Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Table 3 -1. Fish kill events in river basins in North Carolina (Source: Street et. al 2005, © North Carolina <br />Department of Environment and Natural Resources, used with permission) <br />River basin <br />Year <br />1996 <br />1997 <br />1998 <br />1999 <br />2400 <br />2001 <br />Total <br />Neuse <br />14 <br />12 <br />8 <br />16 <br />23 <br />37 <br />110 <br />Cape Fear <br />21 <br />16 <br />23 <br />14 <br />12 <br />5 <br />91 <br />Tar - Pamlico <br />3 <br />6 <br />5 <br />11 <br />14 <br />23 <br />62 <br />Pasquotank <br />10 <br />2 <br />8 <br />2 <br />0 <br />1 <br />23 <br />White Oak <br />3 <br />3 <br />1 <br />3 <br />3 <br />3 <br />16 <br />Lumber <br />4 <br />3 <br />5 <br />0 <br />2 <br />0 <br />14 <br />Chowan <br />2 <br />2 <br />1 <br />1 <br />0 <br />1 <br />7 <br />Roanoke <br />2 <br />0 <br />1 <br />0 <br />0 <br />0 <br />3 <br />Total <br />59 <br />44 <br />52 <br />47 <br />54 <br />70 <br />326 <br />ate levels of turbidity affected foraging success in the <br />rosyside dace (Clinostomus funduloides) collected <br />from the Little Tennessee River Basin. Interactions <br />between turbidity, velocity and interspecific compe- <br />tition with the yellowfin shiner (Notropis lutipin- <br />nis), which has recently invaded the Little Tennessee <br />Basin, have also been shown to affect foraging behav- <br />ior in this species (Hazelton and Grossman 2009). <br />In addition, mussels are particularly vulnerable to <br />silt and sedimentation (reviewed in Watters 1999) <br />as are a number of crayfish species such as Broad <br />River stream crayfish (Cambarus lenati) and Broad <br />River spiny crayfish (C. spicatus) (Simmons and Fral- <br />ey 2010), two priority species occurring in western <br />North Carolina. <br />In 1996 -2001 fish kills were concentrated in the <br />Neuse, Cape Fear, and Tar- Pamlico River Basins <br />(Street et al. 2005). Small schooling fish maybe some <br />of the most affected in estuarine waters, but other <br />fish observed in fish kill events in North Carolina <br />include sunfish, minnows, killifish, suckers, and <br />darters (Table 3 -1, Street et al. 2005). Species from <br />these groups are well- represented in the priority <br />species identified in the North Carolina Wildlife <br />Action Plan. Other freshwater taxa may also be <br />vulnerable, for example, Edisto crayfish (Procam- <br />barus ancylus) is thought to be particularly sensitive <br />to disturbances affecting dissolved oxygen concentra- <br />tions (NatureServe 2009). <br />33 Sea I l;,`vel [,?'Ise (('W' <br />Conservative estimates from the IPCC show that <br />Coastal North Carolina has over 5900 kM2 of land <br />below one meter of elevation (over 1 million acres) <br />(the third largest low -lying region in the U.S. after <br />Louisiana and Florida). Over 1.4 million acres of <br />land in North Carolina are below 1.5 meters (Titus <br />and Richman 2001). North Carolina is fortunate <br />to have access to LiDAR data for the state, which <br />provides high quality elevation data with an accu- <br />racy of 20 cm and is a valuable tool in the assess- <br />ment of vulnerability of low lying areas to sea level <br />rise (Figure 3 -8). <br />A recent report put out by the North Carolina Coast- <br />al Resources Commission (NCCRC) Science Panel <br />on Coastal Hazards (2010) synthesizes the best avail- <br />able science on SLR as it relates specifically to North <br />Chapter 3: Projected Impacts of Climate Change in North Carolina 65 <br />