                  other environmental education efforts in the APES region, would cost about
                                  $50,000 per position, or $150,000 annually. In addition, publication and
                                  postage of a newsletter to a mailing list of 16,000 would cost about $4,000
                                  per issue ($16,000 a year for a quarterly distribution).

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  All of these positions would require additional appropdations from the
                                  General Assembly. Federal and philanthropic grants are widely available,
                                  to assist with the production of environmental education matedals.








                                                                       147









                  -STEWARDSHIP ---- -                                                               .......




                        Management Action 2: Increase opportunities for citizens to
                        communicate with members of environmental agencies and
                                               policy-making commissions.

                                  Explanation: Citizens are more likely to support
                                  environmental protection and be involved in
                                  decision making when they fee/ governments
                                  and regulatory agencies are working with them
                                  as equal partners. Increased opportunities for
                                  public participation and education will promote
                                  citizen involvement in environmental policy
                                  making.



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




                                  CrRical Steps

                                  1.      State agencies involved with estuarine and environmental
                                          protection would increase their efforts to provide education to the
                                          public about their mission and the resources they manage. Some
                                          specific educational goals would be to:

                                            Increase the state's effort to provide education on wetlands and
                                          other important habitats to broaden the public's understanding of
                                          the extent, significance, delineation, and regulation of these areas.
                                          (Primarily involves the Division of Environmental Management-
                                          DER Division of Coastal Management-DCM, and the Division of
                                          Soil and Water Conservation-DSWC-)

                                          -- Enhance outreach and education to small landowners and small
                                          logging operators to increase the use of forestry best management
                                          practices. (Primarily involves the Division of Forest Resources-
                                          DFR, and the Division of Land Resources-DI-R.)




                                                                    148

















                                                                                           ---------------------------
                                                                                                                        STEWARDSHIP


                                                Enhance outreach to commercial fishermen to promote more
                                             widespread understanding of fisheries management programs and
                                             goals.   Also, provide more opportunity for joint meetings of
                                             commercial and recreational fishermen where concerns can be
                                             aired and common ground can be established. (Primarily involves
                                             the Division of Marine Fisheries-DMF and the Wildlife Resources
                                             Commission-WRC.)

                                     2.      The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
                                             (DEHNR) would immediately look for cost-effective ways that public
                                             participation in environmental policy-making could be enhanced.
                                             Currently all DEHNR divisions and their oversight citizen
                                             commissions must run notification of public hearings, meetings, and
                                             permit applications in the legal notice section of local newspapers.
                                             News releases are also distributed to area media prior to hearings
                                             and meetings. Several DEHNR divisions maintain mailing lists of
                                             'interested parties" to whom news releases and meeting agendas
                                             are mailed directly. Any interested citizen can request to be put on
                                             the lists. Two avenues DEHNR would consider for expanding the
                                             effort to advise the public of division and commission activities are:

                                                Distributing press releases after meetings to report any votes or
                                             actions taken at the meeting, and other pertinent information as
                                             necessary.

                                              - Using display ads instead of the legal notice section to
                                             announce upcoming commission and division meetings.

                                     Evaluation. Method
                                     Evaluating the extent to which these actions may increase public
                                     participation would be difficult, as there is no simple way to determine why
                                     people become active in the public policy process. The public is more apt
                                     to be involved when it feels agencies are working with them in good faith
                                     and as equal partners. All educational efforts would be reviewed regularly
                                     to ensure that accurate information is being distributed and that target
                                     audiences are being reached effectively.

                                     Costs and Economic Consid       erations
                                     The benefits of this Management Action would be to increase the availability
                                     of information available to citizens and provide policy makers with better
                                     sources of feedback from the public. Like the previous Management Action,
                                     this would help to improve the decisions made regarding resources in the
                                     region.


                                                                          149













                  STEWARDSHIP
                             ..............

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   While display ads'may be somewhat more expensive to run than legal
                                   notices, the costs of these actions would be relatively minor and absorbed
                                   in the general DEHNR budget.




                         Management Action 3: Enhance and heighten local public
                                     involvement in issues affecting the estuary.

                                   Explanation: Public involvement in local policy
                                   processes can be promoted through
                                   Environmental Advisory Boards. These boards
                                   would not have a regulatory role. Instead, they
                                   would provide credible Information and insight
                                   to local governments on the environmental
                                   issues surrounding projects such as landfill and
                                   roadway siting, water supply and sewage
                                   discharge, land use planning and stormwater
                                   control.




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



                                   Critical Steps

                                   1       Local governments would form Environmental Advisory Boards
                                           (EABs) to serve as focal points for discussions on environmental
                                           aspects of local projects. An EAB would not have a regulatory role,
                                           but would exist to provide credible information and insight to local
                                           governing bodies on the environmental concerns surrounding
                                           activities such as landfill and roadway siting, water supply and
                                           sewage discharge, land use planning, and stormwater control.
                                           General Statutes already allow for the creation of local EABs.
                                           EABs would particularly call upon local citizens with backgrounds
                                           in natural sciences, public health, and resource management.




                                                                       150













                                                                                                                  STEWARDSHIP


                                   Evaluation Method
                                   Local governments would evaluate the effectiveness of their EABs
                                   individually. The extent to which the EAB can act autonomously and
                                   provide legitimate insight on environmental issues that the local government
                                   needs to consider would be the measure of their success.


                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   The administration of EABs would pose only minimal costs to local
                                   governments in the form of the usual incidental expenses associated with
                                   public meetings. EABs could benefit the community by fostering creative
                                   thinking, conflict resolution, and. consensus on ways to deal with local
                                   environmental concerns. It would provide another avenue for citizens to
                                   provide input to important decisions regarding environmental issues as well
                                   as for citizens to become involved in the decision making process.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   To implement this action, local governments would form the Environmental
                                   Advisory Boards using existing staff and resources.




                    Management Action 4: Expand involvement in the Citizen's Water
                  Quality Monitoring Program (CWQMP) and make the program more
                                           interactive with regulatory agencies.

                                   Explanation: Citizen monitoring gouges the
                                   estuary's health and is an important education
                                   tool. In the Albemorle-Pamlico region, the
                                   CWQMP has served both purposes.                                        The
                                   CWQMP would continue andbroaden efforts to
                                   provide accurate data to water quality
                                   management agencies, thereby expanding their
                                   abfflty to track potential problems.



                                            - ------- - -------- . ....... ---------------











                                                                       151












                   STEWARDSHIP
                                        WIN -- ---- --------- ------- ------ - ------------ -

                                     Critical Steps

                                     1       The CWQMP would need to secure a long-term funding source.
                                             The program currently is housed at East Carolina University and is
                                             funded through APES. Future funding would have to come from
                                             another source.

                                     2.      Upon securing funding, the CWQMP would focus its efforts on
                                             intensive monitoring in areas of particular concern, with the goal of
                                             collecting data ft water quality agencies could use as a basis for
                                             pursuing further investigation or initiating mitigation steps. The
                                             CWQMP would work closely with water quality agencies to identify
                                             ways the program could best complement agency activities; e.g.,
                                             by monitoring in areas with high urban runoff or by focusing on
                                             tributary -streams, which the agencies often can not monitor well
                                             due to lack of personnel.

                                     3.      CWQMP would work with state and federal agencies to cultivate
                                             ways its volunteers could be involved in other types of monitoring,
                                             such as observing changes in submerged aquatic vegetation and
                                             other habitats or recording the presence of various types of wildlife.

                                     Evaluation Method
                                     The primary goal for the CWQMP would be for its data to be usable -- and
                                     used -- by resource managers. Achieving and sustaining that would be the
                                     measure of the progranYs success.

                                     Costs and Economic Considerations
                                     The CWQMP would require $75,000 a year for staff, equipment for routine
                                     monitoring; and housingladministration. In addition to the benefits of water
                                     quality monitoring, this management action would have the further
                                     advantage of providing for significant citizen involvement in the stewardship
                                     of the region's water resources. Such local participation would broaden
                                     public understanding of water quality issues in general.

                                     Funding Strategy
                                     Given that the CWQMP's primary goal is establishing a long-term database,
                                     the best funding option for the program would be to secure institutional
                                     funding rather than having to depend on shod-term grants. Several other
                                     states operate cftiz6n monitoring efforts through their Cooperative FAension
                                     Service, and that would be an excellent alternative here as well. Continuing
                                     the program through ECU's Institute of Coastal and Marine Research or the


                                                                          152













                                                                                                                    STEWARDSHIP


                                   UNC Sea Grant program would be afternative possibilities. An additional
                                   alternative would be operating the program through the Partnership for the
                                   Sounds (see Stewardship Plan, Objective A, Management Action 3). This
                                   would likely require the frequent pursuit of grants from foundations or from
                                   programs like the EPA's Section 106 grants which could threaten the
                                   maintenance of a continuous database. This funding avenue may be the
                                   most likely and should be pursued if others do not work out.




                 Management Action 5: Create a citizen ombudsman position within
                      the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
                                                                  (DEHNR).

                                   Explanation: A citizen ombudsman is an
                                   independent advocate for citizen concerns
                                   within a government agency. An ombudsman
                                   would respond to and track these concerns,
                                   and would serve as the public's "eyes and ears"
                                   with regard to activities of DEHNR divIsions.





                                   Crftical Steps

                                   1       A citizen ombudsma     n is an independent advocate for citizen
                                           concerns within a government agency. The ombudsman would be
                                           appointed by the Governor through the Office of Citizen Affairs and
                                           housed within DEHNR, but would be independent and work as an
                                           advocate for citizen concerns.


                                   Evaluation Method
                                   The ombudsman's role as a liaison between the public and DEHNR makes
                                   the position answerable to citizen opinion.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   This action would require funding of $50,000 a year to staff the position and


                                                                       153













                  STEWARDSHIP
                                                          -------------- -. .......

                                   its ancillary needs. The benefits of having an ombudsman in DEHNR would
                                   be greater accountability of state employees to the public.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   In order to ensure the ombudsman's independence, the position would not
                                   be funded from within DEHNR. However, DEHNR would in effect need to
                                   release the necessary funding to the Govemor's Off ice of Citizen Affairs in
                                   order to create this position.




































                                                                        154













                                                                                                                STEWARDSHIP





                            OBJECTIVE C.- ENSURE THAT STUDENTS,
                 PARTICULARLY IN GRADES K-5.. ARE EXPOSED TO
                     SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION.





                         Strategy: The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) is currently updating its statewide science
                         curriculum requirements. DPI expects to include a significant environmental education component
                         at all grade levels, though the specific focus in each grade will vary. The Office'of Environmental
                         Education (OEE) within DEHNR would assist DPI in the effort to make environmental education an
                         important pan of every student's learning experience. Also, OEE would work with DPI and individual
                         school systems to increase opportunities for teachers to gain a background in environmental
                         education and to have access to environmental education materials.





                            Management Action 1: Support the development of a
                  comprehensive environmental science and education curriculum.

                                  Explanation: The Division of Environment, Health,
                                  and Natural Resources (DEHNR) will expand the
                                  operation of the Office of Environmental
                                  Education (OEE) to establish on ongoing liaison
                                  between DPI and OEE. DPI must address a
                                  variety of concerns in developing curriculum,
                                  However, OEE would provide assistance as
                                  needed in targeting environmental education
                                  components.




                                                                     155










                  -STEWARDSHIP ---
                       ----------

                                    Crftical Steps

                                    1      OEE would establish an ongoing liaison between DPI and OEE.
                                           DPI has a variety of concerns it must address in developing
                                           curriculum, but OEE would provide assistance as needed to DPI in
                                           helping to refine environmental education components.

                                    2.     OEE would act as a statewide clearinghouse and repository for
                                           environmental education materials and resources, including
                                           maintaining a speakers bureau, computerizing a database of
                                           existing programs, and developing new environmental education
                                           programs. OEE would maintain regular contact with DPI regarding
                                           the needs for particular resources.

                                    Evaluation Method
                                    Cooperative and ongoing communication between OEE and DPI would be
                                    an important measure of success. A more quantifiable way of determining
                                    the effectiveness of the effort would be to keep track of where
                                    environmental education curriculums are implemented and how extensively
                                    various materials, speakers, and programs are used.

                                    Costs and Economic Considerations
                                    The work of this position would be included in the additional staff position
                                    recommended for the OEE in Objective B, Management Action 1.

                                    Funding Strategy
                                    See Objective B, Management Action 1.



                                                                         - --- ------



                     Management Action 2: Provide for teachers at all levels ongoing
                  opportunities to gain renewal credits in workshops on environmental
                                                     and estuarine education.

                                    Explanation: OEE would assist DPI and other
                                    state agencies, such as the Wildlife                        Resources
                                    Commission (WRC), Division of Parks and
                                    Recreation (DPR), and the Division of Soil and
                                    Water Conservation (DSWC), in conducting


                                                                       156













                                                                                                                   STEWARDSHIP
                                                                    111". -111 IM1111111 poll. - ---- --
                                   teacher in-service workshops that provide
                                   renewal credits.               These workshops not only
                                   would help teachers stay current in
                                   environmental science but wouldprovide brood
                                   perspectives on the relationship between the
                                   estuary and human activities.





                                   Critical Steps

                                   1.      OEE would assist DPI and other state agencies (e.g., WRC, DPR,
                                           DSWC, etc.) in conducting teacher in-service workshops which
                                           provide renewal credits.

                                   Evaluation Method
                                   A specific number of annual workshops would be set as a goal by OEE,
                                   thus making this objective fairly easily measurable. DPI and local school
                                   systems would assist OEE in determining areas of need.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   This effort would be directed by the OEE liaison with DR, described in
                                   Objective B Management Action 1. An additional $10,000 per year would
                                   be required to pay for travel expenses, materials, and other needs of the
                                   OEE liaison with DPI. Local school districts would bear the costs of time
                                   spent by teachers in in-service workshops, which would be run by the
                                   OEE/DPI liaison. The benefits of this activity would be to develop an
                                   awareness of environmental issues among teachers and their students.
                                   Developing critical thinking skills and exposing students to the difficult
                                   problems faced in the management and wise use of natural resources can
                                   improve their ability to make future decisions that best serve a variety of
                                   interests.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   Expansion of state appropriations to OEE would be required to help cover
                                   the incidental expenses, but federal and philanthropic grants are also widely
                                   available to assist environmental education programs. OEE will devote
                                   considerable effort to grant-writing.



                                                                       157





























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



        IMPLEMENTATION PLAN






                      GOAL





          Implement the Comprehensive
      Conservation and Management Plan In
        a way that protects environmental
         quality while using the most cost-
        effective and equitable strategies.













                                                                                                               IMPLEMENTATION






                   OBJECTIVE A:                     COORDINATE PUBLIC AGENCIES
                     INVOLVED IN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND
                    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TO IMPLEMENT
                          THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CCMP.






                         Strategy: The APES Management Conference has for several years provided a unique forum for
                         communication and cooperation among a broad range of agencies, organizations, and interests to
                         protect the resources of the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine region. Once the CCMP is approved, there
                         will be an even greater need for coordination and cooperation during the implementation phase. A
                         Coordinating Council would be created to promote cooperation and coordination among agencies,
                         organizations, and individuals involved in implementing the plan. The Council, which would have no
                         regulatory authority, would consult with five Regional Councils comprised of elected ard/or appointed
                         local government officials, citizens, and representatives from various economic sectors. Each county
                         in the Albemade-Pamlico region, including those in Virginia, would be represented. This would allow
                         for the fullest exchange of information and for developing strategies that combine existing programs
                         with new initiatives. The Coordinating Council also would pursue funding to support CCMP
                         implementation and provide an annual assessment of its progress.















                                                                      161








              IMPLEMENTATION        ------ ---- ---------- --------------- MINIMUM -----



                Management Action 1: Create a Coordinating Council and five
              Regional Councils through executive order by the'Govemor of North
                                Carolina upon approval of the CCMP.

                           Explanation:        The APES program has provided
                           extensive opportunities for            interaction between
                           government agencies, private organizations, citizens
                           and local governments. Continued coordination.in
                           implementing recommendations in the CCMP would
                           be provided through a Coordinating Council and five
                           Regional Councils. The Regional Councils would
                           include representatives from each county in the
                           region, including elected andlor appointed local
                           government officials, interest groups, and members of
                           the general public in each river basin.                        The
                           Coordinating Council would include fifteen
                           representatives from the Regional Councils (ten of
                           whom will be local elected andlor appointed
                           officials), seven representatives of citizen commissions
                           and councils, four representatives of federal resource
                           agencles and three representatives of state
                           government. This structure would provide continued
                           opportunity for interagency coordination and citizen
                           and local government input.


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




                           CrRical Steps

                           1. The Governor of North Carolina would create a Coordinating Council
                              and five Regional Councils by executive order. The appropriate federal
                              agencies would develop Memoranda of Agreement to continue
                              coordination efforts.












                                                                                                                   IMPLEMENTATION
                 -------  ----- -- ------------------------- -------------------------- - ------ -- ---- ---------------

                                   2.  A Regional Council corresponding to each of the following major river
                                       basins of the APES region will be formed:

                                       Neuse (including Bogue and Core Sounds)
                                       Pasquotank/Albemarle/Currituck
                                       Roanoke (below Roanoke Rapids Dam)
                                       Tar-Pamlico/Pamlico Sound
                                       Chowan


                                       Each Regional Council would include at least three representatives from
                                       each county in the river basin and would represent a variety of local
                                       interests. Membership from each county would include: one elected or
                                       appointed county official selected by the county commission; one elected
                                       or appointed municipal official selected by the county commission in
                                       consultation with municipalities in the county (counties without
                                       municipalities would appoint a second county official); and one person
                                       appointed by the Secretary of DEHNR. In making his appointments to
                                       each Council, the Secretary shall, to the greatest extent possible, seek
                                       to ensure demographic and social balance, as well as balance among
                                       the following interests:

                                       agriculture                                  conservation
                                       silviculture                                 environmental science
                                       commercial fishing                           businesstindustry
                                       recreational fishing                         tourism
                                       Soil and Water Conservation                  at large
                                          Districts


                                       Each Regional Council can expand its membership as it deems
                                       necessary.

                                   3.  The Coordinating Council would include:

                                       a.   Fifteen representatives from the five Regional Councils. (Each
                                            Regional Council will elect two elected and/or appointed
                                            government officials and one other representative from any
                                            background).

                                       b.   Seven representatives of citizen commissions and councils. The
                                            Chair of each of the following groups would select a representative.




                                                                         163












                   IMPLEMENTATION
                                    ----------------


                                                      Marine Fisheries Commission
                                                      Soil and Water Conservation Commission
                                                      Environmental Management Commission
                                                      Coastal Resources Commission
                                                      Wildlife Resources Commission
                                                      Forestry Advisory Council
                                                      Sedimentation Control Commission

                                        c.   Four representatives of federal resource agencies would be
                                             selected by appropriate federal administrators.

                                                      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                                      U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                                                      U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                                                      National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

                                        d.   Three representatives of state government.
                                                      The Secretary of the Department of Environment,         Health
                                                        and Natural Resources, or his designee (Chair to the
                                                        Council)
                                                      The Secretary of the Department of Commerce, or his
                                                        designee
                                                      The Commissioner of Agriculture, or his designee

                                    4.  The Coordinating Council would serve to promote continued coordination
                                        and cooperation among agencies, local governments, and private and
                                        public interest groups for CCMP implementation. The Regional Councils
                                        provide a local forum for input into the implementation process by public
                                        and private interests.

                                    5.  The Coordinating Council would consult the Regional Counci            Is for
                                        guidance on coordinating implementation strategies at a local level.
                                        The role of the Regional Councils would be to develop partnerships
                                        between the public and private sector, and between local, state, and
                                        federal governments, on a regional scale. They would inform the public
                                        and public officials about matters related to CCMP implementation and
                                        would convey to the Coordinating Council public and local government
                                        sentiment regarding CCMP implementation.

                                    6.  A minimal staff would serve the Coordinating Council and Regional
                                        Councils.     This staff would be responsible for communications,
                                        organization, and progress reports.



                                                                          164













                                                                                                         IMPLEMENTATION
                                                                                      ------ - - - -


                                Evaluation Method
                                The structure of the Coordinating.   Councils and its effectiveness in
                                facilitating the implementation process will be assessed in a program
                                review, detailed in Objective B, Management Action 2 of this section.

                                Costs and Economic Considerations
                                The Coordinating Council would need approximately $300,000 per year for
                                meetings and support staff. The Council would serve as a focal point for
                                attracting grant funds to support implementation projects in the region.

                                Funding Strategy
                                Implementation grant money would be sought from the EPA and matching
                                funds would be needed from state appropriations.




                  Management Action 2.- Coordinate implementation of the CCMP.

                                Explanation: The best way to ensure efficient
                                operation of government is to increase the
                                coordination and cooperation of existing
                                agencies.            Each agency should fulfill its
                                responsibilities without duplicating the efforts of
                                other agencies.                The Coordinating Council
                                would take advantage of existing resources and
                                staff, establishing connections between public
                                and private interests and all levels of
                                government, rather than creating another layer
                                of government. The Coordinating Council will
                                guide the implementation process to ensure the
                                highest /eve/ of cooperation and coordination
                                among interested parties, as was demonstrated
                                by the original APES Management Conference
                                during the plan's development.



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







                                                                   165












                   IMPLEMENTATION
                                                                                            ------------------- -------  ---------

                                   Crhical Steps

                                   1 .The Coordinating Council would pursue adopting a Memorandum of
                                      Agreement between North Carolina and Virginia to ensure continued
                                      cooperation and coordination in implementing the CCMP.              The
                                      agreement would detail Virginia's implementation strategy for pertinent
                                      CCMP recommendations (such as enhanced land use plans and
                                      nonpoint source reduction plans).

                                   2. The Coordinating Council would     assist in the pursuit of funding to
                                      implement CCMP recommendations.

                                   3. Council members would promote CCMP implementation by informing
                                      their respective commissions, agencies, and organizations, and by
                                      pursuing actions on recommended strategies that relate to the mission
                                      of their commission, agency, or organization,

                                   4. The Council would set annual priodties for implementing sections of the
                                      CCMP and make necessary strategy revisions based on progress and
                                      success.


                                   5. The Council would develop a research agenda during the first year of
                                      implementation that addresses the outstanding information needs
                                      descdbed in the CCMP and update it annually. The Council would seek
                                      researchers and funding.       The research agenda would include
                                      investigations of the economic and sociological impacts of CCMP
                                      strategies.

                                   6. The Council would identify experts who could serve, as needed, on
                                      special -committees to address complex scientific or technical issues.

                                   7. The Council would brief the Environmental Review Commission of the
                                      General Assembly semi-annually on CCMP implementation and highlight
                                      legislative concems.      The Council would also track legislative
                                      developments.

                                   8. The Council would conduct consistency reviews of federal programs at
                                      require d in Section 320 (b)(7) of the Clean Water Act.

                                   9. Council members would develop Memoranda of Agreement as
                                      necessary to support implementation of management strategies
                                      according to the time lines. listed within them.



                                                                      166













                                                                                                                NPLEMENTATION
                                                                          - ----------------------- M111111111VIIIII IIW 1111. 1....................... .......

                                  1 O.The Council would sponsor public education, outreach, and involvement
                                     programs concerning the regions' estuarine resources.

                                  1 1.The Councils would sponsor workshops for cross-training individuals
                                     involved in enforcement, permit review, and other activities. These
                                     workshops will promote inter-agency cooperation in resource
                                     management.

                                  Evaluation Method
                                  The following section recommends an annual program review which would
                                  provide a mechanism for evaluating the success of the Coordinating
                                  Council. Through this process, all interested parties (including the general
                                  public) would have the opportunity to assess the program's ability to
                                  coordinate the public agencies involved and the program's success of
                                  implementation overall.

                                  Economic Costs and Considerations
                                  Most costs of this Management Action are included in the more detailed
                                  break-downs of other Management Actions. Cross-training workshops and
                                  other special projects pursued by the Council (e.g., public education,
                                  support for research) would entail additional costs of approximately $50,000
                                  per year.

                                  Funding Strategy
                                  The additional cost relating to education efforts would be partially funded by
                                  the EPA through implementation funding and would need to be matched by
                                  state appropriations.


















                                                                       167












                                                                                                           IMPLEMENTATION
                                                                            -------------





                         OBJECTIVE B: ASSESS THE PROGRESS AND
                               SUCCESS OF IMPLEMENTING CCMP
                         RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE STATUS OF
                    ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IN THE ALBEMARLE-
                                                 PAMLICO REGION.





                         Strategy: The yardstick by which the CCMP must be measured is the quality of the environment
                         in the Albemarle-Pamlico region. An annual progress review would be developed to allow for
                         flexibility in the implementation process, to monitor the success of the CCMP, and to measure
                         changes in the environment. In addition, the Coordinating Council may use the annual progress
                         review to assess whether its objectives and recommended management actions are in concert with
                         the changing environmental challenges. The progress review would allow any interested party to
                         comment on the process and the success (or failure) of implementation strategies or structure.
                         Reporting progress to the public and receiving comments from it is essential to the success of
                         implementing the CCMP. The progress review would make the process dynamic and flexible,
                         enabling changes to be made when and where necessary. Each Management Action within the plan
                         includes an evaluation statement. These statements are designed to initiate a review of the
                         environmental impacts of the Actions. The agencies and organizations responsible for each action
                         would submit evaluation results to the Coordinating Council to determine whether the actions are
                         having the intended effects on the environment. Much of the environmental review effort is
                         dependent on the monitoring efforts of the appropriate agencies.












                                                                   169




 4













                 IMPLEMENTATION
                                        - --- ---- ----- ------- -------- -------------------- ----




                  Management Action 1: Develop an annual "progress review" of the
                                     implementation of CCMP recommendations.

                                  Explanation: The most critical stage of the
                                  management program is its implementation.
                                  Without carefully thought-out and monitored
                                  implementation, the goals of the management
                                  plan may never be achieved. A progress review
                                  would allow the Coordinating Council, or any
                                  interested party to comment on the
                                  implementation process.                          It also allows
                                  corrections or changes to be made as
                                  necessary.



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




                                  Crklcal Steps

                                  1 .Each participating agency, institution, and organization would submit
                                     annual reports evaluating the progress made in implementing CCMP
                                     recommendations and the success of implementation strategies.
                                     Council members would report to the Council on progress made by their
                                     agencies, institutions, and organizations. The Council would then
                                     assess the success of the implementation strategies within each section
                                     based on the recommendations of the implementing organizations.

                                  2. An annual progress report would be developed by APES and would
                                     include the success of the implementing organizations and the
                                     effectiveness of the Coordinating Council. *The report would be
                                     distributed to the public and any adjustments to the strategy or structure
                                     necessary to improve success would be made.

                                  Evaluation Method
                                  The "progress review" is in itsell an evaluation. Once the progress of
                                  implementation of the CCMP is complete, changes to the process should
                                  be made.



                                                                     170











                                                                                                                IMPLEMENTATION
                                      ------- - -- ------------------ -- ------------------------ ---------------------- -@" 11 111 - I WI

                                 Costs and Economic Considerations
                                 The costs to participating agencies of this Management Action are
                                 considered to be in-kind contributions from them and would not require
                                 additional budget authorizations.

                                 Funding Strategy
                                 Not applicable for this management action.



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


                      Management Action 2: Assess the health of the Albemade-
                    Pamlico Estuary and the success of CCMP recommendations in
                                                 protecting the environment

                                 Explanation:             Assessing the success of the
                                 implementation of the CCMP also requires
                                 monitoring of the environment and a thorough
                                 evaluation of the results. The CCMP must be
                                 flexible to adopt to natural conditions. Data
                                 gathered on the state of water quality, habitats,
                                 and fisheries may be used to adjust strategies as
                                 necessary.





                                 Critical Steps

                                 1   The Council would report on monitoring efforts such as water quality
                                     monitoring from the Division of Environmental Management (DEM) and
                                     the U.S. Geological Survey, monitoring of f ish stocks and habitats by the
                                     Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), and vital habitat mapping by the
                                     Division of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and other appropriate agencies.
                                     Information gained from the appropriate agencies would be presented
                                     to the Council for review of broad scale and long term environmental
                                     trends. (Formonitoring requirements, refer to the following management
                                     actions. Water Quality, Objective D, MA 1 and Objective E, MA 1; Vital
                                     Habitats, Objective A, MA e, and Fisheries Objective A, MA 1.)


                                                                      171











                  IMPLEMENTATOV


                                   2. Data obtained by monitoring reports would be used to assess the
                                      effectiveness of management actions and identify target areas requiring
                                      further action.


                                   3. The Council would continue to support and enhance public outreach and
                                      education efforts as outlined in the stewardship plan.

                                   Evaluation Method
                                   The annual progress review would help the Council assess the
                                   effectiveness of the CCMP. This review would determine N CCMP goals
                                   are being met in a manner that is proactive, cost-effective, and equitable.
                                   The Council also would review its membership at least annually to ensure
                                   that all parties involved in implementing the CCMP are represented.

                                   Costs and Economic Considerations
                                   The costs of these actions are included in other Management Actions of the
                                   CCMP.

                                   Funding Strategy
                                   Not applicable for this management action.
























                                                                       172



  I
  I
  I
  I                ---- - ---------                  m
  I                                                        ---.
  I                     REFERENCES
  I                             -                --
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
                                      I
  I
  I

  L@l


  16




  d











                                                                                                       REFERENCES


              Brown, E.R., T. Sinclair, L. Keith, P. Beamer, J.J. Hazdra, V. Nair, and 0. Callaghan. 1977.
                      Chemical Pollutants in Relation to Diseases in Fish. Annual New York Academy of Science
                      298:535-546.


              Burkholder, JoAnn M. 1993. Draft. Comparative Effects of Wader-Column Nitrate Enrichment on
                      Eelgrass, Shoal Grass and Widgeon Grass. Albemade-Pamlico Estuadne Study Report Number
                      93-09.

              Burkholder, JoAnn M. and Edward J. Noga. 1993. Draft. The Role of a Now Toxic Dinoflagellate in
                      Finfish and Shellfish Kills in the Neuse and Pamlico Estuades. Albemarle-Pamlico Estuadne
                      Study Report Number 93-08.

              Cashin, Gordon E. 1990. Wetland Development in the North Carolina Coastal Plain: Presettlement to
                      the 1980s. Master's Project. Duke University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies.

              Clark, Walter. 1990. A Pilot Study for Managing Multiple Use in the States Public Trust Waters. UNC
                      Sea Grant College Program. ftemarle-Pamlico Estuadne Study Report Number 90-10.

              Collier, Ries S. and Michael C. Odom. 1988. Obstructions to Anadromous Fish Migration. Albemarle-
                      Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 88-12.

              Couch, J.A. 11985. Prospective Study of Infectious and Noninfectious Diseases in Oysters and Fishes in
                      Three Gulf of Mexico Estuaries. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 1:59-82.*

              Cunningham, Patdcia A., Randall E. Williams, Robert L. Chessin, J. Michael McCarthy, Ross J. Curry,
                      Karen W. Gold, Richard W. Pratt, 'and Steven J. Stichter. 1992 (a). Watershed Planning in the
                      Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine System: Report 3 - Toxics Analysis. Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine
                      Study Report Number 92-04.

              Cunningham, Patricia A., Ross J. Curry, Richard W. Pratt, and Steven J. Stichter. 1992 (b). Watershed
                      Planning in the Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine System: Report 5 - Fishing Practices Vapping.
                      Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 92-05.

              Dahl, T. E. 1990. Wetlands losses in the United States 1780s to 1980s. , U.S. Department of the Interior.
                      Washington, D.C.: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 21pp.

              Dodd, Randall C., Gerard McMahon, and Steven Stichter. 1992. Watershed Planning in the Albemade-
                      Pamlico Estuarine System: Report 1 - Annual Average Nutdent Budgets. Albemade-Pamlico
                      Estuadne Study Report Number 92-10.

              Frayer, W.E., T.J. Manohan, D.C. Bowen, and F.A. Graybill. 1983. Status and Trends of wetlands and
                      deepwater habitats in the conterminous United States: 1950s to 1970s. Washington: U.S. Fish'
                      and Wildlife Service.
d1k


                                                               175







                REFERENCES        - - - - ---------- -- ---------------- - ------ -.... . .. _-... . ................------------------------- --
                Frost, Cecil C., Harry E. LeGrand, Jr., and Richard E. Schneider. 1990. Regional Inventory for Critical
                        Natural Areas, Wetland Ecosystems, and Endangered Species Habitats of the Albemade-Pamlico
                        Estuarine Region: Phase 1. Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 90-01.

                Hefner, J.M. and J.D. Brown. 1985. Wetlands trends in the Southeastern United States. Wetlands 4:1 -


                Holman, Robert E. 1992. Evaluation of the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study Area Utilizing Population,
                        Land Use, and Water Quality Information. Albemade-Pamlioo Estuarine Study Report Number
                        92-16.

                Kenwonhy, W. Judson and Daniel E. Haunert (eds.). 1991. The light requirements of seagrasses:
                        proceedings of a workshop to examine the capability of water quality crfteria, standards and
                        monitoring programs to protect seagrasses. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFC-287.

                LeGrand, Harry E., Jr., Cecil C. Frost, and John 0. Fussell, Ill. 1992. Regional Inventory for Critical
                        Natural Areas, Wetland Ecosystems, and Endangered Species Habitats of the Albemade-Pamlico
                        Estuarine Region: Phase 2. Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 92-07.

                LeGrand, Harry E., Jr. 1991. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species of North
                        Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of
                        Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program.

                Levine J.F., J.H. Hawkins, M.J. Dykstra, E.J. Noga, D.W. Moye, and R.S. Cone. 1990a. Species
                        distribution of ulcerative lesions on finfish in the Tar-Pamlico River Estuary, North Carolina.
                        Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 8:1-5.

                Levine, J.F., J.H. Hawkins, M.J. Dykstra, E.J. Noga, D.W. Moye, and R.S. Cone. 1990b.
                        Epidemiology of Ulcerative Mycosis in Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortis tyrannus) in the.Tar-Pamlico
                        Estuary, North Carolina. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health 2:162-171.

                McKenna, Sean and Allen H. Clark. 1993. An Examination of Alternative Fishing Devices for the
                        Estuarine Shrimp and Crab Trawl Fisheries. Albernade-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number
                        93-11.

                Morrison, Nancy M., Michael D. Marshall, Michael J. Dykstra, and Jay F. Levine. 1990. A Survey for
                        Haplosporidium nelsoni (MSX) in North Carolina Crassostrea virginica Populations. College of
                        Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University and Department of Environment, Health, and
                        Natural Resources, Division of Marine Fisheries. Unpublished report





                                                                  176











                                                                                                            REFERENCES


                Newell, Roger 1. E. 1988. Ecological Changes in Chesapeake Bay: Are They the Result of
                        Overharvesting in American Oyster, Crassostrea virginica? In Understanding the Estuary:
                        Advances in Chesapeake Bay Research. Proceedings of a Conference. 29-31 March 1988.
                        Baltimore, Maryland. Chesapeake Research Consortium Publication 129. CBPfTRS 24/88.

                Noga, Edward J., David W. Engel, and Thomas W. Arroll. 1990. Shell Disease in Blue Crabs,
                        Calfinectes sapidus, from the Albemade-Pamlico Estuary. Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine Study
                        Report Number 9D-22.

                North Carolina Division of Environmental Management. 1992. Draft. State of North Carolina Water
                        Quality Assessment - 1992 305 (b) Report. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health,
                        and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Management.

                North Carolina Division of Environmental Management. 1991. Original Exte  nt, Status, and trends of
                        Wetlands in North Carolina: A Report to the N.C. Legislative Study Commission on Wetlands
                        Protection. Nonh Carolina Department of Environment, Heafth, and Natural Resources, Division
                        of Environmental Management. Report Number 91 -01.

                North Carolina Division of Environmental Management. 1990. Water Quality Progress in North Carolina
                        1988 -1989 305 (b) Report. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
                        Resources, Division of Environmental Management. Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report
                        Number 90-07.

                North Carolina Division of Environmental Management. 1988. Water Quality Progress in North Carolina
                        1986 -1987 305 (b) Report. North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community
                        Development, Division of Environmental Management. Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study
                        Report Number 88-02.

                Ortega, Sonia, Sutherland, John P., Peterson, Chades H. 1991. Recruitment and Growth of the
                        Eastern Oyster, Crassostrea virainica in North Carolina. Duke University Marine Laboratory and
                        Institute of Marine Science, UNC. Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 90-88.

                Riggs, S. R., J. T. Bray, J. C. Hamilton, D. V. Ames, C. R. Klingman, R. A. Wyrick, and J. R.
                        Watson. 1993. Heavy Metals in Organic-Rich Muds of the Albemarle Sound and Estuadne
                        System. Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 93-02.

                Riggs, S. R., J. T. Bray, E. R. Powers, J. C. Hamilton, D. V. Ames, K. L Owens, D. D. Yeates, S.
                        L. Lucas, J. R. Watson, and H. M. Williamson. 1991. Heavy Metals in Organic-Rich Muds of
                        the Neuse River Estuarine System. Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 90-07.





                                                                  177











               REFERENCES


               Riggs, S. R., E. R. Powers, J. T. Bray, P. M. Stout, C. Hamilton, D. Ames, R. Moore, J.Watson, S.
                       Lucas, and M. Williamson. 1989. Heavy Metals in Organic-Rich Muds of the Pamlico River
                       Estuarine System: Their Concentration, Distribution, and Effects upon Benthic Environments and
                       Water Quality. Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 89-06.

               Roenigk, D.J., Paterson, R.G., Heraly, M.A., Kaiser, E.J. and Burby, R.J. 1992. Evaluation of Urban
                       Stormwater Maintenance in North Carolina. Department of City and Regional Planning, UNC-CH,
                       WRRI-267.

               Rulifson, Roger A. 1990. Abundance and Viability of Striped Bass Eggs Spawned *in Roanoke River,
                       North Carolina, in 1989. Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 90-11.

               Rulifson, Roger A., Robert B. Hermann, John T. Bray, and W. Michael White. 1990. Water Quality as
                       a Function of Discharge from the Roanoke Rapids Reservoir During Hydropower Generation.
                       Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 90-12.

               Schafale, Michael P. and Alan S. Weakley. 1990. Classif ication of the Natural Communities of North
                       Carolina, Third Approximation. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
                       Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program.

               Sherman, Stan G., E. Thomas Piner, and Jeffrey E. French. 1991. Survey for Peikinsus marinus
                       (Dermo) in selected North Carolina Oyster (Crassostrea virginica) Populations, 1990. North
                       Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. Unpublished report.

               Sindermann, C.J. 1989. The Shell Disease Syndrome in Marine Crustaceans. National Oceanic and
                       Atmospheric Administration. Technical Memorandum, NMFS-F/NEC-64.*

               Sindermann, C.J. 1988. Epizootic Ulcerative Syndromes in Coastal/Estuarine Fish. National Oceanic
                       and Atmospheric Administration. Technical Memorandum, NMFS-F/NEC-54.*

               Sindermann, C.J. 1983. An Examination of Some Relationships between pollution and Disease.
                       Rapports et proces-verbaux des reunions. Conseil intemational pour rExploration de la Mer
                       182:37-43.*

               Skilleter, G.A., Ambrose, W.G. and West, T.L. 1993. Summary and Recommendations of the Effects of
                       Trawling on By-catch in North Carolina Marine and Estuarine Waters. University of Sydney New
                       South Whales, Australia and East Carolina University, Greenville, NC.

               Smith, Inge K., Harry E. LeGrand, Jr., and Stephen P. Hall, Zack E. Murrell, Carl W. Nordman, Michael
                       P. Schafale. 1993. Regional Inventory for Crftical Natural Areas, Welland Ecosystems, and
                       Endangered Species Habitats of the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Region: Phase 3. Albemarle-
                       Pamlico Estuarine Study Report Number 92-21.


                                                               178












                                                                                                         REFERENCES


               Sport Fishing Institute. 1988. Economic Activity Associated with Marine Recreational Fishing in 1985,
                       Volume ll: State-Level and Species Level Estimates. Washington, D.C.

               Stanley, Donald W. 1992. Historical Trends: Water Quality and Fishedes, Albemade-Pamlico Sounds,
                       With Emphasis on the Pamlico River Estuary. University of North Carolina Sea Grant College
                       Program Publication UNC-SG-92-04. Institute for Coastal and Marine Resources, East Carolina
                       University, Greenville, NC.

               Steel, Jennifer, editor. 1991. Status and Trends Report of the Albemade-Pamlloo Estuadne Study.
                       Albemade-Pamlico Estuadne Study Report Number 90-01.

               Street, M.W. and J.D. McClees. 1981. North Carolines Coastal Fishing Industry and the Influence of
                       Coastal Alterations. In Proceedings of Pocosins: A Conference on Alternative Uses of the
                       Coastal Plain Freshwater Wetlands of North Carolina. C.J. Richardson, ed., pp. 238-251'.
                       Stroudsburg, PA: Hutchinson Ross Publishing Company.

               Street, Michael W., Phalen, Paul S. 1989. Scoping Study of Data Requirements for Fishedes Stock
                       Assessment in North Carolina. Division of Marine Fishedes. Albemade-Pamlico Estuadne Study
                       Report Number 89-02.

               Tyler, Mary. 1989. Potential for Long-term Persistence of the Red Tide Dinoflagellate P4chodiscus
                       brevis in North Carolina Coastal Waters. Albemade-Pamlico Estuadne Study Report Number 88-
                       09.

               Ulanowicz, Robert E. and Jon H. Tuttle. September 1992. The Trophic Consequences of Oyster Stock
                       Rehabilitation in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 296-306.

               We'akley, Alan S. 1991. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North Carolina.
                       North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and
                       Recreation, Natural Heritage Program.














                                                                179
























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





       REGIONAL SUMMARIES






                APPENDIX A











            REG04AL SUMAM RIES


                      MAJOR RIVER BASINS OF THE ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO
                                                     WATERSHED



                            PRINCE EDWMM
                                                              I PRIN                                IL
                                                               GEO                      r
                               T        '*NO T    Y D
                                    ILrUNENB;;J                  SUSSEX
                                 --1           1          T
               I HALIFAX                       BRUNSWICK                                              GINIA BEACH
                     'tooth 4/W                        /j                                              CITY
                                                                                   K CiT

                 PERSO          iVAN                                or+
                                      I WARREN                       I
                                     10)-                             HERTFORD        PER\
                        f               . 1--),
                    D                FRANKL1#/                          BERTIE
            ORANG                              NASH i               I -
                                                  _)@GECOWE                           GTON
                         WAKE                                                                         DARE
          MATE"     /
                    /                                        PITT
          I'v-                  JOHNSTON    @-          \\ ,                                 HYDE
             LZE /                                 11 GREENE
                 HARNETT                    WAYNE
                                                     LENOM         CRAVEN

                               SAMPSON                        JOMMS-         PAMLI
                   CUM"
                                               DUPIIN







                                               FENDER

                                                                                                viz@


             1: Chowan River Basin
             2: Roanoke River Basin
             3: Currituck Sound & Pasquotank River/Albernarle Sound Drainage Basin
             4: Tar-Pamlico River & Pamlico Sound Drainage Basin                North Carolina
             5: Neuse River Basin and Core Sound/Bogue Sound Drainage Basin'


                                                             A2












                                                                                                       REGOW SUMAURIES





                                        CHOWAN RIVER BASIN

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


                                                   Regional Summary




                 RIVER BASIN OVERVIEW

                 The headwaters of the Chowan River are in Virginia where the Nottoway, Blackwater and Meherrin Rivers
                 originate and run south toward the North Carolina border. The Nottoway and the Blackwater merge at the
                 state line to form the Chowan River which is soon joined by the Meherrin. The Chowan flows fifty miles
                 through five North Carolina counties before draining into Albemarle Sound at Edenton. The Chowan
                 originates with narrow streams, but broadens to over two miles as it enters the sound. Though it is fed by
                 a large network of North Carolina rivers and streams, most of the Chowan's flow comes f rom Virginia. Like
                 the Roanoke, the Chowan contributes significant quantities of fresh water to Albemarle Sound.

                 Within the state of North Carolina, the Chowan River Basin is about the same size as the lower Roanoke
                 basin, encompassing close to 800,000 acres of land. The Chowan basin's population and density, with just
                 over 55,000 people, is sparse compared to other major APES river basins. Of the basin's total land area in
                 North Carolina, almost half is covered with forest and close to 40% is dedicated to agdculture. The Chowan
                 basin has very few marinas.


                 ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS


                 WATER QUALITY

                 Water quality in the Chowan basin is a widespread concern. The use of the streams and rivers for fishing
                 andfor swimming is impaired in approximately 67% of the total stream miles. The most common causes of
                 this impairment are sediment which affects 38% of the impaired miles, low dissolved oxygen which affects
                 19% of the impaired freshwater miles, and dioxin which accounts for 10%. Even though dioxin is responsible
                 for only 10% of impairment in the entire basin, it is concentrated entirely within the 50 mile stretch of the



                                                                     A3











               REGION4 SUMM4RIES




                                                        CHOWAN RIVER BASIN


                                                                                         %v

            PRINCEE

                               M"


                              .M.g
                            a












                                          . . . . . . . . . . .
                 M[ECKLENBEMG                                                                                     ITY

                                                           ................... .... .......... ..... .......
                 (VANCE

                               WARREN


                                                     HALIFAX



                                                                                                                       AN
                        FRANKLIN                                                            BERTIE
                                            NASH

                                                          EDGECONME                                             . . . . . .







                                                                                                                VU&ia





                                                                                             North Carolina




mw





                                                                        A4











                                                                                                              REGIONAL SUMM4RIES


                  Chowan River from the Virginia/North Carolina border to the mouth of the Chowan River at Albemarle
                  Sound. Im  pairment of all fresh wateris results primarily from nonpoint sources (82%) and to a lesser extent,
                  point sources (18%). Agriculture is the dominant nonpoint source of impairment accounting for 73% of
                  nonpoint loading in the basin. As a result of frequent algal blooms during the 1960's and 1970's, waters Of
                  the Chowan basin have been designated as nutrient sensitive. While some nutrient reductions have been
                  made in the basin, particularly for point sources, a major algal bloom occurred in the Chowan River during
                  the summer of 1993. Continued efforts between North Carolina and Virginia are necessary to meet nutrient
                  reduction goals. Compared to the Neuse, Pamlico, and Roanoke Rivers, contamination of water, sediments,
                  and f ish tissues with toxic metals in the Chowan is moderate. Sediment contamination with lead is of concern
                  at one site in the basin, on the main stem of the river near Winton.

                  Only one discharger in the Chowan basin has been identified as contributing metal loadings. Other potential
                  sources of toxic pollutants to the Chowan River Basin include seven Superfund sites and two solid waste
                  sites. Two of the Supedurid sites are located close to the Chowan and Meherrin Rivers. The contamination
                  of fish tissues with mercury and dioxin is of concern for both wildlife and humans at several sites in the basin.
                  Fish tissue samples indicate that metal contamination is of particular concern for wildlife near Riddicksville.
                  Because of widespread dioxin contamination of fish fillet samples in the basin, the state of North Carolina has
                  issued a fish consumption advisory for the entire Chowan River from the Virginia/North Carolina border to
                  Albemarle Sound, and the state of Virginia has issued an advisory for the Nottoway River from the Union
                  Camp Paper Mill at Franklin downstream to the state border.

                  In the Chowan, the Union Camp plant on the Blackwater River in Virginia has been the major source of
                  dioxin. In general, the highest levels of dioxin found in fish tissues in the Chowan basin were observed
                  downstream at Winton and at the Highway 17 bridge in Bertie County. Dioxin levels are expected to improve,
                  however, because this paper mill has modified its manufacturing process and no longer discharges dioxin.
                  Union Camp will now utilize a new ozone bleaching process as well as improve effluent quality using holding
                  ponds for sludge, by oxygenating wastewater, and by limiting releases during low flow periods.

                  Recommended Management Actions
                  The development of a basinwide plan for the Chowan River Basin will further improve the' coordination of
                  point source management in the basin, target nonpoint source pollution reduction, and improve wetlands
                  protection. A strategy for the nutrient sensitive Chowan River has already been developed. The objectives
                  of the plan include: I)reducing phosphorus input by 35 percent 2)reducing nitrogen input by 20 percent;
                  3)retuming the watershed to pre-1 970 chlorophyll a levels; and 4)establishing eff luent limb for total nitrogen
                  and total phosphorus. To achieve nutrient reduction in the basin, cooperative implementation of the nonpoint
                  reduction strategies in this plan between North Carolina and Virginia will be very important. Cost share
                  funding for best management practices would be targeted at sources throughout the basin in both North
                  Carolina and Virginia. Toxics contamination in the basin would be addressed through increased monitoring
                  and improved planning. Sources of toxics contamination would be evaluated using GIS map layers to analyze.
                  contaminated sites.





                                                                         A5











                 REGOVAL SUMM4RIES


                 VffAL HABffATS

                 The Chowan basin includes a variety of areas Vital for wildlife and the region's natural heritage. The Chowan
                 River Basin contains large swamps of tupelo-gum and cypress trees. Wetlands habitats in the basin provide
                 f lood control and safeguard wildlife habitat and water quality. Relatively little of the Chowan basin in North
                 Carolina is owned by the government for habitat protection. State-owned game lands and parks each
                 account for less than 1% of the basin area, and there are no federal wildlife refuges in the basin.

                 Recommended Management Actions

                 Ecosystem protection plans would target programs to identify and evaluate wetlands for protection,
                 enhancement, restoration, and acquisition. Mapping would also be needed to facilitate -information
                 dissemination and to identify Vital habitats for protection. Priority areas in the North Carolina portion of the
                 Chowan region have been identified for voluntary acquisition and conservation incentives. These vital habitat
                 areas include: 315 acres of nonriverine swamp forest; 200 acres of nonriverine wet hardwood forest; 88
                 acres of tidal freshwater. marsh; and 65 acres of Atlantic white cedar forest.



                 FISHERIES

                 Since colonial times, fishing has been a popular activity in the Chowan River Basin, particularly for shad,
                 herring, and striped bass. These species belong to a class of fish known as anadromous fish which live in
                 marine waters, but migrate up freshwater rivers each spring to spawn. The region includes over 230 miles
                 of rivers and streams that f unction as spawning habitat for these fish - Access to additional potential spawning
                 areas is blocked by six darns and culverts throughout the basin. Several types of equipment are used by the
                 basin's commercial fisherman, including pound nets, sink gill nets, drift gill nets, catfish pots, eel pots, and
                 trotlines.

                 Recommended Management Actions

                 Removing impediments to anadromous fish and re-establishing declining fisheries, such as herring and
                 catfish, are priority fisheries issues in the river basin.













                                                                        A6











                                                                                                             REGIONAL SUMMARIES






                                         ROANOKE RIVER BASIN



                                                     Regional Summary




                 RIVER BASIN OVERVIEW

                 The Roanoke River flows from the foothills of Virginia!s Blue Ridge Mountains to North Carolina's northern
                 coast flowing through several counties in Virginia and North Carolina before emptying into the Albemarle
                 Sound at the junction of Bertie, Martin, and Washington counties. Spanning close to 400 miles, the Roanoke
                 carries more water than any other river in North Carolina, supplying over hall of Albemarle Sound's fresh
                 water. As it flows f rom the Appalachian foothills to the flat coastal plains of North Carolina, the river changes
                 from narrow and lively to broad and slow. In the coastal lands, its swampy floodplains are sometimes five
                 miles wide.- With its springtime tendency to overflow, the river nourishes the basin with a rich blanket of
                 organic sediment.

                 The Roanoke basin below the dam at Roanoke Rapids, NC, comprises parts of five counties and over
                 800,000 acres. The Roanoke River Basin is moderately populated compared to the other river basins within
                 the APES region, with a population of approximately 80,000 in North Carolina. Almost half of the basin's
                 acreage (370,000 acres) in North Carolina is forested and close to a third (267,000 acres) is agricultural. The
                 federal government owns over 6,000 acres, nearly all of which is wildlife refuge. The state of North Carolina
                 owns about 15,000 acres of game lands in the region as well.


                 ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS


                 WATER QUALITY

                 Over 53% of the waters in the Roanoke River Basin are impaired. Nonpoint sources, accounting for 85%
                 of the pollutant input in the river basin, are by far the most important. Suspended sediments, toxics
                 contaminations, excessive nutrient loadings, and fecal contamination are the primary causes of impairment.


                                                                        A7











             REGOVAL SUM94 RIES




                                               ROANOKE RIVER BASIN




                                                   ON
                                                                                    GATES

                    . . .........




                                                                HERTFORD
            HAIHAX                        ........








                                             1.0
                                                     K  :X
                                                                K
                                                                                    .............
                                                          ..........
                    EDGECOMOBE



                                                               . . . . . . . . . .


                                         PITT







                                                                                                 Vff ginia





                                                                                      Camuna
                                                                                    ,7,r











































































                                                                  A8











                                                                                                           REGIONAL SUMMARIES


                 Sediment accounts for about 27% of impaired waters, nutrients account for 12.5% and toxicants for 11 %.
                 State ambient water quality standards and metal concentration limits have been exceeded at many sites
                 along the Roanoke River, possibly due to the relatively high level of industry in the basin. A major region for
                 pollutant loading is the Roanoke Rapids area. Low levels of oxygen are also a problem downstream of
                 Plymouth. Other potential nonpoint sources of toxic pollutants in the Roanoke basin include 10 Supedund
                 sites and 4 solid waste sites. These sources of contamination are primarily concentrated in the headwaters
                 near Roanoke Rapids (3 sites) and at the mouth of the Roanoke River (5 sites).

                 While sediments have been sampled on very few sites in the region, at least one area indicated a potential
                 violation of mercury and chromium concentration standards. Significant levels of metals and other toxic
                 contaminants were found in fish tissue in the Scotland Neck area and in Welch Creek. Because of high
                 levels of dioxin found in fish samples in the lower Roanoke River, the state has issued a health advisory
                 against consumption of fish taken from the river from Williamston to fternade Sound, and from Welch Creek.

                 Water quality in the Roanoke River Basin is also highly influenced by dams. Fluctuations in flow from these
                 dams cause water quality problems in the downstream portion of the river basin. Low f low periods can lead
                 to conditions that are inadequate for dilution or flushing of wastewater. During low flow periods, areas of
                 standing waste may accumulate causing some operations to be temporarily shut down. In addition, excessive
                 releases from reservoirs can create flooding and sewer leakage problems for industry.

                 Recommended Management Actions

                 The Division of Environmental Management is planning to develop a basinwide plan for the Roanoke River
                 Basin by 1997. This plan will help to improve coordination of the management of water quality in the basin.
                 This plan would be used as a base for targeting priority-areas for nonpoint source cost share funding. The
                 plan would be further expanded to set basinwide goals for wetlands protection that recognize the importance
                 of wetlands to basinwide hydrology and water quality. With both urban and agricultural runoff creating
                 significant water quality problems in the Roanoke River, increased cost share funding for urban and
                 agricultural best management practices (BMPs) will be critical for managing water quality. -Additional controls
                 of nonpoint source water pollution would help reduce loadings of nutrients and toxics in the system and would
                 help improve the quality of fish, among other benefits. Reducing the production of toxic substances at their
                 source would be another important part of the toxic reduction effort.

                 The most important components of toxic contamination control in the Roanoke basin include the continued
                 monitoring and assessment of the toxicity of sediments (especially near the mouth of the river), fish tissues
                 (especially for mercury), and ambient water quality, especially in areas which are known to have problems
                 or potential for problems. The Division of Environmental Management would evaluate potential sources of
                 these problems using geographic information systems (GIS) information on point source dischargers and
                 nonpoint sources. The use of GIS would allow agencies and local governments to efficiently organize,
                 analyze and access the information needed to monitor the effects of point source polluters and to plan for
                 runoff controls in the Roanoke basin. This application of GIS will be especially important for restoring water
                 quality in the lower section of the river and in Welch Creek.



                                                                       A9









                  REGIONAL SUMMARIES

                  VITAL HABITATS

                  Significant natural communities abound within the Roanoke River Basin. The basin supports both high quality
                  and rare natural communities as well as rare species habitat. It contains large expanses of bottorriland
                  hardwood forests as well as vast swamps of bald cypress and tupelo-gum. More than 200 species of birds
                  can be found within the basin alongside dense populations of white-tailed door, wild turkey, and herons.
                  Migrating hawks are frequently sighted in the fall. The Roanoke basin's extensive wetlands help protect
                  wildlife habitat, enhanc e water quality, and provide flood control.

                  Recommended Management Actions

                  In 1989, 33,000 acres of land were acquired for the Roanoke River National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge
                  represents a ten-year efforl: by The Nature Conservancy, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Wildlife
                  Resources Commission. Acquisition of the valuable bottomland hardwood habitat resulted from a
                  combination of donation, sale, and land swapping. Acquisition of additional acreage is needed to complete
                  the ref uge. Many other natural areas of the region also need to be protected for the purpose of safeguarding
                  rare species, rare or representative natural communities, other vital wildlife habitats, and fisheries habitat.
                  Basinwide habitat management plans would coordinate efforts to identify and protect, preserve, and enhance
                  important natural areas. Priority natural areas in the Roanoke basin have been identified for voluntary
                  acquisition and conservation incentives. The most significant of these priority areas is 1,500 acres of
                  nonfiverine swamp forests. Over 40,000 acres of wetlands along the Roanoke River floodplain have also
                  been targeted for acquisition for their wildlife value. Acquisition also provides many water quality and
                  downstream habitat protection services of enormous value.

                  FISHERIES

                  Both recreational and commercial fishing are important activities in the Roanoke basin. Commercial
                  fisherman use sink gill nets, drift gill nets, pound nets, catfish pots, eel pots and trotlines to harvest striped
                  bass, river herring, catfish and eel. There are some indications, however, that important f isheries resources
                  are being degraded. Three significant fish kills were reported in the region from 1986 to 1989, and
                  commercial catches of striped bass and herring have declined in recent years. The area is one of the most
                  important spawning areas in the APES region for anadromous fish, of which striped.bass is a familiar
                  example. The Roanoke basin's rivers and streams include close to 500 miles of spawning areas for
                  anadromous fish.

                  Recommended Management Actions

                  Basinwide management plansfor recreational and commercial fisheries would be developed and implemented
                  by 1995. The plans,, a cooperative effort between the Marine Fisheries Commission and the Wildlife
                  Resources Commission, would include recovery objectives for striped bass and herring. Additional data on
                  declining fish stocks and expanded research on the impacts of regulations on fisheries could be acquired
                  through a modified marine fisheries license structure.



                                                                         A10











                                                                                                              REGIONAL SUMMARIES





                    CURRITUCK SOUND AND PASQUOTANK
                                    RIVER / ALBEMARLE SOUND
                                       DRAINAGE BASIN REGION



                                                      Regional Summ                     ary




                 REGIONAL BASIN OVERVIEW

                 This region contains Albemarle and Currituck Sounds and their respective drainage basins. The Roanoke
                 and Chowan, two major rivers that flow into Albemarle Sound are addressed in their own regional summaries.
                 Albemarle Sound is surrounded by ten North Carolina counties with Croatan and Roanoke Sounds to the
                 southeast. Currituck Sound is bordered by Back Bay, Virginia to the north, Currituck County to the west, and
                 Currituck Banks to the east. The Pasquotank River, an important drainage source in this region and a major
                 tributary of Albemarle Sound, will be discussed'in the Albemarle Sound drainage basin.

                 The Alligator, Perquimans, Little, Pasquotank, and North Rivers, along with many other smaller tributaries,
                 drain over 2600 square miles in North Carolina and Virginia and flow into Albemarle Sound. CurrftuckSound
                 receives water from-three sources in Virginia: the North Landing River, the Northwest River, and tributaries
                 from Back Bay estuary. The entire drainage region covers approAmately 1.7 million acres. The Currituck
                 Sound drainage basin contains 469,000 acres; 220,000 acres in northeastern North Carolina and 249,000
                 acres in southeastern Virginia. The Albemarle Sound basin accounts or over 1,2DO,ODO acres within North
                 Carolina and Virginia. Of the region's total acreage, over a third is devoted to agriculture and another third
                 is forested. Wetlands, military land, and developed areas make up the remaining third. While most of the
                 drainage region is rural in nature, some densely populated areas are located on the region's fringe.

                 Both Albemarle and Currituck Sounds are shallow, relative to their area, and circulation of the fresh to
                 brackish water is governed by wind movement. The closest inlet to the ocean is Oregon Inlet,        and saltwater
                 from this source is quickly diluted by the f resh water delivered by the rivers that. drain into the sounds. Since



                                                                         All













           REGOVAL SUMAMRIES


                CURRITUCK SOUND AND PASQUOTANK RIVERIALBEMARLE
                                       SOUND DRAINAGE BASIN



                                                            IMAM
                   -dum
                     LAL A I                            crff





                                    ZN
                  GATES





                               "S.

                              .jj
                            Nx


















                                                                                  Vn*ia






                                                                   Norffi Cwobna









                                                        A12











                                                                                                                REGIOVAL SUMMARIES


                   1585, however, at least six tidal inlets have cut channels through Currituck Banks linking Currituck Sound with
                   the Atlantic Ocean. On Currituck Banks, a new inlet has the highest probability of occurring between Back
                   Bay, Virginia and Corolla, North Carolina. An inlet resulting from a major coastal storm would most likely be
                   rapidly filled, however, due to development and transportation pressures in the region. In such a scenario,
                   only temporary and regional impacts on the water chemistry and ecosystem of the sounds would occur.

                   The population of the North Carolina portion of the region is 101,000; 86,000 residents in the Albemarle
                   Sound drainage basin and 15,000 in the Currftuck Sound Drainage Basin. While the North Carolina region
                   has a relatively low population density, large regional and seasonal population increases are typical. In
                   contrast to the predominantly rural nature of the North Carolina drainage region, Virginia Beach, VA, located
                   on the northem edge of the Currituck Sound Drainage Basin, is highly urbanized with a population of over
                   262,000. The eastem-most land boundary of the drainage basin, the Outer Banks of North Carolina, is
                   currently experiencing rapid development rates. The proximity of the Outer Banks to the heavily populated
                   cities of the northeast makes it a popular vacation destination. Urban and residential areas, to support a high
                   level of tourism and recreation, are more common in this region. Twenty-four marinas are located in the
                   waters of the Albemarle Sound drainage basin while the Currituck Sound drainage basin has only two.


                   ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS


                   WATER QUALITY
                   In general, water quality in both Albemarle and Currituck Sounds is good and waters of the basin support
                   intended uses. Point and nonpoint source pollution from agriculture, forestry, and development are
                   responsible for most estuarine and fresh Water impairment in the region. Particulate matter, dissolved
                   nutrients, toxic metals, turbidity, and salinity are the most important concerns in the region.

                                                     Cuffituck Sound Drainage Basin

                   Assessments of water quality indicate that the waters of the Currftuck Sound Drainage Basin fully support
                   their uses. This conclusion, however, is based on minimal data and sampling. Recent invest       'igations indicate
                   that the waters of Currituck Sound are potentially threatened by four primary sources: 1)nonpoint source
                   runoff from agriculture, logging, and development; 2)septic waste contamination from increased development
                   on Currituck Banks; 3)increased turbidity levels caused by maintenance dredging of the Intracoastal
                   Waterway channel; and 4)saftwater intrusion and increased pollution loading from several canals linking the
                   sound to drainage basins in southeast Virginia. Interbasin diversions of water from agricultural practices has
                   also affected freshwater inflow to Currituck Sound.

                   Toxic pollutant loading in the basin is minimal and the Currituck drainage basin is one of the least polluted
                   in the APES region. No direct dischargers of heavy metals have been identified as contributing directly to
                   the basin. Nonpoint sources of toxic metals have also been determined to be minimal'. Toxic contamination
                   and potentially dangerous levels of metals in fish tissues, however, have been identified in Tull's Bay.
                   Additional sampling may be needed to fully assess toxic contamination in the Currituck Sound area.


                                                                          A13











                 REGIONAL SUMUMES


                 Recommended Management Actions

                 Protection of the water quality in the Currituck area would require boner control of nonpoint source pollution
                 and hydrological modifications. Basinwide planning by the Division of Environmental Management in this
                 region would address these concerns. Planning would involve evaluating total maximum daily loads and
                 reviewing discharge permits for renewal in order to identify the impacts of dischargers on water quality and
                 to accommodate economic growth and development. Best management practices and cost share programs
                 would address nonpoint source pollution and provide economical ways of protecting and enhancing water
                 quality in this basin. Enforcement would ensure compliance with existing regulations. Continued and
                 expanded monitoring of water quality in the Curdtuck region would support continued evaluation of toxic
                 contamination, salinity fluctuations, and turbidity increases.

                                     Pasquotank RiverlAtbemarle Sound Drainage Basin

                 Of the 464 miles of freshwater rivers and streams that make up the Pasquotank River/Albomade Sound
                 drainage basin, 66% are impaired. The three major causes are low dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and turbidity.
                 Impairment in the freshwater areas of the basin is largely attributed to nonpoint source agricultural runoff.
                 While the Roanoke and Chowan Rivers are not included in discussions regarding the quality of fresh water
                 within the drainage basin, they have a considerable influence and impact upon the Albemarle Sound estuarine
                 water quality.

                 Water quality in the estuadne waters of the AJbemade Sound drainage basin is generally good. Overall,
                 support of the basin's estuarine water uses is fairly high with 14% of the basin's estuarine waters impaired.
                 Dioxin, low dissolved oxygen, chlorophyll a and heavy metal contamination accounts for most of the
                 impairment in the estuarine basin. Point source pollution is the largest contributorto water quality impairment
                 in the estuarine waters of the Albemarle Sound drainage basin, affecting approximately 11% of the basin's
                 waters. Nonpoint sources contaminate approximately 3% of the basin's estuarine waters.

                 An exception to the generally good water quality in the estuarine waters of this basin occurs at the mouths
                 of the Roanoke and Chowan Rivers. In this area, eutrophication and dioxin contamination result in impaired
                 water quality for all of the waters of the Yeopim River, at Sandy Point, at Leonard's Point, and at Plymouth.
                 Overall toxics loadings f rom all tdbutary rivers to the AJbemade estuarine system are higher than those in the
                 Pamlico and Neuse estuaries. The Nbernarle basin receives the greatest amount of toxic pollutants from the
                 Roanoke River. To a lesser extent, the Pasquotank and Chowan River Basins also provide a source of toxic
                 loading to Albemarle Sound. Of particular concern are concentrations of heavy metals in sediments in the
                 Pasquotank River, especially in the Elizabeth City area. This location accounts for the largest concentration
                 of toxic metal-contaminated sediment sites in the APES region. Sediment metal concentrations were also
                 of concern at one site in the Scuppemong River and one site near Edenton.

                 Toxic concentrations of heavy metals and other pollutants observed in water, sediments, and fish tissues
                 collected in several areas of the western Albemarle basin have raised concern about the potential impacts
                 that these contaminants may have on aquatic life and human health and this area currently has a fish



                                                                       A14











                                                                                                          REGOWL SUMMARIES


                consumption advisory in effect for dioxin contamination. Two sites of greatest concern for human health in
                the Albemarle basin are Phelps Lake aind the Corapeake Ditch off the Great Dismal Swamp, both of which
                are contaminated with mercury. The greatest concerns for wildlife are observed at Phelps Lake and Now
                Lake, both of which are contaminated by metals, and in Albemarle Sound near the Norfolk and Southern
                Railroad Bridge, which is contaminated by dioxin. In Croatan and Roanoke Sounds, shellfish closures
                increased by 98% and 62% respectively between 1980 and 1990.

                Discharge from the Dare County Landfill has been identified as having the potential to produce toxic
                concentrations of metals during low flow conditions. In addition, other potential nonpoint sources of toxic
                pollutants include twenty-one marinas. The largest concentration of marinas occurs near Elizabeth City and
                on Roanoke Island. The Albemarle basin also contains two hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal
                sites, six Superfund sites, and five solid waste sites.

                Recommended Management Actions

                Basinwide water quality planning for rivers which drain into Albemarle Sound would help to provide protection
                in this region. The Division of Environmental Management would prepare basin plans for'the Pasquotank,
                Chowan, and Roanoke Rivers. (For more information on the Roanoke and Chowan rivers, see their individual
                basin summaries.) Pollution prevention strategies would be important for the reduction of water quality
                impairment in the estuarine waters of this basin. Control of point source pollution, by focusing on proactive
                management options, would reduce waste at the source. DEM would assist dischargers with implementing
                pollution reduction methods. Efforts to develop pollution prevention plans would also be expanded.

                Better control of nonpoint source runoff and the development of aftemative septic systems would address the
                shellfish closures in the eastern pan of this region. In the freshwater areas, increased control of nonpoint
                source runoff, particularly agricultural, would help to improve water quality.. Toxic contamination in the
                Albemarle region would be addressed with continued assessment and improved planning. The most
                contaminated sediment sites, particularly those in the upper Pasquotank River, would be assessed to
                determine whether the levels of contamination are dangerous to aquatic life. The extent of mercury
                contamination in Phelps Lake, most likely from aerial inputs, and Now Lake would also be evaluated.
                Analysis of these contaminated areas using GIS maps may identify possible sources of contamination.
                Pollution prevention strategies would be targeted at discharges that contribute significant1y to toxic loading
                in the basin. Fishermen that use the waters of the region would be surveyed to better assess human health
                risks for recreational and subsistence fishermen. Fish advisories would continue as necessary to protect
                public health.


                VITAL HABITATS

                A moderate amount of the region's vital habitats are protected through government and public ownership.
                Almost 46,000 acres are reserved for state game lands and 30,000 acres are in state parks. Federal wildlife
                refuges occupy 106,000 acres and an additional 6,000 acres are considered federal seashore lands. The


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


                                                                      A15











                 REGIONAL SUMMARIES


                 region's wetlands are a valuable environment for migratory waterfowl. Scattered throughout the drainage
                 basin, wetlands support flood control, provide wildlife habitat, and enhance water quality. In most of the
                 region, agricultural runoff is filtered through wetlands before entering the sounds. This natural filtering
                 mechanism removes a portion of the nutrient load from the runoff, thereby reducing the amount of agricultural
                 nutrients entering the sound system. Although submerged aquatic vegetation provide most of the food for
                 waterfowl in the area, marshes are also a signif icant source.

                                                  Currituck Sound Drainage Basin

                 The Currituck area provides an important winter habitat for waterfowl. Marshes within the basin are also
                 popular sites for waterlowl hunting and sports fisheries. Populations, however, have been steadily declining
                 in recent decades. There are two federally-listed endangered species in the ecosystem, the bald eagle and
                 the peregrine falcon, and a federally threatened species, the piping plover. A diversity of submerged aquatic
                 vegetation (SAV) species is present but concentrations are low. Historical observation records indicate an
                 almost complete disappearance of SAV in Back Bay. In Currituck Sound, major shifts in density and SAV
                 species assemblages have occurred. Currently, SAV beds are much less dense. High turbidity appears to
                 be a potential cause of this decline. Damage to SAV habitat is also caused by eutrophication and changing
                 salinity patterns.

                 Recommended Management Actions

                 Basinwide ecosystem planning would guide the acquisition and protection of vital habitats. Priority areas in
                 the North Carolina portion of the Currituck basin have been identified for the targeting of voluntary acquisition
                 and conservation incentives. These vital habitat areas include: 4200 acres of nonriverine swamp forest; 955
                 acres of nonriverine wet hardwood forest; 100 acres of Atlantic white cedar forest; and 50 acres of coastal
                 f ringe evergreen forest. Wetlands in the Currituck Outer Banks have also been identified as a priority natural
                 area for protection efforts. Accurate records and maps of vital habitat areas including wetlands, SAV, and
                 uplands would be maintained or developed. Biological and field inventories, as well as monitoring, should
                 be performed to provide up-to-date and readily available information. Regulatory program would be
                 strengthened to protect SAV areas. Restoration efforts would also be targeted at the most critical SAV
                 habitats. Official designation and protection for SAV Will also aid in protecting vital fisheries habitat.
                 Improvement of water quality may also help to support the recovery of SAV in this basin.

                                     Pasquotank RiverlAlbemarle Sound Drainage Basin

                 The Albemarle Sound region is home to a great variety of natural communities, including rare natural
                 communities and rare species habitats. The basin provides a winter home to at least seventeen kinds of
                 waterfowl, including Canada and snow geese, black duck, and scaup. Herons, alligators, bears, and white-
                 tailed deer live in the basin's forests and swamps.







                                                                        A16












                                                                                                           REGIONAL SUMMARIES


                 Recommended Management Actions

                 Ecosystem protection plans would set coordinated priortties for critical habitat protection and acquisition.
                 Priority areas in the Albemarle region have been identified for the targeting of voluntary acquisition and
                 conservation incentives. These vital habitat areas include: 1500 acres of nonriverine swamp forests, 1640
                 acres of marttime forests, 1700 acres of nonfiverine wet hardwood forests, and 400 acres of Atlantic white
                 cedar forest. In addition, existing regulatory program would be strengthened and effectively enforced to help
                 protect vital habitats.


                 FISHERIES

                 The region supports a variety of important freshwater and brackish species such as largemouth bass, bluegill,
                 catfish, and perch. Both commercial and recreational fishing are important activities in the sounds and
                 throughout the waters of the region. This area is especially important for recreational freshwater fishing.
                 Striped bass, herring, and shad, anadromous species which live in madne waters but migrate into freshwater
                 to spawn each spring, also enter the Currituck/Albemade region. While this region is one of the most
                 important for the spawning runs of anadromous species, it contains the most obstructions to spawning areas.

                                                  Currituck Sound Drainage Basin

                 In the Cunituck area, anadromous species use 60 miles of the rivers and streams to spawn. Commercial
                 fishermen in this area use mostly sink gill nets, river herring pound nets, and eel pots.

                                     Pasquotank RiverlAlbemarle Sound Drainage Basin

                 The waters of Albemarle Sound have over 160 acres of nursery areas for estuarine fish species. The region
                 includes almost 400 miles of spawning areas for anadromous fish. Striped bass are of particular concern in
                 the Albemarle region. Much research and policy attention has addressed the depressed status of this fish
                 population. Habitat loss, fishing pressure, and water quality concerns are all believed to be factors that have
                 contributed to the decline of this species and need to be further explored. Commercial fishermen working.
                 in the Pasquotank River/ Albemarle Sound Drainage Basin region employ pound nets, crab pots, sink gill
                 nets, catfish pots, eel pots, and trotlines to harvest fish.

                 Recommended Management Actions for Me Region

                 The importance of recreational freshwater fisheries in both drainage basins makes cooperative planning by
                 the Wildlife Resources Commission and the Division of Marine Fisheries very important for this area. The
                 development of joint fisheries management plans for species such as catfish, largemouth bass, perch, and
                 anadromous fish V
                                     ill help to protect and improve these fisheries. In Albemarle Sound, planning and
                 protection for striped bass is of particular concern. The cooperative implementation @f recommendations
                 resulting from the Striped Bass Management Board studies is an important strategy for addressing the decline



                                                                       A17











               REGIONAL SUMMARIES
                                   - -------------       --------------------------------


               of this species. Cooperative planning for the removal of obstructions to anadromous fish migration is another
               strategy for this region. It is important that such planning also aims to prevent future obstructions.
               Anadromous fish spawning areas in the region would receive greater protection through official designation
               and protection by the Wildlife Resources Commission and other state agencies. Bycatch reductions from the
               development of improved gear along with financial assistance from a cost share program to facilitate
               implementation, are also important.









































                                                                     A18





















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

                     Tor-Pamlico River and Pamlico Sound
                                                   Drainage Basins

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


                                                     Regional Summary



                 REGIONAL DRAINAGE BASIN OVERVIEW

                                                 Tar-Pamlico River Drainage Basin

                 The Tar-Pamlico River drains the second largest river basin in the North Carolina portion of the APES region.
                 The Tar and Pamlico Rivers are. consecutive segments of a single river system. The Tar River portion
                 extends 140 miles from Person County to the town of Washington in Beaufort County where it becomes the
                 Pamlico River. For most of its length the Tar River is less than 150 yards wide, has a fairly swift current,
                 and is freshwater. The Pamlico segment, slower and broader than the Tar, flows 37 miles from Beaufort
                 County, NC, into Pamlico Sound, widening from 500 yards at Washington, NC, to nearly five miles at its
                 mouth. Salinity levels increase as the river approaches Pamlico Sound. The Tar-Pamlico River Basin
                 encompasses all or pan of f ifteen counties, is over 2.5 million acres in size, and has a drainage area of 5,400
                 square miles. The estuarine portion consists of 634,400 acres. With a population of around 400,000, the
                 Tar-Pamlico is the second most populated mq@or river basin within the APES region. Population density in
                 the basin is moderate, however, compared to the other basins. Fishing, farming, foresq,, and phosphate
                 mining are the most important economic activities in the basin, With agriculture and forest cover each
                 accounting for slightly over 40% of the total land area.

                                                    Pamlico Sound Drainage Basin

                 Pamlico Sound serves as the main receiving basin of the APES region, covering parts of four counties and
                 over 370,000 acres of land. Including the sound itself, there are close to a million acres of inland waters and
                 estuaries in this area. Water from Albemarle Sound and its rivers flows through Croatan and Roanoke
                 Sounds into Pamlico Sound. The Neuse and Pamlico Rivers also drain directly into the sound. Interaction
                 with the Atlantic takes place through Oregon, Hatteras, Ocracoke, and Swash inlets. Pamlico Sound
                 stretches almost 100 miles f rom north to south and varies in width, expanding up to 25 miles in places. Like











           REGIONAL SUMM4RIES



                         TAR-PAMLICO RIVER AND PAMLICO SOUND
                                        DRAINAGE BASIN



                              I IL
      POWN        (Vmm                     NOWRAWMN            CATO
                             XX
                               lK. ES:
                                 -,,ffl:
                  SH


                                m
                       ... ........


                                                                 CH AN
                  I ", .. IN ,
                                                       monix
                       ....... ....
                                 g
            Ln
                               W


             WAn                      v..... mo:.@ ........                         DAU



                               WILOW       ..... . . . . . .....                      . . . . . . . . .




                  JOW4MN


        HARNrrr               WATM

                                     LE40M        CMAVEN                               ......


     MhoaRLAND   WMMN                                       FANM=
                               Dunm           3wm









                                                                                    Vr&iia






                                                                      Nogh












                                                  AX












                                                                                                              REGIONAL SUMMARIES


                 Albemarle Sound,. Pamlico Sound is moderately shallow, with a mean depth of 15 feet. Continuously
                 influenced by wind and tide, Pamlico Sound has an abundance of constantly changing shoals. Urban
                 development has had little impact on the region. With a population of 12,600, the Pamlico Sound drainage
                 basin has the lowest population density in the study area. Of the basin's total land area, forests covers 33%,
                 wetlands, swamps, and marshes cover 28%, agriculture comprises 25%, and urban land accounts for under
                 1 percent. Military land covers about 200 acres and 21 marinas are located in the waters of the Pamlico
                 Sound drainage basin.


                 ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS


                 WATER QUALITY
                                                   Ter-Pamlico River Drainage Basin

                 Thirty-three percent of the freshwater'streams and rivers within the basin are impaired. For this reason, the
                 entire river basin is considered nutrient sensitive due to elevated nitrogen and phosphorus levels.
                 Sedimentation is the primary cause of water quality degradation in freshwater segments of the basin. Heavily
                 influenced by sediment-attached nutrient inputs, the Tar-Pamlico basin has the second greatest nonpoint
                 source loading of pollution in the APES region. Agriculture contributes the greatest nonpoint source load
                 (70%) while developed lands contribute relatively little (60/6).          Elevated nitrogen and phosphorus
                 concentrations, primarily from agricultural practices in the basin, are responsible for accelerated eutrophication
                 in the lower Tar-Pamlico River. The highest nitrogen concentrations are found in the upper riverine stations
                 at Tarboro, Grimesland, and Washington. Shod retention times in the swiftly moving upper Tar River,
                 however, prevent excessive phytoplankton growth. As the river mixes with the safty water of Pamlico Sound,
                 settling, assimilation, and dilution with nitrogen-poor seawater cause reduced nitrogen levels in the Pamlico
                 River tributaries of Van Swamp, Pungo River, and Durham, Pungo, and Pantego Creeks. Total phosphorus
                 values are generally highest in the mainstream Pamlico River from Tarboro to the Pamlico Sound. The
                 highest mean concentrations of phosphorus are found just downstream of Texasgulf Chemicals in Beaufort
                 County. However, changes in the treatment system are expected to reduce phosphorus discharges by 90%.

                 Water quality in the estuarine part of the basin is poor where waters are impacted by algal blooms and
                 bacterial contamination. All waters from Bath Creek to Washington are impaired. Fish kills, fish diseases,
                 and low oxygen levels are chronic problems. Low dissolved oxygen concentrations attributed to algal blooms
                 have occurred predominately in the waters between Washington and Bath. Persistent problems occur in
                 .Blounts Creek, Bath Creek, Pungo Creek near Belhaven, and in the tributaries near Campbell and Eastham
                 Creeks. There are 128 permitted surface water dischargers to both fresh and saft water in the basin. The
                 majority of these dischargers are municipal wastewater treatment plants locaed in the headwater counties
                 of Granville, Franklin, and Nash. Seven dischargers in the Tar-Pamlico basin have toxics loadings that
                 exceed 1000 pounds per year. Three dischargers may produce instrearn metal concentrations in exceedance
                 of water quality standards during low flow conditions. Five of the most common toxicants found in the river
                 basin include zinc, cyanide, nickel, copper, and lead. However, nearly one million pounds of fluoride are
                 discharged yearly into the Tar-Pamlico River making it the most prevalent toxicant found in the system.


                                                                         A21











                 REGIONAL SUMM4RIES


                 The Tar-Pamlico Basin Association, a coalition of permitted dischargers with support from the Division of
                 Environmental Management, Environmeintal Defense Fund, and the Pamlico Tar River Foundation, is working
                 to reduce nutrient loading to the basin through an innovative point/nonpoint trading strategy. The Association
                 works to fund nonpoint source controls on agricultural lands in exchange for flexibility in point source nutrient
                 requirements. Association members have been able to achieve group nutrient reductions at relatively low
                 cost through engineering evaluations and plant modifications.

                 Recommended Management Actions

                 The Division of Environmental Management will develop a basinwide plan for the Tar-Pamlico river basin by
                 1995. Interim goals, however, include a 64% reduction in phosphorus and a 10% reduction in nitrogen
                 loading to the system. This Will be achieved by expanding current strategies, such as limiting wastewater
                 treatment plant outputs on a seasonal basis, continuing a system of. transferable nutrient loading allowances,
                 and by further developing in-plant reduction techniques. The plans provide an important tool for managing
                 point sources within the basin, for targeting priority areas for nonpoint source cost sharing, and for expanding
                 basinwide goals for wetlands protection. Increasing cost-share funding for agricultural BMPs will help reduce
                 nutrient loadings.

                 The most important efforts to control toxic contamination in the Tar-Pamlico basin would include the continued
                 assessment of the toxicity of sediments (especially near the mouth of the river), fish tissues (especially for
                 mercury), and ambient water quality, especially in areas which are known to have elevated levels of toxicants.
                 The Division of Environmental Management would evaluate potential sources of these problems using
                 geographic information system (GIS) data on point source dischargers and nonpoint sources. The use of GIS
                 would allow agencies and local governments to more efficiently organize, analyze and access the information
                 needed to monitor water quality at the basinwide level and on a cumulative basis. This application of GIS
                 would be especially important to efforts to manage nonpoint source pollution. control measures.

                                                    Pamlico Sound Drainage Basin ,

                 Water quality is one of the main focuses in the Pamlico Sound drainage basin. Although the water quality
                 of the open waters of Pamlico Sound is quite good, almost 500 acres are closed to shellfish harvesting
                 indicating that the system is unable to support all of its designated uses. Closer to land, in the vicinity of
                 Swanquarter, Wysocking Bay, and Englehard, 1388 acres of shellfish waters were closed between 1980 and
                 1990. The amount of acreage closed during that time represents an increase of 109% over previous years.
                 The acreage closed to shellfish harvesting near Ocracoke increased 27% during the same time period. Even
                 though shellfish closures represent a small portion of the sound's approximately 900,000 acres of water, toxic
                 concentrations of heavy metals represent an additional important water quality concern. Samples of fish
                 tissues from the region indicated several sites where toxic contamination may be of concern for human health
                 and wildlife. Some fish tissues collected from the inland basin portion of Lake Mattamuskeet show potentially
                 dangerous levels of mercury for human consumption. Toxic levels in fish tissues collected from Knoll Island,
                 StwW Poird Bay, Great Island, and Lake Mattamuskeet also indicate some level of water contamination.




                                                                        AV











                                                                                                              REGOVAL SUMM4RIES
                  - - -----  - - - ------ ----- - ------
                  The Tar-Pamlico and Neuse River basins contribute directly to the loading of excess nutrients and toxic
                  pollutants to Pamlico Sound. (See the individual basin summaries for these rivers.) Few direct dischargers
                  of toxic pollution to the sound can be identified indicating that nonpoint sources of pollution are probably more
                  significant. Potential nonpoint sources of pollutants include marinas, river basin discharge and solid and
                  hazardous waste sites. Seventeen marinas exist within the drainage basin, with the largest concentrations
                  occurring at Hatteras, Ocracoke, and in Rose Bay. Two Superfund sites are located along the Outer Banks
                  near Salvo and Buxton.

                  Recommended Management Actions

                  A basinwide water quality management plan would be developed by 1999. Water quality in the Pamlico
                  Sound area would benefit from improvements in nonpoint source controls and reductions in toxics loadings
                  from the Neuse and Pamlico Rivers. Establishing total maximum daily loads and associated control strategies
                  for all impaired rivers and streams within the drainage basin is also an important step. Determining the
                  basin's assimilafive capacity with respect to long-term growth and development would also improve water
                  quality management within the basin. Nonpoint source pollution reduction controls including BMPs and cost
                  share programs would also significantly reduce sediment, nutrient, and toxics inputs to basin waters.
                  Continued monitoring of toxic levels and nutrient loading invater bodies, sediment, and shellfish would be
                  used to evaluate the extent and threat of toxic contamination in the Pamlico Sound area. It is important that
                  the risk from mercury contamination in Lake Mattamuskeet be further evaluated as well. Alternatives to septic
                  systems and the implementation of other nonpoint source controls (such as comprehensive marinas
                  management) would help to address shellfish closures in the immediate Pamlico Sound area.


                  VITAL HABITATS

                                                   Tar-Pamlico River Drainage Basin

                  The Tar-Pamlico basin has several rare natural communities and rare species habitats. Wetlands are vital
                  to water quality enhancement, wildlife habitat protection, and flood control. Historical observation records
                  indicate that SAV has almost completely disappeared in the Pamlico River. The primary causes of decline
                  are thought to be related to increased freshwater runoff, increased turbidity (from sediment-laden runoff,
                  bottom-disturbing practices, and algal blooms), and encrustation by algae. Recent research also suggests
                  that nitrate over-enrichment may be a factor. Government parks and refuges offer protection to some of the
                  basin's vital habitats. Approximately 12,000 acres are hold in National Wildlife Refuges. The state retains
                  6,500 acres for game lands, and an additional 3,500 acres for parks.

                  Recommended Management Actions

                  A basinwide ecosystem protection and restoration plan would be developed by 1995. The plan would set
                  coordinated priorities for habitats and critical areas protection in the basin. Many natural areas of the region
                  need to be protected for the purpose of safeguarding rare species, rare or representative natural











                REGIONAL SUMM4RIES


                communities, other vital wildlife habitats, and fisheries habitat. Priority natural areas in the Tar-Pamlico basin
                have been identified for the targeting of voluntary acquisition and conservation incentives including: 6250
                acres of nonriverine wet hardwood forest, 100 acres of tidal freshwater marsh, 85 acres of basic mesic forest,
                46 acres of granitic flatrock, 2 acres of a floodplain pool community, and 1360 acres of nonriverine swamp
                forests. Also targeted for protection are 11,000 acres of wetlands in the Swift Creek floodplain and in the
                Scranton Woods area. Acquisition also protects water quality and downstream habitats of enormous value.
                All acquisitions would be voluntary, from willing sellers or donors. Accurate maps and records would be
                maintained for identification of state endangered species and their habitats, including wetlands. Programs
                that expand the advanced identification and evaluation of wetlands on a regional basis would be promoted.
                Wetlands restoration and mitigation efforts would also be expanded.

                                                   Pamlico Sound Drainage Basin

                Fish nursery areas of the basin embody close to 40,000 acres. Considered vital habitat areas, they support
                fish populations throughout North Carolina and all along the east coast. About 125 miles of the drainage
                basin's rivers and streams are used by anadromous fish for spawning. The Pamlico Sound drainage basin
                is also home to a great variety of natural communities, including rare natural communities and rare species
                habitats. The region's extensive wetlands are vital to the health of the basin as they enhance water quality,
                nourish wildlife habitat, and provide f lood control. Some habitat areas in the region are protected by public
                ownership. The state owns over 30,000 acres and conserves them as game Iands. The federal government
                owns 90,000 acres of wildlife refuges. These and other conservation efforts would be continued.

                Recommended Management Actions

                It is important to protect land areas of the region for the purpose of safeguarding rare species, rare or
                representative natural communities, nearby f isheries habitat, and other wildlife habitats. Ecosystem protection
                and restoration plans would be developed by 1999. Wetlands would be identified and evaluated on a regional
                basis to preserve the most vital areas. Existing wetlands regulations would be enforced to make permitting
                more predictable for developers and governments. Priority areas in the Pamlico Sound basin have been
                identif ied forvoluntary acquisition and conservation incentives. These vital habitat areas include: 1205 acres
                of nonfiverine swamp forests, 450 acres of maritime forests, 20 acres of coastal f ringe evergreen forest, and
                100 acres of nonriverine wet hardwood forest. Priority wettand areas in the region that would also be targeted
                include Outer Banks sites such as Buxton Woods.



                FISHERIES

                                                  Tar-Pamlico River Drainage Basin

                Both comrriercial and recreational fishing are important uses of Tar-Pamlico River Basin waters. The Tar-
                Pamlico Basin encompasses extensive vital fisheries habitats Mich support important economic acfivity in
                the region. Commercial fishing practices in the basin include the use of long haul seines, shrimp and crab


                                                                       A24












                                                                                                          REGOVAL SUMMARIES


                trawls, crab pots, drift gill nets, pound nets, eel pots, and oyster dredges. Approximately 5,500 acres of
                pdmary and secondary nursery areas support the continued production of coastal fishedes. Manyofthealgal
                blooms noted eadier are occurdng in or near these nursery areas. Increased agdcultural activities, resulting
                in the draining of large expanses of land into the Pamlico's brackish waters, have caused concern that
                freshwater intrusion may be harmful to primary nursery areas. Spawning areas for anadromous fish are also
                of special concern in the river basin. The rivers and streams of the basin provide close to 400 miles of
                spawning areas for anadromous species such as Amedcan shad, river herring and stdped bass. Pathways
                to the spawning grounds of these fish are frequent@ obstructed by dams and culverts. Other concerns
                regarding fishedes in the region include an increase in the number and severity of fish kills, especially from
                ulcerative mycosis, since 1984. Most occurrences were in the lower hall of the basin, particulady in the main
                Pamlico River, Pungo Creek, and various canals and tdbutades. Suspected causes included low dissolved
                oxygen, disease, sediment, and salinity. Researchers have recently discovered a toxic dinoflagellate that may
                be causing at least 25% of the kills and may be related to disease outbreaks.

                Recommended Management Actions

                Management plans for f ishedes would be developed and implemented for recreational and commercial fishing
                interests. The designation of vital fishedes habitats in the region and the removal or alteration of obstacles
                to anadromous fish. migration would be important pans of regional efforts to maintain and enhance fishedes
                resources.


                                                  Pamlico Sound Drainage Basin

                Commercial and recreational fishing represent important activities for the sound and adjacent waters. W.fthin
                Pamlico Sound there is an abundance of blue crabs, oysters, shrimp, and finfish. The quantity and diversity
                of the area's fishedes population signif icantly enhance local and state economies.. The habitats of the
                drainage basin also provide ideal reproductive environments for several species of fish and shellfish.
                Commercial fishing practices in the basin include pound nets, long haul seines, shrimp trawl and crab trawls,
                crab pots, and sink gill nets. Shellfish (including crabs, oysters and bay scallops) are taken by tonging,
                raking, buil raking, hand harvesting, and dredging.

                Recommended Management Actions

                The designation and protection of vital fishedes habitats will ensure a healthy madne environment. and viable
                fishedes industry. The great importance of commercial and recreational fishedes in this area emphasizes
                the need for coordinated and comprehensive fisheries management planning. An individual management plan
                would be developed for each important fishery or group of f isheries by 1999. The reduction of bycatch would
                be addressed through the implementation of best fisheries practices and would include a cost share program
                and the use of bycatch reducing gear to help to protect and enhance the region's fisheries. Oyster
                populations along the western edge of Pamlico Sound have suffered from over-harvest and disease.
                Harvests of oysters have declined drastically since the eady 1900's. Restorati.on of oyster beds is especially
                important for enhancing shellf ish populations in the region.


                                                                      A25












                                                                                                          REGOVAL SUMMARIES





                              Neuse River and, Core Soundl
                              Bogue Sound Drainage Basins

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


                                                    Regional Summary




                REGIONAL DRAINAGE BASIN OVERVIEW


                                                    Neuse River Drainage Basin

                The Neuse River is one of two major rivers that enter Pamlico Sound. The Neuse River Basin extends f rom
                Durham County in the Piedmont to the mouth of the Neuse River near Now Bern in the Pamlico Sound
                estuary. The watershed for this river encompasses all or part of 19 counties and almost 3.5 million acres
                making it the largest drainage basin within the APES region. The rivers, streams, and estuarine waters of
                the basin cover over 145,000 acres. Freshwater flow in the river covers about 150 miles from its source to
                the city of New Bern. In this stretch, the river is usually less'than 150 yards wide, and the current is fairly
                rapid. Above Raleigh, flows of the Neuse have been significantly altered by the construction of Falls Lake
                Reservoir. At Now Bern, freshwater begins mixing with saltwater as the river flows another 40 miles to its
                mouth at the southern end of Pamlico Sound. Over this stretch, the river moves more sluggishly across the
                flat Coastal Plain. The width of the river increases from about a mile at New Bern to over 5 miles at its
                mouth. In addition to being the largest, the Neuse River watershed is the most populated among the major
                drainage basins in the APES region. Population in the watershed is now slightly over 1.5 million. Land cover
                in the basin is primarily forest (36%) and agriculture (35%). Compared with other basins in the Albemarle-
                Pamlico region, the Neuse River Basin is highly industrialized. The military owns over 21,000 acres and there
                are 13 marinas in this basin.










                                                                      A27









              REG101VAL SUMMARIES                            ----------



                                 NEUSE RIVER AND CORE SOUND/ BOGUE
                                             SOUND DRAINAGE BASIN


                 PZRXON             VAPKZ                        NORTHANTM
                                                                                          GAUE
                                                                                                     PA
                                         @iWAWM
                                                        K"HAX



                               ix
                                       nwmm


           DRANGS
                                                  NAM
                                X-Xv-
                           @xq
                                                         ZDGKW
                                                      J,
                                                                      j MUM
                                  MU.                                                                              DARE

       CRATHW


                                      Is m
                                                                                   MAU701m
                                      ."NEW
           Ln                                                                                            NWDZ

                   RARNrff




                                                                                                     X,


        maim     CuhmzRL4m         AAW"N     I

                                                 win"



                                                                ONKAW
                                                                                     ----------- -- :1

          R03mN        %
                            SLADEN








                                                                                                    Virginia





                                                                                   North Carolina
                                                                                                            MRRRVW.Q






                                                                                    Z



























































                                                               A28











                                                                                                           REGIONAL SUMMARIES


                                           Core SoundlBogue Sound Drainage Basin

                 Core and Bogus Sounds drain about 215,ODO acres of land in the southeastern portion of the APES region.
                 The drainage area consists of low-lying coastal plains and includes about two-thirds of Carteret County and
                 a portion of eastern Pamlico County. The Core-Bogus drainage basin is relatively small, has no major rivers
                 feeding into it, and encompasses over 260,000 acres of water. Salt water flows into the sounds through
                 Bogus, Beaufort, and Drum Inlets, and the overall salinity of both Core and Bogus Sounds is higher than that
                 of either Albemarle or Pamlico Sound. Bogus and Core Sounds provide a valuable resource in terms of
                 spawning grounds, nursery areas, submerged aquatic vegetation, and shellfish habitat. Since these two
                 bodies of water influence, and are influenced by, the processes that occur in Pamlico Sound, they are
                 included within the Albemade-Pamlico Study region. While the Bogus and Core Sound drainage area is in
                 DEM's White Oak River Basin, approximately half of this area is in the APES region.

                 The basin has a permanent population of almost 45,000 and is one of the most densely populated basins
                 in the APES region. Bogus Banks, which separates Bogus Sound f rom the Atlantic Ocean, accommodates
                 a large annual influx of seasonal visitors while Core Banks, located between Core Sound and the Atlantic
                 Ocean, is a National Seashore. Typical of most of the basins in the APES region, a third of the Coreftgue
                 Basin is forested. However, the basin has the lowest percentage of farmland in the APES region, wit only
                 17% of its area used for agriculture. A large proportion of the basin is within the Croatan National Forest and
                 about 4% of the land is in military use. With a total of 78 madnas, this basin has significantly more madnas
                 than any other basin in the region.


                 ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS


                 WATER QUALiTY

                                                     Neuse River Drainage Basin

                 Compared to the other river basins in the Albemarle-Pamlico region, the impairment of water uses in the
                 Neuse basin aff ects less area, but the basin is affected by more severe localized problems. Water use
                 impairment affects 30% of the freshwater stream miles and 9% of the estuadne area. In the freshwater
                 portion, the most widespread causes of impairment are high levels of sediment and low dissolved oxygen..
                 In the estuadne area, the most widespread causes of impairment are high levels of chlorophyll a, reflecting
                 algal growth, and high levels of nutrient runoff from both urban areas and agriculture.

                 Due to eutrophication in the estuarine area, the lower Neuse River Basin was classified as nutrient sensitive
                 waters (NSW) in 1988. The upper Neuse River basin above Falls Lake has been classified NSW since 1983.
                 In eutrophic water bodies, such as the lower Neuse River, frequent algal blooms reduce available dissolved
                 oxygen and result in fish kills and general environmental stress for aquatic organisms. The waters between
                 Minnesoft Beach and New Bern are highly use impaired as a result of frequent algal blooms. Such symptoms
                 of eutrophication in the Neuse estuary have resulted in special concern for nutrient loadings in the basin.


                                                                        A29











                    REGIONAL SUMMARIES


                    Closures of shellfish harvesting areas are another consequence of impairment in the estuarine portion of the
                    basin. Closures result when concentrations of fecal coliform indicate a possible health hazard for human
                    consumption. This has resulted in the closure of shellf ish waters in the lower Neuse estuary. Since 1980,
                    substantial increases in the acreage of shellfish closures occurred in the South River and Oriental areas.
                    Local concentrations of toxic substances, particularly metals and dioxin, have been identified at several sites
                    in the Neuse basin. Samples of water, sediments, and fish tissues have indicated areas of concern for
                    impacts on aquatic life and human health. Compared to the other major river basins of the APES region,
                    toxic concentrations of metals in the water column were highest in the Neuse, particularly in the upper portion
                    of the basin in Durham and Wake counties. Concentrations of metals in sediments are of particular concern
                    in the estuarine portion of the Neuse basin in the Now Bem-Bridgeton, Slocum Creek, Lawson Creek-Trent
                    River, and Oriental Harbor areas. Fish tissues sampled at 13 sites had concentrations of metals and other
                    substances at levels of concern for human health. The area of greatest concern is Slocum Creek.
                    Concentrations of metals in fish tissues were of particular concern for wildlife along Contentnea Creek at
                    Wilson and along the Neuse River at New Bern and Kinston. Dioxin concentrations that may be of concern
                    for human health and for wildlife were found in the Neuse near the Weyerhauser facility at New Bern. The
                    Weyerhauser plant has since changed its bleaching process in an effort to minimize this source of dioxin.
                    Contamination levels for dioxin in the Neuse were generally lower than in the Chowan, Roanoke, and
                    Albemarle basins.

                    Toxic substances enter the basin through both point and nonpoint sources. The point sources in the APES
                    region have been evaluated for their potential to cause toxicity. There are at least 21 dischargers in the
                    Neuse basin that contribute loadings of four metals: zinc, copper, lead, and chromium. Eleven dischargers
                    in the Neuse basin may contribute to instrearn water quality concentrations of toxics that exceed acceptable
                    levels during low flow conditions. Seven dischargers in the basin have been identified that may potentially
                    exceed such levels under average flow conditions. These dischargers are in Orange, Durham, Wake, and
                    Johnston counties. Another cause of concern for the water quality of the basin it the occurrence of fish and
                    shellfish diseases and kills. Between late 1986 and late 1989,41 fish kills were reported in the Neuse basin.
                    About two-thirds of these kills occurred in the upper hag of the river basin. Low dissolved oxygen, disease,
                    and suspended sediments were suspected of causing the kills. Another possible cause of fish kills in the
                    Neuse basin is a toxic dinoflagellate recently discovered in the Albemade-Pamlico region. This organism is
                    thought to have been responsible for at least 25% of the fish kills in the Neuse basin over the last two years.
                    The relationship of this organism's behavior to phosphate levels is now under investigation.
                    The largest source of nonpoint source pollution in the ba@in is agriculture. Several urban areas in the basin
                    provide another source of runoff. These areas include Durham, Raleigh, Smithfield, Wilson, Goldsboro,
                    Kinston, New Bem, and Havelock. In urban areas, there is a high potential for stormwater to move rapidly
                    into streams and rivers without adequate filtration. Waste disposal sites are another source of polluted
                    runoff. The Neuse basin has over 70 solid and hazardous waste sites, most of which are concentrated in
                    the upper basin counties. There are almost 400 permits for point source discharges in the Neuse basin.





                                                                           A30











                                                                                                          REGIONAL SUM94RIES


                Recommended Management Actions

                DEM has already developed a basinwide plan for the Neuse River. Objectives of the plan include: 1)
                reducing springtime nitrogen inputs by 30%; 2) reducing annual phosphorus inputs by 50%; and 3) restricting
                total phosphorus levels in wastewater treatment plant discharges. The Falls Lake portion of the river basin
                is also considered nutrient sensitive and limits on phosphorus inputs have been set. With agriculture as the
                dominant land use in the basin, increased cost share funding for agricultural best management practices
                (BMPs) will be critical for the Neuse. Because of the high level of urban development in this basin, funding
                for nonagricultural BMP cost sharing will also be of critical importance. The additional controls of nonpoint
                source water pollution would reduce loadings of nutrients and toxics to the Neuse and reduce shellfish
                closures in the estuarine region of the basin, in addition to other benefits. In the South River area, where
                shellfish closures are of particular concern, nonpoint source controls would be targeted to reduce bacterial
                contamination. Enforcement of water quality standards would also help to ensure compliance with water
                quality standards.

                The most important components of efforts to control toxic contamination in the Neuse basin include the
                continued assessment of the toxicity of sediments, fish tissues, and ambient water quality, especially in areas
                which are known to have elevated levels of toxicants. The Division of Environmental Management would
                evaluate potential sources of contamination using geographic information systems information on point source
                dischargers, nonpoint sources, and ambient water quality data. The plan would also expand basinwide goals
                for wetlands protection that recognize the importance of wetlands to the basinwide hydrology and water
                quality.

                                          Core Souncfflogue Sound Drainage Basin

                Compared to the other drainage basins in the APES region, the waters of the Core-Bogue Sound drainage
                basin are clean and maintain relatively healthy estuarine habitats. The waters of Core Sound and portions
                of Bogue Sound have been designated as uOutstanding Resource Waters' because of exceptional water
                quality and recreational value. Overall, only about 7.6% of. the waters of the Core-Bogue region are
                considered impaired. Nearly all of the water use impairment is attributed to bacterial (fecal coliform)
                contamination, with a small area of metal contamination in the Newport River. There are,'however, some
                significant localized problems and indicators of water quality concerns in the basin. For instance, 25% of the
                waters of the Newport River only partially support their uses. From 1980 to 1990, closures of shellfish
                harvesting beds in the region increased by .54% to over 4000 acres. The region is also subject to frequent
                temporary shellfish closures following periods of heavy rainfall.

                The major sources of impairment are pollution coming from urban and agricultural runoff, defective septic
                tanks, marinas, a state port, and waste water treatment plants. Nonpoint source pollution is responsible for
                approximately 80% of the   area!s impaired water quality. A great portion of this nonpoint source runoff comes
                -from urban development where there is a high potential for stormwater to move rapidly into estuaries and
                sounds without adequate filtration. Urbanized areas in the region include Morehead City,. Beaufort, and
                several areas of development along Bogue Banks from Atlantic Beach to Emerald Isle. Thereare a few



                                                                      A31








                 -REGOYAL SUMMARIES                                          - -- ------ ----                      -------

                 incorporated areas in the eastern part of Car teret County which are not highly urbanized but may have a level
                 of residential development and supporting services that presents a potential nonpoint source pollution
                 problem. With respect to toxic contamination, the Core and Bogue Sound area is considered one of the least
                 polluted basins in the APES region. No facility was identified as contributing metals directly to the basin and
                 no toxic contamination at levels of concern was found. Nonpoint sources, however, may become a large
                 source of toxic pollutants. Further sampling is needed to document the lack of contamination. The heavy
                 concentration of marinas in this area is another source of possible pollution. Marinas are particularly
                 concentrated near Harkers Island, Atlantic, and Davis in Core Sound and near Beaufort, Morehead City,
                 Atlantic Beach, Cates Creek, Pine Knoll Shores, and Salter Path in Bogue Sound. No solid waste disposal,
                 hazardous waste, or Superfund sites are located in the basin.

                 Recommended Management Actions

                 Basinwide management plans will be completed by 1999 in which better nonpoint source pollution control will
                 be needed to address water quality issues in the Core-Bogue area. A nonpoint source cost share program
                 to support non-agricultural as well as agricultural best management practices would contribute to improved
                 water quality. Stormwater runoff controls would be enhanced by strengthening existing regulations by 1995.
                 More comprehensive planning for marinas, through the implementation of an inter-agency state policy that
                 addresses marina siting and best management practices, would help to address the potential for cumulative
                 water quality impacts. Coordinated permitting and public education efforts would be expanded.


                 VITAL HABITATS

                                                      Nouse River Drainage Basin

                 The Neuse River Basin includes a variety of important natural areas including habitat     for rare species, rare
                 natural communities, and high quality examples of other natural communities. Wetlands habitats throughout
                 the basin provide water quality protection, wildlife habitat, flood control, and other important functions. The
                 estuarine waters include approximately 2,750 acres of primary nursery areas and 1,250 acres of secondary
                 nursery areas which are essential to the continued production of coastal fisheries. The rivers and streams
                 of the basin provide spawning areas for anadromous fish, such as shad and herring which are saltwater
                 species that migrate up rivers to spawn in fresh water. Many habitats are protected through government
                 holdings'in parks and refuges. State parks encompass 48,000 acres, or 1.4% of the basin. The Wildlife
                 Resources Commission holds approximately 110,000 acres, or 3.2% of the basin, in gamelands. There are
                 no National Wildlife Refuges in the basin, but almost 58,000 acres (1.7%) of the basin is National Forest.

                 Recommended Management Actions

                 It is important to protect many land areas of the region as well for the purpose of safeguarding rare species,
                 rare or representative natural communities, nearby fisheries habitat, and other   *wildlife needs. Priority areas
                 in the Neuse basin have been identified for the-targeting of voluntary acquisition and conservation incentives.


                                                                        A32











                                                                                                             REGXN& SUMMARIES


                 These priority areas include: 90 acres of basic mesic forest, 70 acres of coastal plain mad outcrop, 100 acres
                 of nonriven"ne wet hardwood forest,'100 acres of coastal fringe evergreen forest, 5 acres of diabase glade,
                 30 acres of upland depression swamp forest, and 35 acres of granitic f latrock. Other vital habitats of special
                 concern in the Neuse area are spawning areas for anadromous fish. Currently, the APES program is working
                 to remove two dams which obstruct the migration of anadromous fish to their spawning grounds on the
                 Neuse. The use of geographic information systems (GIS) would allow agencies and local governments to
                 much more efficiently organize, analyze, and access the information needed to plan runoff controls in the
                 Neuse Basin. This application of GIS will be especially important to efforts in the South River area, where
                 reductions in nonpoint source pollution Will help maintain and enhance shellfish populations. The use of this
                 technology will help agencies provide the greatest level of environmental benefits per tax dollar spent.

                                            Core SounclABogue Sound Drainage Basin

                 The Core and Bogue Sound drainage basin is home to a great variety of natural areas, including rare natural
                 communities and rare species habitats. The Core-Bogue area is the home, as well as an important migratory
                 stopover, for several endangered birds including bald eagles, peregrine falcons and the red-oockaded
                 woodpecker. Alligators, which are threatened in North Carolina, inhabit wetland areas, while endangered sea
                 turtles make their nests on area beaches. Important game animals such as duck and deer range throughout
                 the region. Wetlands are especially important, providing wildlife habitat and flood control, while contributing
                 considerably to water quality maintenance. Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) is also abundant in this
                 area providing the sole habitat for the bay scallop in North Carolina. SAV is also an important habitat and
                 nursery area for a variety of other f ishery species. Some Vital habitats in the area are protected through the
                 large amount of government holdings in parks and forest lands. Over 10% of the basin is state gamelands,
                 and another 10% is national forest. Federal seashore land covers 7% of the basin, and federal wildlife refuge
                 lands cover about 6%. State parks cover less than 1% of the basin.

                 Recommended Management Actions

                 It is important to protect many land areas of the region as well for the purpose of safeguarding rare species,
                 rare or representative natural communities, protecting nearby fisheries habitat, and for other wildlife protection
                 needs. Programs that expand the advanced identification and evaluation of wetlands on a regional basis
                 would be undertaken to preserve valuable habitats. Priority areas in the Core-Bogue region have been
                 identified for the targeting of voluntary acquisition and conservation incentives. These vital habitat areas
                 include: 242 acres of maritime forests, 65 acres of small depression ponds, and 50 acres of coastal fringe
                 sandhills. The protection of submerged aquatic vegetation is especially important to assuring a viable
                 f isheries industry as well as a healthy marine environment. Restoration of submerged aquatic vegetation and
                 oyster beds is especially important for enhancing shellfish populations in the region. This measure would be
                 complemented by the designation of vital f isheries; habitats and the strengthening of regulatory programs by
                 1995. The use of geographic information systems (GIS) would allow agencies and local governments to
                 easily share and update information which it critical to the management of important resources in the Core-
                 Bogue area such as shellfish beds, submerged aquatic vegetation, and rare species habitat. Maps of these



                                                                        A33











                 REGOVAL SUM94 RIES


                 resources on GIS, in conjunction with other map layers, such as land uses and development perrnits, would
                 allow assessment of water quality concerns.


                 FISHERIES
                                                     Neuse River Drainage Basin

                 Recreational and commercial fishing are important economic activities in the estuarine and fresh         water
                 portions of the basin. Important fisheries include flounder, catfish, bass, blue crabs and oysters. Commercial
                 fishing in the Neuse basin is conducted with long haul seines, shrimp trawls, crab trawls, crab pots, oyster
                 dredging, drift gill nets, bait fish pound nets, and eel pots.

                 Recommended Management Actions

                 Fisheries management plans would address declines and include recovery objectives for severely depleted
                 stocks. In addition, best fishing practices (BFP) that reduce bycatch and impacts on fisheries habitat will be
                 evaluated along with the implementation of a cost share program to encourage use of BFPs.

                                            Core Soun&Bogue Sound Drainage Basin

                 Core and Bogue Sounds are very important estuarine fishing areas for both recreational and commercial
                 fishermen. Commercial fishing is an important component of the economy in this area, and commercial
                 fishermen harvest a wide variety of fish with many diff erent gear types. Commercial fishing practices in the
                 sounds include pound nets, long haul seines, shrimp and crab trawls, crab pots, sink gill nets, and channel
                 nets. Shellfish are taken by tonging, raking, bull raking, hand harvesting, dredging, and clam kicking. The
                 region is also a popular destination for recreational fishing, providing another important component of the
                 regional economy.

                 The waters of Core and Bogue Sounds are particularly important for their shellfish beds. Almost all of the
                 state's bay scallops and many of its hard clams. and oysters are *harvested here using both hand and
                 mechanical means. The Bogue and Core Sound area has an abundance of vital fisheries habitats. Next to
                 the Pamlico Sound Basin, the Coreftgue Basin possesses more fish nursery areas than any other basin
                 in the APES region. Nursery areas in Core and Bogue Sounds and their tributaries comprise the greatest
                 percentage of the basin. The importance of commercial and recreational fisheries in the region emphasizes
                 the need for coordinated and comprehensive fisheries management planning. The modification of the existing
                 marine fisheries license structure would improve data collection and generate increased revenues for
                 improved fisheries management. The reduction of bycatch attained with bycatch reducing gear and the best
                 fishing practices cost share program would also help to protect and enhance the region's fisheries.






                                                                       A34



I
I
I
I -                            ------
I
I      PUBLIC COMMENT ond
I      PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
I
I
I
I
                 APPENDIX B
I
I
I







.4






1











                PUBLC COMMOVT

                    SUMMARY OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
                           DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CCMP



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


                The goal of public involvement within the Albemade-Pamlico Estuadne Study (APES) was to establish the
                public consensus necessary to ensure long-term support for, and implementation of, the Comprehensive
                Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP). Consensus signifies substantive agreement among four
                component groups: elected officials, environmental managers, scientists and the public. Those groups had
                to concur on what was technically well-founded, fair, feasible and most likely to succeed within the
                management strategies descdbed in the CCMP. Consensus also implies the willingness of participants to
                work together and to compromise to achieve mutual goals.

                Informinglinvolving the public and secudng their concurrence for support of a program as vaded and
                widespread as the APES was no small undertaking. Public participation, as defined and demonstrated within
                the APES, meant involving citizens to all practicable levels in the decision-making process. To achieve this,
                and it was achieved to an unprecedented degree, required several important elements. Paramount among
                them was the need for the dissemination of timely and relevant information pertaining to the Management
                Conference and the issues and needs of the region. In order to accomplish this a Public Involvement Off ice
                was established in the region in November, 1987 and a Public Involvement Coordinator was hired.

                The Public Involvement Coordinator, in concert with the Citizens Advisory Committees (A-CAC and P-CAC),
                created a Public Involvement Plan. The Plan recognized the need for a comprehensive mailing list, a slide
                show, newsletter, printed and electronically transmitted information pieces, and public meetings. Because
                the Public Involvement staff consisted of the Public Involvement Coordinator only, a 'call for proposals" was
                issued for assistance in attaining the Plan's objectives.

                The matedals and activities produced for and by APES targeted a comprehensive array of users. Included
                in those products were print pieces entitled: A Citizens's Guide to Coastal Water Resource Management;
                Where the Rivers Meet the Sea; A Guide to Estuades; A Bluepdnt for Action; Fact Sheets (on the Albemade,,
                Pamlico and Virginia portions of the Study); Environmental Management Program for the Southeastern
                Virginia Ponion of the APES Watershed; Nature's Caretakers; and a non-technicalHandbook on Water Quality
                and Non-point Source Pollution.

                Other print pieces produced included: posters emphasizing the physical aspects of estuarine areas and the
                human impact on them; a series of bumper stickers; a companion piece to the T.V. public service
                announcement (PSA) campaign entitled Yes,in Your Back Yard; and the synopses of ten technical research
                projects, the selection of which were determined by the Citizens Advisory Committees.





                                                                     B2











                                                                                                                 PUBLE COMMENT


                 Electronically transmitted pieces for radio and T.V. included: (Radio) a f ive-part series about the sounds which
                 was aired on National Public Radio; eight, PSAs consisting of interviews with area environmental experts
                 which aired on radio stations around the APES region; six radio programs which were developed and aired
                 on ten radio stations in North Carolina and Virginia, that stressed estuarine health and good stewardship.
                 Issues which were the focus of the shows included point and non-point sources of pollution, wetlands, waste
                 treatment, human impacts, economics, public participation, fisheries, and fish diseases. These were live
                 interactive radio broadc asts with public phone-in capabilities.

                 Another radio PSA campaign consisted of eight programs (25 broadcasts) on the state syndicated radio
                 program Weekdays with Barbara King. The series consisted of taped interviews and suggestions for public
                 actions to help preserve the estuarine system.

                 Additionally, a heavy penetration into T.V. was undertaken. Those efforts consisted of four PSAs dealing
                 with area environmental issues; two campaigns entitled State of the Estuary (five spots) and Yes, In Your
                 Back Yard (five spots) which were distributed to every T.V. market in North Carolina; -and an intense
                 campaign entitled Inside North Carolina which consisted of five T.V. shows, of one hours duration each, that
                 highlighted the various sections contained in the CCMP. These shows were broadcast live over the cable
                 network in North Carolina and were received in over 10,000 households. Phone-in capabilities were provided
                 to the public and a panel of environmental experts involved with the Management Conference fielded
                 questions by the viewers calling-in. And finally, a broadcast on the local ABC affiliate entitled Newsleader
                 Sunday which featured a point, counterpoint format. Participating were the APES Program Director and a
                 representative of the economic development community.

                 Workshops and public meetings were an important pan of the APES public participation effort. Extending
                 from the designation ceremony establishing APES as the first NEP in November, 1987, to the signing
                 ceremony formally accepting the APES CCMP into implementation, the public has been closely and
                 continually involved. In addition to the two mentioned, other examples of meetings and activities include: the
                 Institutional Enhancement, Public Involvement, and Information Exchange which encouraged and facilitated
                 public participation, information exchanges and technical evaluations in southeastern Virginia; a media tour
                 for regional and local reporters (newspaper, T.V. and radio); APES Annual Meetings; a workshop on Water
                 Quality and Non-point Source Pollution; a public forum on management needs (series of three held around
                 the region) where citizens voiced their concerns on a variety of environmental issues; two series of
                 user-group meetings to determine their concerns and to elicit their suggestions for management
                 recommendations; and public meetings devoted to receiving public comment on the draft versions of the
                 CCMP.

                 Other APES efforts targeted at public involvement and education included the creation of a slide show which
                 focused on the watersheds of the Albemarle and Pamlico sounds (chronicling the path of water from the
                 mountains of North Carolina to the sounds), a video which dealt with the issues of pollution, fisheries and
                 waterfowl migration, and the APES newsletter, The Albamade-Pamlico Advocate, circ. 16,000@ with quarterly
                 publication.




                                                                         B3











                  PUBLIC COMMOT


                  The establishment of permanent exhibits at two of the state's three aquaria was another APES educational
                  contribution. They are entitled, Striped Bass and Precious Waters and depict, through the use of graphics,
                  interactive computers and large aquaria, the life history of striped bass and an appreciation and awareness
                  of the region's fragile coastal environment, respectively.

                  Completing the array of APES public involvement and educational activities were the workshops devoted to
                  teacher environmental education and visits/presentations to public officials.

                  Teacher workshops focused on providing teachers with an understanding of the aquatic environment and its
                  management, and the ability/opportunity to develop creative ways of integrating those concepts into their
                  curTicula.

                  Visits/presentations to area public officials were aimed at apprising them of the status of the Management
                  Conference, impending recommendations of the CCM P, answering their questions, quelling misinformation,
                  eliciting their input, and assuring them that the CCMP was not adding "another layer of bureaucracy' to their
                  already overly burdened compliance with regulations. The APES region consists of the 36 most northeastern
                  counties in North Carolina and 16 of the most southeastern counties in Virginia. Included in this area are
                  approximately 250 municipalities and unincorporated communities. Personal visitations were made to
                  135-150 of those locations.

                  The broad goal of public involvement, to establish public consensus, suggested several specific objectives,
                  namely:

                           -to provide adequate, timely information about the sounds, the problems and opportunities North
                           Carolina faces in managing them, and progress being made in the AJbemade-Pamlico Estuarine
                           Study;

                           -to expand educational programs to inform the public, (youth and adult populations) about the values
                           of the Albemarle-Pamlico system and the importance of good management/stewardship;

                           -to ensure that the interested public had ample opportunity to participate in the policy.;making process.
                           related to the sounds, especially the development of the CCMP; and

                           -to initiate a process for involving local elected officials in the APES program

                  The public has been actively involved in all phases of the Comprehensive Conservation and Management
                  Plan (CCMP) development. Participation by members of the Management Conference, and most especially
                  the two Citizens Advisory Committees (A-CAC, P-CAC), local governments, fisheries auxiliaries, League of
                  Women Voters, environmental organization members, general citizenry, and others provided input at every
                  stage of development. (See Public Comment Summary).





                                                                            B4











                                                                                                                PUBLC COMMOVT


                 Included in APES outreach were numerous presentations to civictcommunity groups and school children.
                 Extensive participation in environmental field days in the region, APES' presence at festivals and other
                 outdoor activities, coordination and presentation of several in-service teacher training workshops and a heavy
                 media presence that included the print and electronic media coverage described earlier, were all a pan of
                 outreach/involvement activities.

                 In addition to the approximately twenty- five APES funded public participation projects a citizens'water quality
                 monitoring program (including more than 100 volunteers and 65 collection sites) and an environmental
                 education day-camp for middle school aged students, complemented staff public participation efforts.

                 The most specific CCMP input and public comment was received during the numerous presentations lo local
                 governments (approximately 135-150 on both the county and municipal level); at the two series of
                 Guser-group" workshops with facilitated leadership; and at the three rounds (consisting of at least four
                 locations each) of public hearings held in September, 1992, and January and October, 1993. Phoned-in and
                 written comments were also received at the program offices.

                 As a first step toward developing the CCMP, the Management Conference committees (the Policy, Technical
                 and Citizen committees) produced a list of suggested management actions they felt should be included in
                 the CCMP. Following that, in the winter of 1992, the first series of Ouser-group" workshops was held to gather
                 input from those that might be affected by the suggested actions. Dischargers, developers, fishermen, local
                 officials, environmentalists, agricultural and silvicukural representatives and others were invited and
                 homogeneously grouped, to discuss which actions they could support, which they perceived as controversial,
                 and other actions they deemed important, but which might not have been listed. Feedback from these
                 workshops formed the foundation of the first CCMP draft which was presented to the public in September,
                 1992.

                 A second CCM P draft was developed based upon comments received from the first         round of public hearings
                 and in January, 1993 it was released for public comment.

                 In late June and early July, 1993 the second series of six "user-group' workshops was held around the study
                 area to elicit response to an internal CCMP third draft and to gather input preparatory to producing the third
                 public draft. This time, however, the participants were grouped heterogeneously for the purposes of identifying
                 potential areas of conflict among them and to promote the consensus needed to drive development and
                 ownership of the CCMP.

                 Attendance at each of the six workshops consisted of approximately 15 participants which again, represented
                 a variety of interests. Included in the mix were representatives from agriculture, economic development,
                 fishing communities, local government, environmental organizations, industry, and others. While not every
                 meeting had participants from every group, the overall participation by these interested parties was well
                 represented.





                                                                        65











                PUBVC COMMENT


                Attendees were asked to offer general comment on the organization and content of the draft CCMP which
                had been distributed to them. at an earlier date - They then were asked to offer comment on the individual
                plans contained in the draft, and finally to rate their overall reaction to the plan and specific management
                action priorities. These recommendations were entertained and incorporated in the third public draft.

                In addition to the "user-group' workshops, the third round in the series of public hearings was held in October
                of 1993 to obtain comment on the third public draft. Held at appropriate locations within the study area, each
                of the meetings was attended, on average, by approximately eighty-five persons.

                All public comments are summarized in this document. Each draft of the CCMP is discussed separately so
                that the reader may understand how different each version was and how much public comment influenced
                these changes.


































                                                                       B6











                                                                                                              PUBM COMMOVT

                         SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENT
                           DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CCMP



               The development of a Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) for the estuarine system
               of North Carolina has been a highly public process from its inception, beginning with a kickoff meeting in 1987
               which was attended by over 500 people. That commitment to widespread involvement continued through the
               course of the Study. Agencies at all levels of government, citizens and members of organized interest groups
               participated throughout.

               The goal of the public involvement campaign has been to increase local government and public understanding
               of the extent and causes of the region's environmental problems, thereby building consensus for ways to
               address those problems (Giordano 1989). This public involvement goal has dictated the structure and tone
               of the CCMP throughout its development.

               The publ ic involvement effort was heightened as production of the CCMP began in 1992. as a result of
               concern about insufficient involvement by local governments, staff was added to contact each county in the
               region. Local government liaisons provided information on the APES program and responded to concerns
               and comments from local governments.

               North Carolina's APES program has actively involved the public. It has been guided by a Management
               Conference, composed of 95 members who are divided into four committees: a Policy Committee, a
               Technical Committee, an Albemarle Citizens Advisory Committee, and a Pamlico Citizens Advisory
               Committee. The members of these committees represent government agencies, university researchers, and
               the public. Citizens represent a variety of interests: environmental groups, agriculture, forestry, industry,
               fishermen, and local elected officials.

               The two Citizen Advisory Committees provided input to the Study from various interests, and over $1 million
               was awarded to public participation projects during APES' research phase (1988-92). Three public hearings
               and over 100 meetings involving various sectors of the public were held. Staff in the Department of
               Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR) offices in Raleigh and Washington served as contacts
               for the public.










                                                                      87










                PUBW COMMOVT
                                                                                                               ------ -----


                                                    PREPARING THE CCUP

                                      The CCMP has gone through three full public drafts.

                As a first step toward developing the CCMP, the Management Conference committees (the Policy, Technical
                and Citizen committees) produced a list of suggested management actions they felt should be included in
                the CCMP. Following that, a series of "user group' workshops was held to got input from groups that might
                be affected by the suggested actions. Dischargers, developers, fishermen, local officials, environmentalists,
                farmers and others were invited to discuss which actions they could support, which they perceived as
                controversial, and other actions they deemed important, but that had not been listed. (Armingeon 1992)
                Feedback from these workshops formed the foundation of the first draft.

                That draft was delivered to the Management Conference in June of 1992. Upon review by the Management
                Conference committees, it was decided that major changes were needed to the document before it went out
                for a general public review. Those changes were made during the Summer of 1992. The Plan went for its
                first public review in September of 1992. Comments received during that period were incorporated into a
                second draft which went out for review in January of 1993.

                Originally it was anticipated that the document would be completed following this review, but the intensity of
                reaction to the Plan prompted the Management Conference to approve a third draft and review. Based on
                public comments, an internal third draft was produced in the Spring of 1993 and reviewed in another series
                of *user group" workshops in June. Changes based on those workshops were then incorporated into a third
                public draft, which went out for review in October of 1993. Final changes were made over the next month
                and the Study's Policy Committee approved the Plan for delivery to the Governor and the EPA Administrator
                on November 30,1993.

                Throughout the entire drafting process, written and phoned-in comments were received and considered in
                subsequent drafts. All public review periods were followed by a Management Conference meeting to discuss
                public comment and appropriate recommendations. Management Conference hearings were always open
                to the public.

                All public comments are summarized in this document. Each draft is discussed separately so the reader may
                understand how different each draft was and how much public comment influenced these changes.


                                            SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENT:
                                           FIRST PUBLIC DRAFT, SEPTEMBER 1992

                Pvbfic heafings were held in New Bem, Rocky Mount, Elizabeth City, and Franklin, VA.

                Extensive public comment was received on this draft regarding its style and readability. Overwhelmingly in
                public hearings, individuals described the CCMP as too complicated and technical and diff icult for the average
                citizen to read and understand. A list of main issues follows:



                                                                       B8











                                                                                                  PUBLIC COMMENT


              GENERAL COMMENTS
                             Complex and bureaucratic, too technical
                             Focuses excessively on regulation and mandates
                             Use incentives, technical assistance and compensation (take advantage of programs
                             such as the Tar-Pamlico Basin Association's pollution trading program)
                             Prioritize problems and solutions to better focus implementation
                             Set clearer and better-defined goals
                             Develop more actions involving Virginia

              WATER QUALITY PLAN
                             Eliminate mandatory buffers
                             Expand mandatory buffer zone
                             No need for notice of intent to harvest forested areas
                             Recommend stronger enforcement of water quality standards (e.g., a comprehensive,
                             enforceable marinas policy)

              VITAL TERRESTRIAL AREAS AND WETLANDS ACTION PLAN
                             Ensure that land acquisition is a voluntary program
                             Don't limit amount of lands to be acquired
                             Reimburse counties for loss to tax base if land acquired
                             Statewide wetlands policy unnecessary -- federal policy exists
                             Define protective designations for SAV beds

              HUMAN ENVIRONMENT PLAN
                             Oppose mandatory land and water use planning
                             Need to recognize vital role that farmers play in human environment as food providers
                             Use of Geographic Information Systems is cost prohibitive for municipalities to fund on
                             their own


              PUBLIC ACTION AND INVOLVEMENT PLAN
                             Acknowledge volunteer programs

              FISHERIES ACTION PLAN
                 8           No written comment


              IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
                             Too many DEHNR representatives
                             Not enough local government representation
                             Not enough citizen representation
                             People involved with Management Conference should be included in post-APES
                             structure
                             Ensure ongoing documentation of the progress of implementation


                                                               B9











                PURX COMMBVT


                RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON FIRST DRAFT


                GENERAL
                Throughout development of the second draft, any detail-oriented comments on the first draft were usually
                integrated into the text. Changes to wording or definition of technical terms submitted by experts replaced
                existing language. Other technical comments, such as those which questioned the validity of statistical
                figures, graphs or statements, were re-confirmed by the staff and kept in the text K verifiable. Attention to
                an individual's specific comments occurred at every stage of the process. The following reviews responses
                to general public comment:

                To address the complexity of the document, management actions were defined more clearly in the second
                draft. The structure of the text was modified to be more explanatory. Some technical background information
                was taken out and placed in an appendix. Many of the regulatory recommendations were modified to be
                more *incentive-based. Some management actions were redrafted to accommodate concerns of user groups
                who presented substantive rebuttal. For example, an action requiring logging operators to file a notice of
                intent to harvest was removed. An action calling for mandatory land use planning was transformed into
                incentives for county planners to integrate environmental planning into economic development plans, and
                providing grant funding for them to do so.

                WATER QUALITY PLAN
                In the Water Quality Plan, the most controversial hem was the recommendation for mandatory 20-foot
                vegetative buffer strips along all estuarine/river shorelines. The buffer strips had been recommended as a
                best management practice (BMP) that would cost-effectively control nutrient and sediment pollution in the
                region's waters. This action was both supported and opposed. Many people who desired strong controls
                for water quality supported the buffers but cited research demonstrating that buffers of at least 50 feet were
                needed to ensure adequate protection. Others were concerned that mandatory buffers would limit the use
                of their land. They considered the action a taking of property and would therefore require compensation.
                The 20-foot buffer strips remained in the Plan at this stage.

                In addressing other water quality concerns, most mandatory programs were modified to encourage resource
                managers to develop interagency policies or better integrate best management practices.

                VITA TERRESTRIAL AREAS AND WETLANDS ACTION PLAN
                Many of the suggestions given for this section were taken into consideration. Responses to public comment
                took the form of changes to wording or structure of the document. Many clarifications to the actions were
                added to dispel fears of hidden agendas.

                IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
                Instead of just departmental representatives, the new implementation structure included a "Coordinating
                Council" which had broader representation and was intended to work in tandem with three other advisory
                councils -- a Local Government Advisory Council, a Citizen's Advisory Council and Technical Advisory
                Council. Each advisory council would have representation on the Coordinating Council.



                                                                     B10











                                                                                                                   PUBLIC COMMOVT


                                              SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENT.-
                                                   SECOND PUBLIC DRAFT, JANUARY 1993

                                 Public hearings were held in Morehead City, Greenville, Manteo, and Raleigh.

                  Many comments indicated that the second draft appeared little improved f rorn the first. Although some of the
                  stronger, more regulatory actions were removed, the predominance of comments received indicated that the
                  document still focused too much on new regulation. County govemments in particular voiced their concerns
                  over this and the lack of attention to economic impacts in the document. Environmental groups asked again
                  for more clarity in the type of actions the CCMP was recommending. Many individuals continued to describe
                  the Plan as too technical and hard to read. They said it was difficult to determine the main goals and
                  objectives of the study. As noted earlier, the intensity of reaction to the Plan at this stage led the Management
                  Conference to call for a third draft and public review rather than going to a final version from this point.

                  GENERAL
                                   Many comments from I st draft were not adequately addressed
                                   Falls short of expectations
                                   Reduce regulation and controls (minimize state influence on land use planning), enforce
                                   existing laws better
                                   Support for greater focus on nonpoint source pollution control
                                   Strongly suggest recommending more stringent nonpoint source pollution controls
                                   Contains no thorough cost-benefit analysis or assessment of impacts on tax base and
                                   jobs
                                   No specific requirements for waste minimization
                                   Plan initially flawed because Management Conference committees aren't diverse enough
                                   Streamline bureaucracies and supporttacknowledge successful programs
                                   Balance environmental protection with human activities
                                   Develop basin action plans with specific goals, priorities and actions
                                   Expand outreach efforts to make contents of the CCMP clear
                                   Must prioritize problems and solutions
                                   Make monitoring program more scientifically sound (Quality Assurance/Qu'alfty Control,
                                   include air deposition)
                                   Reference other APES research better
                                   Improve structure: shorter in length, better graphics, references and citations
                                   Economic considerations: caution about long-term costs to the public, respond to value of
                                   tourist industry, don't be anti-growth (balance land development), costs should be shared
                                   across watershed, assess costs of compliance
                                   Add finance section to each action


                  WATER QUALITY PLAN
                                   Support buffer strips; increase them to 50 feet
                                   Support education for logging industry instead of requiring notice of intent to harvest


                                                                         B11












              PUBM COMMENT
                  - ---- -----               - - ----- - -- - - -------------


                              Need better logging BMPs
                              Create enforcement program for nonpoint source pollution, expand controls
                              Evaluate effectiveness of agricultural cost share program
                              Continue to investigate causes of fish & shellfish kills & disease

              VITAL TERRESTRIAL AREAS AND WETLANDS ACTION PLAN
                              Revise definitions of wetlands degradation and loss
                              Recognize private property rights, re: compensation for publicly acquired lands
                              Regulation in vital areas more effective than tax incentives
                              include data on Virginia critical natural areas, wetlands & endangered species
                              Develop Memorandum Of Agreement between VA and NC to continue research and
                              cooperate

              FISHERIES PLAN
                              Examine socioeconomic impacts of regulation on fishermen
                              Promote aquaculture as a defined Best Fishing Practice (BFP)
                              Concern that a government-sponsored BFP cost-share program would be inefficient and
                              unfairly administered
                              Support license to sell fish, but differentiate between commercial and recreational
                              Support license to sell only if 50% of income comes from sale of fish
                              Consider prohibiting the use of trawls in the Sounds
                              Include those who make a living fishing in the development of fishery management plans
                              Include baseline catch estimate for bycatch reduction
                              Don't reduce access to fishery
                              Develop a separate education effort for those involved in commercial fishing
                              Modify license structure to allow for control of fishing effort and/or gear where necessary

              HUMAN ENVIRONMENT PLAN
                              Don't duplicate efforts of CAMA
                              Help instill an environmental ethic
                              Oppose mandatory land use planning

              IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
                              Oppose the implementation of anything which does not use existing resources and
                              f unding
                              Coordinating Council as described is unmanageable and still does not have adequate
                              citizen representation
                              Include implementation actions and timelines
                              Needs more local government representation
                              Keep at least 1 staff member to coordinate implementation and keep public informed
                              Retain committee structure
                              Develop regional Advisory Councils
                              Council needs representatives from regulated community


                                                                B12











                                                                                                                  PUBLIC COMMENT


                  REVIEW OF RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMEAff ON THE SECOND DRAF7'

                  GENERAL
                  The third public draft was dramatically restructured from the second due to overwhelming public comment.
                  Several activities were undertaken to bring this about. In addition to public meetings and the receipt of written
                  comment, another series of user group workshops was conducted in the Summer of 1993 to review an
                  internal redrafting of the Plan (Waters 1993). These workshops were very effective in determining the path
                  to consensus, and they helped further push the document toward a simpler and more accessible format.
                  Whereas the first two drafts focused on the vast amount of scientific research supported by the APES
                  program, it was decided that the technical and scientific data could be found in project reports and did not
                  need to be repeated in depth in the Plan itself. Therefore the main section of the CCMP was structured to
                  provide only a basic explanation of what each management action was expected to achieve and what steps
                  would be necessary to implement ft. The third draft also reflected more movement to consensus and
                  compromise in order to broaden public support of ft.

                  The following specific changes were made to the Plan:

                  Monitoring requirements and procedures were included in each management action and were no longer listed
                  as a separate section. A breakdown of estimated program costs of each recommendation was included with
                  each action. Sources of funding to support each action were listed as well. The five sub-plans were renamed
                  and reorganized to enhance understanding and public perception of the issues. Vital Terrestrial Areas and
                  Wetlands Action Plan be   'came the Vital Habitats Plan. This plan recognizes the unique nature of habitat
                  areas without placing an undue emphasis on wetlands management. The Human Environment and Public
                  Education and Involvement Plan were combined into one Stewardship Plan, intended to promote responsible
                  stewardship of our natural resources. Water quality, viewed by most as the highest priority of the CCMP, was
                  placed first among the individual plans.

                  Ultimately, the third draft became more oriented toward incentives and better coordination of existing efforts.
                  Recommendations emphasized best management practices and interagency policies to coordinate common
                  problems.

                  The issue of priorftizing problems and solutions was addressed in the implementation section of the Plan.
                  However, the most significant change the third draft made was to emphasize a basinwide approach to
                  management of water quality and habitat protection. Each major river basin in the APES region is
                  characterized by a unique set of problems. Members of the Management Conference determined that the
                  best way to achieve flexibility (and consensus) was to consider recommended management actions on a
                  basinwide scale. The third public draft included regional summaries of these individual river basins. These
                  summaries describe problems specific to each basin area and suggest how the recommended actions would
                  be applied to the region. Each river basin will go through individual, intensive analyses to determine its own
                  priorities and timetables.





                                                                        B13











                PUBL)C COMMENT
                                                    ----- - ----------- -------------- --- --- ------------------ -------


                WATER QUALITY PLAN
                The requirement to have mandatory buffer strips, the most controversial issue of the CCMP, was removed
                from this draft. Due to the new focus on basinwide management, it was determined by the Management
                Conference that a regionwide standard control would be ineffective. The use of buffer strips still takes high
                priority as a best management practice to control nonpoint source pollution, but it may now be used to
                accommodate varying circumstances.

                The Management Conference also determined that an educational program to control damage from
                silviculture practices was insufficient. The requirement that loggers file a notice of intent to harvest with the
                Division of Forest Resources was reinstated at the recommendation of the Management Conference. The
                Agricultural Cost Share program was evaluated by APES and determined to be both effective and worth
                expanding. Shellfish disease will continue to be investigated.

                VITAL TERRESTRIAL AREAS AND WETLANDS ACTION PLAN
                The section on these habitat areas was greatly reorganized for the third draft. Protecting vital areas was
                promoted with an emphasis on voluntary conservation or management of privately owned lands. Wetlands
                actions were modified and remain consistent with existing programs at a federal and state level. The
                Wetlands Action Plan was combined with the Vital Habitats Plan to reduce concerns about the creation of
                a regulatory structure separate from existing federal and state programs. Information from and cooperation
                with Virginia is integrated into this section.

                FISHERIES PLAN
                The Fisheries Plan was structured to closely mirror recent activities of the Division of Marine Fisheries and
                the Marine Fisheries Commission, which had been in the process of developing new recommendations that
                are feasible and supported by the fishing community, This section encouraged existing authorities to develop
                individual management plans as appropriate for species, taking into consideration biological and
                socioeconomic impacts to the fisheries. Stronger controls (such as the prohibition of inshore trawling) were
                inappropriate at this time due to a lack of sufficient supporting data.

                HUMAN ENVIRONMENT PLAN
                The intention of this section, modif ied as the Stewardship Plan for the third draft, was to prdmote individual
                protection of natural resources. It recognizes that land use planning is a valuable tool for integrating the
                environment into economic development and allows local governments to adopt this strategy --- not through
                mandatory land use planning but by providing funds to enable local governments to develop or update
                environmental planning. The effort is designed to complement CAMA requirements for planning inst          ead of
                creating new ones.

                Two-thirds of the Stewardship Plan is dedicated to promoting an environmental ethic for the protection of the
                sounds through educating the public. This section extends outreach efforts, calls for the establishment of
                environmental education centers, integrates science into school curricula, and illustrates successful volunteer
                and non-profit organizations that serve the region.




                                                                       B14











                                                                                                                 PUBLC COMMENT


                  IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
                  Consensus was perhaps the hardest to reach in this section, primarily due to continuing concerns over the
                  structure of the Coordinating Council. The Coordinating Council as descdbed in the second public draft was
                  reorganized to include Regional Advisory Councils. Regional Advisory Councils would include local
                  government officials and members of other interest groups who would in turn be represented on the
                  Coordinating Council by an individual chosen by the region. The Coordinating Council as descdbed would
                  perform much of the same function as the present Management Conference and would include a small
                  support staff.

                  The management actions in the third draft now descdbed how each action would be implemented by the
                  appropriate parties. The Implementation Plan would then provide consistency and forward progress. The
                  Coordinating Council would be charged to oversee implementation, set pdorities and evaluate success of the
                  actions.



                                                  SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENT:
                                                   THIRD PUBLIC DRAFT, OCTOBER 1993

                                      Hearings were held in Morehead Cfty, Greenville, Raleigh, Edenton,
                                                                and Kill Devil Hills

                  Public responses to the third public draft were much more favorable than to earlier drafts. Some groups who
                  opposed certain sections went on record in support of the Plan as a whole, recognizing that it was a
                  document that reflected consensus and necessary compromise. Three issues remained contentious -- the
                  notice of intent to harvest for loggers, the lack of local government representation on the Coordinating
                  Council, and a fear that the implementation of the Plan would create an additional layer of bureaucracy. The
                  Plan in similar form with modifications to address these issues, was accepted by the Management
                  Conference's Policy Committee on November 30,1993.

                  GENERAL
                                   Support for basinw*ide approach
                                   Much improved over last draft
                                   Support for cost share programs
                                   The Plan has no teeth, lacks specific recommendations
                                   Must now provide the public with more information on stewardship from an individual
                                   level
                                   Format is more user fflendly
                                   Lacks priorities and deadlines
                                   Still doesn't provide a thorough cost-benefit analysis of proposals





                                                                        B15











              PUBLIC COMMSVT
                              -- - -------- ----             -------                   ------------------ - -- ------ - ------


              WA TER QUA L I TY PLA N
                              Some specific water issues are excluded (attention to water quantity, effects of air
                              deposition)
                              Incentives for compliance are weak--need stronger nonpoint source pollution controls
                              Lack of attention to forestry issues
                              Reject requiring a notice of intent to harvest
                              Pleased to see mandatory buffers removed
                              Disappointed that buffers were removed
                              Needs more emphasis on best management practices requirements and how they relate
                              to the APES CCMP
                              Recognize incentive programs to address point source pollution

              VITAL HABITAT PLAN
                              Shouldn't promote the public acquisition of lands because the government poorly
                              manages currently owned lands

              FISHERIES PLAN
                              Fishing rules are inconsistently enforced
                              Support sound management of fisheries
                              Make license fees variable depending on fishing practices, gear used and size of
                              operation
                              Prohibit trawling in the sounds
                              Don't lot Division of Marine Fisheries research on new bycatch-reducing gears
                              lapse

              STEWARDSHIP PLAN
                              Concern for how regulation will affect development
                              Concern for impact on local planning process and government
                              Ensure that environmental education includes attention to the interrelationship
                              between the environment and the economy

              IMPLEMENTATION
                              Concern that the implementing structure adds a layer of bureaucracy
                              Concern that costs associated with implementation will continue to expand
                              Not enough local government representation on the Coordinating Council









                                                                B16











                                                                                                                  PUBW COMMENT


                  RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE THIRD DRAFT
                  (TO PRODUCE THE FINAL DRAFT)

                  GENERAL
                  Much of the general comment received from the Plan was supportive. In terms of the Plan not being strong
                  enough, or not having enough leeth,' it was determined by the Management Conference that it was still an
                  excellent framework for protection of the estuarine region. In its present form, more groups could support
                  it and pledge to implement its recommendations. Specific control strategies tailored to the needs of each
                  basin would be developed during the implementation process.

                  WATER QUALITY PLAN
                  A meeting was held immediately after the public meetings to address the forestry intent to.harvest issue.
                  Representatives f rom the forestry industry and government convened to discuss options and determined that
                  an education effort, privately funded training program, and increased enforcement would be more effective.

                  Other comments referring to issues which were excluded at that time were considered and referenced in the
                  CCMP inan appropriate location. For example, one may find a description of the Tar-Pamlico Association's
                  pollution trading program and how it works in the introduction.

                  VITAL HABITATS PLAN
                  The Vital Habitats Plan was not modified. It is the position of the Management Conference that the public
                  acquisition is still a good,tool for habitat conservation. This section of the plan should enhance existing public
                  management programs.

                  FISHERIES PLAN
                  The Fisheries Plan was not modif ied. A response to similar issues may be found with the response to the
                  second draft.


                  STEWARDSHIP PLAN
                  The section on land use planning in the Stewardship Plan specifically makes local governments responsible
                  for any action taken. The recommendation calls for financial and technical assistance. Also,, a management
                  action recommending support for a public-private organization called the Partnership for the Sounds was
                  shifted from its place in the section's educational objective to its planningleconomic development objective,
                  reflecting the economic emphasis of the Partnership,

                  IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
                  The structure of the Coordinating Council was modified to include more local govemment representation.
                  The membership of each Regional Council has at least two electedtappointed local government officials
                  representing every county in each basin. Each Regional Council will then choose three members to represent
                  it on the Coordinating Council; at least two of which must be electedlappointed local government officials.





                                                                         B17











              PUBLIC COMMENT
                            ........ . ..... ........ .--- - -------------------                 - ----


                                                        CONCLUSION

              Public comment has had a tremendous impact on the APES program throughout its existence, for it is
              understood that the public has to live with the Plan and that implementation will fail H there is no public
              support for ft. It is important to note that the final version of the CCMP recognizes this clearly and in fact calls
              for continuing and increasing public involvement in environmental policy-making during the implementation
              phase.




              REFERENCES

              Armingeon, Neil A. 1992. Resource Management Options for the Sounds: A Summary of
              User Group Workshops. Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study & National Estuary Program.

              Giordano, Joan. 1989. Public Involvement Plan. Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study
              Report Number 89-04.

              Waters, Elizabeth B. 1993. Albemade-Pamlico Estuarine Study Workshops. Unpublished
              report for the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study.










              GLOSSARY AND LIST OF
                           ACRONYMS



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






                                            /X c











                                                                                                                       GLOSSARY


               acquisition                                                  To obtain or procure vital habitats, through
                                                                            purchase, donation or other means, for protection,
                                                                            enhancement, and restoration.
               acute toxicity                                               Lethal or having other harmful effects to
                                                                            organisms in controlled toxicity tests with short-
                                                                            term exposure to specific substances or mixtures.


               aerobic                                                      Living or occurring only in the presence of oxygen.

               agriculture cost                                             A program that provides financial assistance for
               share                                                        implementation of best management practices.

               algae                                                        Plants that are aquatic, nonflowering, and have no
                                                                            roots. Algae convert carbon dioxide and inorganic
                                                                            nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus into
                                                                            organic matter through photosynthesis and form
                                                                            the basis of the marine food chain. Common
                                                                            algae include dinoflagellates, diatoms, seaweeds,
                                                                            and kelp.

               algal bloom                                                  A condition which occurs when excessive nutrient
                                                                            levels and other physical and chemical conditions
                                                                            enable algae to reproduce rapidly. Algal blooms
                                                                            often cause a change in water color, and the
                                                                            decay of the algal bloom may reduce dissolved
                                                                            oxygen levels in the water.

               anadromous                                                   Fish species, such as shad, herring, and striped
                                                                            bass, which migrate from their primary habitats in
                                                                            the oceans up freshwater rivers and streams to
                                                                            spawn.

               anaerobic                                                    Able to live or occurring in the absence -of oxygen.

               anoxia                                                       The absence of oxygen.

               anthropogenic                                                Effects or processes that are derived from human
                                                                            activity.

               aquaculture                                                  The controlled cultivation and harvest'of aquatic
                                                                            plants or animals.


                                                                       C3



0








               -GL-OSS4RY

               aquifer                                                    An underground layer of rock or soil in which
                                                                          groundwater is stored.


               assimilative capacity                                      The amount of pollutants that a water body may
                                                                          absorb while maintaining corresponding water
                                                                          quality standards including the protection of best
                                                                          Use.


               bathymetry                                                 The measurement of the depth of large bodies of
                                                                          water.

               benthic                                                    Living in or on the bottom of a body of water.

               benthos                                                    Collectively, all organisms living in, on, or near the
                                                                          bottom substrate in aquatic habitats.

               be st fishing practices (BFP)                              Techniques that reduce unwanted or non-targeted
                                                                          fish harvests in an economically feasible manner.

               best management                                            A method, activity, maintenance procedure, or
               practice (BMP)                                             other management practice for reducing the
                                                                          amount of pollution entering a body of water.

               best uses.                                                 Designated uses for a water body which include
                                                                          aquatic life propagation and maintenance
                                                                          (including fishing, fish and functioning primary
                                                                          nursery areas), wildlife and secondary recreation,
                                                                          water supply (freshwaters), and shelffishing
                                                                          (saftwaters).

               bioaccumulation                                            The process by which a contaminant accumulates
                                                                          in the tissues of an organism.
               biological Integrity                                       The capability of supporting   and maintaining a
                                                                          balanced, integrated, adaptive community of
                                                                          organisms having a species composition and
                                                                          functional organization comparable to that of the
                                                                          natural habitat in the region.






                                                                     C4











                                                                                                                           GLOSS4RY


                 biological oxygen demand (BOD)                                The measurement of oxygen required by aerobic
                                                                               biological processes to break down organic matter
                                                                               in water. (Conventional wastewater treatment
                                                                               aims to reduce BOD to prevent a signif icant
                                                                               reduction in the oxygen content of the receiving
                                                                               water body.)

                 blota                                                         The animals, plants, and microbes that live in a
                                                                               particular location or region.

                 brackish                                                      Having a saft content in the range between fresh
                                                                               and saft water.


                 buffer strips                                                 A management practice that reduces runoff and
                                                                               nonpoint source pollution loading by maintaining a
                                                                               protective border around critical habitats or water
                                                                               bodies.

                 bycatch                                                       Due to the use of certain gear or f ishing practices,
                                                                               fish harvested in addition to the species targeted
                                                                               for harvest.

                 catch per unit effort                                         The amount of fish caught With a given amount of
                                                                               effort (e.g., number of boats/people, amount of
                                                                               gearttime fished).

                 chronic toxicity                                              Any harmful effects to organisms in controlled
                                                                               toxicity tests widh long-term exposure during a
                                                                               sensitive period of the life cycle to specif ic
                                                                               substances or mixtures. Early life stages or
                                                                               reproductive toxicity tests may be used to
                                                                               determine chronic impacts.

                 chlorophyll a                                                 A green pigment, found in all plants that undergo
                                                                               photosynthesis, that is used as an indicator of
                                                                               algal growth in a water body.

                 community                                                     See natural community.







                                                                          C5











                GLOSS4RY


                critical habitat                                             Areas which are essential to the conservation of
                                                                             an officially-listed endangered or threatened
                                                                             species and which may require special
                                                                             management considerations or protection.

                crustacean                                                   Invertebrates of the phylum Arthropoda, including
                                                                             shrimps, crabs, copepods, barnacles, and other
                                                                             animals which have segmented bodies, jointed
                                                                             legs, and hard external shells.

                cuitch                                                       A hard substrate, such as oyster shells, on which
                                                                             larval oysters ('spat) attach and mature.

                database                                                     A collection of data arranged for ease and speed
                                                                             of retrieval.

                dinofiagellate                                               Minute organisms, chiefly marine protozoans of
                                                                             the class Dinoflagellata. Dinoflagellates usually
                                                                             have two flagella and an outer envelope of
                                                                             cellulose. These organisms are one of the main
                                                                             constituents of plankton.

                dioxin                                                       A chemical by-product of the paper bleaching
                                                                             process.

                dissolved oxygen (DO)                                        Oxygen available to      organisms and chemical
                                                                             processes in an aquatic environment.

                easement                                                     A voluntary, legally binding agreement in which
                                                                             the land owner sells or donates some or all of her
                                                                             or his rights to develop or use the land.


                ewtourism                                                    Maintaining and preserving natural resources as a
                                                                             basis for promoting economic growth and
                                                                             development in vital natural areas.

                eelgrass (Zostere marina)                                    A type of submerged aquatic vegetation. Eelgrass
                                                                             is a flowering marine plant that grows on intertidal
                                                                             and shallow subtidal sand or mudflats.






                                                                        C6











                                                                                                                    GLOSS4RY


               effluent                                                    Treated or untreated waste material that is
                                                                           discharged into the environment from a point
                                                                           source, such as a wastewater treatment plant or
                                                                           an industrial facility.

               epiphyte                                                    A plant which grows on another plant and
                                                                           depends on that plant for mechanical support but
                                                                           not for nutrients.


               estuary                                                     A coastal water system in which ocean water
                                                                           mixes with fresh water from rivers and streams;
                                                                           where the river meets the sea.


               eutrophication                                              A process in which a water body becomes rich in
                                                                           dissolved nutrients, often leading to algal blooms,
                                                                           low dissolved oxygen, and changes in community
                                                                           composition. This occurs naturally, but can be
                                                                           accelerated by human activity which increases
                                                                           nutrient inputs to the water body.

               exotic                                                      Not native. Introduced from another location.


               fecal coliform                                              Bacteria from the intestinal tracts of warm blooded
                                                                           animals. High numbers of fecal coliform bacteria
                                                                           in a water body may indicate a recent release of
                                                                           untreated wastewater and/or the presence of
                                                                           animal feces. Fecal colfform is used as an
                                                                           indicator for managing the closure of shellfish
                                                                           beds to harvest to protect the-public health.

               fishery management plan (FMP)                               A documented strategy for the sustainable use of
                                                                           a fishery resource, which considers the biological
                                                                           limits - of a fish species and the socioeconomic
                                                                           impacts of restricting fishing effort.

               fishing gear                                                Fish and shellfish harvesting devices.

               flux                                                        A fluctuation or change.







                                                                     C7










                  GLOSSARY
                                    ----------- --                          --------------- - - -----------

                  geographic Information system (GIS)                           A system of computer hardware and software that
                                                                                is used for compilation, storage, analysis, and
                                                                                display of geographic and associated tabular data.
                                                                                This system can be used to produce maps which
                                                                                overlay information layers of locations of various
                                                                                environmental and physical features.

                  gill net                                                      A not which traps fish by entangling them as they
                                                                                pass through the net.

                  ground water                                                  The water which occurs beneath the earth's
                                                                                surface between saturated soil and rock and which
                                                                                supplies wells and springs.

                  growth overfishing                                            The overharvest of fish that are below optimal
                                                                                size.

                  habitat                                                       A specific area in which a particular type of plant
                                                                                or animal lives. An organism's habitat must
                                                                                provide the basic requirements for survival.

                  haul seine                                                    A long fishing not which is pulled between two
                                                                                boats and brought together around a stake to
                                                                                encircle fish.

                  high quality waters                                           Waters which are rated as excellent based on
                                                                                biologicallphysicallchemical characteristics through
                                                                                the Divisiori of Environmental Monitoring.

                  hypoxia                                                       A condition of low dissolved oxygen in         aquatic
                                                                                systems.

                  Impaired waters                                               Surface waters that are negatively impacted by
                                                                                pollution resulting in decreased water quality.

                  Impervious surface                                            A sudace such as pavement that cannot be easily
                                                                                penetrated by water.

                  Interjurisdictional                                           Within the boundaries of more than one state (or
                                                                                other level of government).

                  juvenile                                                      Physiologically or sexually immature.



                                                                           C8












                                                                                                                        GLOWRY


                land and water use plans                                     Documents which are produced by a local
                                                                             government and its citizens to identify the
                                                                             preferred uses of land and water within a
                                                                             community and to serve as a tool for guiding
                                                                             growth.

                macrophyte                                                   A macroscopic plant in an aquatic environment.

                marine sanitation device (MSD)                               A device installed on a boat to treat or hold
                                                                             sewage. All vessels with installed toilets are
                                                                             required by the federal Clean Water Act, Section
                                                                             312, to have approved MSDs.

                mesohallne                                                   Moderately saline water, generally having salinity
                                                                             levels of 8 to 15 parts per thousand (ppQ
                                                                             (freshwater = 0 ppt; seawater = 35 ppt).

                metals (also heavy metals)                                   A group of elements found in rocks and minerals
                                                                             that are naturally released to the environment by
                                                                             erosion as well as generated by human activities..
                                                                             Some metals (e.g., mercury, lead, nickel, zinc, and
                                                                             cadmium) are of environmental concern because
                                                                             they are released by human activity and can
                                                                             produce toxic effects in animals and plants.

                mitigation                                                   The process of making the impacts of a particular
                                                                             action less severe or intense.

                mitigation bank                                              Habitat protection or improvement actions taken
                                                                             expressly for the purpose of compensating for
                                                                             unavoidable, necessary losses f rom specific f uture
                                                                             development actions.

                model ordinance                                              A sample regulation which contains elements and
                                                                             language necessary to achieve a desired effect.

                natural community                                            A distinct and reoccurring assemblage of
                                                                             populations of plants, animals, bacteria, fungi, and
                                                                             viruses naturally associated with each other and
                                                                             their physical environment.





                                                                        C9








                 .GL-OS-S4RY          ---- - -- -            ------
                                                                                                   --------------

                 nitrate (NO;)                                                A form of nitrogen which is readily available to
                                                                              plants as a nutrient. Generally, nitrate is the
                                                                              primary inorganic form of nitrogen in aquatic
                                                                              systems.

                 nonpoint source                                              Pollution  that enters the natural environment
                                                                              through runoff with no discrete point or discharge.

                 nursery areas                                                Areas where young finfish and shelft spend
                                                                              their early life because of an abundance of food,
                                                                              the presence of protective cover, and favorable
                                                                              conditions of salinity, temperature, and other
                                                                              factors.

                 nutrients                                                    Chemicals which are needed by plants and
                                                                              animals for growth (e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus).

                 nutrient-sensitilve waters                                   Waters subject to excessive growths of
                                                                              microscopic or macroscopic vegetation requiring
                                                                              limitations on nutrient inputs.

                 oligohaline                                                  Low salinity water, generally having salinity levels
                                                                              of 0.5 to 5 parts per thousand (ppt) (freshwater
                                                                              0 ppt; seawater = 35 ppt).

                 ombudsman                                                    One that investigates complaints from citizens,
                                                                              relates their concerns to the relevant state
                                                                              agencies and assists in achieving fair settlements.

                 on-she wastewater treatment systems                          Systems including septic tanks and package
                                                                              plants which treat wastewater' where it is
                                                                              produced. These systems are smaller scale than
                                                                              municipal central sewer and treatment plants.

                 palustrine                                                   Swampy, related to freshwater.

                 pathogen                                                     An agent such as a virus, bacterium, or fungus
                                                                              that can cause diseases in humans.

                 phytoplankton                                                Aquatic, unicellular plants which are free-floating
                                                                              or weakly motile.




                                                                         10












                                                                                                                         GLOSS4RY


                point source                                                  Any confined and discrete conveyance from which
                                                                              pollutants are or may be discharged. These
                                                                              include pipes, ditches, channels, tunnels, conduits,
                                                                              wells, containers, and concentrated animal feeding
                                                                              operations.

                polyheline                                                    High salinity water, generally having salinity levels
                                                                              of 18 to 30 parts per thousand (ppt) (freshwater
                                                                              0 ppt; seawater = 35 ppt).

                pound net                                                     A large net suspended from poles driven into the
                                                                              bottom of the water body. Fish enter the net
                                                                              through a funnel entrance and become trapped.

                pretreatment                                                  The treatment of industrial wastewater to remove
                                                                              pollutants prior to discharge into municipal sewage
                                                                              systems.

                primary treatment                                             The level of wastewater treatment which uses
                                                                              settling, skimming, and often, chlorination, to
                                                                              remove solids, floating materials, and pathogens.

                public trust areas                                            Land and water areas in which the public has
                                                                              certain fights including the right to navigation and
                                                                              recreation.

                renewal credits                                               A system used by professional educators to
                                                                              maintain certification.

                restoration                                                   Renewing or repairing a natural system so that its
                                                                              functions and qualities are comparable to its
                                                                              original, unaltered state.

                riparian                                                      Relating to the bank or shoreline of a body of
                                                                              water.


                runoff                                                        Water which is not absorbed by soil and drains off
                                                                              the land into bodies of water.

                salinity                                                      The amount of dissolved safts in water, generally
                                                                              expressed in parts per thousand (ppt).




                                                                        C11











                  GLOSS4RY


                  secondary treatment                                          The level of wastewater treatment which involves
                                                                               biological treatment in addition to the primary
                                                                               treatment.

                  sediment                                                     Particles of mud, clay, sift, and organic material
                                                                               which are carried in water and compose the
                                                                               bottom material (substrate).

                  sedimentation                                                The deposition of sediment, such as sand, sift, or
                                                                               clay.

                  siltation                                                    The deposition or accumulation of fine soil
                                                                               particles.

                  silviculture                                                 The area of forestry which deals With
                                                                               establishment, development, reproduction, and
                                                                               management of trees.

                  spawn                                                        To deposit fish eggs.

                  stock assessment                                             The estimate of the size and productivity of a fish
                                                                               stock based on age, growth, harvest, reproduction,
                                                                               and mortality data.

                  stormwater                                                   Water which is generated by rainfall, causes
                                                                               runoff, and often is routed into drain systems.

                  submerged     aquatic vegetation (SAV) (also:                Beds of underwater marine and estuarine plants.
                  seagrass)                                                    SAV is characterized by high productivity and
                                                                               species diversity. It serves as nursery area for
                                                                               juveniles and supports adult 'popuWions of
                                                                               economically important seafood species. SAV
                                                                               beds also enhance water quality by reducing
                                                                               turbidity and stabilizing sediments. Species of
                                                                               SAV include: eelgrass (Zostera matina),
                                                                               shoalgrass (Halodule wfightfi), and widgeongrass;
                                                                               (Ruppia madtima), Sago pondweed (Potamogetan
                                                                               pectinatus), leafy pondweed (Potamogetan
                                                                               folibsus), widgeongrass; (Ruppia marffima), homed
                                                                               pondweed (Zannichelfia palustds), bushy
                                                                               pondweedtsoutem naiad (Ngias guadalupeqsis),
                                                                               wild celery (Valfisneria ameficaria), spatterdock
                                                                               (Nuphar luteum), and bladderwort (Uftficularia sp.).


                                                                         C12











                                                                                                                          GLOSSARY


                 substrate                                                     A surface or medium in or on which an organism
                                                                               lives.

                 suspended solids                                              Organic and inorganic particles, such as solids
                                                                               from wastewater, sand, clay, and mud, that are
                                                                               suspended and carried in water.

                 sustainable use                                               Conserved use of a resource such that it may be
                                                                               used in the present and by future generations.

                 Total Maximum Dally Loads                                     The loading capacity is the maximum amount of
                                                                               pollution that a water body can receive without
                                                                               violating water quality standards. Total Maximum
                                                                               Daily Loads are the sum of point and nonpoint
                                                                               source loads.

                 toxic                                                         Poisonous, carcinogenic, or otherwise directly
                                                                               harmful to life.

                 toxic substance, toxicant or toxin                            A substance or mixture which has the potential to
                                                                               cause death, disease, behavioral abnormalities,
                                                                               cancer, genetic mutations, physiological
                                                                               malfunctions (including malfunctions or
                                                                               suppression in reproduction or growth), or physical
                                                                               deformities in organisms or their offspring.
                                                                               Organisms are exposed to toxicants after
                                                                               discharge and upon exposure, ingestion,
                                                                               inhalation, or assimilation into any organism, either
                                                                               directly from the environment or. indirectl@ by
                                                                               ingestion through food chains.

                 tributary                                                     A stream or river that f lows into a larger stream or
                                                                               river.

                 turbidity                                                     The measurement of the amount of material
                                                                               suspended in water.

                 vital                                                         'Necessary to the continuation of life; Iffe-
                                                                               sustaining.






                                                                         C13









                -G-L-OS-S4RY ------------------------------- -------------             -----

                wasteload allocations                                        Set of limitations and monitoring requirements
                                                                             specific to each discharge which protects the best
                                                                             uses of the surlace waters of the state through
                                                                             implementation of the state water quality
                                                                             standards and the anti-degradation policy.

                watershed                                                    The geographic region within which water drains
                                                                             to a particular river, stream, or body of water.

                water table                                                  The depth or level below which the ground is
                                                                             saturated with water.

                wetland degradation                                          The process of transition of a wettand from a
                                                                             higher to a lower natural -value or to a condition of
                                                                             decreased natural function.

                wetiand loss                                                 The degradation of a wetland area through
                                                                             draining or other conversion to the degree that the
                                                                             area no longer supports natural wetlands f unctions
                                                                             or uses.









































                                                                       C 14












                                                                                                                   GLOSSARY

                                                     ACRONYMS



               ADID      Advanced Identif ication                       GIS       Geographic Information Systems
               BMP       Best Management Practice                       MFC       Marine Fisheries Commission
               CGIA      Center for Geographic Information and          NOAA      National Oceanic and   Atmospheric
                         Analysis                                                 Administration
               CRC       Coastal Resources Commission                   NPDES     National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
               CWQMN Citizen's Water Quality Monitoring                           System
                         Network                                        OEE       Office of Environmental Education
               CWQMP Citizens Water Quality Monitoring                  OWR       Office of Waste Reduction
                         Program                                        PERT      Pamlico Environmental Response Team
               DA        Department of Agriculture                      SAV       Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
               DCA       Division of Community Assistance               SCS       Soil Conservation Service
               DCM       Division of Coastal Management                 SSB       Shelft Sanitation Branch
               DEH       Division of Environmental Health               SWCC      Soil and Water'Conservation
               DFR       Division of Forest Resources                             Commission
               DLR       Division of Land Resources                     TMDL      Total Ma)dmum Daily Load
               DMF       Division of Marine Fisheries                   TNC       The Nature Conservancy
               DOC       Department of Commerce                         TSDF      Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility
               DOT       Department of Transportation                   USACE     Army Corps of Engineers
               DPI       Department of Public Instruction               USDA      United States Department of Agriculture
               DPR       Division of Parks and Recreation               USFWS     United States Fish and Wildlife Service
               DSWC      Division of Soil and Water Conservation        USGS      U.S Geological Survey
               EAB       Environmental Advisory Board                   WERC      Wetlands Enhancement, Restoration and
               EES       Environmental Epidemology Section                        Creation
               EMC       Environmental Management Commission            WRC       Wildlife Resources Commission
               ERC       Environmental Resources Commission
               FDA       U.S. Food and Drug Administration














                                                                      C15



I
I
I
i                       ----------------- - ----
I
i            COST MATRIX
I                   -
I
I
i
'I              APPENDIX D
I
1,
I
I
i
I
I
I











             COST AfA TRIX

                                  WATER QUALITY PLAN



             MANAGEMENT ACTION                                       ANNUAL STATE AGENCY
                                                                     ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS


             ACTION All:                                             $50,000
             Basinwide planning for water quality and
             wetland protection and restoration.

             ACTION A2:                                              $100,000
             Establish TMDLs.

             ACTION A3:                                              No additional costs are anticipated.
             Complete synchronous permit-renewal
             for each basin.

             ACTION A4:                                              No additional costs are anticipated.
             Determine assimilative capacity
             allocation considering sustainable
             growth and secondary impacts of
             wastewater capacity.

             ACTION AS:                                              $400,000
             Improve scientific models.

             ACTION A&                                               $150,00
             Continued comprehensive water quality
             monitoring to assess system health and
             target regional problems.

             ACTION B1:                                              No additional costs are anticipated
             Develop NPS pollution control plan for
             each basin to address surface and
             ground water quality.








                                                          D2












                                                                                               COST MATRIX


             ACTION 132:                                              $5,000,000
             Expand funding for the NC Agriculture
             Cost Share Program in the APES region
             including wetlands restoration to control
             NPS pollution and fund a new water
             quality cost share program for additional
             NPS controls.

             ACTION 193:                                              $350,000
             Develop afternative septic systems and
             new BMPs.

             ACTION 134:                                              $200,000
             Strengthen current enforcement
             programs to detect and remediate NPS
             caused Violations of ground and surface
             water quality.

             ACTION 85:                                               $350,000
             Strengthen implementation of forestry
             UPS.

             ACTION 136:                                              $150,000
             Enhance the stormwater runoff control
             program.

             ACTION 87                                                No additional costs are anticipated.
             Implement an interagency state marinas
             policy to address cumulative siting and
             BMP's.

             ACTION Cl:                                               No additional costs are anticipated.
             Require pollution prevention plans for all
             point sources.

             ACTION C2:                                               $300,000
             Expand and strengthen enforcement of
             NPDES.








                                                          D3











            COSTMATWX


            ACTION D1:                                         $150,000
            Monitor and evaluate sediment toxicity;
            continue to monitor fish & shellfish toxic
            contamination, ambient WQ and identify
            sources of WQ standard exceedances.

            ACTION D2:                                         No additional costs are anticipated.
            Continue to issue fish advisories to
            protect public health.

            ACTION D3:                                         Costs to be determined.
            Remediate toxic contamination where                See Action D1
            necessary and feasible.

            ACTION Ell:                                        $125,000
            Continue to monitor & evaluate
            environmental stress indicators including
            blooms, fish kills, diseases.

            ACTION E2:                                         $100,000
            Improve techniques for evaluating
            cumulative impacts in estuarine waters.

            ACTION E3:                                         See Stewardship Plan
            Develop better indicators of shellfish             Objective A, Management Action 2.
            contamination.

            WATER QUALITY TOTAL:                               A4251000














                                                     D4












                                                                                                     COSTMATRIX
                                       VITAL.HABITAT PLAN


             MANAGEMENT ACTION                                             ANNUAL STATE AGENCY
                                                                           ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS


             ACTION All:                                                   $50,000
             Habftat plans.

             ACTION A2:                                                    $135,000
             Mapping

             ACTION A3:                                                    $50,000
             ADID evaluation

             ACTION 1311:                                                  No additional costs anticipated.
             Acquisition/Management

             ACTION 132:                                                   $524,000
             Incentives/assistance

             ACTION CII:                                                   $150,000
             Wetlands evaluation

             ACTION C2:                                                    $200,000
             Fisheries habitat

             ACTION CI                                                     $100,000
             Restoration

             ACTION C4:                                                    $170,000
             Wetlands rnhigation

             HABITAT TOTAL:                                                $lt379,000








                                                              DS












                               COST MATRIX
                               ---------------------                        ----- --- - -------- - ----------------- - -----------    ----- ------        - ----           ------- - - ------------ -----
                                                                                                   FISHERIES PLAN



                               MANAGEMENT ACTION                                                                                                                      ANNUAL STATE AGENCY
                                                                                                                                                                      ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS


                               ACTION All:                                                                                                                            $300,000
                               Develop and implement state fishery
                               management plans.

                               ACTION A2:                                                                                                                             No additional annual administrative
                               Modify the existing madne fisheries                                                                                                    costs anticipated.
                               license structure to improve data
                               collection.


                               ACTION 131:                                                                                                                            $200,000
                               Continue to expand and develop
                               bycatch reduction gear & practices and
                               require their use.

                               ACTION 132:                                                                                                                            $2DO,000
                               Institute cost share program for BMP's
                               in commercial fishing.

                               FISHERIES TOTAL:                                                                                                                       $700,000
















                                                                                                                                           D6












                                                                                               COST MATRIX

                                     STEWARDSHIP PLAN



            MANAGEMENT ACTION                                         ANNUAL STATE ADMINISTRATIVE
                                                                      COSTS


            ACTION All:                                               $450,000
            Local planning

            ACTION A2:                                                $460,000
            Provide local governments with
            affordable and accessible GIS.


            ACTION A3:                                                $37,500
            Managing public trust waters: conduct
            feasibility studies.

            ACTION A4:                                                Unknown
            Promote environmentally sound
            economic development in the region.

            ACTION B1:                                                $166,000
            Increase efforts to coordinate & foster
            environmental education outside school
            settings.

            ACTION 82:                                                No additional costs anticipated.
            Citizens communications with agencies
            & commissions


            ACTION 83:                                                Unknown
            Local government environmental
            advisory boards.

            ACTION 84:                                                $75,000
            Citizen's water quality monitoring
            program

            ACTION 135:                                               $50,000
            Citizen ombudsman in DEHNR




                                                          D7












             COS T MATRIX



             ACTION CII:                                              See Objective B, Management Action 1
             Science/environmental curriculum

             ACTION C2:                                               $10,000
             Teacher training

             STEWARDSHIP TOTAL                                        $1,248,500


                                IMPLEMENTATION PLAN



             MANAGEMENT ACTION                                        ANNUAL STATE AGENCY
                                                                      ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS

             ACTION All:                                              $300,00
             Management Conference

             ACTION A2:                                               $50,000
             Initiate implementation of the CCMP

             ACTION BI:                                               No additional costs are anticipated.
             Progress report

             ACTION 132:                                              Costs included in other management
             Support assessment                                       actions.

             IMPLEMENTATION TOTAL:                                    $35OtOOO











                                                          D8












                                                                    COSTMATRIX



         PLAN TOTALS                              ANNUAL COSTS


         WATER QUALITY                              $7,425,000

         VITAL HABITAT                              $1,379,000

         FISHERIES                                  $700,000

         STEWARDSHIP                                $1,248,500.

         IMPLEMENTATION                             $350,000


         CCMP ADMINISTRATIVE                      $11,1102,500
         COST TOTAL






























                                          D9



I
I
I
I
I
I        No C,  AGRICULTURE.
I      COST SHARE PROGRAM
I        BEST MANAGEMENT
I              PRACTICES
i
I
I
I               APPENDIX E
I
I                                    -
I
I
I
i












                                                                                                      AGRICUMIRAL BMPS
                                                                                                      ------------


                     LIST OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR COST SHARING
                                                              UNDER
                    THE NORTH CAROLINA AGRICULTURE COST SHARE PROGRAM



             EROSION / NUTRIENT CONTROL

                 Conservation Tillage
                 Terraces
                 Diversions
                 Critical Area Planting
                 Sod-Based Rotation
                 Stdpcropping
                 Cropland Conversion to Grass
                 Cropland Conversion to Trees
                 Cropland Conversion to Wildlife Plantings
                 Cropland Conversion to Chdstmas Trees
                 Grade Stabilization Structures


              SEDIMENT / NUTRIENT CONTROL

                 Filter Strips
                 Field Borders
                 Grassed Waterways
                 Water Control Structures


              CONFINED ANIMAL OPERATIONS CONTROL

                 Lagoons                                        Ponds
                 Dry Stacks                                     Pads
                 Litter Storage                                 Composters;
                 Heavy Use Area Protection                      Spdng Development
                 Stock Trails                                   Stream Crossings
                 Pesticide Load Areas                           Wells
                 Livestock Water Facilities (TankiTrough)
                 Nutrient Reduction Management
                 Portable Watedng Facilities (Livestock)
                 Land Application of Animal Waste
                 Solid Set Waste Management System for Land Application
                 Wetlands Development for Land Application
                 Dry Hydrant Waste Management System for Land Application



                                                                   E3











               AGRICULTURAL BMPS


                          NORTH CAROLINA'AGRICULTURE COST SHARE PROGRAM
                                                                  FOR
                                     NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL


               Definition of Practices:

               (1)        Conservation Tillage System means a form of noninversion tillage that retains protective
                          amounts of residue mulch on the sudac.e throughout the year. These include notillage, stdp
                          tillage, stubble mulching, and other types of non-inversion tillage which maintain a minimum of
                          50 percent ground cover at planting or a minimum surface residue of 2000, 1500, and 1000
                          pounds per acre for com, soybeans, and small grain, respectively.

               (2)        Critical Area Planting means planting trees, shrubs, grasses, or legumes on crftically eroding
                          agricultural areas in order to reduce erosion, sediment delivery, and nonpoint source pollution to
                          receiving waters.

               (3)        Critical Erosion as applied to critical areas means erosion so severe that other than normal
                          agricultural BMPs must be used to stabilize the area of concern.

               (4)        Cropland Conversion means the establishment of perennial grasses, trees, or permanent wildlife
                          plantings on excessively eroding cropland. Cost share will be based on 75 percent of the
                          average cost of establishing fescue.

               (5)        Diversion means a channel with a supporting ridge on the lower side constructed across the
                          slope to divert excess water from cropland areas.

               (6)        Excessive Erosion means sheet, rill and/or concentrated erosion on agricultural lands occurring
                          at an annual rate greater than the soil loss tolerance (T).

               (7)        Field Border means a strip of perennial vegetation established at the edge of the field to control
                          erosion.

               (8)        Filter Strip means a strip or area of perennial vegetation for removing sediment, organic matter,
                          and other pollutants from cropland or as a part of waste management systems for treating
                          runoff from concentrated waste areas.

               (9)        Grade Stabilization Structure means a structure to stabilize the grade of agricultural cropland or
                          pasture land where concentrated and high velocity runoff results in head cutting and gully
                          formation.




                                                                    E4











                                                                                                            AGRICULTURAL BMPS


               (10)       Grassed Waterway means a natural waterway or outlet, shaped or graded, and established in
                          suitable vegetation used to route excess water from cropland, reduce gully erosion, and to
                          reduce nonpoint source pollutant delivery to receiving waters. As a condition for cost sharing,
                          the field or treatment unit draining into the waterway must have installed, or the farmer must
                          agree to install as a pan of the agreement, erosion control measures necessary to prevent
                          damage from washout or excessive sedimentation in the waterway.

                  1)      Heavy Use Area Protection means stabilizing high concentration areas for livestock to reduce
                          stream loading of sediment and/or animal waste.

               (12)       Livestock Exclusion means permanent fencing used to exclude livestock from an area and is to
                          be used in conjunction with animal waste treatment systems, stream crossings, streambank
                          protection, or other areas as needed to protect surface water quality.

               (13)       Pastureland Conversion means establishing trees or perennial wildlife plantings on excessively
                          eroding pasture that is too steep to mow or maintain with conventional equipment. (Class V11
                          Land)

               (14)       Rock-lined Waterways or Outlets means a water way or outlet having an erosion-resistant lining
                          of permanent material used to provide for safe disposal of runoff where unlined or grasses
                          waterways would be inadequate.

               (15)       Sediment Control Structure means a temporary or permanent basin constructed to collect and
                          store sediment and other agricultural nonpoint source pollution.

               (16)       Sod-based Rotation means establishing perennial grasses ariftr legumes or a mixture of them
                          on excessively eroding cropland and maintaining at least a four year rotation. A one-time
                          incentive payment per field will be made for establishment.

               (17)       Spring Development means improving springs and seeps by excavating, cleaning, capping or
                          providing collection and storage facilities. Springs are to be developed as a source for livestock
                          watering in conjunction with livestock exclusion from streams.

               (18)       Stock Trails and Walkways means a system used to control erosion where livestock cross
                          ditches, streams, or other areas where surface water quality needs to be protected. Must be
                          used in conjunction with livestock exclusion.

               (19)       Stripcropping means growing crops in a systematic arrangement of strips or bands across the
                          general slope. The crops are arranged so that a strip of grass or close-growing crop is
                          aftemated with a clean-tilled crop or a crop under a conservation tillage system. Cost sharing
                          will be based on a one-time payment of 75 percent of the average cost of establishing fescue
                          multiplied by the acres in sod and an incentive payment for the establishment of the strips.


                                                                       E5











                 AGRCULTUR4L BMPS


                 (20)      Terrace means an earth embankment, a channel, or a combination ridge and channel
                           constructed across the slope.

                 (21)      Trough or Tank means constructing a device for livestock watering in conjunction with livestock
                           exclusion from streams.

                 (22)      Waste Management System means a planned system for managing liquid and solid waste and
                           runoff from concentrated waste areas. System components may include:

                    (A)    Waste Storage Pond means an impoundment made by excavation or earthfill for temporary
                           storage of animal or other agricultural waste.

                    (B)    Waste Stora  ge Structure means a fabricated structure for temporary storage of animal or
                           agricultural waste.

                    (C)    Waste Treatment Lagoon means an impoundment made by excavation or earthfill for biological
                           treatment of animal or other agricultural waste.

                    (D)    Land Application of Wastes means the application of agricultural wastes on land in an
                           environmentally acceptable manner.

                 (23)      Water Control Structure means a human-made structure installed in on-farm water management
                           systems to reduce the delivery of nonpoint source pollutants into main water courses.

                                      Best Management Practices Eligible for Cost Share Payments

                 (1)       Best Management Practices eligible for cost sharing include the practices listed below and any
                           approved District BMPs. District BMPs shall be reviewed by the Division for technical merit in
                           achieving the goals of this program. Upon approval by the Division, the District BMPs will be
                           eligible to receive cost share funding.

                                           Best Management Practices Eligible for Cost Sharing
                                               Under the Nutrient Sensitive Waters Program

                 Pwice                                                        minimum Life
                                                                              Expedancy (years)

                 Conservation Tillage System                                  1
                 Critical area Planting                                       10
                 Cropland Conversion (Trees, Grasses, or                      10
                 Permanent Wildlife Plantings)
                 Diversion                                                    10



                                                                        E6












                                                                                                      AGRICULTURAL BMPS


              Field Border                                              10
              Filter Strip                                              10
              Grassed Waterway                                          10
              Heavy Use Area Protection                                 10
              Livestock Exclusion                                       10
              Pastureland Conversion                                    10
              Rock-lined Waterways or Outlets                           10
              Sediment Control Structure                                10
              Sod-based Rotation                                        4 or 5
              Spring Development                                        10
              Stock Trails and Walkways                                 10
              Stdpcropping                                              5
              Terrace                                                   10
              Trough or Tank                                            10
              Waste Management System                                   10
                  Waste Storage Pond                                    10
                  Waste Storage Structure                               10
                  Waste Treatment Lagoon                                10
                  Land Application of Waste                             1
              Grade Stabilization Structure                             10
              Water Control Structure                                   10

              (2)       The minimum life expectancy of the BMPs shall be that listed in the previous table. Practices
                        designated by a District shall meet the life expectancy requirement established by the Division
                        for that District BMP.

              (3)       The list of BMPs eligible for cost sharing may be revised by the Commission as deemed
                        appropdate in order to meet program purposes and goals.

                                                 Cost Share and Incentive Payments

              (1)       Conservation tillage systems, sod-based rotation, stripcmpping, and land application of animal
                        wastes shall be funded under a cost share incentive- payment. Payments for conservation
                        tillage systems and land application of animal wastes shall be limited to a maximum of.three
                        years per farm.










                                                                   E7



I
f
I
I                          -- --------------------
I
I          MANAGEMENT
I     CONFERENCE MEMBERS
I
1,                - - ----


I
                APPENDIX F
I                     i
I
I
I
I
I -
I

I












                                                                                                           MEMBERSHIP LIST


               Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study
               Policy Committee


                                                         CURRENT MEMBERS



               Dan Ashe                                                   House of Representatives: Merchant Marine
                                                                             Fisheries Commission
               Brewster Brown                                             Albemarle Citizen's Advismy Committee
               Don Bryan                                                  Citizen
               Keith Buttlernan                                           Virginia Council on the Environment
               Col. George Cajigal                                        U.S. Arrny Corps of Engineers
               Derb Caner                                                 Pamlico Citizen's Advisory Committee
                                                                             Southem Environmental Law Center
               John Costlow                                               Retired Professor of Duke University
               Ford "Bud" Cross                                           National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                                                                             Administration: Southeast Fisheries Center
               Ray Cunningham                                             U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
               L. K. Gantt                                                U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
               Jonathan Howes                                             N.C. Department of Environment, Heafth and
                                                                             Natural Resources (DEHNR)
               William Queen                                              Institute of Marine and Coastal Resources



                                                          FORMER MEMBERS



               William Coby                                               N, C. Department of Environment, Health, and
                                                                             Natural Resources (DEHNR)
               Lee Dehihns                                                U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
               Dirk Frankenberg                                           University of North Carolina, Department of
                                                                          Marine Sciences
               Thomas S. Rhodes                                           N.C. Department of Natural Resources and
                                                                          Community Development
               Parker Chesson                                             Albemarle Citizen's Advisory Committee









                                                                     F3











                MEMBERSHIP LIST
                                                           ---------------------

                Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study
                Technical Committee



                                                           CURRENT MEMBERS


                Ann Brooks                                                  Virginia Council on Environmental Quality
                William Cole, Jr.                                           U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                B. J. Copeland                                              University of North Carolina Sea Grant Program
                Bowman Crum                                                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                Tom Ellis                                                   N. C. Department of Agriculture
                Richard Hamilton                                            Wildlife Resources Commission
                William Hogarth                                             N.C. DEHNR: Division of Marine Fisheries
                Don Hoss                                                    National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                Preston Howard                                                 Administration: Southeast Fisheries Center
                                                                            N.C. DEHNR. Division of Environmental
                                                                               Management
                Ernie Larkin                                                Pamlico Citizen's Advisory Committee
                Steve Levkas                                                N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and
                                                                               Natural Resources
                Dave Moreau                                                 University of North Carolina: Water Resources
                                                                               Research Institute
                Mitchell Norman                                             Virginia Department of Game and Inland
                                                                               Fisheries
                Michael Orbach                                              Duke University Beaufort Marine Lab
                Rich Pepino                                                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region 3
                Lawrence Saunders                                           U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                Roger Schecter                                              N.C. DEHNR: Division of Coastal Management
                Cecil Settle                                                U.S. So# Conservation Service
                David Sides                                                 N.C. DEHNR: Division of Soil and Water
                                                                               Conservation
                Eric Slaughter                                              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Division
                                                                               of Ocean and Coastal Protection
                John Stallings                                              Albemarle Citizen's Advisory Committee
                James Turner                                                U.S. Geological Survey
                Fred White                                                  N.C. DEHNR: Division of Forest Resources









                                                                      F4











                                                                                                       MEMBERSHIP LIST
              - -------- -      -------------- --- --- --- ----- -------


                                                       FORMER MEMBERS



              Mark Alderson                                           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
              Bruce Barrett                                           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
              Ernie Cad                                               N.C. Department of Natural Resources &
                                                                      Community Development
              Bobbye Jack Jones                                       U.S. Soil Conservation Service
              Harry Layman                                            N.C. DNRCD: Division of Forest Resources
              Alvin Morris                                            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
              Dave Owens                                              N.C. DNRCD. Division of Coastal Management
              James Stewart                                           N.C. State University, Water Resources
                                                                      Research institute
              Paul Wilms                                              N.C. DNRCD. Division of Environmental
                                                                      Management






























                                                                  F5








                MEWBERSHIP LIST                                                         - ------ -- --------- - --------- ---------

                Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarin                     e Study
                Albemarle Cifizens'Advisory Council


                                                              CURRENT MEMBERS



                Yates Barber                                                   At Large
                Brewster Brown                                                 At Large
                Tom Bums                                                       Agriculture
                J. Webb Fuller                                                 Public Official
                Iredell Hassell                                                At Large
                Carolyn Hass                                                   Environmental Group
                Phillip Hinton                                                 At Large
                Thomas Holland                                                 At Large
                Joe Hollowell                                                  At Large
                Affred Howard                                                  At Large
                Clyde Hughes                                                   At Large
                Paul Lilly                                                     At Large
                Shelby Mansfield                                               At Large
                William Piland                                                 At Large
                Terry Pratt                                                    At Large
                Bill Richardson                                                Public Official
                Ead Roundtree                                                  At Large
                Shelia Smith                                                   Virginia, At Large
                John Stallings                                                 At Large
                Joe Stutts;                                                    Industry
                David Watson                                                   Development
                A. G. Whitley                                                  At Large
                L. Polk Williams                                               At Large
                J. A. Wright                                                   Engineering
                Philip McMullan                                                At Large
                Janne Meiggs                                                   Education
                Murray Nixon                                                   Marine Fisheries Commission










                                                                          F6












                                                                                                                 MEMBERSHIP LIST


                                                            FORMER MEMBERS



               Yvonne Abernathy                                              Education
               John Acree                                                    At Large
               Quentin Bell                                                  At Large
               John Bone                                                     At Large
               Chesson, Parker                                               At Large
               Mike Cocoran                                                  At Large
               Michael Daniels                                               At Large
               Don Flowers                                                   At Large
               Phillip Hinton                                                At Large
               Chuck Little                                                  At Large
               William McGeorge                                              Virginia, At Large
               Phillip McMullan                                              At Large
               Murray Nixon                                                  At Large
               Gerald Perry                                                  At Large
               Robert Powell                                                 At Large
               Frank Thomas                                                  Virginia, At Large
               W.C. Witherspoon                                              At Large
               Glen Wood                                                     Industry






















                                                                       F7











                MEMBERSHIP LIST


                Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study
                Pamlico Cifizens'Advisory Committee


                                                             CURRENT MEMBERS



                Sybil Basnight                                                 At Large
                Vince Bellis                                                   At Large
                Dick Brame                                                     Sport Fishing
                Lee Brothers                                                   At Large
                Beth Bums                                                      At Large
                Ralph Buxton                                                   Tourism
                Rann Carpenter                                                 industty
                Ann Caner                                                      Public Official
                Derb Carter                                                    At Large
                Luther Daniels                                                 Public Official
                Grace Evans                                                    At Large
                John Greene                                                    At Large
                Etles Henries, Jr.                                             At Large
                Jim Hodge                                                      At Large
                Bill,lackson                                                   At Large
                Ernie Larkin                                                   Environmental Group
                Dick Leach                                                     Development
                RogerLyons                                                     At Large
                Todd Miller                                                    Environmental group
                David O'Neal                                                   Agriculture
                Thomas Quay                                                    At Large
                Jerry Schill                                                   Marine Fisheries Commission'
                Wayland Sermons                                                At Large
                Jeffrey Smith                                                  At Lafge
                Edward C. Smith, Jr.                                           At Large
                Frank Sommerkamp,                                              At Large
                John Spagnola                                                  Education
                John Van Duyn                                                  At Large
                Dan Windley                                                    At Large








                                                                         F8












                                                                                                                 MMERSHIP UST


                                                             FORMER MEMBERS



               Alron Ballance                                                At Large
               Bill Barker                                                   At Large
               Vince Bellis                                                  At Large
               Grace Bonner                                                  At Large
               Fred Bonner                                                   At Large
               Rodney Calhoun                                                Industry
               Don Ensley                                                    Education
               Roy Fogle                                                     Public Official
               Sharon Gibbs                                                  At Large
               Gavin Haridson                                                At Large
               Ralph Jarvis                                                  At Large
               Susan King                                                    Enviornmental Group
               Neal Lewis                                                    Public Official
               Katie Mor@s                                                   At Large
               Doug Nelson                                                   At Large
               Bill Paul                                                     At Large
               Willy Phillips                                                At Large
               Clark Rodman                                                  At Large
               Stuart Shinn                                                  At Large
               Garland Strickland                                            At Large
               Tom Stroud                                                    Education
               Buddy Swain                                                   At Large
               Stanford White                                                At Large
               Scott Whitford                                                At Large


















                                                                        F9




























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



                                                               PUBLICATIONS LIST






                                                                                                      APPENDIX G









                                                                                                                                              PUBLICATIONS



                                Information Acquisition Document
                                Executive Summaries are available for all Information Documents


                     p         Public Participation/Program Documents

                                Not an APES document, but material Is related to the Study


                   No.                  Abbreviated Title                                       Author/Editor                   Status
                                                                                                (Affiliation)

                   86-01(l)             Existing Management Programs                            Brower                          Available
                                                                                                (UNC)

                   87-01 (P)            Source Document                                         Rader et al.                    Available
                                                                                                (APES)

                   87-02(P)             Five Year Workplan                                      Rader et al.                    Available
                                                                                                (APES)

                   87-03(l)             Proceedings: Modeling                                   Stewart/Duffy                   Available
                                        Workshop                                                (WRRVSCI)

                   87-04(1)             Proceedings: Remote                                     Stewart                         Available
                                        Sensing Workshop                                        (WRRI)

                   87-05(l)             Proceedings: Fish Disease                               Stewart                         Available
                                        Workshop                                                (WRRI)

                   87-06(P)             Citizens' Monitoring Pilot                              Lekson                          Available
                                                                                                (PTRF)

                   88-01/02(P)          Baseline Monitoring Network                             Rader/Holman                    Available
                                                                                                et al.
                                                                                                (APES)

                   88-03 (P)            A Citizen's Guide to Coastal                            Kennedy                         Available
                                        Water Resource Management:                              (NCCF)
                                        Second Edition

                   88-04(P)             Status Report: March 1988                               Rader                           Available
                                                                                                (APES)


                   88-06(l)             Water Quality/Hydrology                                 Bales                           Available
                                        Bibliography                                            (USGS)

                   88-07(l)             Trawl Excluder Device                                   Pearce/Street                   Available
                                                                                                (Mariners'
                                                                                                Marine/DMF)




                                                                                       G3







                PUBLICATIONS


                88-08(P)          Project Abstracts for the                   Holman, et al.            Available
                                  Period 1987-89                              (APES)

                88-09(1)          Red Tide Persistence                        Tyler                     Available
                                                                              (Versar)

                88-10(1)          Submerged Aquatic Vegetation                Ferguson                  Available
                                  (Eastern)                                   (NOAA)

                88-11 (P).        Can Albemarle and Pamlico                   Taylor                    Available
                                  Be Saved?                                   (Wildlife of NC)

                88-12(l)          Obstructions to Anadromous                  Collier/Odom              Available
                                  Fish Migration                              (USF&WS)

                88-13(l)          Value of Recreational                       K. Smith                  Available
                                  Fishing A/P Estuaries                       (NCSU)

                88-14(l)          Analysis of Fringe                          Brinson                   Available
                                  Wetlands in A/P Sounds                      (ECU)

                89-01 (P)         Progress Report for 1989                    Holman                    Available
                                                                              (APES)

                89-02(1)          Fish Stock Assessment                       Phalen                    Available
                                                                              (DMF)

                89-03(l)          Baseline Demographic Trends                 Tschetter                 Available
                                                                              (ECU)

                89-04(P)          Public Involvement Plan                     Giordano                  Available
                                  1989                                        (APES)

                89-05(1)          Scoping of Water-Column                     Wells                     Available,
                                  and Bottom Sediments                        (UNC)

                89-06(1)          Heavy Metal/Mud Pollutants                  Riggs                     Available
                                  in Pamlico River Estuary                    (ECU)

                89-07(P)          State & Federal Interrelated                Holman, et al.            Available
                                  Programs To The APES                        (APES)

                89-08(p)          Project Abstracts For The                   Holman, et al.            Available
                                  Period 1989-1990                            (APES)                    (Aff iliation)

                89-09(1)          Evaluation of Nursery Area                  Noble                     Available
                                  Data                                        (DMF)

                89-10(l)          Submerged Aquatic Vegetation                Davis                     Available
                                  (Currituck Sound and Western                (ECU)
                                  APES Region)



                                                                       G4








                                                                                                                 PUBLICATIONS


               89-110)          Water Quality Trends                        Hamed                     Available
                                                                            (USGS)

               89-12(P)         Where the River Meets the                   Okun                      Available
                                Sea                                         (UNC)                     ($3/copy)


               90-OO(P)         A Guide to Estuaries                        Gale                      Available
                                                                            (PTRF)                    ($'/copy)

               90-01(l)         Inventory of Natural Areas:                 Frost, et al.             Available
                                Phase I Report                              DPR-NHP

               90-02(l)         Evaluation of Environmental                 Nichols                   Available
                                Management and Resource                     (RTI)
                                Protection Programs in the
                                APES Region

               90-03(l)         Abundance and Viability of                  Rulifson                  Available
                                Striped Bass Eggs Spawned                   (ECU)
                                in the Roanoke River, N.C.
                                in 1988


               90-03(l)         Synoptic Survey (WO)                        NC Div. Env.              Available
               (DEM)                                                        Management

               90-04(P)         Coastal Satellite Scene                     National                  Available
                                                                            Geographic/KRS            ($1 0/copy)

               90-05(P)         Progress Report for 1990                    Holman                    Available
                                                                            (APES)

               90-06(l)         Data Management and Analysis                Siderelis                 Available
                                System                                      (CG IA)

               90-07(l)         Heavy Metals-Neuse River                    Riggs                     Available
                                                                            (ECU)

               90-08(l)         Oyster Recruitment & Growth                 Ortega                    Available
                                in Pamlico                                  (Duke Univ. Marine
                                                                            Lab)

               90-09(l)         Effects of Water Mgmt. and                  Chescheir                 Available
                                Land Use Practices on                       (NCSU)
                                Hydrology and W.O. in
                                the APES Region








                                                                      G5







                PUBMATIONS


                90-10(1)         A Pilot Study for Managing                  Clark                     Available
                                 Multiple Use in the State's                 (UNC Sea Grant)
                                 Public Trust Waters

                90-11(f)         Abundance and Viability of                  Rulifson                  Available
                                 Striped Bass Eggs Spawned                   (ECU)
                                 in the Roanoke River, N.C.
                                 in 1989

                90-12(l)         WO as a Function of Discharge               Ruldson                   Available
                                 From The Roanoke River                      (ECU)
                                 Reservoir During Hydropower
                                 Generation

                90-13(l)         A-P Coupling Study                          Pietrafesa                Available
                                                                             (NCSU)

                90-14(l)         Reduction of Nutrient Loading               Kuenzler                  Available
                                                                             (UNC)

                90-15(1)         Eutrophication and Nutrients                Paerl                     Available
                                 Algal Blooms                                (UNC)

                90-16(l)         Food/Feeding Larval Fishes                  Rulifson                  Available
                                                                             (ECU)

                90-1 B(P)        Project Abstracts                           Holman                    Available
                                 FY 89 & go                                  (APES)

                90-19(l)         A Comprehensive Env. Mgmt.                  Rideout                   Available
                                 Plan ... Currituck Sound                    (NCSU)
                                 Drainage Basin

                90-20(l)         Federal Consistency Review                  Duff in                   Available
                                 for the APES Area                           (RTI)

                90-21(l)         Functional Description                      Siderelis                 Available
                                 Document                                    (CGIA)

                90-22(l)         Shell Disease in Blue Crab                  Noga                      Available
                                 (NCSU)                                      (NCSU)

                90-23(l)         Animal Waste Management                     Lewis                     Available
                                                                             (Va. SWCS)

                90-24(P)         Educational Handbook For                    Hoban                     Available
                                 Nonpoint-Source Pollution                   (NCSU)

                90-25(P)         Teacher Training in WO Issues               Okun                      Available
                                                                             (UNC)




                                                                      G6







                                                                                                                PUBLCATIONS


               90-26(P)         Blueprint for Action                        Albemarle/               Available
                                APES Citizens Advisory                      Pamlico CACs/
                                Committees                                  Armingeon(NCCF)

               90-27(l)         Public Attitudes Regarding WQ               Hoban                    Available
                                Phase I                                     (NCSU)

               90-28(l)         Data Inventory                              Sideralis                Available
                                                                            (CGIA)

               90-29(l)         Anemic Blue Crabs                           Brouwer                  Available
                                (interim Report)                            (Duke Univ.)

               91 -OO(P)        APES Projects Funded                        Steel                    Available
                                                                            (APES)

               91-01(1)         Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine                 Steel                    Available
                                System: Technical Analysis                  (APES)
                                of the Status and Trends
                                (Technical Document)

               91-02(l)         Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine                 Steel                    Available
                                System: Technical Analysis                  (APES)
                                of the Status and Trends
                                (Executive Summary)

               91-03(l)         Abundance and Viability                     Rulifson                 Available
                                of Striped Bass Eggs                        (ECU)
                                Spawned in the Roanoke
                                River, NC 1990

               91-05(l)         APES Fish Tissue Baseline                   Tedder                   Available
                                Study 1989                                  (DEM)

               91-06(1)         W.O. Data/Pamlico Neuse                     Garrett/                 Available
                                89-90                                       Bales (USGS)

               91 -07(P)        Estuarine Resource Center                   McNaught                 Available
                                                                            (PTRF)

               91-08(1)         GIS Development                             Siderelis                Available
                                Land Use and Land Cover                     Khorran
                                Categories                                  (CGIA/NCSU)

               91 -09(P)        1991 Annual Report                          Steel                    Available
                                                                            (APES)

               91-10(1)         Water Quality Data from Continuously        Garrett                  Available
                                Monitored Sites in the Pamlico and          (USGS)
                                Neuse River Estuaries: 1990-1991





                                                                     G7








                PUBL ICA TIONS


                92-01(l)           Environmental Management                       Bartholomew/                Available
                                   Strategies                                     Ridgeway
                                                                                  (CPN)

                92-01(l)           Albemarle-Pamlico Baseline                     NC DEM - Water              Available
                (DEM)              Water Quality Monitoring Data
                                   Quality Section Summary:
                                   1988-1991


                92-02(P)           Citizens W.Q. Monitoring                       Blinkoff                    Available
                                   Program                                        (APES)

                92-03(l)           Urban BMPs: A Stormwater                       Belk, et a[.                Available
                                   Demonstration Project                          (Cly. of Greenville)

                92-04(l)           Watershed Planning in the                      Cunningham, et al.          Available
                                   A-P Estuarine System:                          (RTI)
                                   Toxics Analysis

                92-05(l)           Watershed Planning in the                      Cunningham                  Available
                                   A-P Estuarine System:                          (RTI)
                                   Fishing Practices Mapping

                92-06(l)           Sediment Toxicity report                       Gulf Breeze                 Available

                92-07(l)           Inventory of Natural Areas:                    LeGrand, et al.             Available
                                   Phase 11 report'                               DPR-NHP

                92-08(l)           An Examination of the Blue Crab                McKenna, Camp               Available
                                   Fishery in the Pamlico River Estuary

                92-09(l)           Hemocyanin Concentrations in                   Engel, et al.               Available
                                   Blue Crabs                                     (NOAA)

                92-10(l)           Watershed Planning in the A/P                  Dodd, et al.                Available
                                   System: Annual Average Nutrient                (RTI)
                                   Budgets

                92-11 (P)          EDUCATION MODULES:                             Meiggs                      Available
                                    Please specify module:
                                   *Environmental Awareness: Teacher's Guide
                                     and Student Activity Sheets
                                   *Aqueous: Teacher's Guide and Student
                                    Activity Sheets
                                   *Flora and Fauna: Teachers Guide and
                                      Student ActA* Sheets



                     Regional Inventories are also available for the folloyAng counties upon request: Beaufort, Carteret, Craven, Hyde, Jones,
                Pamlico, and Pitt. (Please specify county.)



                                                                           G8







                                                                                                                    PUBLICATUNS


               92-12(l)          Interim Report on Flows in the Lower          Bales, Strickland,        Available
                                 Roanoke River, and Water Quality              Garrett
                                 Hydrodynamics of Albemarle-Pamlico            (USGS)

               92-13(l)          Public Attitudes Toward Water                 Hoban, Clifford           Available
                                 Quality and Management Alternatives           (NCSU)
                                 in the A/P Estuarine System
                                 (Phase 11 Report)

               92-14(l)          Hydrologic and Water Quality Data             Treece, Bales             Available
                                 from Three Agricultural Basins in             (USGS)
                                 Hyde County, Three Agricultural
                                 Basins in Beaufort County and
                                 Campbell Creek, NC

               92-15(l)          Determining the Relationship                  Noga, et al.              Available
                                 Between WO and Ulcerative Mycosis             (ECU,NCSU)
                                 in Atlantic Menhaden


               92-16(l)          Evaluation of the Apes Area Utilizing         Holman                    Available
                                 Population, Land Use, and WO                  (NCSU)
                                 Information


               92-17(P)          A Citizen's Guide to Wastewater               Rowles                    Available
                                 Management in Carteret County                 (APES)

               92-18(l)          Southeastern Virginia Institution             Carlock                   Available
                                 and Public Involvement                        (HRPDC)

               92-19(l)          Southeastern Virginia Env. Mgmt.              Carlock                   Available
                                 Program                                       (HRPDOC)

               92-20(l)          Watershed Planning in the A-P                 Dodd, et al               Available
                                 Estuarine System: Report 7-                   (RTI)
                                 Geographic Targeting for
                                 Nonpoint Source Programs

               92-21 (ES) (1)    Regional Inventory: Phase 3                   Smith, et al.             Available
                                 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                             DPR-NHP


               92-21(l)          Inventory of Natural Areas: Phase 3           Smith, et al.             Available
                                                                               DPR-NHP

               92-22(l)          Currituck Sound Investigations                Riggs                     Available
                                                                               (ECU)

               93-01(l)          Watershed Planning in the A/P                 Dodd, et al.              Available
                                 System: Subbasin Profiles                     (RTI)



                    Regional Inventories are also available for the following counties upon request: Durham, Edgecombe, Franklin, Granville,
               Halifax, Johnston, Northampton, Orange, Vance, and Wake. (Please specify county.)







               PUBLICATIONS


               93-02(l)          Heavy Metals in the Albemarle Sound        Riggs                     Available
                                                                            (ECU)'

               93-03(l)          Watershed Planning in the A/P              Tippett, Dodd             Available
                                 System: Subbasin PC Database               (RTI)

               93-04(l)          Striped Bass in Roanoke River: 1991        Ruldson                   Available
                                                                            (ECU)

               93-05(l)          Groundwater Discharge and                  Liddle                    Available
                                 Groundwater Quality                        (RTI)

               93-06(l)          Flow and Transport Modeling for            Overton, McAllister       Available
                                 the London Bridge Creek-West               (NCSU)
                                 Neck Creek Systems

               93-07(l)          Water Quality Data from                    Garrett                   Available
                                 Continuously Monitored Sites               (USGS)
                                 in the Albemarle Sound
                                 Estuarine Sys., 1989-91

               93-08(l)          The Role of a New Dinoflagellate...        Burkholder                Available
                                                                            (NCSU)

               93-09(l)          Submerged Aquatic Vegetation               Burkholder                Available
                                 and Nitrates                               (NCSU)

               93-10(l)          Hydrologic and Water Quality               Treece                    Available
                                 Data from Beaufort and Hyde                 (USGS)
                                 Counties: 1990-1992


               93-11(l)          Alternative Fishing Devices                McKenna, Clark            Available
                                 for the Estuarine Crab Trawl Fisheries     (DMF)

               93-12(l)          A/P Baseline Water Quality                 DEM                       Available
                                 Monitoring Data Summary:
                                 1991-1992


               93-13(l)          Inventory and Protection Plan              Rawinski, Fleming         Available
                                 for Southeast Virginia's Critical          (Va. Nat. Heritage
                                 Natural Areas, Exemplary                   Division)
                                 Wetlands, and Endangered
                                 Species Habitat

               93-14             Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study:         A/P Study                 Available
                                 Comprehensive Conservation and
                                 Management Plan Technical Document
                                 (A shorter summary document and
                                 brochure are available upon request.)





                                                                      G10







                                                                                                               PUBLICATIONS


              93-15             APES Descriptions of Related               A/P Study, RAI            Available
                                Government Programs, Agencies,
                                and Entities


              93-16             Economic Characterization of the APES RAI                            Available
                                Comprehensive Conservation and
                                Management Plan

              93-17             Riparian Buffers Report                    Dodd, et al.              Available

              93-18             Roanoke River Water Flow Committee         Rulifson, Manooch         Available
                                Report: 1991-1993

              94-01             Water Quality from Continuously            Garrett                   Available
                                Monitored Sites in the Pamlico-            (USGS)
                                Neuse River Estuaries, NC 1991-1992

              94-02             Rooted Vascular Aquatic Beds in the        Ferguson, Wood            Available
                                A/P System                                 (NOAA)

              94-03             Marsh Grass Protection with Low-Cost       Rogers                    Available
                                Breakwaters: Shoreline Erosion Control     (UNC/NCSU)
                                Demonstration Project

              94-04             Flow and Salinity in West Neck Creek,      Bales, et. al.            Available
                                VA., 1898-1992, and Salinity in the North
                                Landing River, NC and VA 1991-1992

              94-05             Scallop Recruiting Report                  Peterson                  Available

              94-06             Effects of Trawling on Benthos             Ambrose, et. al.          Available
                                and Bycatch

              94-07             Pollutant Removal by a Demonstration       Stanley                   Available
                                Detention Pond                             (ECU)

              94-011            Demonstration of Agricultural BMPs for     DSWC                      Available
                                Water Quality Protection



              Additional Publications                                                                AuthorlEditor
                                                                                                     (Affiliation)

                                Fact Sheets (Albemarle Region)                                       AEA

                                Fact Sheets (Pamlico Region)                                         PTRF

                                Fact Sheets (Virginia)                                               HRPDC

                                Fact Sheets ("A-P Wetlands)                                          USFINS

                                Information Sheets (Various topics of interest)                      NCCF


                                                                     G11






            -PLABLICAT1016
                                                                            WIN

                            Educational Poster (Human Impact)                                PTRF
                              on AIP Estuary

                            Projects Funded by the A-P Study-                                Steel, Scully
                            Updated July 24, 1992

                            Comprehensive Conservation                                       APES
                            Management Plan: Second Public Draft


                            Draft Economic Characterization                                  RAI


                            Draft Financing Options Plan                                     Smutko, Cox

                            APES Workshops                                                   Waters
                            (Report on six June-July 1993 Consensus Workshops)

                            A-P Environmental Education Activfty Kit                         USFWS

                            Nature's Caretakers: You Can Be One!                             AEA


             Videola


                            A Coastal County in 2010 A. D                                    GIS
                            GIS - Develop the Future































                                                              G12








                                                                                             PUBLICATMS


                          Publications order form

             Quantity       Publication     Abbreviated title or author(s)
                            Number




































           Send to:       Name:
                          Company/Affiliation:
                          Street:
                          City, State, Zip:

           How to receive you APES publication(s):
                          Mail this form and make all checks payable to DEHNR-APES, P. 0. Box 27687, Raleigh,
                          NC 27611-7687, or the DEHNR-APES, 1424 Carolina Avenue, Washington, NC 27889;
                          Fax this form to the APES main office at (919) 733-1616, or the Public Involvement Office
                          at (919) 975-3716.
                          Contact the APES main office at (919) 733-0314, or the Public Involvement Office at (919)
                          946-6481.
                          Visit the APES library nearest you: Raleigh, NC, or 1424 Carolina Avenue, Washington,
                          NC.
            Publications are free of charge unless a price is indicated under the status heading.




                                                        G13




























                --------- ----- - ------ ----- ..................... ----- -------------- -



         CONTENT AND APPROVAL
                        REQUIREMENTS



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







                                APPENDIX H











               CONTENT & APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS
                                           .......... ---- ----------                ------- ----------- --- ----------------- ---------

                  National Estuary Program Content and Approval Requirements:
                                                             A Response



               The following summary addresses content and                 Summary of Characterization Findings: The
               approval requirements for the Comprehensive                 introduction to the technical document
               Conservation and Management Plan, as                        summarizes the results of just over five years of
               identified in the Clean Water Act of 1987. Each             scientific research in the Albemade- Pamlico
               National Estuary Program is unique in its form,             estuafine system. Research was conducted to
               allowing programs to modify the national                    determine pdority problems in the estuarine
               recommendations and structures in order to                  system, to characterize the nature of
               custom design the CCMP to meet an individual                environmental degradation and to establish pilot
               region's needs. The direction that each CCMP                studies to examine management alternatives. A
               takes is molded by local environmental                      comprehensive list of all the studies sponsored
               conditions, public needs and political climate.             by the program can be found in the CCMP in .
               Foremost, each plan must be consistent with                 Appendix G. All publications are available to the
               state programs and goals in order for it to be              public and have been subject to an extemal peer
               acceptable by the public and other regulatory               review.
               agencies.                                                   Statement of Priority Findings: Priority
               The following are statutory required components             findings serve as the basis for establishing the
               of the CCMP:                                                goals and objectives of each Action Plan. These
               Management Conference Membership List                       priorfties are integrated into each Action Plan.
               Summary of Characterization Findings                        Environmental Quality Goals and Objectives:
               Statement of Priority Findings                              Goals and Objectives for addressing pdority
               Environmental Quality Goals and                             problems and environmental quality are included
               Objectives                                                  in each Action Plan.
               Base Program Analysis
               Action Plans                                                Base Program Analysis: This requirement is
               Finance Plan and Implementation                             addressed in a variety of ways. The Albemade-
               Strategy                                                    Pamlico Estuarine Study funded two analyses of
               Monitoring Program Plan                                     existing state and Federal programs which have
               Federal Consistency Review                                  jurisdiction in the region. These reports entitled,
               Summary of Public Involvement and Review                    'State and Federal Interrelated Programs to the
                                                                           A/P Study" and " Descriptions of Related
               Management Conference Membership List: A                    Govemment Programs, Agencies, and Entities"
               list including the membees affiliation is included          may be found in the publications list, Appendix
               in the document in Appendix F.                              G.The effectiveness of the existing management
                                                                           framework was assessed by the Management


                                                                      H2











                                                                                            CONTENTS APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS

                Conference and recommendations were                         officials and the public relating to the progress
                developed to enhance existing programs. The                 towards estuary protection, and provide a
                results of program analyses were integrated into            framework for the overall assessment of the
                Action Plans through "strategies" and "critical             CCMP.
                steps.u
                                                                            Environmental Monitoring
                Action Plans: Five Actions Plans constitute the             An environmental monitoring program has been
                body of the Albemarle-Pamlico CCMP: Water                   created by developing implementation strategies
                Quality Plan, Vital Habitats Plan, Fisheries Plan,          that incorporate and complement existing
                Stewardship Plan and Implementation Plan.                   monitoring programs. Since a significant
                These plans outline priority problems; goals and            amount of important data pertaining to estuarine
                objectives established to correct those problems            processes, functions, problems, and issues has
                and to maintain a high standard of                          resulted from the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine
                environmental quality; and management actions,              Study, it was utilized as a foundation upon which
                evaluations and funding strategies necessary to             an effective environmental monitoring program
                meet the goals and objectives.                              was developed. This comprehensive monitoring
                                                                            program will be closely tied to data management
                Finance Plan and Implementation Strategy:                   and analysis activities and will communicate
                Each recommended action in the Action Plans                 monitoring results to a broad range of
                contains a section entitled, "funding strategy,'            audiences.
                which explains how the proposed
                recommendation may be implemented                           The environmental monitoring program covers
                financially. The Implementation Plan describes              water quality monitoring, the monitoring of vital
                in great detail how the implementation of the               habitat and natural heritage protection efforts,
                CCMP will involve local governments and other               and the development of fisheries management
                interest groups on a regional level to carry out            plans.
                the recommendations in the plan.
                                                                            Water Quality
                Monitoring Program Plan:                                    Long-term, comprehensive monitoring and
                Programmatic and environmental monitoring                   assessment of Albemarle-Pamlico system-wide
                procedures and methods used to track the                    water quality is presented in Objective A,
                progress made during CCMP implementation                    Management Action 6 of the Water Quality Plan.
                have been incorporated into the body of the                 Utilizing a three-pronged approach, water quality
                Technical Document. The environmental                       monitodng will incorporate the following
                monitoring program provides information on                  components:
                environmental benefits resulting from CCMP                  - Long-Term Water Quality Trend and
                implementation. The programmatic monitoring
                system will help reveal the effective programs              Ecosystem Health Assessment:
                and projects that are working well, help identity           Data from a fixed station network will be used to
                potentially advantageous estuary management                 assess the system's long-term water quality
                programs, provide accountability to elected                 trends. The network will include stations with


                                                                       H3












                CONTENT & APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS
                                     - ----------- - -  -------  -- -------------------------- -----
                                                             ----------------

                continuous monitors and stations monitored                   analysis of comprehensive locational information
                through grab samples. The monitor network will               concerning critical areas and human land uses.
                be administered by the U.S. Geological Survey                Specifically, data on land uselland cover,
                (USGS) for the continuous monitors and by the                wetlands, rare natural communities, and
                N.C. Division of Environmental Management                    essential habitat for threatened and endangered
                (DEM) for the grab sample stations in an                     species is required.
                arrangement similar to that which has been
                effective in the APES program to date.                       Vital habitat conservation and mitigation efforts
                Additional grab sample stations will be provided             will be monitored by periodic reports from the
                in a coordinated manner through the efforts of               most active agencies and organizations involved
                EPA's Environmental Monitoring and                           in wetlands mitigation and restoration, critical
                Assessment Program (EMAP) and the APES                       area acquisition, and management of habitat for
                Citizen's Water Quality Monitoring Network                   conservation purposes. Habitat mapping and
                (CWQMN). Fixed station monitoring will be                    periodic updates, promoted in Objective A of the
                expanded to include biological and pesticide                 Vital Habitats Plan, will be used to monitor the
                monitoring.                                                  status of baseline information and change
                                                                             detection. Assessing the effectiveness of
                 Targeted Assessment                                         protection efforts as well as the changes and
                Area intensive assessments will be made on a                 extent of vital habitats within the APES region
                rotating basis and will be used to characterize              will rely upon a monitoring process that includes
                water quality inputs during high flow periods.               the following parameters:
                These assessments will be conducted through
                the coordination of such efforts by DEM in                   - Baseline Information:
                basin-wide planning and the USGS National                    Some baseline locational information is available
                Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program.                    for each of the data types. Land use/land cover
                These data will be used to revise management                 maps are available through the N.C. Center for
                strategies in specific basins.                               Geographic Information and Analysis'(CGIA)
                                                                             Geographic Information System (GIS).
                 Problem Identification and                                  Wetlands baseline information and maps are
                Management Success Monitoring: Data will be                  available in several forms including the U.S. Fish
                collected on an as-needed, response basis at                 and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory
                problem area sites. These efforts will be                    (NWI), CGIA Land Use/Land Cover data layers,
                conducted by DEM, USGS, and the CWQMN.                       and the U.S. Forest Service Forestry Inventory
                These data will be used to identify sources of               and Analysis. Locational information is available
                immediate problems, guide corrective                         on the essential habitats of threatened and
                management strategies, and to assure the                     endangered species through federal Recovery
                effectiveness of those strategies.                           Plans for listed species and through the N.C.
                                                                             Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database on
                Vital Habitats                                               known occurrences of these species. Locational
                Assessment of the status of vital habitats in the            information and some large-scale maps on high
                APES region will rely on the collection and                  quality rare and natural communities is available


                                                                       H4











                                                                                               CONTENT & APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS


                 through the NHP. Additional baseline data is                  - Disease and Kills Monitofing:
                 needed in the form of more comprehensive                      A continuous database of information on the
                 listings of locations of essential habitat and more           occurrence and possible causes of fish kills and
                 precise and comprehensive mapping of rare                     diseases will be established. Data will be
                 natural communities.                                          collected on a response to event basis by DEM
                                                                               and the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF).
                 - Change Detection:                                           Disease surveys will also be conducted. These
                 For each data type, change detection monitoring               data are necessary to detect trends in the
                 will be conducted to update locational                        occurrence of diseases and kills. An
                 information (and maps) on at least a five year                environmental stress indicators network
                 basis. This information will be used to                       consisting primarily of DMF, DEM, NMFS, and
                 determine trends in land uses and the status of               USFWS will standardize the investigation and
                 critical areas. This data will be collected by the            reporting of important environmental indicators
                 appropriate divisions of the Department of                    such as algal blooms, kills, and disease. This
                 Environment, Health, and Natural Resources                    network may include private citizens such as the
                 (DEHNR) (e.g., NHP, DEM, Wildlife Resources                   Citizens Water Quality Monitoring Network and
                 Commission).                                                  will eventually be used to develop management
                                                                               strategies.
                 Fisheries
                 Assessment of the Albemarle-Pamlico region's                    Crffical Fish Habitat
                 fisheries requires monitoring that is closely                 As with critical habitat information discussed in
                 linked with efforts outlined in both the Water                the Vital Habitat Plan above, baseline and
                 Quality and Vital Habitats Plans. Monitoring to               change detection data are needed for the
                 assess the occurrence and causes of fish kills                following types of fish habitat: shellfish areas,
                 and diseases is covered in Objectives D and E                 submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) beds,
                 of the Water Quality Plan. Objective D focuses                spawning areas, and primary and secondary
                 on reducing the risk of toxic contamination to                nursery areas (PNAs and SNAs). Baseline
                 aquatic life and human health while Objective E               information is available on the location of each
                 describes improved monitoring and evaluation of               of these. Change detection monitoring will be
                 environmental stress indicators in the estuary.               conducted by updating maps of these areas on
                 In addition, the extent and status of critical fish           at least a five year basis. Interim monitoring of
                 habitat will be monitored through mapping                     problem areas will be conducted on an as
                 updates included in the change detection section              needed basis.
                 of the Vital Habitats monitoring program.                     - Stock Assessments:
                 Within the Fisheries Plan of the CCMP,                        Information on status of fish stocks to support
                 Objectives A and B propose that fisheries                     the development of fishery management plans
                 management plans be monitored through stock                   requires the collection of fishery dependent and
                 assessments and bycatch reduction evaluations.                independent data. Fishery dependent data is
                                                                               currently collected through commercial and
                                                                               recreational fishery surveys. This data set can



                                                                          H5












                CONTENT & APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS
                . . .........-----------
                 --------- -----

                be expanded through the collection of additional               focus their management efforts and resources
                recreational fishing data by citizens in the                   by identifying areas in need of immediate
                CWQMN. Additional collection of fishery                        attention, successful management actions,
                independent data (e.g., age and size                           effective implementation techniques and
                composition, year class abundance, and life                    procedures, and interagency coordination and
                history information) by the DMF is needed to                   communication problems. The annual progress
                support the development of fishery management                  report will also provide a vehicle for assessing
                plans.                                                         the effectiveness of public outreach and
                                                                               education efforts.
                 Bycatch Reduction
                To preserve fish populations and diversity, a                  Data Management
                reduction in bycatch of at least 50 percent by                 All programmatic and environmental monitoring
                1995 is recommended. This reduction in non-                    results will be compiled by the responsible
                targeted harvests will be assessed by DMF                      reporting organization and forwarded to the
                through the use of gear and fishing practice                   APES off ice for inclusion in the annual progress
                testing results and bycatch estimates.                         report. The report will be distributed to all
                Commercial fisherman would also be closely                     involved resource management agencies at the
                involved in the monitoring of bycatch reduction.               Annual Summit, as described in Objective B of
                                                                               the Implementation Plan, for review of broad
                Programmatic Monitoring                                        scale and long term environmental actions, to
                The Technical Document incorporates a                          assess monitoring program performance, and to
                functional programmatic monitoring system for                  assess past and current estuarine resource
                assessing all the management actions contained                 management efforts. The annual progress
                in the CCMP. Within each management action                     report will also guide the development and focus
                is an evaluation method that describes the                     of a research agenda that will address
                agency or organization responsible for                         outstanding information needs and the economic
                implementing the management action, the                        and sociological impacts of CCMP strategies.
                procedures that will used by that organization to              Both the annual progress report and the
                evaluate the success of implementing the                       research agenda will be available to the general
                management action, and a description of how                    public.
                evaluation results can be used to improve the
                effectiveness and efficiency of the management                 The estimated costs associated with specif ic
                action.                                                        monitoring activities listed in the CCMP can be
                                                                               found within the Funding Strategy section
                As outlined in Management Action 1, Objective                  located at the end of each Management Action
                B of the CCMP's Implementation Plan, an                        description.
                annual progress report will be produced
                describing the overall progress of CCMP
                implementation, as well as the success achieved
                in implementing specific management actions.
                The progress report will help agencies effectively



                                                                         H6












                                                                                     CONTENT A APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS


               Federal Consistency Review: Several studies
               have been promoted by the Albemarle-Pamlico
               Estuarine Study to assess Federal consistency.
               See the following reports for details: "Federal
               Consistency Review for the Albemade-Pamlico
               Estuarine Study," "State and Federal Interrelated
               Programs to the A/P Study," and Description of
               Related Government Programs, Agencies and
               Entities." The Federal Consistency Review
               report was published in 1991, before
               recommendations for the plan were written. The
               Management Conference, which includes
               representatives from several federal agencies
               was able to consider consistency with federal
               programs while writing the CCMP
               recommendations. A consistency review of the
               state's Coastal Area Management Act is
               included in the CCMP approval process.



























                                                                  H7









              CONTENT & APPROVALREWIREMENTS          ------- ........-............

              Summary of Public Involvement and Review:
              A summary of public involvement and review is
              included in Appendix B.

              The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan of the Albemarle- Pamlico Estuarine Study has
              involved a collaborative effort between public and private local groups, citizens and government agencies.
              It embodies a proactive management framework for the protection of the Albemarle-Pamlico watershed
              and was developed in the spirit of cooperation and consensus-building. As a result, the river drainage
              basin approach was generated as an effort to provide management flexibility. The APES management
              framework is unique in this way, and reflects that nature in its recommendations. Each sub-basin of the
              APES region will be able to determine basinwide specific goals, priorities and actions. The true success
              of the plan can be demonstrated only during its implementation.
































                                                                H8




























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



       MANAGEMENT ACTION
     IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE





               -- ----------- -...




                  APPENDIX









           -IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE        -- ----- ----------                     -----------
                          IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE
                         FOR CCMP MANAGEMENT ACTIONS



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



           Appendix I presents a graphical illustration of the anticipated implementation
           timeframes for each Management Action contained in the CCMP. Five tables, each
           representing a section of the CCMP, have been completed to summarize the
           important information pertaining to each individual Management Action found in the
           CCMP.

           For each Management Action, information that is presented includes: 1) The CCMP
           Plan that contains the Management Action, 2) The corresponding Objective and
           Management Action number, 3) The activity described by the Management Action, 4)
           the lead agency that will have the primary responsibilities of implementing or
           continuing the activity, 5) a brief description of the activity including the types of events
           that are anticipated (i.e. begin a new activity, continue with a current activity, enhance
           or refine an existing activity, complete an activity, etc), 6) the target date (month and
           year) for achieving the Management Action's goals, and 7) a graphical representation
           of the time that each Management Action will be started, continued, or completed.

           The darkest shading in the tables show the period of time that the lead agency will
           need to develop specific policies and procedures related to implementation of a
           Management Action. The lighter shading represents the implementation time for a
           Management Action. Management Actions that require a continued implementation
           effort contain a period of dark shading followed by the lighter shading continuing
           through 12/99. Management Actions that will result in a final product have a period of
           dark shading followed by no shading at all.

           As an example, in the creation of a specific management plan, plan development will
           be'represented by the dark shading while plan implementation will be represented by
           the lighter shading.










                                                      12














   MGMT.
                                                                                       WATER QUALITY PLAN


  ACTION                         ACTIVITY                             LEAD                   DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY                  MONTH YEAR        12%  w    I= 10 IM 07         12f97 60 i2M fift law
     Al     ROANOKE RIVER BASINWIDE WO PLAN                           DEM                  5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                1      97
            TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASINWIDE WO PLAN                       DEM                  5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                1      95
            NEUSE RIVER BASINWIDE WO PLAN                             DEM                5 YEAR CYCLE (SECOND CYCLE DUE)                  1      98
            PASQUOTANK RIVER BASINWIDE WO PLAN                        DEM                  5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                1      98
                                                                                                                                                                                     . . . . . . . . . .


            CHOWAN RIVER BASINWIDE WO PLAN
                                                                      DEM                  5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)
                                                                                                                                          6      98

            WHITE OAK RIVER BASINWIDE WQ PLAN                         DEM
                                                                                           5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                6      97

     A2     BASINWIDE DETERMINATION OF TMDLs
                                                                      OEM                  COMPLETE ALL INITIAL PLANS BY                  12     99
     A3     SIMULTANEOUS PERMITTING BY BASIN                          DEM                   COMPLETE FOR ALL BASINS BY                           99
                                                                                                                                          12

     A4     CONSIDER LONG-TERM IMPACTS OF ASSIM. CAP.
                                                                      DEM                   COMPLETE FOR ALL BASINS BY                    12     99

     A5     WATER QUALITY MODELING BY BASIN
                                                                      DEM                   COMPLETE FOR ALL BASINS By                           99
     A6     WATER QUALITY MONITORING                               DEMAJSGS            CONTINUE COMPREHENSIVE MONITORING


     BI     ROANOKE RIVER IJASINWIDEWQ PLAN                           DEM                  6 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                1      97
            TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASINWIDE WO PLAN                       DEM                  5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                1      95
            NEUSE RIVER BASINWIDE WO PLAN
                                                                      DEM                  5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                1      98
            PASQUOTANK RIVER BASINWIDE WQ PLAN                        DEM                  5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                1      98
            CHOWAN RIVER BASINWIDE WQ PLAN                            DEM                  5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                6      98
            WHITE OAK RIVER BASINWIDE WO PLAN                         DEM                  5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                6      97
     B2     WATER QUALITY COST SHARE PROGRAM                          DEHNR                   BEGIN NEW PROGRAM BY                               95
                                                                                                                                          7
            AGRICULTURE COST SHARE PROGRAM                            swc              INCREASE AG. COST SHARE PROGRAM BY                 12     94
     B3     DEVELOP ALTERNATIVE SEPTIC SYSTEMS                    ENV HEALTH                    BEGIN RESEARCH BY                         7      95
            R & D BMPs TO REDUCE NPS POLLUTION                        SWC                       BEGIN RESEARCH BY                         7      95
                                                                                                                                                                 ..........                         ------
     84     ENFORCEMENT OF WATER QUALITY VIOLATIONS                   DEM               BEGIN INCREASED ENFORCEMENT BY                    12     94
     B5     STRENGTHEN FORESTRY BMPS                                  DFR                INCREASE TRAINING/EDLICATICIN BY                 12     94
     B6     ENFORCE STORMWATER RUNOFF CONTROLS                        OEM              STRENGTHEN CURRENT REGULATIONS BY                  12     95
     B7     CREATE A MARINA SITING POLICY                             DCM                          COMPLETE BY                            12     94


                                                                                                       KEY
                                                                                WORK TOWARDS COMPLETION OF ACTIVITY.

                                                                                IMPLEMENTIUNDERTAKE ACTIVITY.

                                                                                NO FURTHER ACTION. ACTIVITY COMPLETE.







                                                                             WATER QUALITY PLAN (Cont'd)

    MGM T.
  ACTION                        ACTIVITY                           LEAD                    DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY               MONTH YEAR        Im    wo  12M GM JOU GM7 IN7 UN i2fN        10
     cl    PROMOTE POLLUTION PREVENTION PLANNING                 OWR/DEM                          BEGIN BY                          10      94
     C2    STRENGTHEN NPIDES ENFORCEMENT                           DEM                          COMPLETE BY                         12      95


     DI    MONITOR & ASSESS ESTUARINE CONTAMINATION                DEM                            ON-GOING
     D2    ISSUE FISH ADVISORIES                                 DEM/EES                          ON-GOING

     D3    REMEDIATE TOXIC CONTAMINATION                         DEM/SWM                          AS NEEDED



     El    TRACK ENVIRONMENTAL STRESS INDICATORS                   DMF                            ON-GOING

     E2    IMPROVE ESTUARINE HEALTH EVALUATIONS                    DEM                 BEGIN IMPROVING TECHNIQUES BY                12      94

     E3    DEVELOP & ADOPT SHELLFISH CONTAM. INDICATORS            SSB           BEGIN AFTER NEW INDICATOR TEST APPROVAL            12      94



                                                                                                    KEY

                                                                             WORK TOWARDS COMPLETION OF ACTIVITY.

                                                                             IMPLEMENT/UINDERTAKE ACTIVITY.

                                                                             NO FURTHER ACTION. ACTIVITY COMPLETE.









                                                                                        VITAL HABITAT PLAN
   _MGMT.
   ACTION                                                                                                                             MONTH                                                  as 12M Im 12"
                                    ACTIVITY                           LEAD                  DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY                            YEAR
      Al     WHITE OAK RIVER BASINWIDE HABITAT PLAN                    WRC                5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                  6      97
             NEUSE RIVER BASINWIDE HABITAT PLAN                        WRC                5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                  4      98
             PASQUOTANK RIVER BASINWIDE HABITAT PLAN                   WRC                5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                  1      98
             CHOWAN RIVER BASINWIDE HABITAT PLAN                       WRC                5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                  6      98
                                                                                                                                                                                       Q
             TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASINWIDE HABITAT P                     WRC                5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                  1      95
                                                     LAN
                                                                       WAC                5 YEAR CYCLE (INITIAL PLAN DUE)                         97
             ROANOKE RIVER BASINWIDE HABITAT PLAN
      A2     DEVELOP HABITAT MAPPING STANDARDS                         JOINT            CONTINUE ALONG WITH HABITAT PLANS
             DEVELOP BASINWIDE HABITAT MAPSIRECORDS                    JOINT        UPDATE BASIN MAPS AT LEAST EVERY 5 YEARS                                        poll,
      A3     EXPAND WETLANDS IDENTIFICATION PROGRAMS                   DCM         COMPLETE ALL COASTAL COUNTIES W/ DATA BY                12                        ja


      BI     EXPAND PUBLIC HAB. OWNERSHIP/ MANAGEMENT                  DPR              DEVELOP ALONG WITH HABITAT PLANS                   7      95
      B2     EXPAND PRIVATE HABITAT MANAGEMENT                         DPR              DEVELOP ALONG WfTH HABITAT PLANS                   7      95


      Cl     ENHANCE WETLANDS REGULATION ENFORCEMENT                 DEM/DCM                        COMPLETE BY                            12     95
      C2     STRENGTHEN REGULATIONS FOR FISHERIES HABS                 DMIF                         COMPLETE BY                            12     95
      C3     EXPAND WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM                     DEM/DCM            EXPAND RESTORATION ACTIVITIES BY                   10     94
      C4     ESTABLISH WETLANDS MITIGATION PROGRAM                   DEM/DCM            ESTABLISH AN EFFECTIVE PROGRAM BY                  12     95



                                                                                            FISHERIES PLAN

    MGMT.
   ACTION                           ACTIVITY                           LEAD                   DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY                 MONTH YEAR       j iv"   so  1"Is"llm w Imlem im m                    im
      Al     DEV. & IMPLEMENT MGMT. PLANS FOR FISHERIES                DMF                          COMPLETE BY                            12     99
      A2     MODIFY MARINE FISHERIES LICENSE                           MFC                          COMPLETE BY                            12     95


      Bl     REDUCE BYCATCH BY 50%                                     DMIF                         COMPLETE BY                            12     95
      B2     ESTABLISH A COST SHARE PROGRAM FOR BFPs                   MFC                     BEGIN A PROGRAM BY                          12     95


                                                                                                       KEY

                                                                                WORK TOWARDS COMPLETION OF ACTIVITY.
                                                                   "
                                                                                 IMPLEMENT/UNDERTAKE ACTIVITY.
                                                                     @@O FURTHER ACTION. ACTIVITY COMPLETE.






                                                                                    STEWARDSHIP PLAN

   MGMT.
   ACTION                       ACTIVITY                          LEAD                DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY              MONTH YEAR         im em 12M 6" Im          997 12V OU 12W 01" 120
     Al     SUPPORT LOCAL PLANNING                             DCA/JOINT                    COMPLETE BY                        12
     A2     PROVIDE GIS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS                      CGIA                      COMPLETE BY                        12     96
     A3     IMPLEMENT PUBLIC TRUST MANAGEMENT PLANS               JOINT              HAVE A PLAN COMPLETED BY                  12     96
     A4     PROMOTE NATURE-BASED TOURISM                          DEHNR                       ON-GOING
     81     EXPAND & COORD. ENV. EDUCATION PROJECTS               OEE                         BEGIN BY                         12_1_94
     B2     INCREASE CITIZEN/GOVT. COMMUNICATION                  DEHNR                       BEGIN BY                         12     94
     B3     INCREASE LOCAL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT                     EAB                         BEGIN BY                         12     94
     B4     EXPAND CWOMP AND INCREASE AGENCY COOP.                CWQMP                       BEGIN BY                         12     94
     B5     CREATE CITIZEN OMBUDSMAN                              DEHNA                     COMPLETE BY                        12     95



     CI     EXPAND OEE AND COOPERATION WITH DPI                   OEE                         BEGIN BY                         12     94
     C2     PROVIDE RENEWAL CREDITS FOR TEACHERS                  OEE                         BEGIN BY                         7      95




                                                                                  IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

   MGMT.
   ACTION                       ACTIVITY                          LEAD                DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY              MONTH YEAR         1"        12"      I= 997    12V OU 12W     M t2M
     Al     CREATE ALL COUNCILS                                   DEHNA           BEGIN CREATING ALL COUNCILS BY               12     94
     A2     DEVELOP RESEARCH AGENDA                               COORD           DEVELOP A RESEARCH AGENDA BY                 6      95
                                                                                                                                                  all
            PROMOTE AGENCY COORDINATION & OUTREACH                COORD.                      BEGIN BY                         1      95
            IMPLEMENT CCMP RECOMMENDATIONS                        COORD.                      BEGIN BY                         7      94               mill,
            ADOPT MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT W/ VA                   COORD.                    COMPLETE BY                        1      95

     81     DEVELOP PROGRESS REVIEW                               COORD.                      ANNUALLY                         12     94                    m         m
     B2     ASSESS THE SUCCESS OF THE COUNCILSfCCMP               COORD.                      ANNUALLY                         12     94



                                                                                               KEY
                                                                           WORK TOWARDS COMPLETION OF ACTIVITY

                                                                            IMPLEMENTAJNDERTAKE ACTIVITY

                                                                            NO FURTHER ACTION. ACTIVITY COMPLETE




















                                    RAI,                               If A*
                                                vol"EPA                   F=l


                                                                            3 6668 00003 5206