United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
(4504F)
EPA842-F-01-006Y
August 2001
vvEPA
BACKGROUND
The Albemarle and Pamlico Estuary forms a
complex and dynamic ecosystem that provides a
bounty of natural resources, essential for North
Carolina's economy. The rivers, creeks, wetlands,
and watershed supply food, recreation, jobs,
transportation, and a vital habitat for fish and
shellfish. Economically, the Albemarle and
Pamlico sounds represent the region's key
resource base through commercial fishing,
tourism, recreation and resort development,
while the watershed supports mining, forestry
and agriculture. Additionally, the diverse ecolog-
ical communities provide a rich natural heritage
for people living in the region.
Several signs of environmental stress have been
recognized in the Albemarle-Pamlico system.
Among these are declining fisheries, frequent
algal blooms, closure of shellfish waters, losses of
historic submerged aquatic vegetation beds, and
degradation of wedand, fish and upland habitats. Much of
this stress can be linked to declines in water quality, due to
nonpoint source pollution.
RIVER BASINS IN THE ALBEMARLE / PAMLICO REGION
Estuaries and other coastal and marine waters are national resources
that are increasingly threatened by pollution, habitat loss, coastal devel-
opment, and resource conflicts. Congress established the National
Estuary Program (NEP) in 1987 to provide a greater focus for coastalprotec-
tion and to demonstrate practical, innovative approaches for protecting estuar-
ies and their living resources.
As part of the demonstration role, the NEP offers funding far member estu-
aries to design and implement Action Plan Demonstration Projects that
demonstrate innovative approaches to address priority problem areas, show
improvements that can be achieved on a small scale, and help determine the
time and resources needed to apply similar approaches basin-wide.
The NEP is managed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
It currently includes 28 estuaries: Albemarle-Pamlico Sounds, NC;
Barataria-Terrebonne Estuarine Complex, LA; Bamegat Bay, NJ; Buzzards
Bay, MA; Casco Bay, ME; Charlotte Harbor, PL; Columbia River, OR and
WA; Corpus Christi. Bay, TX; Delaware Estuary, DE, NJ, and PA;
Delaware Inland Bays, DE; Galveston Bay, TX; Indian River Lagoon, PL;
Long Island Sound, CTandNY; Maryland Coastal Bays, MD;
Massachusetts Bays, MA; Mobile Bay, AL; Morro Bay, CA; Narragansett
Bay, RI; New Hampshire Estuaries, NH; New York-New Jersey Harbor, NY
andNJ; Peconic Bay, NY; Puget Sound, WA; San Francisco Bay-Delta
Estuary, CA; San Juan Bay, PR; Santa Monica Bay, CA; Sarasota Bay, PL;
Tampa Bay, PL; and Tillamook Bay, OR.
-------
Nonpoint source pollution is the greatest cause of impairment
to both salt and fresh water resources in the Albermarle-
Pamlico region. Of the miles of impaired streams in the
Roanoke River basin that do not meet criteria for supporting
aquatic life, 81% are impaired due to nonpoint sources of pol-
lution. The most significant land use in the watershed is agri-
culture, including crop farming and cattle farming. Aldiough
agriculture is not the only land use that contributes to non-
point source pollution, agricultural practices are often cited as
the major contributor to nonpoint source pollution. Stream
bank erosion, sedimentation, and nutrient loading all con-
tribute to water quality degradation and can be traced to
detrimental agricultural practices.
A current demonstration project seeks to enhance Roanoke
River water quality and to provide education and outreach
with transferable benefits to others. The demonstration proj-
ect is expected to restore approximately 36 acres of riparian
habitat along the Roanoke River, located in Halifax County,
northeast of the town of Norfleet. Expected benefits include
improving water quality and wildlife and fish habitats for
species such as anadromous fish and migratory birds. This
will be accomplished by reducing stream bank erosion, sedi-
mentation and nutrient loading through removal of catde
from the riverbank. Methods being used include fencing out
catde from the riverbank, establishing river and tributary
buffers through the planting of hardwood trees, supplying an
alternate watering source for the catde, and providing a cattle
crossing to allow for a pasture rotation system.
':~ : ' '"" !.". " " ' i i ' B » E t
The Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system is the second largest
estuarine complex in die United States, second only to the
great Chesapeake Bay. The system supports an abundant
and rich variety of organisms and encompasses important
habitat for fish and shellfish, including key nursery areas for
East Coast fisheries.
The system is composed of seven sounds: the Albemarle,
Currituck, Croatan, Pamlico, Bogue, Core and Roanoke,
and is drained by several major river basins: the Chowan,
Tar-Pamlico, Neuse, Roanoke, Pasquotank, Perquimans,
Little, North, Pungo and Alligator. The rivers drain a basin
of over 30,000 square miles, including 36 counties in north-
eastern North Carolina and 16 counties and independent
cities in southeastern Virginia. They discharge fresh water
largely into the western side of the sounds.
North Carolina's sounds are characterized by wind-driven
tides, which affect circulation patterns within die 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 constituting North
Carolina's beautiful Outer Banks, forms a barrier (with very
few inlets) between the sounds and the Atlantic Ocean.
The Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system supports an array
of ecological, economic, recreational, and aesthetic functions
that are of regional and national importance. For these rea-
sons, the sounds were included in the EPA's National
Estuary Program (NEP) in November of 1987.
The Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study (APES, as it was
known then) completed its Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plan (CCMP) in November, 1994, bring-
ing to a close the research and development phase of the
program, and commencing the implementation phase. At
this time the program was renamed as the Albemarle-
Pamlico National Estuary Program (APNEP).
Fortunately die Albemarle-Pamlico ecosystem is relatively
healthy when compared to heavily populated and industrial-
ized estuarine systems in other parts of the country, such as
Boston Harbor or Long Island Sound. Nevertheless, non-
point sources of pollution have impacted this largely unde-
veloped and agricultural region.
One of the five major river basins included in the APNEP
region is the Roanoke River basin. It begins in the Blue
Ridge Mountains of northwestern Virginia and flows in a
southeasterly direction for 400 miles before emptying into
the Albemarle Sound in eastern North Carolina. By the
time it reaches the fall line near Roanoke Rapids, water from
nearly 8,000 square miles of watershed has drained into it.
From Roanoke Rapids to the coast, another 2,000 square
miles are drained, giving the Roanoke the distinction of car-
rying more water than any other river in North Carolina.
The lower portion of the basin contains the largest intact
-------
and least disturbed bottomland hardwood and cypress-tupe-
lo ecosystems on die Atlantic coast of North America.
Forestry and cultivated cropland account for approximately
22 percent of die land use in the basin. Cotton, peanuts, :
tobacco and soybeans are among the most commonly grown
crops, and only six percent of land use falls within the .; ;
urban/developed category.
Because surface waters in North Carolina are classified
according to their best-intended uses, water quality is deter-
mined by how well the intended uses are being met. This is
known as "use support status" and is expressed as FS, for
fully supporting; PS, for partially supporting; NS, for not
supporting; and NR for not rated. Intended use categories
include aquatic life protection/secondary recreation, primary
recreation, fish consumption, shellfish harvesting, and water
supply. Data are derived through water quality monitoring,
fish tissue studies, benthic macroinvertebrate and fish com-
munity sampling, and are compared to use criteria. These
comparisons determine the use support status or condition
of the water. Water bodies receiving NS or PS ratings are
considered to be impaired.
One of the greatest causes of degraded or impaired fresh or
salt water is nonpoint source pollution. Forestry, construc-
tion, and urban/agricultural waste runoff all contribute sig-
nificant nonpoint source pollution to the Roanoke River.
The river has approximately 178 miles of streams that are
impaired with respect to fish consumption and aquatic
life/secondary recreation protection. While some loading of
mercury and dioxin can be traced to point sources and con-
tributes to the fish consumption impairments, the majority
of the river miles are impacted by nonpoint source contribu-
tions.
Because nonpoint source pollution had been implicated in
water quality impairment in this particular area of the
Roanoke, the Roanoke River Basin Regional Council
(RRBRC), a member of the APNEP, chose to address it in a
demonstration project involving agricultural practices.
Detrimental agricultural practices in this area included
allowing catde to enter the riparian zone for water, grazing
and shade. The consequences of this practice resulted in cat-
de excrement being deposited either direcdy into the river or
immediately adjacent to upgradient riverbank slopes. At the
same time, allowing catde access to the river resulted in
severe streambank erosion and sedimentation, which further
contributed to water quality degradation.
The "Roanoke River Riparian Zone Rehabilitation
Demonstration Project," begun in the summer of 2000 at a
cost of $42,000, consisted of fencing catde to exclude diem
from a two-mile stretch of the Roanoke River in order to
reduce stream bank erosion, sedimentation and nutrient
loading. To form a 150-foot buffered area extending back
from'the river and a 75-foot buffered area on both sides of a
tributary stream, hardwood plantings were established in
winter, 2001 to restore approximately 21 acres of riparian
habitat. Water quality will be monitored over the next four
years, in conjunction with twice-yearly ground cover inspec-
tions.
This project is a joint effort among the Fishing Creek Soil
and Water Conservation District, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, North Carolina Division of Water
Quality, North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service, US
Fish and Wildlife Service, the Albemarle-Pamlico National
Estuary Program, and a private landowner. As a cost-shared,
cooperative effort, the project created cooperation between
participating agencies and the landowner. The US Fish and
Wildlife Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service,
and the landowner installed project fencing in September,
2000. An existing stream crossing widi eroded banks caused
by catde use was restored; this involved removing the old
pipe, replacing it with new pipe measuring 42 inches, haul-
ing soil, and placing filter fabric and gravel on the site. In
addition, an existing but unused water well was repaired and
new water lines were installed to new watering troughs to
provide a new water source to the cattle.
The landowner, catde and the environment will all benefit
from the project. The catde will retain more of their weight
by not having to travel as far to their water supply.
Rotational pasture grazing is now available, drinking water
for catde will be cleaner, and there will be an annual per acre
payment from the USDA for each acre of riparian buffer
installed. Benefits accruing to the environment will also be
realized through improved water quality and aquatic habitat
downstream, and will help to forestall costlier future reme-
dies.
-------
1
This demonstration project has local and statewide applica-
tions. History has demonstrated that during high flows of
the Roanoke River in warm months, water quality does not
support aquatic life. Fish kills caused by low dissolved oxy-
gen levels are experienced annually in the lower reaches of
the river. These events have been accompanied by assertions
that the problem is due in part to background, natural or
backswamp biochemical oxygen demand, beyond the land
managers' control. Land use practices that contribute to
impaired water quality should be modified to prevent further
impacts to historically marginal water quality. In the west-
ern reaches of North Carolina, not only streams but also
drinking wells continue to be contaminated by fecal col-
iform bacteria from cattle excrement. Changing farming
practices to include buffers to both riparian and wellhead
areas would better protect water quality.
Printed on Recycled Paper
Iff .rl. .... 1 ' . . '
• -:;'i "••" • ^:', ;"'„"• ' " ,:',',"" *-~m"
~*>": "• '", :-. ' "."." "T ".'•'."' T -~\, ',7 ur .
Report Title
Buzzards Bay MSep Trade" Initiative
New Options for Dredging in Barataria-Terrebonne
Coquina Bay Walk at Leffis Key
"Pilot Project Goes Airborne"
The National Estuary Program: A Ten-Year Perspective
Rock Barbs In Oregon's Tillamook Bay Watershed
The Weeks Bay Shoreline & Habitat Restoration Project
Evaluation of Shrimp Bycatch Reduction Devices in Texas Coastal Bend Waters
National Estuary Program
Buzzards Bay, MA
Barataria-Terrebonne Basin, LA
Sarasota Bay, FL
Narragansett Bay, RI
General NEP Discussion
Tillamook Bay, Oregon
Mobile Bay, AL
Corpus Christi, TX
Evaluating Simple, Cost Effective Solutions for Reducing Stormwater and Urban Runoff Santa Monica, CA
Bay Scallop Restoration Project in Chincoteague Bay
Clear Creek Wetland Restoration Project
The Tampa BayWatch High School Wetland Nursery Program
Punta Gorda Waterfront Juvenile Fisheries Habitat Project
Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program
Tillamook Bay National Estuary Project
Broad Marsh River Stormwater Remediation Project
Morro Bay National Estuary Program
Santa Monica Bay, Innovations in Treating Urban Runoff
For copies of an)
Annapolis, MD
GalvestonBay.TX
Tampa Bay, FL
Punta Gorda, FL
Indian River Lagoon, FL
Tillamook County, OR
Buzzards Bay, MA
Morro Bay, CA
Santa Monica, CA
r of these publications contact:
National Clearinghouse for Environmental Publications Telephone: (513) 489-8190
Date
1997
1997
1997
1997
1998
1998
1998
1998
1999
1999
1999
1999
2000
2000
2000
2000
2001
2001
Publication #
EPA842-F-97-002G
EPA842-F-97-002H
EPA842-F-97-002I
EPA842-F-97-002J
EPA842-F-98-003K
EPA842-F-98-003L
EPA842-F-98-003M
EPA842-F-98-003N
EPA842-F-99-0040
EPA842-F-99-004P
EPA842-F-99-004Q.
EPA842-F-99-004R
EPA842-F-00-005S
EPA842-F-00-005T
EPA842-F-00-005U
EPA842-F-00-005V
EPA842-F-01-006W
EPA842-F-01-006X
Facsimile: (513) 489-8695
vxEPA
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
(4504F)
Washington, DC 20460
------- |