DOCSLIB.ORG

Interstate Fisheries Management Program Implementation for North Carolina

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Interstate Fisheries Management Program Implementation for North Carolina INTERSTATE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION FOR NORTH CAROLINA By A. Blake Price and Jeff Gearhart Completion Report for Cooperative Agreement No. NA 87FG0367 /3 Study II DOCUMENTATION AND REDUCTION OF BYCATCH IN NORTH CAROLINA FISHERIES JOB 4: Large Mesh (> 5-inch) Gillnet Discard Mortality of Spotted Seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus), Weakfish (Cynoscion regalis), Southern Flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), and Red Drum (Sciaenops ocellata) in Roanoke Sound, Core Sound, and the Neuse River, North Carolina August 2002 ABSTRACT A large mesh (> 5.0 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study was conducted in Pamlico Sound, Pungo River, and Hatteras Island at high and low salinity sites to determine delayed mortality estimates of red drum (Sciaenops ocellata) and striped bass (Morone saxatilis). Large mesh gillnets were soaked for approximately 12 hours. Upon retrieval, live fish were transferred to net pens located near the capture site and held for 72 hours. Mortalities and water quality data (temperature, dissolved oxygen, and salinity) were collected at 24 hr intervals. Delayed mortality estimates were 33% for red drum and 8% for striped bass. Logistic regression analysis was employed to model the effects of area (Outer Banks or River sites), mesh size, trial, fish length, dissolved oxygen, temperature, and salinity on mortality for each species. Temperature was related to mortality for both species. Salinity and mesh size were also related to red drum mortality. The results offer insights for fishery managers developing Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) and may assist in bycatch mortality estimates for each of these species. Recommendations include expansion of the study to fishery-dependent gillnet fisheries, establish more consistent observer coverage, implement control groups to measure the confounding effects of handling, transport and confinement stress in future delayed mortality studies. 4-ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................................... 4-ii TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................... 4-iii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... 4-iv LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................... 4-v INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 4-6 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................ 4-7 PROJECT LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................... 4-9 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................................. 4-9 Catches .............................................................................................................................................. 4-9 Total Mortality .................................................................................................................................. 4-9 At Net Mortality .............................................................................................................................. 4-10 Delayed Mortality ........................................................................................................................... 4-10 Day of Death ................................................................................................................................... 4-12 Water quality ................................................................................................................................... 4-13 Statistical analyses........................................................................................................................... 4-13 DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................................... 4-16 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................... 4-17 Striped Bass ..................................................................................................................................... 4-17 Red Drum ........................................................................................................................................ 4-17 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................... 4-18 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................... 4-19 LITERATURE CITED ........................................................................................................................ 4-20 4-iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Number of striped bass and red drum caught by month in the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted at sites located in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. ............................. 4-9 Table 2. Length frequency distributions of striped bass captured in the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. ........................................................... 4-10 Table 3. Length frequency distributions of red drum captured in the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. ........................................................... 4-11 Table 4. Percent mortality (at net delayed) of striped bass and red drum caught by mesh size in the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted in Pamlico Sound, and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. ............................................................................................................................................... 4-11 Table 5. Total mortality, at net mortality (upon capture), and delayed mortality of striped bass and red drum caught in the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. ......................................................................................................... 4-12 Table 6. At net mortality by month (Apr – Aug) of striped bass and red drum caught in the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. ........................... 4-12 Table 7. Delayed mortality of striped bass and red drum caught in the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. ........................................................... 4-12 Table 8. Water quality data collected during the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. Data include mean water temperature (C), mean dissolved oxygen content (mg/L), and mean salinity (ppt) for the Outer banks and river sites by month. .............................................................................................................. 4-14 Table 9. Summary of stepwise logistic regression analyses of independent variables on 72-h discard mortality of striped bass caught in large mesh gillnets (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in. stretch mesh) in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. .................................................................................................................................... 4-15 Table 10. Summary of stepwise logistic regression analyses of independent variables on 72-h discard mortality of red drum in large mesh gillnets (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in. stretch mesh) in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. ....................... 4-15 4-iv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Sample sites for the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted in Pamlico River and Pungo River (Map A), and Roanoke Sound (Map B), NC in the 2001 fishing season. ..................................................................... 4-8 Figure 2. Day of death for striped bass and red drum caught in the large mesh (5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5 in stretched mesh) gillnet discard mortality study conducted in Pamlico Sound and Roanoke Sound, NC during the 2001 fishing season. ........................................................... 4-13 4-v INTRODUCTION Large mesh gillnets (> 5.0 in stretched mesh) are common finfish gear used throughout the inshore waters of North Carolina. These nets are typically utilized in the flounder (Paralichthys spp.) fishery. There are many bycatch and discard mortality issues surrounding large mesh gillnet fisheries.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cape Hatteras National Seashore
    05 542745 ch05.qxd 3/23/04 9:01 AM Page 105 CHAPTER 5 Cape Hatteras National Seashore Driving along Hatteras and Ocracoke islands national seashore and other nature preserves are on a narrow strip of sand with the ocean close wild and beautiful. Being here, it’s easy to on both sides, you may think that the Outer imagine what it was like when the first English Banks are a geographic miracle. Why should colonists landed more than 400 years ago, or this razor-thin rim of sand persist far out in the when the Wright brothers flew the first airplane sea? How wild it seems, a land of windy beach over a century ago. Both events are well inter- with no end, always in motion, always vulner- preted at their sites. The area is fascinating eco- able to the next, slightly larger wave. There’s so logically, too. Here, north and south meet, the much here to see and learn, and so much soli- mix of ocean currents, climate, fresh and salt tude to enjoy. You’re like a passenger on an water, and geography creating a fabulous diver- enormous ship, and unpredictable nature is the sity of bird and plant life at places like the Pea captain. Island National Wildlife Refuge (p. 124) and Oddly, many people don’t see Cape Hatteras Nags Head Woods Ecological Preserve (p. 124). this way. When they think of the Outer Banks, In this sense, the area is much like Point Reyes, they think of Nags Head or Kill Devil Hills, its counterpart on the West Coast, covered in towns where tourist development has pushed chapter 21, “Point Reyes National Seashore.” right up to the edge of the sea and, in many And for children, the national seashore is a places, gotten really ugly.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography of North Carolina Underwater Archaeology
    i BIBLIOGRAPHY OF NORTH CAROLINA UNDERWATER ARCHAEOLOGY Compiled by Barbara Lynn Brooks, Ann M. Merriman, Madeline P. Spencer, and Mark Wilde-Ramsing Underwater Archaeology Branch North Carolina Division of Archives and History April 2009 ii FOREWARD In the forty-five years since the salvage of the Modern Greece, an event that marks the beginning of underwater archaeology in North Carolina, there has been a steady growth in efforts to document the state’s maritime history through underwater research. Nearly two dozen professionals and technicians are now employed at the North Carolina Underwater Archaeology Branch (N.C. UAB), the North Carolina Maritime Museum (NCMM), the Wilmington District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), and East Carolina University’s (ECU) Program in Maritime Studies. Several North Carolina companies are currently involved in conducting underwater archaeological surveys, site assessments, and excavations for environmental review purposes and a number of individuals and groups are conducting ship search and recovery operations under the UAB permit system. The results of these activities can be found in the pages that follow. They contain report references for all projects involving the location and documentation of physical remains pertaining to cultural activities within North Carolina waters. Each reference is organized by the location within which the reported investigation took place. The Bibliography is divided into two geographical sections: Region and Body of Water. The Region section encompasses studies that are non-specific and cover broad areas or areas lying outside the state's three-mile limit, for example Cape Hatteras Area. The Body of Water section contains references organized by defined geographic areas.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Lost Fishing Gear Recovery Project: Call for Working Water Assistance
    2021 Lost Fishing Gear Recovery Project: Call for Working Water Assistance Applications Accepted Until December 15, 2020 The North Carolina Coastal Federation is currently accepting applications for “on-water” cleanup assistance relating to its annual Lost Fishing Gear Recovery Project. This project is open to commercial watermen and women in North Carolina. This project is funded by the N.C. Marine Fisheries Commission Commercial Resource Fund Committee and the Funding Committee for the N.C. Commercial Resource Fund under the Commercial Fishing Resource Fund Grant Program and is intended to improve habitat, water quality and support coastal economies. Eligible participants are selected for involvement in this program to help the federation and N.C. Marine Patrol remove lost fishing gear from coastal waters during the “no-potting” period. In January 2019, commercial watermen and women in partnership with Marine Patrol officers removed 3,112 pots from select areas in Districts 1, 2, and 3. The 2021 project will take place in select areas within all three Marine Patrol Districts statewide, during the closed seasons: o Jan. 1-31 north of the Highway 58 bridge to Emerald Isle o March 1-15 south of the Highway 58 bridge Compensation is $450 per boat per day. A captain and mate are required for each boat. Captain refers to the individual who is in charge of and provides the vessel. (A merchant mariner credential is not required for this project.) To be considered, captains must have a valid North Carolina standard commercial fishing license (SCFL). A copy of the license must be submitted with this application.
    [Show full text]
  • Tursiops Truncatus) Sighted in the Roanoke Sound, NC Jacquelyn Salguero
    Delineating the northern extent of common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) sighted in the Roanoke Sound, NC Jacquelyn Salguero Introduction Common bottlenose dolphins (hereafter referred to as bottlenose dolphins), Tursiops truncatus, inhabit temperate and tropical waters across the world, including both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans of the United States (Rice, 1998). Within these regions, two main morphotypes of bottlenose dolphins can be distinguished: pelagic and coastal. In the western North Atlantic, along the Eastern United States, coastal populations are managed as distinct stocks, where a “stock” is defined as a group of animals that occupy the same area and interbreed (Rosel et al., 2009). Despite being highly mobile with a continuous range, coastal Atlantic bottlenose dolphins have been classified into two main ecotypes based on their primary habitat: “migratory coastal” found along the coastline and “estuarine” primarily residing in areas such as estuaries, bays, and harbors (Hayes et al., 2017, Toth et al., 2012). For management purposes, a number of estuarine stocks have been defined based on their spatial and temporal ranging patterns despite no clear spatial barrier to dispersal, migration, and gene flow (Rosel et al., 2009). This pattern of divergence without physical barriers, or sympatry, within inshore populations of bottlenose dolphins can also be seen in populations of bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops aduncus, in Moreton Bay, Australia. Significant genetic divergence was found along the small geographic region of Moreton Bay, showing patterns of fine-scale discrete population structuring depending on the varying water depths in the Southern and Northern regions of the bay (Ansmann et al., 2012). Another example of this overlapping spatial distribution within bottlenose dolphin populations can be found in Southern Georgia and Jacksonville, Florida estuarine systems which are approximately 80 km apart (Rosel et al., 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Occurrence, Distribution and Reproductive Status of Female Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops Truncatus) in Roanoke Sound, NC
    Occurrence, Distribution and Reproductive Status of Female Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Roanoke Sound, NC By Waverly Reibel Dr. Andrew J. Read, Advisor April 23rd, 2020 Master’s Project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Environmental Management degree in the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University. Executive Summary I examined the spatial distribution of bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) nursery groups in Roanoke Sound, NC, to gain insight into how environmental parameters affect site fidelity, and to determine whether habitat use patterns change based on the reproductive state of females. I performed a home range analysis of mature females and compiled information on interbirth intervals and length of calf dependency to obtain a more comprehensive picture of the ecology and life history of this age and sex class of estuarine dolphins. I analyzed photo- identification survey data from Roanoke Sound collected over 11 years (2008-2019) to determine core usage areas of female bottlenose dolphins with respect to reproductive state. I compared the location and extent of kernel density estimates of home ranges for nursery groups and non- nursery groups. Many nursery groups are observed in this area during spring and summer, leading to the hypothesis that Roanoke Sound is an important nursery habitat. The importance of this area to lactating females may be attributable to its relatively shallow depth and abundant seagrass beds, which provide protection and a relatively plentiful supply of prey. In Roanoke Sound, nursery groups (n = 170) were significantly (p < 0.00001) larger than non-nursery groups (n = 68) with a mean of 12 individuals per sighting, while non-nursery groups had an average group size of 4 individuals.
    [Show full text]
  • Manteo Harbor Report
    A CULTURAL RESOURCE EVALUATION OF SUBMERGED LANDS AFFECTED BY THE 400TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION Manteo, North Carolina Conducted By Underwater Archaeology Branch North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources Richard W. Lawrence, Head Leslie S. Bright Mark Wilde-Ramsing Report Prepared by Mark Wilde-Ramsing November, 1983 Abstract Field investigations of the submerged bottom lands at Manteo, North Carolina were carried out by the Underwater Archaeology Branch, Division of Archives and History, Department of Cultural Resources. The purpose of these investigations was to identify historically and/or archaeologically significant cultural materials lying within the area to be affected by construction of a bridge and canal system and berthing area proposed for the 400th Anniversary Celebration (1984 to 1987) on Roanoke Island. Initially, a systematic survey of the project area was performed using a proton precession magnetometer to isolate magnetic disturbances, any of which might be generated by cultural material. Following this, a diving and probing search was conducted on isolated magnetic targets to determine the source. With the exception of the remains of a sunken vessel, Underwater Site #0001ROS, all magnetic disturbances were attributed to cultural debris of recent origin (twentieth century) and were determined historically and archaeologically insignificant. Recommendations for the sunken vessel located on the south side of the proposed berthing area are (1) complete avoidance of the site during construction activities, or (2) further
    [Show full text]
  • Class G Tables of Geographic Cutter Numbers: Maps -- by Region Or
    G3862 SOUTHERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3862 FEATURES, ETC. .C55 Clayton Aquifer .C6 Coasts .E8 Eutaw Aquifer .G8 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway .L6 Louisville and Nashville Railroad 525 G3867 SOUTHEASTERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3867 FEATURES, ETC. .C5 Chattahoochee River .C8 Cumberland Gap National Historical Park .C85 Cumberland Mountains .F55 Floridan Aquifer .G8 Gulf Islands National Seashore .H5 Hiwassee River .J4 Jefferson National Forest .L5 Little Tennessee River .O8 Overmountain Victory National Historic Trail 526 G3872 SOUTHEAST ATLANTIC STATES. REGIONS, G3872 NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. .B6 Blue Ridge Mountains .C5 Chattooga River .C52 Chattooga River [wild & scenic river] .C6 Coasts .E4 Ellicott Rock Wilderness Area .N4 New River .S3 Sandhills 527 G3882 VIRGINIA. REGIONS, NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. G3882 .A3 Accotink, Lake .A43 Alexanders Island .A44 Alexandria Canal .A46 Amelia Wildlife Management Area .A5 Anna, Lake .A62 Appomattox River .A64 Arlington Boulevard .A66 Arlington Estate .A68 Arlington House, the Robert E. Lee Memorial .A7 Arlington National Cemetery .A8 Ash-Lawn Highland .A85 Assawoman Island .A89 Asylum Creek .B3 Back Bay [VA & NC] .B33 Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge .B35 Baker Island .B37 Barbours Creek Wilderness .B38 Barboursville Basin [geologic basin] .B39 Barcroft, Lake .B395 Battery Cove .B4 Beach Creek .B43 Bear Creek Lake State Park .B44 Beech Forest .B454 Belle Isle [Lancaster County] .B455 Belle Isle [Richmond] .B458 Berkeley Island .B46 Berkeley Plantation .B53 Big Bethel Reservoir .B542 Big Island [Amherst County] .B543 Big Island [Bedford County] .B544 Big Island [Fluvanna County] .B545 Big Island [Gloucester County] .B547 Big Island [New Kent County] .B548 Big Island [Virginia Beach] .B55 Blackwater River .B56 Bluestone River [VA & WV] .B57 Bolling Island .B6 Booker T.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Bottlenose Dolphin, Tursiops Truncatus, Seasonal Habitat Use and Associations with Habitat Characteristics in Roanoke Sound, North Carolina
    2019, 32 Heather M. Hill Editor Peer-reviewed Common Bottlenose Dolphin, Tursiops truncatus, Seasonal Habitat Use and Associations with Habitat Characteristics in Roanoke Sound, North Carolina Shauna McBride-Kebert1,2, Jessica S. Taylor3, Krystan A. Wilkinson1,4, Heidi Lyn5, Frank R. Moore6, Donald F. Sacco2, Bandana Kar7, and Stan A. Kuczaj II2 1 Chicago Zoological Society’s Sarasota Dolphin Research Program c/o Mote Marine Laboratory, U.S.A. 2 School of Psychology, University of Southern Mississippi, U.S.A. 3 Outer Banks Center for Dolphin Research, U.S.A. 4 School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Florida, U.S.A. 5 Department of Psychology, University of South Alabama, U.S.A. 6 School of Biological, Environmental, and Earth Sciences, University of Southern Mississippi, U.S.A. 7 National Security Emerging Technologies Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S.A. Understanding how habitat characteristics influence common bottlenose dolphin, Tursiops truncatus, distribution and behavior can be useful for conservation. The dolphin community in Roanoke Sound, North Carolina, primarily exhibits seasonal residency, and there is limited information on their habitat use. The objectives of this study were to increase habitat use knowledge and to determine the relationship between habitat characteristics and dolphin distribution using standardized photographic-identification data (2009-2017). A hot spot (Getis-Ord Gi*) analysis showed dolphins frequently use the southern region containing the mouth of the estuary for feeding and traveling. Habitat characteristics were modeled with zero-altered gamma (ZAG), generalized linear (GLM), and generalized additive (GAM) models to predict dolphin group density. Models showed that groups were more likely to be present in areas with greater benthic slope variation and shallow areas closer to land and that different habitat characteristics were associated with feeding, social, and travel activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Contents Chapter 5 Outer Banks
    Contents Chapter 5 Outer Banks ............................................................................................................................... 2 5.1 General Description ...................................................................................................................... 2 5.2 Population and Land Cover ........................................................................................................... 2 5.3 Biological Health and Ambient Water Quality .............................................................................. 2 5.4 Shellfish Sanitation and Recreation Water Quality....................................................................... 3 5.4.1 Potential Pollution Sources ................................................................................................... 3 5.4.2 Water Quality and Shellfish Harvesting ................................................................................ 4 5.5 How to Read the Watershed (HUC 10) Sections ........................................................................... 6 5.6 North Landing River (HUC: 0301020512) ...................................................................................... 8 5.7 Sand Ridge-Bodie Island (HUC: 0301020517) ............................................................................... 8 5.8 Currituck Sound (HUC: 0301020513) ............................................................................................ 8 5.8.1 Dowdys Bay (Poplar Branch Bay) [AU# 30-1-15b] ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seasonal Exchange of Bottlenose Dolphins Between Roanoke Sound and Beaufort, North Carolina Emma Bancroft and Jessica Taylor Outer Banks Center for Dolphin Research
    Seasonal Exchange of Bottlenose Dolphins Between Roanoke Sound and Beaufort, North Carolina Emma Bancroft and Jessica Taylor Outer Banks Center for Dolphin Research Introduction Bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) are commonly found around the world in both offshore and inshore areas of tropical and temperate waters. These areas include the eastern coastline of the United States in the western North Atlantic (NOAA 2015). Many of these dolphins exhibit seasonal migratory patterns while other dolphins may demonstrate different residency patterns. These patterns include long-term and permanent residency, short-term seasonal residency, or are migratory (Toth et al. 2011). Differing patterns of site fidelity among individual dolphins may be in response to foraging, searching for nursery areas, water temperature, and protection from predators (Miller et al. 2013). The migratory patterns of some dolphins make it difficult to develop management decisions regarding the protection and monitoring of this species. A better understanding of the movements and behaviors of bottlenose dolphins in the western North Atlantic is imperative to protect and manage this species. Groups of dolphins of the same species that occupy the same general area and interbreed are defined as “stocks” (NOAA 2015). The Northern North Carolina Estuarine System Stock (NNCESS) is defined as bottlenose dolphins that occupy the waters within and connecting to the Pamlico Sound and the surrounding estuarine system of North-Eastern North Carolina (Hayes et al. 2017). This stock is estimated to be approximately 823 dolphins (Gorgone et al. 2014), some of which remain in the Pamlico estuarine system during warm months while others use near- shore coastal waters to travel from the Chesapeake Bay to the north and south to Beaufort, North Carolina.
    [Show full text]
  • Mid-Currituck Bridge Study Statement of Purpose And
    MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND NEED WBS Element: 34470.1.TA1 STIP NO. R-2576 CURRITUCK COUNTY DARE COUNTY Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff 909 Aviation Parkway, Suite 1500 Morrisville, North Carolina 27560 for the Raleigh, North Carolina October 2008 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Table of Contents 1.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Area ............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Project Needs........................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Project Purpose ....................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Project Description................................................................................................. 7 1.4.1 Setting and Land Use................................................................................. 7 1.4.2 Project History ............................................................................................ 8 1.5 System Linkage..................................................................................................... 11 1.5.1 Existing Road Network ........................................................................... 11 1.5.2 Sidewalks, Bicycles Routes, and Pedestrian Movements ................... 12 1.5.3 Modal Interrelationships........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Raleigh National Historic Site: Preservation and Recognition, C
    CONTENTS Figure Credits iv List of Figures V Foreword vii Acknowledgements ix Introduction 1 Chapter One: The Roanoke Colonies and Fort Raleigh, c. 1584-1590 9 Associated Properties 28 Registration Requirements/Integrity 29 Contributing Resources 30 Potentially Eligible Archeological Resources 30 Chapter Two: The Settlement and Development of Roanoke Island, c. 1650-1900 31 Associated Properties 54 Registration Requirements/Integrity 55 Noncontributing Resources 57 Potentially Eligible Archeological Resources 57 Chapter Three: Fort Raleigh National Historic Site: Preservation and Recognition, c. 1860-1953 59 Associated Properties 91 Registration Requirements/Integrity 93 Contributing Resources 97 Noncontributing Resources 97 Potentially Eligible Archeological Resources 97 Management Recommendations 99 Bibliography 101 Appendix A: Descriptions of Historic Resources A-l Appendix B: Property Map/Historical Base Map B-l Appendix C: National Register Documentation C-1 Index D-l iii FIGURE CREDITS Cover, 15, 17, 22: courtesy of Harpers Ferry Center, National Park Service; pp. 10, 12, 13, 16, 23: Charles W. Porter III, Adventurers to a New World; pp. 22, 27: Theodore De Bry, Thomas Hariot’s Virginia; pp. 35,39,41: courtesy of the Outer Banks History Center, Manteo, NC; pp. 37, 38: Samuel H. Putnam, The Story of Company A, Twenty-Fifth Regiment, Massachusetts Volunteers, in the War of the Rebellion; p. 43: Vincent Colyer, Report of the Services Rendered by the Freed People to the United States Army, in North Carolina; pp. 44, 46, 47: Joe A. Mobley, James City, A Black Community in North Carolina, 1863-1900; pp. 55, 67, 81: S. Bulter for the National Park Service; pp. 61, 66, 78: William S.
    [Show full text]