Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan

              I N W R Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Mike Bryant - Refuge Mananger
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
c/o: Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge
P. O. Box 1969
Manteo, NC 27954
Pea Island Visitor Center: 252-987-2394
Office Phone: 252-473-1131
Fax: 252-473-1668
Email us: alligatorriver@fws.gov
Pea Island website: www.fws.gov/peaisland
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
1 800/344 WILD
http://www.fws.gov
September 2006
I
W R
Pea Island
National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Whimbrel
Photo courtesy of Michael Halminski
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Comprehensive Conservation Plans provide long-term guidance for
management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies
needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and identify the Fish and
Wildlife Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail
program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above
current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service
strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans
do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational
and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition.
COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
PEA ISLAND NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
Dare County, North Carolina
U.S. Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Southeast Region
Atlanta, Georgia 30345
September 2006
Table of Contents i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION A. COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................1
I. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................1
Introduction..................................................................................................................................1
Purpose And Need For The Plan .................................................................................................2
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ......................................................................................................3
National Wildlife Refuge System ..................................................................................................3
Legal Policy Context.....................................................................................................................4
National Conservation Plans and Initiatives .................................................................................5
Relationship To State Partners.....................................................................................................5
II. REFUGE OVERVIEW.......................................................................................................................7
Introduction..................................................................................................................................7
Location..............................................................................................................................7
Establishment.....................................................................................................................7
Importance ..........................................................................................................................7
Refuge History and Purposes.......................................................................................................7
History ................................................................................................................................7
Purpose..............................................................................................................................9
Special Designations ....................................................................................................................9
Ecosystem Context.....................................................................................................................10
Regional Conservation Plans and Initiatives ..............................................................................10
Ecological Threats and Problems...............................................................................................12
Habitat Loss and Fragmentation .......................................................................................12
Alterations To Hydrology...................................................................................................14
Siltation Of Aquatic Ecosystems .......................................................................................14
Proliferation Of Invasive Aquatic Plants ............................................................................15
Conservation Priorities ......................................................................................................15
Challenges ........................................................................................................................16
Physical Environment .................................................................................................................16
Climate ..............................................................................................................................16
Geology............................................................................................................................17
Minerals............................................................................................................................20
Soils .................................................................................................................................20
Hydrology ..........................................................................................................................20
Water Quality ....................................................................................................................22
Air Quality.........................................................................................................................23
Visual Resources ..............................................................................................................23
Biological Environment ...............................................................................................................23
Habitats .............................................................................................................................23
Wildlife..............................................................................................................................29
Insects and Diseases........................................................................................................31
Exotic Organisms ..............................................................................................................31
Threatened and Endangered Species ..............................................................................31
i i Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Cultural Resources.....................................................................................................................32
Socioeconomic Conditions and Land Use..................................................................................32
History Of Dare County.....................................................................................................33
Land Use in Dare County..................................................................................................34
Demographics in Dare County..........................................................................................35
Employment in Dare County.............................................................................................36
Outdoor Recreation ..........................................................................................................36
Outdoor Recreation Economics........................................................................................38
Tourism............................................................................................................................39
Transportation..................................................................................................................39
Cultural Environment ........................................................................................................40
Refuge Administration and Management...................................................................................40
Land Protection and Conservation ...................................................................................40
Visitor Services .................................................................................................................40
Personnel, Operations, and Maintenance.........................................................................44
Refuge Infrastructure ........................................................................................................44
III. PLAN DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................................................................49
Public Involvement and The Planning Process ..........................................................................49
Summary of Issues, Concerns, and Opportunities.....................................................................49
Hydrology.........................................................................................................................50
Fish and Wildlife Populations............................................................................................50
Habitat Management.........................................................................................................51
Visitor Services (Public Use).............................................................................................52
Resource Protection .........................................................................................................52
General Administration .....................................................................................................53
IV. MANAGEMENT DIRECTION.........................................................................................................55
Introduction ...............................................................................................................................55
Vision ........................................................................................................................................55
Goals.........................................................................................................................................56
Fish and Wildlife Populations:...........................................................................................56
Habitat: .............................................................................................................................56
Public Use:........................................................................................................................56
Resource Protection: ........................................................................................................56
Administration: ..................................................................................................................56
Objectives, Strategies, and Projects ..........................................................................................56
Fish and Wildlife Populations............................................................................................56
Habitat ..............................................................................................................................61
Public Use.........................................................................................................................64
Resource Protection .........................................................................................................70
Refuge Administration ......................................................................................................76
Table of Contents iii
V. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ..............................................................................................................79
Introduction................................................................................................................................79
Proposed Projects ......................................................................................................................79
Refuge Administration ................................................................................................................83
Funding and Personnel ..............................................................................................................83
Volunteers .................................................................................................................................84
Step-Down Management Plans..................................................................................................84
Monitoring and Adaptive Management.......................................................................................88
SECTION B. APPENDICES
APPENDIX I. GLOSSARY...................................................................................................................89
APPENDIX II. REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED..................................................................95
APPENDIX III. RELEVANT LEGAL MANDATES ................................................................................99
APPENDIX IV. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT...........................................................................................107
APPENDIX V. DECISIONS AND APPROVALS ................................................................................119
Intra-Service Section 7 Biological Evaluation ...........................................................................119
Compatibility Determinations....................................................................................................125
APPENDIX VI. REFUGE BIOTA........................................................................................................133
APPENDIX VII. PRIORITY BIRD SPECIES AND THEIR HABITATS ...............................................149
APPENDIX VIII. BUDGET REQUESTS............................................................................................151
APPENDIX IX. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION................................................................181
APPENDIX X. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.................................................................185
i v Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location of Pea Island River National Wildlife Refuge in Dare County, North Carolina ........8
Figure 2. Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge in the South Atlantic Coastal Plain
Physiographic Area .............................................................................................................11
Figure 3. Characteristics of soils of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge ...........................................21
Figure 4. Vegetative habitat types of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge.........................................24
Figure 5. Cross-section of vegetative habitat types of coastal barrier islands....................................25
Figure 6. Approved acquisition boundary, Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge.................................41
Figure 7. Current visitor facilities at Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge ...........................................47
Figure 8. Future visitor facilities at Pea Island NWR ..........................................................................85
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. The Nature Conservancy ranking of vegetative communities of
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge...................................................................................10
Table 2. Threatened and endangered animals of the North Carolina Coastal Plain ........................13
Table 3. Classifications of water bodies and streams surrounding
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge...................................................................................22
Table 4. Species of Management Concern at the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge ...................30
Table 5. Dare County agricultural statistics from 1997 .....................................................................35
Table 6. Commodity production in Dare County in 1992 and 1997 ..................................................35
Table 7. Economic and population data for northeastern North Carolina counties. .........................37
Table 8. Acquisition history of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge .................................................40
Table 9. Staff of the Alligator River and Pea Island National Wildlife Refuges, 2005.......................45
Table 10. Projects supporting Wildlife Strategies ...............................................................................79
Table 11. Projects supporting Habitat Strategies ...............................................................................80
Table 12. Projects supporting Public Use Strategies..........................................................................81
Table 13. Projects supporting Resource Protection Strategies ..........................................................82
Table 14. Projects supporting Refuge Administration Strategies .......................................................83
Table 15. Proposed staffing plan for Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge .........................................86
Executive Summary
The Fish and Wildlife Service prepared this Comprehensive Conservation Plan to guide the
management of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge in Dare County, North Carolina. The plan
outlines programs and corresponding resource needs for the next 15 years, as mandated by the
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997.
Before the Service began planning, it conducted a biological review of the refuge’s wildlife and habitat
management program and conducted public scoping meetings to solicit public opinion of the issues
the plan should address. The biological review team was composed of biologists from federal and
state agencies and non-governmental organizations that have an interest in the refuge. The staff
held the public scoping meetings at four locations on four evenings. The staff also held another
round of public meetings to solicit public reaction to the proposed alternatives.
The Service developed and analyzed five alternatives. Alternative 1 was a proposal to maintain the
status quo. The refuge currently manages its impoundments very intensively by managing water
levels and vegetation to create optimum habitat for migrating waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, and
aquatic organisms. It also manages marshes with prescribed fire. The staff surveys sea turtles,
waterfowl, shorebirds, and wading birds on a routine basis. The refuge allows five of the six priority
public use activities: fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education
and interpretation. The staff conducts extensive environmental education and interpretation
programs with the assistance of 25,000 hours of volunteer service every year. There is one staff
public use specialist (0.9 FTE) stationed on the refuge. Staff from the Alligator River National Wildlife
Refuge (an additional 6.3 of the 23 FTEs) manages the refuge, administers budgets and contracts,
maintains the facilities, manages impoundment and marsh habitat, and conducts wildlife surveys.
Alternative 2 proposed moderate program increases. The refuge would continue to manage its
impoundments very intensively by managing water levels and vegetation to create optimum habitat
for migrating waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, and aquatic organisms. It would manage for fall
shorebird habitat. It would also manage marshes with prescribed fire. The staff would survey a wider
range of wildlife on the refuge, adding regular surveys of land birds. The refuge would continue to
allow five of the six priority public use activities, but would have the capacity to increase the number
of opportunities. The staff would continue to conduct extensive environmental education and
interpretation programs with the assistance of 30,000 hours of volunteer service every year. There
would be five staff members (4.4 FTEs) stationed on the refuge, including an assistant refuge
manager, biologist, two public use specialists, and a maintenance worker. Staff from the Alligator
River National Wildlife Refuge (an additional 8.85 of 39 FTE) would still administer budgets and
contracts and manage impoundment and marsh habitat.
Alternative 3 proposed optimum program increases. The refuge would continue to manage its
impoundments very intensively by managing water levels and vegetation to create optimum habitat
for migrating waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, and aquatic organisms. It would manage for fall
shorebird habitat. It would also manage marshes with prescribed fire. The staff would survey a wider
range of wildlife on the refuge, adding regular surveys of land birds, wading birds, mammals,
invertebrates, reptiles, and amphibians. The refuge would continue to allow five of the six priority
public use activities, but would have the capacity to increase the number of opportunities. The staff
would continue to conduct extensive environmental education and interpretation programs with the
assistance of 35,000 hours of volunteer service every year. There would be twelve staff members
(11.4 FTEs) stationed on the refuge, including an assistant refuge manager, biologist, three biological
technicians, two public use specialists, and five maintenance workers. Staff from the Alligator River
National Wildlife Refuge (an additional 13.9 of the 69.5 FTEs) would still administer budgets and
contracts and manage marsh habitat.
Alternative 4 assumed that vehicular access to the refuge on a paved road would be eliminated from
the north but would be maintained from the south as far north as the Visitor Center. The alternative
assumed that natural processes would dominate the area north of the Visitor Center and habitat for
colonial nesting shorebirds would increase. The refuge would continue to manage impoundments
and marshes. The staff would survey wildlife on the refuge. The refuge would provide public use
opportunities, but the number of visitors would decrease due to the limited access. Staffing would be
the same as Alternative 3.
Alternative 5 assumed that access to the refuge on a paved road would be totally eliminated. The
Service would provide other means of accessing the refuge. The alternative assumed that natural
processes would dominate the entire refuge and habitat for colonial nesting shorebirds would
increase substantially. The refuge would continue to manage impoundments and marshes. The staff
would survey wildlife on the refuge. The refuge would provide public use opportunities, but the
number of visitors would decrease due to the limited access. Staffing would be the same as
Alternative 3.
The planning team selected Alternative 2 as its preferred alternative. It advances the refuge program
considerably, and is more realistic than Alternative 3 in terms of expected staffing levels to conduct
the proposed program. The staff evaluated Alternatives 4 and 5 in the event that the North Carolina
Department of Transportation would close the Bonner Bridge over Oregon Inlet and eliminate access
from the northern end of the island. The North Carolina Department of Transportation is considering
the bridge’s closure, but has not yet made a decision.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1
SECTION A. COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
I. Background
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) developed this Comprehensive Conservation Plan
for Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge in Dare County, North Carolina, to provide a foundation
for the management and use of the refuge. The Service designed the plan as a working guide for
the refuge’s management programs and actions over the next 15 years.
However, with the pending Herbert C. Bonner Bridge replacement project, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation proposes several alternatives, each affecting future refuge
management in significant ways. The “status quo” alternative in this plan should not be
interpreted in any way as a statement that the Service prefers the Bonner Bridge or North
Carolina Highway 12 remain where it is currently located. The alternatives merely reflect
planning strategies with the road and bridge located in their current positions. The potential
exists for the refuge portion of the North Carolina Highway 12 to be relocated west of the refuge
in the Pamlico Sound as early as 2010. If this occurs, this comprehensive conservation plan may
require revision to reflect new methods of access that would result if the North Carolina
Department of Transportation chooses to abandon its existing right-of-way through the refuge.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation has indicated that if it chooses to replace the
bridge by paralleling the existing alignment and using the existing right-of-way, it will request
permits for work outside the existing right-of-way, such as large-scale, repetitive beach building
and dune building over at least the next 50 years; and permits for many miles of a major new
right-of-way west of the existing right-of-way in an attempt to maintain North Carolina Highway 12
for the life of the new bridge. Requests for large-scale, long-term, repetitive beach building and
dune building permits or for major new right-of-way permits are not likely to be compatible. The
Service would work with federal, state, county and local officials, and other groups to identify
feasible public use access and management actions that are compatible with the purposes for
which the refuge was established.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dredges the Oregon Inlet navigation channel adjacent to the
refuge. This dredging affects the amount and kind of sand that natural processes bring to the
refuge beach face and the beach-face organisms. Annually, the Corps requests a refuge permit
to dispose dredged sand on the refuge. Dredge disposal timing and placement, sand suitability
characteristics, and monitoring and remediation of impacts are addressed in permit conditions.
Long-term trends are analyzed to monitor changes in beach sediment and beach-face organisms
associated with sand disposal on and near the refuge. Present trend analysis indicates that the
Corps’ Oregon Inlet dredge disposal has changed the refuge beach over time to a beach with
finer grain-sized sand, a greater percentage of heavy (dark) minerals, and decreased abundance
of beach-face organisms. Compatibility of this permitted use can only be determined if long-term
monitoring and adjustments to other permit conditions continue.
The permitted activities of both the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Corps of
Engineers are long-term and large-scale. They have significant effects on the physical
environment of the refuge and on all management planning and actions. To achieve the refuge’s
desired condition, the actions of these two agencies must be considered when refuge
management decisions are made.
2 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
The Service developed this plan in compliance with the National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997 and Part 602 (National Wildlife Refuge System Planning) of the Fish and
Wildlife Service Manual. When fully implemented, this plan will strive to achieve the vision and
purposes of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge. The actions described within this plan also meet the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The refuge staff achieved
compliance with this Act through the involvement of the public and the preparation of an
Environmental Assessment, which was Section B of the Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan for
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge. The environmental assessment contained a description of the
alternatives considered and an analysis of the environmental consequences of the alternatives.
The plan’s overriding consideration is to carry out the purposes for which the refuge was established.
Fish and wildlife are the first priority in refuge management, and the Service allows and encourages public
use (e.g., wildlife-dependent recreation) as long as it is compatible with the refuge’s mission and
purposes.
A planning team prepared the plan. The planning team was made up of representatives from various
Service programs, including the divisions of Refuges, Fisheries, Ecological Services, Realty, and
Migratory Birds. In developing this plan, the planning team and refuge staff incorporated the input of the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, other governmental organizations, local citizens, and the
general public through a series of stakeholder and public scoping meetings.
The plan represents the Service’s preferred alternative and is being put forward after considering four
other alternatives, as described in the environmental assessment referred to above. After reviewing a
wide range of public comments and management needs, the planning team developed the alternatives in
an attempt to determine how to best meet the goals and objectives of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge.
The preferred alternative is the Service’s recommended course of action for management of the refuge,
and forms the basis for this comprehensive conservation plan.
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PLAN
The purpose of this comprehensive conservation plan is to identify the role that Pea Island National
Wildlife Refuge will play in support of the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, and to
provide long-term guidance to the refuge’s management programs and activities for the next 15
years. The plan is needed to:
• provide a clear statement of direction for the future management of the refuge;
• provide refuge neighbors, visitors, and local, state, and federal government officials with n
understanding of the Fish and Wildlife Service’s management actions on and around the
refuge;
• ensure that the Service’s management actions, including land protection and recreational and
educational programs, are consistent with the mandates of the National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act of 1997;
• ensure that the management of the refuge is consistent with federal and state laws; and
• provide a basis for the development of budget requests for the refuge’s operational,
maintenance, and capital improvement needs.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 3
Perhaps the greatest need of the Service is to communicate with the public and include public
participation in its efforts to carry out the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System. Many
agencies, organizations, institutions, businesses, and private citizens have developed relationships
with the Service to advance the goals of the Refuge System. This plan supports the Partners in
Flight Initiative; South Atlantic Coastal Plain Migratory Bird Conservation Plan; North American
Waterfowl Management Plan; Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network; and National
Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the primary federal agency responsible for the conservation,
protection, and enhancement of the Nation’s fish and wildlife populations and their habitats. Although
the Service shares some conservation responsibilities with other federal, state, tribal, local, and
private entities, it has specific trustee obligations for migratory birds, threatened and endangered
species, anadromous fish, and certain marine mammals. In addition, the Service administers a
national network of lands and waters for the management and protection of these resources.
As part of its mission, the Service manages more than 540 national wildlife refuges covering a total of
more than 93 million acres. These areas comprise the National Wildlife Refuge System, the world’s
largest collection of lands and waters specifically managed for fish and wildlife. The majority of these
lands, 77 million acres, lie in Alaska. The remaining 16 million acres are spread across the other 49
states and several island territories.
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM
The mission of the Refuge System, as defined by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement
Act of 1997, is:
... to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management,
and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife and plant resources and their habitats
within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.
The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 established, for the first time, a clear
mission of wildlife conservation for the National Wildlife Refuge System. The Act states that the
Service will manage each refuge to:
• fulfill the mission of the Refuge System;
• fulfill the individual purposes of each refuge;
• consider the needs of fish and wildlife first;
• fulfill the requirement of developing a comprehensive conservation plan for each unit of the
Refuge System, and fully involve the public in the preparation of these plans;
• maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System; and
• recognize that wildlife-dependent recreational activities including hunting, fishing, wildlife
observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation are
legitimate and priority public uses.
4 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Following passage of the Act in 1997, the Service immediately began efforts to carry out the direction
of the new legislation, including the preparation of comprehensive conservation plans for all refuges.
The development of these plans is now ongoing nationally. Consistent with the Act, the Service is
preparing all refuge comprehensive conservation plans in conjunction with public involvement, and is
requiring each refuge to complete its own plan within a 15-year schedule.
Approximately 37.5 million people visited the country’s national wildlife refuges in 1998, mostly to
observe wildlife in their natural habitats. As this visitation continues to grow, the visitors generate
substantial economic benefits to the local communities that surround the refuges. Economists have
reported that national wildlife refuge visitors contribute more than $400 million annually to the local
economies. In addition, the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation
reports that nearly 40 percent of the country’s adults spent a combined $108 billion on wildlife-related
recreational pursuits in 1996 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2001).
Volunteerism continues to be a major contributor to the successes of the Refuge System. In 1998,
volunteers contributed more than 1.5 million person-hours on refuges nationwide, a service valued at
more than $20.6 million.
The wildlife and habitat vision for national wildlife refuges stresses the following principles:
• Wildlife comes first.
• Ecosystems, biodiversity, and wilderness are vital concepts in refuge management.
• Refuges must be healthy.
• Growth of refuges must be strategic.
• The National Wildlife Refuge System serves as a model for habitat management with broad
participation from others.
Pea Island is one of ten national wildlife refuges in eastern North Carolina. Those refuges—Alligator
River, Cedar Island, Currituck, Great Dismal Swamp, Mackay Island, Mattamuskeet, Roanoke River,
Pocosin Lakes, Swanquarter, and Pea Island—and the Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge in Virginia
are all located in the watersheds of the Roanoke, Tar, Neuse, and Cape Fear rivers, which the
Service has classified as Ecosystem Unit #34. This watershed unit covers a 40,000-square-mile-area
in southeast Virginia and eastern North Carolina, extending from the piedmont to the Atlantic Coast.
Specifically, Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge is located within the Pasquotank River basin that
encompasses 3,635 square miles of low-lying lands and vast open waters, including the Albemarle
and Pamlico sounds, in the state’s northeast outer coastal plain.
LEGAL POLICY CONTEXT
A variety of international treaties, federal laws, federal regulations, departmental and Service policies,
and presidential executive orders guide the administration of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge.
The documents and acts listed in Appendix III contain management options under the refuge’s
establishing authority, the National Wildlife Refuge Administration Act of 1966, and the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (the legal and policy guidance for the operation of
national wildlife refuges).
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 5
NATIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS AND INITIATIVES
Along with the Service’s legal mandates and initiatives, other planning activities directly influence the
development of the comprehensive conservation plan. Various groups and agencies develop and
coordinate planning initiatives involving federal, state, and local agencies; local communities, non-governmental
organizations, and private individuals to help restore habitats for fish and wildlife on
and off public lands.
The Service is initiating cooperative partnerships in an effort to reduce the declining trend in biological
diversity. Biological planning for species groups targeted in this plan reflects the North American
Waterfowl Management Plan. The North American Waterfowl Management Plan of 1986 brings
together international teams of biologists from private and government organizations from Canada
and the United States. The partnerships, called joint ventures, are working to restore waterfowl and
other migratory bird populations to the levels of the early 1970s by protecting about 6 million acres of
priority wetland habitats from the Gulf of Mexico to the Canadian Arctic.
The United States Shorebird Conservation Plan and the Waterbirds for the Americas outline
approaches to conserving those species groups. Restoration of migratory songbird populations is a
high priority of the Partners in Flight Plan. It also provides strategies for conserving and managing
wintering, breeding, and migration habitat for midcontinental wood duck and colonial bird populations.
The Partners in Flight Plan emphasizes land bird species as a priority for conservation. Habitat loss,
population trends, and the vulnerability of species and habitats to threats are all factors used in the
priority ranking of species. Further, biologists have identified focal species for each habitat type from
which they will determine population and habitat objectives and conservation actions. This list of
focal species, objectives, and conservation actions will aid migratory bird management on the refuge.
The Farm Bill programs administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture provide cost-share
funding and technical assistance to private landowners to install and manage conservation practices
on working farms and forests, and to restore cropland to natural habitats. The programs provide
opportunities for landowners in the vicinity of national wildlife refuges to manage their land better as
wildlife habitat, or to protect it with easements.
RELATIONSHIP TO STATE PARTNERS
A provision of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, and subsequent agency
policy, is that the Service shall ensure timely and effective cooperation and collaboration with other
federal agencies and state fish and wildlife agencies during the course of acquiring and managing
refuges. This cooperation is essential in providing the foundation for the protection and sustainability
of fish and wildlife throughout the United States.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission is a state-partnering agency with the Service
charged with enforcement responsibilities for migratory birds and endangered species, as well as
managing the state’s natural resources. It also manages approximately 1.8 million acres of game
lands in North Carolina.
The Commission coordinates the state’s wildlife conservation program and provides public
recreation opportunities, including an extensive hunting and fishing program, on several game
lands and from several boat ramps located in Dare County. The Commission’s participation and
contribution throughout this comprehensive conservation planning process have been valuable.
It is continuing its work with the Service to provide ongoing opportunities for an open dialogue
6 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
with the public to improve the condition of fish and wildlife populations on the Outer Banks. Not
only has the Commission participated in biological reviews, stakeholder meetings, and field
reviews as part of the comprehensive planning process, it is also an active partner in the
coordination, planning, and execution of various wildlife and habitat surveys. The Commission
also assists refuge staff in providing special wildlife observation opportunities. A key part of the
comprehensive planning process is the integration of common mission objectives between the
Service and the Commission, where appropriate.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 7
II. Refuge Overview
INTRODUCTION
LOCATION
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge is located within the Dare County, North Carolina, coastal barrier
island chain known as the Outer Banks. The refuge is between Oregon Inlet to the north, the village
of Rodanthe (2000 population: 206) to the south, the Atlantic Ocean to the east, and the Pamlico
Sound to the west. The refuge also lies within Cape Hatteras National Seashore, which is managed
by the National Park Service. The town of Nags Head (2000 population: 2,700) is 13 miles north of
the refuge, just north of Cape Hatteras National Seashore (Figure 1).
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge is located within the Pasquotank River basin that encompasses
3,635 square miles of low-lying lands and vast open waters, including the Albemarle and Pamlico
sounds, in the state’s northeast Lower Coastal Plain.
ESTABLISHMENT
Executive Order 7864 established Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge on April 8, 1938, as a refuge
and breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife. Presidential Proclamation 2284 closed a
25,700-acre area encompassing the refuge and a portion of the Pamlico Sound west of and adjacent
to the refuge to migratory bird hunting. The refuge covers approximately 5,000 acres (reduced by
erosion from the original 5,915 acres).
IMPORTANCE
The Bureau of Biological Survey named the refuge for the beach peas (Stropostyles helvula) that
once dominated the backsides of the coastal dunes. The peas mature in October as geese arrive.
The beach face and exposed areas of the dunes are also nesting habitat for colonial nesting birds,
such as oystercatchers. The beaches provide foraging habitat for shorebirds and nesting habitat for
sea turtles. Piping plovers nest on unvegetated sand areas with shallow pools of water. Ducks rest
and feed in the bodies of water west of the refuge. Marsh birds and wading birds inhabit the
marshes.
REFUGE HISTORY AND PURPOSES
HISTORY
In the early days, Pea Island had only a sand pathway traversing the refuge. Ferry transportation
began to the area that is now Pea Island in the mid-1920s, when Captain J.B. Tillet established a tug
and barge service across Oregon Inlet. In 1934, the North Carolina Highway Commission recognized
the importance of this service to residents and began subsidizing Tillet’s business. In 1942, full
reimbursement by the state began and Tillet eliminated the tolls. This continued until 1950 when
Tillet sold his business to the state. The Service authorized a specific road easement for the State of
North Carolina in October 1951, and the state constructed a clay-surface road. The state initially
paved the road that is now North Carolina Highway 12 in the mid-1950s. Ferry service ceased with
the opening of the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge on November 20, 1963.
8 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 1. Location of Pea Island River National Wildlife Refuge in Dare County, North Carolina
NC−12
DARE CO.
DARE CO.
NC 12NC 12
􀀀
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
Refuge Ownership
Proclamation Boundary
Impoundments
Primary Roads
County Boundaries
Open Water
Cape Hatteras National Seashore Soundside Boundary
􀀀     􀀀        
      􀀀  
P e a I s l a n d N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e R e f u g e P r e s i d e n t i a l P r o c l a m a t i o n B o u n d a r y
Rodanthe
To Nags Head􀀀
􀀀
Oregon
Inlet
Eagles Nest
Point
Goat Island
Goose Island
Pea Island
Point
Terrapin Creek
Bay
Jack
Shoal
Cedar
Hammock
Round Hammock
Point
C a p e H a t t e r a s N a t i o n a l S e a s h o r e
South Point
North Point
 􀀀 
        
        

North
Pond
South
Pond
New
Field
New Inlet
Eagle Nest Bay
Salt
Flats
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 9
Upon its establishment, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Biological Survey, managed
“Pea Island Migratory Waterfowl Refuge.” A U.S. Army Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) camp
(Camp BF-2, Company 436, 1933-1942) in the area was responsible for numerous jobs, including
dike construction; dune enhancement; water control structure installation; planting to prevent erosion;
land surveys; building fences; maintaining truck trails; marking boundaries; and planting trees and
shrubs. One of the most significant jobs the CCC accomplished was the construction of dikes. The
initial purpose of the dike system (according to historic narratives) was to prevent salt water from
contaminating the inland freshwater areas.
In 1939, the administration placed the Bureau of Biological Survey and Bureau of Fisheries under the
U.S. Department of the Interior. The following year, these two bureaus were combined to create the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the refuge was officially renamed Pea Island National Wildlife
Refuge. The first manager at Pea Island Refuge was Sam A. Walker, who served in this capacity from
1938 through 1944. The staff grew to a high of eight permanent full-time employees in the mid-1980s.
Pea Island Refuge is an overlay of a portion of Cape Hatteras National Seashore. Through a
Memorandum of Understanding signed in July 1975 and amended in 1987, the National Park Service
and Fish and Wildlife Service work together to manage the refuge and the national seashore. The
National Park Service is responsible for interpreting historical and cultural assets, maintaining all
parking lots and the restroom facility adjacent to the Visitor Center, and assisting with law
enforcement patrols along the beach. The Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible for all wildlife and
habitat management activities, operation of the Visitor Center, recreational access, and uses on the
refuge. The current Memorandum of Understanding is under review and the agencies will update it in
the near future.
Pea Island Refuge remained a stand-alone refuge until 1984 when the Service started administering
it as part of a two-refuge complex with the newly created Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge.
Today, the refuge complex staff administers both the Pea Island and Alligator River refuges from an
office located in Manteo, North Carolina.
PURPOSE
The purpose of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge is to protect and conserve migratory birds and
other wildlife resources through the protection of wetlands, in accordance with the following:
“...as a refuge and breeding ground for migratory waterfowl and other wildlife…” (Executive
Order 7864, August 8, 1938)
SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program has designated most of the refuge, with the exception
of its moist-soil areas, as a Significant Natural Heritage Area. The Nature Conservancy ranks certain
vegetative communities as imperiled or rare (Table 1).
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality has designated several water bodies in the vicinity of
Pea Island Refuge as outstanding resource waters or high-quality waters (Table 3).
The North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries has designated water bodies within and off the
borders of the refuge as anadromous fish spawning habitats.
10 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Table 1. The Nature Conservancy ranking of vegetative communities of Pea Island National
Wildlife Refuge
Vegetative Community State Rank Global Rank
Maritime Dry Grassland S2 G3
Dune Grass S3 G3
Maritime Shrub S3 G4
S1 = Critically imperiled in North Carolina because of extreme rarity or otherwise very vulnerable to extirpation in the
state.
S2 = Imperiled in North Carolina because of rarity or otherwise very vulnerable to extirpation in the state.
S3 = Rare or uncommon in North Carolina.
G1 = Critically imperiled globally because of extreme rarity or otherwise very vulnerable to extinction throughout its range.
G2 = Imperiled globally because of rarity or otherwise very vulnerable to extinction throughout its range.
G3 = Either very rare or local throughout its range, or found locally in a restricted area.
G4 = Apparently secure
ECOSYSTEM CONTEXT
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge lies within a physiographic area known as the South Atlantic
Coastal Plain (Figure 2). The South Atlantic Coastal Plain was once a 25 million-hectare (62 million-acre)
complex of forested wetlands and uplands, dunes, and marshes that extended from Florida to
North Carolina. Historically, the extent and duration of seasonal flooding along the ecosystem’s rivers
have fluctuated annually, recharging the South Atlantic Coastal Plain’s aquatic systems and creating
a rich diversity of dynamic habitats that supported a vast array of fish and wildlife resources.
On the Lower Coastal Plain, the daily tidal cycles flooded beaches and marshes maintaining the
hydrology that kept the area’s flora and fauna vigorous. Coastal breezes blew salt spray over the
barrier islands trimming the woody vegetation behind the low broad dunes and depositing fresh sand on
the herbaceous dune vegetation. Periodic storm events cut inlets through the barrier islands bringing
tidal fluctuations to the sounds. Periodic storm events also overwash the barrier islands. Ocean
overwash can deposit fresh layers of sand across the islands that sometimes extend new layers of
sand to the sounds. Within a period of sea level rise where ocean overwash occurs, the elevation of
the island can be raised and the whole island effectively moves toward the mainland to the west.
REGIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS AND INITIATIVES
Along with the Service’s legal mandates and initiatives, other planning activities directly influence the
development of the comprehensive conservation plan. Various groups and agencies develop and
coordinate planning initiatives involving regional, state, and local agencies; local communities; non-governmental
organizations; and private individuals to help restore habitats for fish and wildlife on
and off public lands.
The Service is initiating cooperative partnerships in an effort to reduce the declining trend in biological
diversity. Biological planning for species groups targeted in this plan reflect the North American
Waterfowl Management Plan, which includes the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture; the joint venture
between the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the Fish and Wildlife Service; the
Partners in Flight Plan; and the South Atlantic Migratory Bird Initiative.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 11
Figure 2. Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge in the South Atlantic Coastal Plain
Physiographic Area
12 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
The Atlantic Coast Joint Venture focuses on the middle and upper Atlantic coast. Within the Atlantic
Coast Joint Venture is the joint venture formed between the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, Fish and Wildlife Service, and private conservation organizations.
The South Atlantic Coastal Plain serves as a primary migration habitat for migratory songbirds returning
from Central and South America. It also provides wintering, breeding, and migration habitat for
midcontinental wood duck and colonial bird populations. Restoration of migratory songbird populations
is a high priority of the Partners in Flight Plan for the South Atlantic Physiographic Region.
The Partners in Flight Plan emphasizes land bird species as a priority for conservation. Habitat loss,
population trends, and the vulnerability of species and habitats to threats are all factors used in the
priority ranking of species. Further, biologists from local offices of the Service, the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission, and conservation organizations, such as Audubon Society and The
Nature Conservancy, have identified focal species for each habitat type from which they will
determine population and habitat objectives and conservation actions. This list of focal species,
objectives, and conservation actions will aid migratory bird management on the refuge.
The Farm Bill programs administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture have state-level plans
and priority ranking systems in which the Service has input. For private landowners who own lands in
the vicinity of national wildlife refuges, the Service uses these programs to help them manage habitat
for wildlife, or protect their lands with easements.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has its own Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation
Strategy to help direct the state’s allocation of funds from the federally funded State Working Grants
Program. The Service has provided input to the development and execution of the strategy.
ECOLOGICAL THREATS AND PROBLEMS
HABITAT LOSS AND FRAGMENTATION
The South Atlantic Coastal Plain has changed markedly over the last 100 years as civilization spread
throughout the area. Scientists have estimated that land conversion has cleared 40 percent of the
natural vegetation. The greatest changes to the landscape have been in the form of land clearing for
urban development and agriculture (Hunter et al. 2001).
Although these changes have allowed people to settle and earn a living in the area, they have had a
tremendous negative effect on biological diversity, biological integrity, and environmental health of the
South Atlantic Coastal Plain. The changes have reduced vast areas of forests, pocosins, marshes,
and coastal beaches to fragments ranging in size from very small tracts of limited functional value to a
few large areas that have maintained many of the original functions and values. Severe
fragmentation has resulted in a substantial decline in biological diversity and integrity. Species
endemic to the South Atlantic Coastal Plain that have become extinct, threatened, or endangered
include the extinct passenger pigeon, Carolina parakeet, and Bachman’s warbler; the threatened
piping plover and sea turtles; and the endangered red wolf. Federal species of concern for this area
include the black rail and the “Buxton Woods” white-footed mouse. Table 2 provides a complete list
of the threatened and endangered animals in North Carolina.
Breeding bird surveys show continuing declines in species and species populations. The avian
species most adversely affected by fragmentation include those that are area-sensitive (dependent
on large continuous blocks of hardwood forest); those that depend on forest interiors; those that
depend on special habitat requirements such as mature forests or a particular food source; and/or
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 13
Table 2. Threatened and endangered animals of the North Carolina Coastal Plain
Status Common Name Scientific Name
Endangered Manatee, West Indian** Trichechus manatus
Endangered Sea Turtle, Hawksbill** Eretmochelys imbricata
Endangered Sea Turtle, Kemp’s Ridley** Lepidochelys kempii
Endangered Sea Turtle, Leatherback** Dermochelys coriacea
Endangered Sturgeon, Shortnose Acipenser brevirostrum
Endangered Tern, Roseate** Sterna dougallii
Endangered Whale, Finback Balaenoptera physalus
Endangered Whale, Humpback Megaptera novaeangliae
Endangered Whale, Right Balaena glacialis
Endangered Whale, Sea Balaenoptera borealis
Endangered Whale, Sperm Physeter catodon
Endangered Wolf, Red** Canis rufus
Endangered Woodpecker, Red-cockaded** Picoides borealis
Threatened Eagle, Bald* Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Threatened Plover, Piping* Charadrius melodus
Threatened Sea Turtle, Green* Chelonia mydas
Threatened Sea Turtle, Loggerhead* Caretta caretta
Threatened Silverside, Waccamaw Menidia extensa
* Presence Documented on Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
** Presence Not Documented on Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
those that depend on good water quality. Habitat loss has also affected species dependent on
coastal marshes, exposed sandy areas on beaches and sandbars, and within dune ecosystems.
More than 300 species of breeding migratory songbirds occupy the region. Some inland species,
including the Swainson’s warbler, prothonotary warbler, swallow-tailed kite, wood thrush, and cerulean
warbler, have declined substantially and need the benefits of large forested blocks to recover and sustain
their existence. On the Outer Coastal Plain, songbirds, such as the seaside sparrow, saltmarsh sharp-tailed
sparrow, and Nelson’s sharp-tailed sparrow, depend on declining marsh habitat. The black rail and
yellow rail, secretive marshbirds, require brackish marsh. The red knots, least terns, black skimmers,
American oystercatchers, and threatened piping plovers are shorebirds that nest on the decreasing
acreage of unvegetated sand along beaches and among coastal dunes.
Habitat loss on the Outer Coastal Plain is more permanent than in the Upper Coastal Plain.
Conversion of coastal dunes and marshes for commercial development is irreversible.
Construction of tall, steep-sided dunes and vegetative stabilization of those dunes to protect
14 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
infrastructure prevents natural processes from shaping the landscape and the vegetative
communities that evolve on that landscape.
ALTERATIONS TO HYDROLOGY
In addition to the loss of vast acreages of wetlands, substantial alterations have occurred in the
South Atlantic Coastal Plain’s hydrology. The changes are a result of channel dredging for
navigation and access to marshes; drainage ditches; degradation of aquatic systems from
excessive sedimentation, contaminants, and urban development; changes in managed stream
flows from flood control and hydroelectric power generation reservoirs; river channel
modifications; flood control levees; and deforestation.
The natural hydrology of a region is directly responsible for the connectedness of wetlands and
indirectly responsible for the complexity and diversity of habitats through its effects on topography
and soils. Natural resource managers recognize the importance of dynamic hydrology to wetlands
and waterfowl-habitat relationships (Fredrickson and Heitmeyer 1988).
Instead of natural hydrology, large-scale, man-made hydrological alterations have changed the
spatial and temporal patterns of flooding throughout the entire South Atlantic Coastal Plain. In
addition, these alterations have modified both the extent and duration of annual seasonal as well as
daily flooding. The alteration of the annual flooding regime has had a tremendous effect on the
interior forested wetlands and their associated wetland-dependent species. Changes in daily flooding
regimes by drainage ditches and closing inlets through coastal barrier islands accelerate erosion on
the ditch banks and throughout the marshes. The changed flooding regimes also decrease the
exposure of intertidal areas that would be available with normal lunar tidal cycles. According to
Mitsch and Gosselink (1993), restoration of wetland functions is especially difficult because the
wetlands depend on a dynamic interface of hydrologic regimes to maintain water, vegetation, and
animal complexes and processes.
The dredging of navigation channels also generates a spoil material that must be disposed. If the
material is fine-textured, it may not be suitable for placement on the closest potential site, such as
beaches. On beaches the material must be a coarse substrate for invertebrate populations and
shorebird and turtle nesting.
SILTATION OF AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS
Deforestation and hydrologic alteration have degraded aquatic systems, including lakes, rivers,
sloughs, and bayous. Clearing of bottomland hardwood forests has led to an accelerated
accumulation of sediments and contaminants in aquatic systems. Sediment now fills many water
bodies, greatly reducing their surface area and depth. Concurrently, the non-point source runoff of
excess nutrients and contaminants is threatening the area’s remaining aquatic resources. The
Service lists six species of aquatic organisms as threatened and twelve species as endangered in
North Carolina (Table 2).
Hydrologic alterations have basically eliminated the geomorphologic processes that created
sandbars, oxbow lakes, sloughs, and river meander scars. Consequently, the protection,
conservation, and restoration of aquatic resources are of added importance in light of the alterations
associated with navigation and flood control.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 15
PROLIFERATION OF INVASIVE AQUATIC PLANTS
Compounding the problems faced by aquatic systems is the growing threat from invasive aquatic
vegetation. Static water levels caused by the lack of annual flooding and reduced water depths
resulting from excessive sedimentation have created conditions favorable for the establishment and
proliferation of several species of invasive aquatic plants. Additionally, the introduction of exotic
(nonnative) vegetation capable of aggressive growth is further threatening the viability of aquatic
systems. These invasive aquatic species threaten the natural aquatic vegetation important to aquatic
systems, and choke waterways to a degree that often prevents recreational use. Common reed
(Phragmites australis) is the most dominant of these plants on the Outer Banks and the refuge, and
has a negative impact on the marshes in the area. Alligator weed (Alternanthera philoxeroides) is an
ever-increasing invasive aquatic plant in eastern North Carolina. It can severely impede the natural
surface flow of water with its web-like growth in narrow bodies of water.
CONSERVATION PRIORITIES
The declines in the area of the South Atlantic Coastal Plain’s bottomland hardwood forests and their
associated fish and wildlife resources have prompted the Service to designate this forest type as an
area of special concern. These areas are of particular concern as habitat for neotropical migratory
songbirds that only breed in the interior of large forested areas. They also provide habitat for fish-eating
raptors that require forested habitat close to water in which to perch and from which to fish.
The forests protect the aquatic habitat for interjurisdictional fish and other aquatic organisms. Much
of the development has been for crop production, and these areas have potential for restoration when
crop prices do not justify the maintenance of intensive drainage systems required to maintain
production. Many government habitat restoration programs focus on bottomland hardwood forests.
In the Outer Coastal Plain, the loss of marsh, dune, and beach habitat continues unabated. Although
wetland protection laws regulate development in the marshes, the public’s desire to live and recreate in
dune and beach habitats is steadily growing, and development continues to alter these areas. The potential
for restoring these habitats is lower than it is for bottomland hardwood forests because the habitat loss is
due to land use conversions to residential and commercial development. Conservationists must mitigate
habitat loss by intensive management through restoration or use of a variety of habitat enhancement
techniques involving various plantings, mechanical manipulation, prescribed fire, or water management.
A collaborative effort involving private, state, and federal conservation partners is now underway to
implement a variety of tools to restore the functions and values of wetlands in the South Atlantic
Coastal Plain. The goal is to prioritize and manage wetlands to most effectively maintain and
possibly restore the biological diversity in the South Atlantic Coastal Plain. Through cooperative
efforts, apportioning resources, and the focusing of available programs, conservationists can improve
the South Atlantic Coastal Plain’s biological diversity.
Conservationists have initiated several coordinated efforts to set priorities and establish focus areas
to overcome the impacts of hydrologic changes and habitat fragmentation. Conservation
organizations and agencies established a cooperative private–state–federal partnership known as the
North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Atlantic Coast Joint Venture in 1988, to help provide
sufficient wintering waterfowl habitat throughout the Atlantic Coastal Plain.
16 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
The initial Atlantic Coast Joint Venture effort for waterfowl has expanded to also establish breeding
bird objectives for shorebirds and neotropical migratory birds. Partners in Flight has developed bird
conservation plans to focus a number of private, state, and federal restoration programs into specific
areas in an effort to provide maximum program benefits for neotropical migratory birds.
One of the biggest challenges to the management and restoration efforts underway in the South
Atlantic Coastal Plain, and one that affects refuges in particular, is the need to meet long-term
management objectives that address comprehensive ecosystem needs. These needs include those
of wintering migratory waterfowl, neotropical migratory birds, shorebirds, large mammals, and other
wide-ranging species. Often management for one species or species group conflicts with the
management objectives for another species or species group. The tendency is to pursue short-term
priorities that frequently change as scientific knowledge expands and interests in special resources
shift. Biologists must exercise caution to prevent the start-up of management and restoration actions
that are difficult to reverse and fail to meet the long-term, comprehensive management needs of the
ecosystem or a specific area within the ecosystem. An example might be a tendency to totally
manage Pea Island Refuge in an effort to provide habitat for many species of waterfowl that require
managed herbaceous wetlands. Such an approach may overlook the critical habitat needs of
neotropical migratory songbirds that prefer a shrubby habitat.
Active management of wetlands, moist-soil areas, and croplands on both public and private land is
necessary to meet the habitat goals of the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture (Reinecke and Baxter 1996).
The management (i.e., vegetation manipulation and hydrology restoration) compensates for the
spatial and temporal habitat changes that deforestation and hydrologic alterations have caused
throughout the South Atlantic Coastal Plain. When appropriately managed, Pea Island Refuge will
make a substantial contribution to meeting the objectives of the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture. Setting
habitat and species objectives from the perspective of the South Atlantic Coastal Plain is
advantageous because it looks at the big picture and enables managers to plan and provide habitat
for a diversity of species throughout their range.
CHALLENGES
In order for Pea Island Refuge to meet its multiple objectives of national, regional, and local scope,
ranging from impoundment and marsh management to providing for public use, the Service must
seek resources above current levels. Securing resources to successfully address historical wetland,
beach, and dune alterations and hydrological functions is the refuge’s biggest challenge. In the
interim, as the needed resources become available, the refuge must concentrate on its highest
priorities without committing irreversible actions that would preclude future implementation of the
desired management programs.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
CLIMATE
Because the flow of air over North Carolina is predominantly from west to east, the continental
influence is much greater than the ocean or marine influence. Therefore, the state experiences a
fairly large variation in temperature from winter to summer.
The Gulf Stream current flows only a short distance off the North Carolina coast. One might think this
"river" of warm water would have a profound effect on the climate, which is true to a degree.
Temperatures on the coast are typically warmer in winter months and cooler during summer months
than mainland Dare County due to the temperature of the surrounding waters.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 17
Low pressure areas sometimes reform along the coast as "Cape Hatteras lows" and then move north
along the coast. Winter's low-pressure storms are usually more intense because of the large north-to-
south contrasts. The winter storms bring prolonged periods of steady rain and are responsible for
most of the winter precipitation. The forms of precipitation in spring begin to change from these
steady rains to occasional thunderstorms. The Gulf of Mexico's warm, moist air produces warm,
humid weather throughout the summer. Rainfall comes from occasional thunderstorms. Autumn,
North Carolina's driest season, is to many people the most pleasant with its many clear, warm days
and cool nights with little rain. This weather usually lasts until November. Winter is cool and has brief
occasional cold spells. Snowfall is not common.
The average annual precipitation is 56.99 inches. Rainfall is evenly distributed throughout the year;
the average monthly rainfall ranges from 3.43 inches in April to 5.98 inches in August. The average
seasonal snowfall is about 1.9 inches. The record snowfall was 8.2 inches at Hatteras in December
1989. Twelve inches fell on the Outer Banks on January 23, 2003. Twenty-five inches is the record
at Elizabeth City, North Carolina.
Of the total annual precipitation, about 27 inches usually falls in May through September. The growing
season for most crops is within this period. Thunderstorms occur on about 43 days each year. Every few
years, a hurricane or tropical storm crosses the county, bringing one to three days of intensive rainfall.
The average relative humidity in mid-afternoon is about 65 percent. Humidity is higher at night, and
the average at dawn is about 80 percent. The sun shines on 55 percent of winter days. The
prevailing wind is from the southwest. Average wind speed is highest, 13 miles per hour, in spring.
The average daily maximum temperature at the Cape Hatteras weather station from 1971-2000 was
69.9 degrees Fahrenheit, and the average daily minimum is 55.6 degrees.
In January the average temperature is 46.1 degrees, the average daily maximum is 53.6 degrees,
and the average daily minimum temperature is 38.6 degrees. The lowest temperature on record,
which occurred at Cape Hatteras on January 21, l985, is 6 degrees. In July the average temperature
is 79.2 degrees, the average daily maximum temperature is 85.4 degrees, and the average daily
minimum temperature is 72.9 degrees. The highest recorded temperature, which occurred on
July 10, 1992, was 96 degrees.
The average last freezing temperature in spring is March 16. The average first freezing temperature
in the fall is December 7. The average growing season is 265 days.
GEOLOGY
The Outer Banks are part of the Coastal Plain of North Carolina that stretches from the Piedmont
Plateau in the west to the continental shelf in the east. Water covered this area during the Tertiary
period and early Pleistocene epoch more than 730,000 years ago. The coast later emerged during
the first ice age, but with the melting of the continental ice sheets was again submerged.
During the Wisconsin glacial maximum approximately 25,000 years ago, the sea was between 250
and 450 feet below its present level. It seems that the barrier islands of the Outer Banks were formed
since the melting of the Wisconsin ice sheet, and have generally been in their current position for the
last 4,000 to 5,000 years. Although there is no general agreement as to how the barrier islands were
initially created, they may have existed in one form or another near the edge of the current
continental shelf during low stands of sea level, and then migrated back and forth across the Coastal
Plain with fluctuating sea levels.
18 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
The Outer Banks are being constantly modified as a rule. Generally, the barrier islands are long,
narrow islands standing only a few feet above sea level. The islands vary in width from about 600
feet to nearly 3 miles, and are separated from the mainland by shallow sounds as much as 28 miles
wide. The barrier islands are slowly moving westward, primarily due to a lack of sediment supply and
a rise in sea level. The sea level is rising at approximately two feet per century. When it was
established in 1938, Pea Island Refuge was 5,915 acres in size. Today, likely due to erosion and
natural barrier island processes, the size is approximately 5,000 acres.
This consistent pattern of migration is only one of the dynamic features associated with the barrier
islands. The sediments that make up the islands are composed mainly of sand, and are therefore
subject to constant alteration by both wind and water (i.e., via waves, currents and flooding). Wind is
constantly moving and reshaping the dune features on the islands. Historical documents indicate that
such major dunes engulfed dwellings and roads in the past, and the only practical response to this
threat was to move such features out of harm’s way.
The more common dune feature is the beach dune. These are found just behind the beach line and
offer some measure of protection to the land surfaces behind. But unless they are stabilized, beach
dunes will also migrate and fluctuate, exposing interior areas to storms and wind. During the 1930s,
the Civilian Conservation Corps augmented and stabilized the entire beach dune line of the Outer
Banks (Stick 1958; Pilkey et al. 1998). The project trucked sand where the beach dunes had eroded
and bulldozers shaped the fill into dunes (Ted Mew, personal communication). Workers stabilized the
dunes with sand fences and planted stabilizing vegetation. The program offered artificial protection
from overwash and inlet formation to many exposed areas of the islands, including the refuge.
Oregon Inlet at the north edge of Pea Island formed during a northeastern storm in 1846, at the same
time that Hatteras Inlet formed to the south. The fishing vessel Oregon was lost at the new inlet, and
from that point on the inlet has been called Oregon Inlet. Oregon Inlet migrated southward at a rate
of 23 meters/year and landward, or westward, at 5 meters/year between 1849 and 1975 (Inman and
Dolan 1989). With it, two lighthouse structures were lost. Today, the Bodie Island Lighthouse sits
near where the northern extremity of Oregon Inlet once was.
Due to migration, local officials and fishermen began their effort for channel stabilization in the 1940s to
ensure a safe route of passage through Oregon Inlet. In 1950, Congress authorized the Corps of
Engineers to dredge a 400-foot-wide by 14-foot-deep channel through the Inlet, but the actual dredging
did not begin until 1962. This dredging has been ongoing sporadically since that time.
In 1963, the Bonner Bridge over the Oregon Inlet was opened to traffic. Because of erosion on the
southern side of the Inlet, a permit was issued to the North Carolina Department of Transportation in
1989 to install a terminal groin on the north end of Pea Island Refuge. Since that time, the Inlet’s
southern shoreline has remained relatively stable, while the northern shore and the tidal channels
within the Inlet have continued to fluctuate in response to coastal processes. The Corps of Engineers
has dredged Oregon Inlet for navigational passage for more than 30 years, with approximately 0.6–
1.2 million cubic yards of sediment removed annually.
At least 13 inlets have existed between the Virginia state line and Cape Hatteras since historic maps were
recorded. Various inlets existed at or near Oregon Inlet from 1585 to 1770 and then again since 1846
with the current inlet. New Inlet, located on the Pea Island Refuge, was open from the 1730s until 1922,
when it closed naturally. An attempt to open the inlet artificially in 1925 failed. A hurricane in 1933
reopened the inlet, but it again closed on its own in 1945. The remaining bridge structures found in the
shallow sound waters of this area were constructed at that time. A third inlet known as Loggerhead Inlet
also may have been in the area of the refuge during the mid- to late-1800s.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 19
The Outer Banks of North Carolina have the highest wave energies striking the Atlantic coast in the
southeastern United States. The long-term average annual oceanfront erosion rates for the refuge,
as defined by the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, range from 2 to 16 feet per year.
Erosion rates are greatest at the southern boundary of the refuge near Rodanthe and at two points
roughly 4 and 6 miles south of Oregon Inlet. Accretion locally occurs approximately 2 miles south of
the old Headquarters buildings and stretches for about a mile. Boss and Hoffman (2000a) attribute
part of the high erosion rates on Pea Island to the fairly narrow and steep shoreface that allows
higher wave energies to reach the beach, and to the lack of sand in the offshore trough to naturally
replenish the beaches; they also state that the presence of the bathymetric trough impedes cross-shore
transport of sediment to the beaches. Platt Shoals may also reflect and refract incoming waves
such that the wave energy is concentrated in certain areas and comparatively defused in others,
which may explain the variability in erosion rates within the refuge (Boss and Hoffman 2000a).
There are six “hot spots” of perpetual overwash and erosion along Hatteras and Ocracoke islands.
These hot spots threaten North Carolina Highway 12 in three places within the refuge: the Canal
Zone Hotspot located 0.75 miles south of Oregon Inlet; the Sandbag Area Hotspot located 3.4 miles
south of Oregon Inlet; and the “S” Curves Hotspot, which extends from the south refuge boundary at
Rodanthe to about 1 mile north. The State of North Carolina has relocated Highway 12 several
times, both within and outside the refuge, as a result of these natural hazards. Many of the hot spots
appear to be controlled by the underlying geology, which recent research suggests consists of
paleofluvial channels of the Pamlico Creek drainage basin during lower sea levels. This basin
emptied into the Neuse/Pamlico system to the southwest of Cape Hatteras. These channels and
their valleys were then filled in with estuarine sediments (i.e., mud, peat) as sea level rose (Riggs et
al. 1995). North of Oregon Inlet, the Roanoke/Albemarle river basin drained to the east and underlies
the current Nags Head–Kitty Hawk area. These soft mud deposits tend to erode slower than sand
and gravel sediments (Riggs et al. 1995).
Pea Island would be an overwash-dominated island if left to completely natural processes. Starting
with the extensive dune building in the 1930s with the Civilian Conservation Corps and Works
Progress Administration, however, man has stabilized the island. Since that time, dune building with
sand fences, bulldozers, and vegetation has stabilized the island and held it in place. Overwash is a
natural coastal process that adds elevation to central parts of the island and to the sound-side
shoreline. The North Carolina Department of Transportation continually removes storm overwash
deposits from the roadway of North Carolina Highway 12, and rebuilds artificial dunes between the
highway and the beach. Thus, the lack of natural sediment redistribution hinders the island’s
migration during a time of rising sea level. The oceanfront beaches are narrower than they would
naturally be, and the interior and sound shorelines of the island are starved of sediment. The artificial
dunes are not in their natural position, composed of their natural stratigraphy and sedimentology, or
of natural shapes and sizes.
The sediments composing these barrier islands were deposited in a marine or near-marine environment.
Silt and clay may be mixed with sand to form heterogeneous beds of low permeability. The beaches of
the Outer Banks are composed mostly of sand but also may have outcrops of mud, peat, pea gravel,
shells, or tree stumps, depending on the underlying geology. Sands and gravels dominate areas that
once were inlets. Old stream or river channels from periods of lower sea level will have some pea gravel
as well as mud from estuaries that filled them as sea level rose. Peat and tree stumps indicate old forests
or marshes that the island has since migrated or rolled over. Likewise, oyster or clamshells, as well as
shells stained black, are from marsh deposits that are now cropping out on the beach or the shoreface
(the underwater portion of the beach). Pea gravel content may vary between 20 and 60 percent on the
local beach surface, while shells may compose up to 25 percent of the surface sediments (Carroll 1999).
(Much of this has already been documented above.)
20 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
No new sediment is being delivered to these barrier islands from either the rivers or eroding
headlands, because the rivers discharge into estuaries. The Albemarle and Pamlico sounds
separate the flows that would deliver sediment from the beaches. Various geologists, including Riggs
et al. (1995) and Pilkey et al. (1998), have called them “sediment starved.” The underlying geologic
framework of old inlet sands and gravels, fluvial channel sands and gravels, and marsh peats and
estuarine muds are supplying a limited amount of sediment to the oceanfront beaches when the
island migrates over itself and recycles its sediments.
MINERALS
Sand is the only mineral resource occurring in economic quantities. There are no sand pits in the vicinity
of the refuge. Because sand has become a very desirable material due to erosion, there have been
several instances of persons removing sand from the refuge without authorization to use on personal
projects outside the refuge boundary. Also, the North Carolina Department of Transportation has mined
sand from behind the terminal groin to use for dune construction within the refuge.
SOILS
Soil types identified on the refuge are Carteret sand, Corolla fine sand, Duckston fine sands, and
Newhan fine sands, and a complex of Corolla and Duckston fine sands (USDA Soil Conservation
Service 1992). The soils with an asterisk are listed as hydric in “Hydric Soils of the United States”
(USDA Soil Conservation Service 1985). Hydric soils are “soils that in their undrained condition are
saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic
conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic (water-loving) vegetation” (USDA
Soil Conservation Service 1985) (Figure 3).
Most of the refuge is Carteret sand, a soil with 80 inches or more of sand. It floods regularly to a
depth of up to 3 feet with tidal fluctuations and has a water table from the surface to 1 foot below the
surface. Carteret soils support freshwater and brackish herbaceous marsh vegetation.
Duckston fine sands occur on the eastern edge of the Carteret soils. They have 8 inches of fine sand
over 72 inches of sand. Duckston soils have rapid permeability above the water table. They are
poorly drained with water tables from the surface to 1 foot below the surface. They flood more than
once every 2 years, but only for 2 to 7 days. Duckston soils support shrub and herbaceous
vegetation adapted to poor drainage.
Corolla fine sand and Newhan fine sand are well-drained soils that occur under the dunes on the
eastern edge of the refuge. Corolla fine sand occurs on the backsides of dunes and has 3 inches of
fine sand over sandy subsoil. The water table is 1-1/2 to 3 feet below the surface. The herbaceous
dune vegetation on Corolla soils is adapted to good drainage, but not necessarily tolerant of
extremely droughty conditions. Corolla soils are also excellent soils for building construction, but are
poor filters for septic systems. Newhan fine sand occurs on the tops of dunes and has 80 inches of
fine sand over sandy subsoil. The water table is more than 6 feet below the surface. Newhan soils
also support herbaceous vegetation that is the most drought-tolerant and salt-tolerant. They are also
excellent soils for building construction, but are poor filters for septic systems.
HYDROLOGY
Ground water provides the freshwater resources for the area. Studies have shown that the
groundwater reservoir consists of two types of aquifers: a water table aquifer that extends from the
land surface to the first confining beds of silt and clay, and a confined or semi-confined aquifer
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 21
Figure 3. Characteristics of soils of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
22 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
beneath and between the silt and clay beds. The water table aquifer ranges in thickness from 10 to
50 feet and averages 15 feet. The water table itself averages 3 feet above mean sea level.
Maintenance of the fresh ground water depends on the amount of rainfall. Due to the sandy nature of
the soils, rainfall enters the water table aquifer with little or no surface runoff. After the ground has
become saturated, some runoff occurs in roadside ditches and small intermittent freshwater ponds
during periods of intensive rainfall.
The deeper confined aquifers are as much as 30 feet thick and are below the first confining beds that
range in thickness from 5 to 20 feet. Exact thicknesses are difficult to determine due to the
gradational nature of sediments below the water table aquifer.
The fresh ground water is best described as a lens-shaped mass floating on top of denser salt water.
The amount of fresh water in this lens varies depending on the amount of recharge and discharge.
Between the fresh water and salt water a zone of brackish water occurs. This zone periodically
changes due to flooding, tidal movement, and rainfall.
WATER QUALITY
There are six National Pollution Discharge Elimination System-permitted sites that discharge into
waters adjacent to the refuge. One is a domestic sewage system for a town; one is a harbor project;
two are domestic water supply treatment plants; and two are seafood-processing facilities.
The state’s list of impaired waters due to fecal coliform includes portions of Roanoke, Croatan, and Pamlico
sounds. Technical conditions do not exist to develop total maximum daily loads for the water bodies.
The state has classified the water bodies and streams according to their water quality and the uses that
quality supports. The classifications for the waters surrounding Pea Island Refuge are listed in Table 3.
Table 3. Classifications of water bodies and streams surrounding Pea Island National Wildlife
Refuge
Water Body or Stream Classification Best Uses
Pamlico Sound
Oregon Inlet
Eagle Nest Bay
Goat Island Bay
The Trench
Pea Island Creek
Pea Island Bay
Terrapin Creek Bay
Terrapin Creek
Beach Slue
Wreck Creek
Round Hammock Bay
Pauls Ditch
SA – Highest
Quality Saltwater
HQW – High
Quality Water
Commercial shellfishing and all other tidal
saltwater uses
Atlantic Ocean SB – Moderate
Quality Saltwater All recreation
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 23
AIR QUALITY
The area closest to the refuge that an environmental agency monitors is the Virginia Beach–Norfolk,
Virginia, metropolitan area. The Environmental Protection Agency monitors carbon monoxide,
nitrogen dioxide, ozone, sulfur dioxide, and particulates in Norfolk, Virginia Beach, Hampton, Newport
News, Suffolk, and Chesapeake. Despite the large population with the industry, traffic, and power
plants, the area has exceeded only ozone level standards in 2002. Monitoring has indicated
unhealthy levels only twice and unhealthy levels for sensitive groups only thirteen times.
Prescribed burning on the refuge has the potential to have an impact on air quality. The State of
North Carolina specifies that prescribed fires purposely set to marshes (for marsh management
practices acceptable to the North Carolina Division of Forestry and the Environmental Management
Commission) are permissible if not prohibited by ordinances and regulations of governmental entities
having jurisdiction. The regulation also includes a disclaimer that addresses certain potential
liabilities of burning even though permissible.
VISUAL RESOURCES
Visitors have recognized Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge for its outstanding and diversified visual
resources that have been a draw for persons of all ages, backgrounds, and interests since its
establishment. A 13-mile stretch of North Carolina Highway 12 runs directly through the refuge and is part
of the North Carolina Scenic Byway System; it is also the primary route from the mainland to the historic
Cape Hatteras Lighthouse. Cape Hatteras National Seashore, a national recreation area that extends
from Nags Head to Ocracoke Island, surrounds the refuge and overlays portions of the same land.
The refuge’s location between sound and ocean provides unique opportunities for visitors to view
both sunrise and sunset over water. A photo blind enables birding enthusiasts to capture the many
species of birds identified on the refuge without disturbing them in their natural environment. Walking
trails, raised platforms, and platforms overlooking impoundments offer further opportunities for
viewers to appreciate the small mammalian and feathered species dependent upon the refuge for
their habitat and survival. The 13 miles of sand dunes create a barrier between ocean and
beachfront and the marsh, shrub thickets, tidal ponds, freshwater ponds, and nesting areas. Refuge
waters within the sound are a haven for the tens of thousands of migratory birds that use the Atlantic
Flyway each season. Islands with sea oats, wax myrtle thickets, salt meadow cord grass, and other
vegetation dot the sound.
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
HABITATS
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge is situated on a typical southeastern United States barrier island
system with ocean beach, dune, brackish ponds, and marsh communities dissected by tidal creeks
containing submerged aquatic vegetation (Figures 4 and 5). The refuge’s plant communities have
been affected by human development activities over time. Some of these activities occurred before
the Service established the refuge and some have occurred since. The most notable products of
those activities today are artificial dunes, North Carolina Highway 12, the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge,
and three impoundments.
Although natural dunes occur, the Civilian Conservation Corps first constructed some oceanfront dunes in
the 1930s and, since then, agencies have vegetated and maintained them for various reasons. The
primary reason for dune maintenance on the refuge today is protection of North Carolina Highway 12.
24 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 4. Vegetative habitat types of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 25
Figure 5. Cross-section of vegetative habitat types of coastal barrier islands
Although a sand trail pre-dated the refuge, the state did not pave what is now North Carolina Highway 12
until the 1950s, and the state has relocated much of it westward since its initial construction.
The Service constructed three man-made impoundments in the late 1950s and 1960s to enhance habitat
quality for migratory waterfowl. The plant communities today reflect succession since the late 1930s, with
some areas being subjected to ocean overwash, agricultural practices, and prescribed fire. More
recently, prescribed fire has substantially altered plant communities and successional stages on most of
the refuge. The community descriptions in this document are not complete species lists.
Ocean Beach Community
Lower Beach. This is the exposed portion of the beach between the mean high tide and mean low
tide lines. It is the unvegetated portion of the beach subject to diurnal tidal flooding. Substrate
consists of unconsolidated sand and variable shell fragment content. This is a dynamic community
subject to the effects of tidal swash twice daily.
Upper Beach. This is that portion of the beach above the mean high tide line up to the toe-of-slope
for the frontal dune or berm. The substrate consists of unconsolidated sand and shell fragments and
is constantly changing due to wind and tidal surges during storm events. Vegetation is sparse,
characterized by a small number of mostly succulent species adapted to regular disturbance: Sea
rocket (Cakile edentula; Cakile harperi), seabeach sandmat (Chamaesyce spp.), and seabeach
knotweed (Polygonum glaucum). Although biologists have not located it on the refuge, the federally
threatened seabeach amaranth (Amaranthus pumilus) could occur in this community. This
community is subject to the dynamics of coastal processes including frequent tidal inundation and
wind disturbance. Landward of the Upper Beach community is a Barrier Dune ecosystem.
Barrier Dune Community
Dune Grass. The Dune Grass Community occurs immediately landward of the Upper Beach
community and is subject to exposure to salt spray and abrasive, wind-blown sand. These
communities are excessively drained due to the nature of the substrate and are subject to frequent
shifting unless stabilized through artificial means. Artificial dune building by sand fencing and dense
planting of grasses has led to the development of a high continuous line of dunes which concentrates
the effects of storm waves on the beach, increasing erosion rates. Vegetative composition and plant
community structure is highly correlated with exposure to salt in the environment, either in aerosol
form or by ocean overwash. Generally, plant species found on the ocean side of the dunes are more
tolerant to salt and the abrasive effects of wind-blown sand. The Dune Grass community transitions
26 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
into a Wet or Dry Maritime Grassland, Maritime Shrub, Maritime Forest, or various combinations on
the landward side of the barrier dune.
Common plants in this community are sea oats (Uniola paniculata), which grow from sturdy rhizomes
that help to stabilize shifting sands. Other plants in this community may include American beach
grass (Ammophila breviligulata), Atlantic coastal panic grass (Panicum amarum), seaside bluestem
(Schizachyrium scoparium), trailing wild bean (Strophostyles helvula), seaside croton (Croton
punctatus), and gaillardia (Gaillardia pulchella). Plant species of federal concern, such as dune
bluecurls (Trichostema spp.) and the federally threatened seabeach amaranth, may also occur in this
community, but neither has been documented on the refuge.
Grasslands
Maritime Dry Grassland. This community occurs on low, stable dunes and sand ridges. It also
occurs in overwash terraces behind or between dunes in areas subject to inundation by the ocean or
partial burial due to wind-blown sand. Frequently, this community transitions into the dune grass
community on the ocean side. The dominance of saltmeadow grass (Spartina patens) readily
distinguishes maritime dry grassland from the dune grass community. Under natural conditions this
community is influenced by salt spray that retards shrub invasion. Where dunes are naturally
protected or have been artificially stabilized, these grasslands can succeed into maritime shrub and
possibly to maritime forest with sufficient time. In contrast, the maritime dry grassland may transition
from maritime shrub or maritime forest in areas where there is loss of dune protection. In addition to
saltmeadow cordgrass, this community may have a moderate to dense herbaceous cover of species
such as seaside goldenrod (Solidago sempervirens), marsh pink (Sabatia stellaris), seaside
greenbrier (Smilax auriculata), and gaillardia (Gaillardia pulchella). It is not uncommon to find some
sparse woody vegetation such as yaupon (Ilex vomitoria) and yucca (Yucca spp.).
Maritime Wet Grassland. This community occurs on dune swales, sand flats, and sand-filled marsh
where the water table is near the surface. Typically, this community type is seasonally or
permanently staturated, but lacks surface flooding throughout most of the year. The community may
be subject to infrequent overwash.
Dense, herbaceous vegetation dominates this community, with a mix of wetland and mesic species
such as saltmeadow grass (Spartina patens), bald spikerush (Fimbristylis spadicea), three-square
bulrush (Scirpus americancus), or duneslack muhly (Muhlenbergia filipes). Seaside pennywort
(Hydrocotyle bonariensis), small whitetop sedge (Rhynchospora colorata), common foxtail grass,
(Setaria geniculata), and common broom sedge (Andropogon virginicus) may also occur and can
sometimes be very common in patches.
Through exposure to some salt spray, occasional (but infrequent) overwash, and saturated soil
conditions, succession does not occur quickly in this community type. With dune accretion through
overwash or aeolian deposition, the community type could transition into dry grassland or maritime
shrub. The lack of standing water for most of the year distinguishes this community from the
Interdune Pond community. Its higher diversity and occurrence on wetter sites distinguishes it from
the Maritime Dry Grassland community.
Shrub Communities
Maritime Shrub. The Maritime Shrub community occurs in a wide range of conditions from
excessively to poorly drained soils in areas protected from salt spray and flooding by salt water.
These conditions may occur on stabilized sand ridges, in dune swales, and on sand flats. Depending
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 27
upon successional stage, there may be substantial variation in the plant community. In earlier
successional stages it has a dense growth of shrubs, mostly wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana), Southern red cedar (Juniperus silicicola.), saltmeadow bush (Baccharis
halimifolia), yaupon (Ilex vomitoria), greenbrier (Smilax spp.), blackberry (Rubus spp.), and poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans). Stunted live oak (Quercus virginiana) dominates older communities.
Artificial dune construction increases protection from overwash on sand flats and from salt spray,
allowing shrubs to invade. The maritme shrub community can undergo succession into Maritime
Evergreen Forest with increased protection.
The prevalence of shrubby, woody plant species distinguishes this community from maritime
grasslands and dune grass communities. The relatively low canopy and a lower occurrence of live
oak distinguish it from the maritime evergreen forest community. It is distinguishable from the Salt
Shrub community due to the predominance of wax myrtle and presence of species such as yaupon,
live oak, and greenbrier.
Salt Shrub. The Salt Shrub community occurs along higher margins and other slightly higher areas in salt
and brackish marshes. The plant species diversity found in the community is somewhat variable and is
positively correlated with the frequency and amount of saltwater flooding. Most salt shrub communities
have an open to closed shrub canopy, typically consisting of saltmeadow bush (Baccharis halimiflora),
marsh elder (Iva fructescens), seaside oxeye (Borrichia frutescens), wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), and
southern red cedar (Juniperus silicicola), as well as inclusions of marsh vegetation.
The salt shrub community is similar to the maritime shrub community, but is distinguished by the
dominance of the species listed above and the absence of species not tolerant of salt, as well as its
physical location. The salt shrub community may grade into salt or brackish marsh as areas become
wetter. In contrast, the community can grade into maritime shrub, maritime forest, or grassland
communities with lower salinity or sand deposition.
Marsh
Salt Marsh. This community occurs on the margins of sounds, estuaries, and other coastal waters.
Salt marsh occurs on the landward side of barrier island systems in areas under tidal influence.
Although the community is not dependent upon diurnal tide cycles, it does require periodic flooding by
water with a moderate salinity level. Smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) dominates the salt
marsh community. Although overall plant species diversity is low, black needlerush (Juncus
roemerianus), salt grass (Distichlis spicata), or saltmeadow grass (Spartina patens) dominates areas
that are slightly higher in elevation. Other plant species may include seashore mallow (Kosteletskya
virginica), Virginia saltwort (Salicornia virginica), rose mallow (Hibiscus moscheutus), and bald
spikerush or fimbry (Fimbristylis spadicea). Although the salt marsh community occurs on the refuge,
it is most prevalent in the middle and southern portions of the North Carolina coast.
The salt marsh community may transition into brackish marsh, or it can become an estuarine channel
mud flat. It can also undergo a conversion into a salt flat or salt shrub community, depending upon
changes in environmental conditions.
The refuge staff manages the salt marshes with prescribed fire at a 3- to 5-year frequency to maintain
herbaceous vegetative cover and suppress succession to woody vegetation.
Brackish Marsh. The brackish marsh community occurs along the margins of sounds and estuaries
in areas not subjected to regular flooding by salt water. Often referred to as “high marsh,” this
community is subjected to irregular flooding mostly from wind tides along the Outer Banks. Salinity in
28 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
the brackish marsh is generally low due to the distance from a saltwater source and freshwater inflow,
but can be mid-range for brief periods. If a brackish marsh occurs in an area subjected to regular
flooding with low salinity water, mineral deposition can result in mud flats. Black needlerush (Juncus
roemerianus) dominates the vegetation in the brackish marsh community, but patches of saltmeadow
grass (Spartina patens) and salt grass (Distichlis spicata) are common. Less common are patches of
big cordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides) and sawgrass (Cladium jamaiciense). As salinity increases,
this community can grade into salt marsh or, if salinity decreases, freshwater marsh. This community
is most prevalent in the middle and northern portions of the North Carolina coast.
The refuge staff manages the brackish marshes with prescribed fire at a 3- to 5-year frequency to
maintain herbaceous vegetative cover and suppress succession to woody vegetation.
Salt Flat. The salt flat community occurs in estuarine areas subjected to irregular flooding by salt
water. It occurs in shallow depressions wherein evaporation of the high salinity ocean water
concentrates salt. Sparse cover and low diversity characterize its plant density and species
composition. In vegetated areas, dominant species may include halophytic herbs such as
saltmeadow glasswort (Salicornia virginica), Bigelow's saltwort (S. bigelovii), jointed saltwort (S.
maritima), rarely sea blite (Suaeda linearis), sand spurrey (Spergularia marina), and orach (Atriplex
patula). Saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora), salt grass (Distichlis spicata), and seaside oxeye
(Borrichia frustecens) occur in marginal zones. The centers of these communities are often
completely barren of vegetation.
These communities tend to be relatively small and occur within the salt marsh community. Primary
differences between the salt flat and salt marsh communities include the dominance of vegetation
with high salt tolerance and lower overall vegetative cover in the salt flat community. The salt flat
community can change or shift location depending upon change in environmental conditions, such as
a change in water circulation, salinity, or sand deposition. The salt flat community may transition into
either salt or brackish marsh.
Exposed Overwash Flats. The exposed overwash flats are marine flats, not otherwise considered
part of the current beach. These flats are direct results of overwash during storm events. These flats
are the unvegetated, sandy areas adjacent to beaches and inlets that can have high shell content. At
low tide, rich overwash from previous storms or other events are exposed. Due to the lack of
vegetation, this habitat type is attractive to several species of shorebirds and colonial nesting birds as
nesting habitat and is the most likely place for the occurrence of seabeach amaranth. This
community will transition into a dune grass community as natural dunes begin to form with
accumulation of various types of debris.
Managed Wetlands. These are manmade impoundments with borrow canals around the perimeter that
may include open water, moist soil, exposed sand/mud flats, and emergent vegetation with varying
amounts and management regimes. Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge has three impoundments:
390-acre North Pond, 192-acre New Field Pond, and 208-acre South Pond. Plant communities within
the impoundments include maritime wet grassland, maritime shrub, salt marsh, brackish marsh, and
open water. Open water areas typically have a bottom substrate dominated by sago pondweed
(Potamogeton pectinata), wigeon grass (Ruppia maritime), and muskgrass (Chara spp.). Horned
pondweed (Zannichellia palustris) has been identified on occasion. The refuge staff manages this
wetland community primarily for wintering waterfowl and spring shorebird migration.
The staff manages the areas by draining water in the spring to create mudflats for shorebirds and
allow annual seed-bearing plants, maintaining it at a low elevation through the late summer shorebird
migration, and allowing them to fill or pumping water to fill them for waterfowl migration in the fall.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 29
The staff fills the impoundments by opening the water control structures when the tide is appropriate
to fill or drain them whenever possible. The impoundments are burned, mowed, and/or disked as
needed to suppress succession to perennial herbaceous and woody plants.
WILDLIFE
Appendix VI provides a complete list of wildlife species that occur on the refuge. Table 4 lists the
species of management concern that occur on the refuge.
Birds
Birds are the most common and evident land vertebrates along the Outer Banks. Because the environment
is predominantly maritime, the large and conspicuous water and marsh birds are especially well
represented. Approximately 265 species of birds regularly visit the refuge, with about 50 additional species
considered accidental visitors.
The area is roughly at the midpoint of the Atlantic Flyway and is a much used and valuable feeding and
resting area for numerous species of wintering waterfowl. Snow geese, tundra swans, coots, and more than
25 species of ducks winter here. In addition to waterfowl, large numbers of shorebirds, colonial nesting
birds, gulls, terns, ibises, hawks, owls, and numerous species of passerine birds frequent the area. During
the spring and fall, large numbers of raptors, especially accipiters and falcons, use the Outer Banks as a
migration corridor. Other birds such as warblers, shorebirds, colonial nesting birds, gulls, terns, herons, and
egrets also follow the barrier islands during migration.
Avian species composition changes throughout the year since most are migratory. Peak shorebird
spring migration occurs in early to mid-May, with a less defined fall migration beginning in late July
and extending through September in some years. The populations of migratory waterfowl peak
during the months of November through February.
In summer, dunlins, dowitchers, plovers, sandpipers, royal terns, least terns, black skimmers,
American oystercatchers, yellowlegs, willets, black-necked stilts, laughing gulls, and numerous other
shorebird species are observed. Many wading birds such as glossy ibises; snowy and great egrets;
little blue, tri-colored, green, and black-crowned night herons; American avocets; and others are also
present. An interesting variety of songbirds is present throughout the year.
Osprey and brown pelicans are very common. Although they were species of special concern in past
years, they have made a remarkable comeback.
Several species of shorebirds and colonial nesting birds have been found nesting along the open
beaches of the area. The black skimmer, least tern, common tern, and gull-billed tern nest in the
cobble and overwash areas of the beach above high tide. From one to four American
oystercatchers nest on the refuge beach each year. All of these birds are recognized species of
various levels of concern in a recent Fish and Wildlife Service publication entitled, “Birds of
Conservation Concern 2002.” Degradation or loss of breeding habitat is the primary cause for
concern with all of these species.
Mammals
Of the 47 species of mammals that occur in the lower coastal plain of North Carolina, 21 native
terrestrial mammals, 8 marine mammals, and the feral cat are recorded for the Outer Banks. The
most common land mammals are the cottontail rabbit, raccoon, and mink. Semi-aquatic furbearers
30 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Table 4. Species of Management Concern at the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Species Status Brackish
Marsh
Maritime
Shrub
Beach,
Dune,
Grass / Dry
Grassland
Managed
Wetlands
(Moist Soil
Units)
Piping Plover FL X
Loggerhead Sea Turtle FL X
Green Sea Turtle FL X
Bald Eagle FL X
Seabeach Amaranth FL X
Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed
Sparrow
FSC X
Seaside Sparrow FSC X
Black Rail FSC X
Yellow Rail FSC X
King Rail FSC X
Sedge Wren FSC X X
Prairie Warbler FSC X
Yellow-throated Warbler FSC X
Northern Parula FSC X
Red Knot FSC X
Wilson’s Plover FSC X
Least Tern FSC X
Black Skimmer FSC X
American Oystercatcher FSC X
Canada Goose SMC X
Snow Goose SMC X
Tundra Swan SMC X
American Black Duck SMC X X
Gadwall SMC X X
Mallard SMC X
American Widgeon SMC X
Blue-winged Teal SMC X
Green-winged Teal SMC X
Ruddy Duck SMC X
Ringneck Duck SMC X
Northern Pintail SMC X
Greater Scaup SMC X
Lesser Scaup SMC X
Gull-billed Tern SMC X
Common Tern SMC X
(FL=Federally-listed, FSC=Federal Species of Concern, SMC=Species of Management Concern on Pea Island NWR)
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 31
such as the muskrat, nutria, and river otter are common. White-tailed deer numbers have been
increasing in recent years. Marine species, including various species of whales, dolphins, and
porpoises, are seen at rare intervals in the nearshore ocean waters.
Reptiles and Amphibians
There are 20 species of reptiles recorded on the barrier islands. Sea turtles include the loggerhead
and the green, and they are present only during the nesting season. The relatively few permanent
freshwater ponds produce a correspondingly small number of amphibian species.
Fish
Many species of important invertebrates and fish are found in the waters surrounding the islands.
The marshes and tidal creeks serve as nursery grounds fish such as spot, croaker, red drum, striped
and white mullet, Atlantic menhaden, and several species of flounder. Striped bass, bluefish, and
spotted sea trout are also present. Productive shellfish beds are found throughout the surrounding
waters. Clams and scallops are found in the grass and softer mud bottoms, and crab and shrimp are
found on the bottom. Oysters are found in the shallow sound areas.
INSECTS AND DISEASES
The gypsy moth is now well established as far south as northeastern North Carolina. The North
Carolina Division of Plant Industry and USDA Forest Service closely monitor gypsy moth populations
using pheromone traps located throughout the Dare County mainland and barrier islands, including
refuge lands. When they detect large-scale outbreaks, they use integrated pest management
techniques to suppress the outbreak, but not necessarily eliminate the species from the area.
Although the refuge is within the quarantine area of northeastern North Carolina, there have not been
any outbreaks of the gypsy moth requiring treatment other than on Roanoke Island.
EXOTIC ORGANISMS
At the present time biologists know little about exotic organisms on the refuge. Unknown individuals
introduced the ring-necked pheasant to the barrier islands and a viable population existed until the
mid-1990s. A few birds remain on the refuge and were sighted in the spring of 2004. There are feral
cats on the refuge, but their numbers and the extent of their impact on wildlife are unknown. Other
possible species include nutria, phragmites, alligator weed, and beach vitex.
THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
Four federally listed species occur in the area. Among them are the piping plover, loggerhead and
green sea turtles, and bald eagle (Table 2).
The Service has listed the bald eagle as a federally threatened species and biologists observe them
infrequently throughout the year. There have been no nesting attempts on the refuge. Sighting
numbers have been increasing in recent years.
The Service has listed the Atlantic Coast and Northern Great Plains populations of the piping plover
as a federally threatened, whereas the Great Lakes population is endangered. Between one and
three nesting attempts have occurred annually since 1996. Over those 9 years, the plovers have
attempted to nest 12 times and have fledged 5 chicks.
32 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
Primary federally protected reptiles found using the refuge are the Atlantic loggerhead and green sea
turtle. Both species are inhabitants of the open ocean and nest just above the high tide line on the
beach. Mating takes place in the water near nesting beaches. Egg-laying occurs most frequently
during June thru mid-August.
The refuge is within the known range of the seabeach amaranth and dune bluecurls. The Service
has listed the seabeach amaranth as federally threatened, whereas the dune bluecurls is a species of
special concern. Biologists have not observed either species on the refuge.
The refuge staff will give the status and habitat requirements of the above species primary
consideration during the planning and implementation of management actions.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
The refuge has no documented cultural resource sites. In 1978, the Thunderbird Research
Corporation conducted background and archival investigations and field reconnaissance to assess
the cultural resources of the Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge. It concluded that, due to the
dynamic nature of the geologic forces on the barrier islands, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources have been preserved on the refuge. There was the Pea Island Lifesaving Station in the
vicinity of the former refuge headquarters, but the facilities were moved frequently and no
archaeological remains were found at that location (Thompson and Gardner 1979). The refuge staff
and refuge visitors occasionally find shipwrecks uncovered on the beach, and the staff reports the
shipwrecks to the State Historic Preservation Office. The State Historic Preservation Office has not
found any of these to be significant.
SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND LAND USE
The entire span of Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge lies within Dare County, North Carolina.
Recently made more accessible to the mainland by bridges and primarily supported by tourism,
coastal Dare County has seen an influx of tourists, visitors, and residents over recent decades. This
considerable population growth and development of the barrier islands has brought substantial
economic benefit to a region historically rural and impoverished. As a result, the refuge has seen
greater recreational and public use due to this increase in visitors. However, the region’s natural
resources of land and water have suffered increasing demands, often with negative impact. As one
of the few remaining tracts of intact natural land, the refuge and, consequently, its management
considerations have become even more critical.
Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge and Dare County are in the northeastern part of North Carolina
and are bounded by Currituck County to the north, Tyrrell County to the west, and Hyde County to the
south. The Alligator River forms the western boundary of the county, which is bound to the north by
the Albemarle Sound, to the east by the Atlantic Ocean, and to the south by the Hyde County line
dividing the Pamlico Sound.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 33
For many decades, Dare County has been in the forefront of economic growth and development in
the State of North Carolina, and historically, unemployment has been lower than the state average.
Seven million tourists visit the Outer Banks of Dare, Currituck, and Hyde counties every year. The
next closest areas of economic growth and social life are Greenville, North Carolina, 100 miles west
of the refuge, and Virginia Beach, Virginia, 100 miles north of the refuge.
Despite the growth on the Outer Banks, Dare County is still predominantly rural, with the largest town
being Kill Devil Hills (2000 population: 5,897). Like other rural areas throughout the country, outdoor
activities are both popular and necessary. Hunting, recreational fishing, and bird watching are popular
pastimes, and commercial fishing is an important element of the local economy. The importance of Pea
Island Refuge and its appropriate management is, therefore, easily understood.
HISTORY OF DARE COUNTY
The original residents of the area were Native Americans described as those of the Coastal
Algonkian linguistic group at the time of European contact. Northeastern North Carolina was the
most southern extent of Coastal Algonkian habitation. One chiefdom was located on the Outer Banks
on Hatteras Island (Haag 1958). The Algonkians lived in permanent villages where they could hunt,
fish, shellfish, and farm in close proximity to the village. They utilized seasonal villages to follow
migrating fish and wildlife populations. They grew corn, beans, sunflower, and squash in small
gardens; and hunted deer, bear, alligators, turtles, and a variety of small mammals. Mention of the
Algonkians ceased by the mid-eighteenth century (Mathis and Crow 1983).
As early as 1584, English officers spent two months exploring Roanoke Island and its surrounding area.
In 1585, Sir Walter Raleigh sent a fleet of seven vessels back to the island in an attempt to establish the
first English colony in what is now eastern North Carolina. Fort Raleigh was built on Roanoke Island, but
the survivors returned to England the following year. In 1587, Raleigh sent an expedition of 117 people
that included women and children to give permanence to the colony. Led by John White, these settlers
rebuilt the fort. On August 18, 1587, White’s granddaughter, Virginia Dare, was born in the colony—the
first English child born in the New World. Later that year, White sailed back to England for supplies, but
Spanish hostilities and England’s financial hardships delayed his return for three years. Upon arriving
back at Roanoke Island in 1590, he found no trace of the colonists. Many theories have been proposed
about the fate of those 117 people—called “The Lost Colony”—but the mystery remains unsolved. The
area remained unpopulated for more than a half century after the disappearance of the “Lost Colony.” Sir
John Colleton established the first permanent settlement on Colington Island on the Outer Banks in the
winter of 1664–1665. Shipwrecked sailors and settlers from Virginia established the first settlements.
These settlers made an effort to grow tobacco, to grow grapes for a winery, and to raise hogs. The only
real profit was from oil extracted from beached whales. Raising livestock on the grasslands of the dunes
became an important occupation. The only agriculture was in small gardens (Stick 1958).
In the early 1700s, pirates moved into the area to prey on ships that passed too close to the
treacherous shoreline. The most famous of these pirates, Blackbeard, made his headquarters on the
Outer Banks. His death in 1718 brought an end to piracy. Around 1726, residents built windmills to
grind grain on Roanoke Island and the Outer Banks. The residents made a living from farming,
fishing, hunting, and beachcombing (U.S. Department of the Interior 1981).
Modern tourists first found the Outer Banks of Dare County at Nags Head in the 1830s when planters
from the inland counties came to escape the hot humid summer. Cottages and the Nags Head Hotel
became a home to visitors. The hotel was the scene of nightly dinners and dances. A railway was
built for transportation to the beach (Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce 2003).
34 Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge
In the early 1800s, the Atlantic Ocean earned the name “Graveyard of the Atlantic” as numerous
vessels sunk. During the Civil War, Union forces captured Fort Hatteras and Roanoke Island to
secure access to North Carolina by sea. The Union ironclad ship, USS Monitor, sank in a gale off
Cape Hatteras on December 30, 1862 (Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce 2003).
In 1870, the state assembly established Dare County, (named for Virginia Dare), from parts of Hyde,
Currituck, and Tyrrell Counties. During this time, most opportunities for work were in the U.S. Coast
Guard as lighthouse operators or weather station employees. The improvements of inlets and
advances in navigation and transportation allowed commercial fishing to become an important part of
the economy (Stick 1958).
On December 17, 1903, Wilbur and Orville Wright made the first successful power-driven airplane
flight from Kill Devil Hill near Kitty Hawk on the Outer Banks. German submarines filled the waters off
the North Carolina coast during World War I and II. Since World War II, tourism replaced hunting and
fishing as the principal industry (Outer Banks Chamber of Commerce 2003).
The rivers and sounds were once the major transportation avenues in the area. As the area grew
and the railroad arrived, boat traffic declined. In the twentieth century with the popularity of
automobiles, the state developed a network of highways connecting the county to all areas of the
eastern United States. The state replaced a drawbridge across the Croatan Sound on U.S. Highway
64 at Manns Harbor in 2002 with a high-rise bridge so motorists could bypass downtown Manteo on
their way to the Outer Banks. The state is widening U.S. Highway 64 to four lanes that will connect
the area to Interstate 95 and the Outer Banks. There are small local airports in Manteo and Frisco;
regional airports in Greenville; and an international airport in Norfolk, Virginia. Amtrak provides
passenger rail service as far east as Rocky Mount.
LAND USE IN DARE COUNTY
Logging and farming have seldom been important sources of income in Dare County due to the deep,
sandy soils of the dunes, the saturated soils of the marshes on the Outer Banks, and the wetlands
with deep organic soils on the mainland. The forest and marsh plant communities have always
provided hunting opportunities, however, and the marshes are important nursery areas for fish. The
beaches, dunes, wildlife, and fishing opportunities on the Outer Banks are major attractions to tourists
for their summer vacations.
There is limited residential construction in the marshes, pocosins, and forested wetlands of the
county. The largest development has been on the northern end of the coastal barrier islands known
as the Outer Banks from Hatteras Village to Corolla.
Before the Civil War, farmers cultivated up to 5,000 acres of corn and tobacco on mainland Dare
County in a settlement known as Beechlands, near Milltail Creek. They also grazed cattle on 25,000
acres of marsh. The Dare County Lumber Company harvested enough timber on 168,000 acres of
mainland Dare County to set up a settlement called Buffalo City, which eventually went bankrupt.
Both areas are now part of the Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge.
Today, Dare County is 57 percent forested (142,212 acres) and 3 percent farmland (4,961 acres).
From 1992 to 1997, the land in farms decreased 30 percent from 7,046 acres to 4,961 acres; the
average size of the farms decreased 45 percent from 1,007 acres to 551 acres; the number of full-time
farm operators remained the same at 6; the total market value of agricultural products sold
increased 34 percent from $554,000 to $836,000; and the average market value of agricultural
products sold per farm increased 17 percent from $79,114 to $92,923 (Table 5).
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 35
Table 5. Dare County agricultural statistics from 1997
Number of Farms 9
Acres in Farms 4,961
Average Size of Farms (Acres) 551
Market Value of Land Per Farm $55,033
Market Value of Land Per Acre $1,007
Market Value of Equipment Per Farm $75,877
Total Cropland (Acres) 4,265
Market Value of All Products Sold $836,000
Market Value of Products Sold Per Farm $92,923
Operators with Farm as Principal Occupation 6
Operators with Anther Occupation as Principal Occupation 3
Land in Soybeans (Acres) 3,516
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture, 1997
Soybeans are the most important crop in Dare County. Production has increased substantially
between 1992 and 1997 (Table 6) (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1997).
Table 6. Commodity production in Dare County in 1992 and 1997
Commodity 1997 Production 1992 Production 1997-1992 Change
Soybeans (acres) 3,516 2,736 Increased 29%
Wheat (acres) 0 1,652
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture, 1997
DEMOGRAPHICS IN DARE COUNTY
Dare County is primarily rural with a total estimated population of 29,967