Agenda - 04-20-2021; 8-a - Minutes

Browse Search

3 1 The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has recently published a conservation plan 2 to direct management activities for three freshwater mussels in addition to the Carolina Madtom 3 and the Neuse River Waterdog within the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico river basins. Published 4 December 10, 2020, this is in addition to the Federal Endangered Species protections proposed 5 by the US Fish & Wildlife Service and currently under review in Congress. Titled: The 6 Conservation Plan for Five Rare Aquatic Species Restricted to the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico 7 River Basins in North Carolina it calls for"Establishing and maintaining working relationships 8 between governing bodies (federal, state, and local), universities, private landowners, private 9 companies, and conservation organizations" such as the Triangle Land Conservancy, to explore 10 conservation easements and other strategies for protecting these five species from extinction 11 over the next 100 years. It plans for the release of Carolina Madtoms into the Upper Eno 12 watershed. Also, it is of note that all of Sevenmile Creek, along with the first and second order 13 creeks that feed into it, are included in the range of the Neuse River Waterdog as defined by the 14 US Fish and Wildlife Service. 15 16 If you come up the Eno River, into the South Fork Little River and then on into Sevenmile Creek, 17 the areas defined in the Buckhorn Area Plan as parcels B, C & D, look like they are already 18 developed, just fine. 19 20 A comprehensive land use plan would identify and address its environmental impact. In my 21 opinion, the Buckhorn Area Plan is not a land use plan but rather a real estate marketing plan. 22 If adopted it would set a path for industrial and manufacturing development resulting in the 23 degradation of a critical watershed and Hillsborough's municipal water supply. In addition, the 24 Buckhorn Area Plan would set goals for land use that would be in direct opposition to people 25 and organizations, including those in the North Carolina State government, whose jobs include 26 working to protect this environmental resource for us all. 27 28 Why not ask the Committee for the Environment to study the short and long term environmental 29 impact of the Buckhorn Area Plan? And why weren't Orange County residents at the table 30 earlier to participate in the discussion of an area so critical to their health and welfare? Shouldn't 31 we be protecting the headwaters of Hillsborough's municipal water supply? There is currently 32 zoning in place that allows plenty of time to study and address the serious environmental 33 questions raised but left unanswered in the Buckhorn Area Plan. 34 35 Fiona Johann read the following letter: 36 37 Good evening, 38 I'm Fiona Johann and I live in Orange County. I am here again for public comment because 1 39 believe it is important for citizens in the area to stay informed on how things are progressing 40 with the Buckhorn Area Plan. 41 42 The last time I spoke during a public comment on March 2, 1 asked that two items come out of 43 the March 9 joint working session with the Orange County BOCC and Mebane City Council 44 concerning the BAP. 45 46 The first, and I believe the most important ask, was for a clear plan on public engagement on 47 the proposed Buckhorn Area Plan. The second was for the two governments to consider a 48 binding agreement on a joint area plan. I understand that the commissioners and city council 49 have different priorities, but I had truly hoped that while in a 90 minute zoom discussion with 7 50 commissioners and 6 council members, with over 220 collective years of civic responsibilities 51 among them that a path moving forward on public engagement would have been evident.