NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES Division of Water Quality Water Quality Section Environmental Sciences Branch

June 2003

This page was intentionally left blank

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

LIST OF APPENDICIES ...... 3 LIST OF TABLES...... 4 LIST OF FIGURES ...... 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 9 OVERVIEW OF THE WATER QUALITY OF THE FRENCH BROAD RIVER BASIN ...... 10 PROGRAM AREA OVERVIEWS ...... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES...... 16 FISHERIES ...... 17 LAKE ASSESSMENT...... 20 AMBIENT MONITORING SYSTEM ...... 20 AQUATIC TOXICTY MONITORING ...... 21 INTRODUCTION TO PROGRAM METHODS ...... 22 QUALITY ASSURANCE...... 22 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES...... 22 FISHERIES ...... 23 LAKE ASSESSMENT...... 23 AMBIENT MONITORING SYSTEM ...... 23 AQUATIC TOXICITY MONITORING ...... 24 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 01...... 26 Description...... 26 Overview of Water Quality...... 27 River and Stream Assessment ...... 28 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 02...... 34 Description...... 34 Overview of Water Quality...... 35 River and Stream Assessment ...... 37 Lake Assessment ...... 51 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 03...... 54 Description...... 54 Overview of Water Quality...... 54 River and Stream Assessment ...... 55 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 04...... 57 Description...... 57 Overview of Water Quality...... 58 River and Stream Assessment ...... 58 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 05...... 65 Description...... 65 Overview of Water Quality...... 66 River and Stream Assessment ...... 67 Lake Assessment ...... 78 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 06...... 81 Description...... 81 Overview of Water Quality...... 82 River and Stream Assessment ...... 82 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 07...... 89 Description...... 89 Overview of Water Quality...... 89 River and Stream Assessment ...... 90 AMBIENT MONITORING SYSTEM...... 93 AQUATIC TOXICITY MONITORING...... 112 REFERENCES ...... 116

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 2 LIST OF APPENDICIES

Appendix Page

1 Flow measurement and flow conditions in the French Broad River basin, 2002...... 119

2 Habitat evaluations and stream and riparian habitats at fish community monitoring sites in the French Broad River basin...... 123

3 Habitat evaluation at 23 basinwide fish community sites in the French Broad basin, 2002 ...... 127

4 Habitat evaluation at 20 basinwide fish community sites in French Broad River basin, 1997 ...... 128

5 Habitat evaluation at 54 benthic macroinvertebrate sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002...... 129

6 Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling methods and criteria...... 131

7 Benthic macroinvertebrate data collected in the French Broad River basin,1983 - 2002 ...... 133

8 Water quality measurements at benthic macroinvertebrate basinwide sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002...... 144

9 New species and distributional records for the benthic macroinvertebrate fauna of the French Broad River basin ...... 145

10 Fish community sampling methods and criteria...... 147

11 Fish community structure data collected in the French Broad River basin, 1993 - 2002 ...... 152

12 Fish community metric values from 23 wadeable streams in the French Broad River basinwide monitoring program, 2002...... 154

13 Fish distributional records for the French Broad River basin...... 155

14 Water quality at fish community sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002...... 156

15 Fish community assessments conducted by the Tennessee Valley Authority in the French Broad River basin ...... 158

16 Fish tissue criteria ...... 160

17 Lake assessment program...... 161

18 Surface physical water data and photic zone chemistry data collected from lakes in the French Broad River basin, 1992 – 2002 ...... 163

19 Ambient water quality summaries for the French Broad River basin, August 1997 – September 2002...... 165

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 3 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Most recent ratings for all rateable benthic macroinvertebrate sites in the French Broad River basin sampled since 1983 ...... 16

2 Sites with improving or declining water quality in the French Broad River basin ...... 16

3 Facilities that have had difficulty meeting toxicity limits in the French Broad River basin ...... 21

4 Freshwater parametric coverage for the ambient monitoring system...... 23

5 Selected water quality standards for parameters sampled as part of the ambient monitoring system...... 25

6 Land use in Subbasin 01...... 26

7 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 01 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002...... 27

8 Biotic Index, EPT taxa richness, and habitat score for four sites in Subbasin 01 of the French Broad River basin, 2002 ...... 32

9 Land use in Subbasin 02...... 34

10 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 02 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002...... 36

11 Comparisons of Crab Creek and Batfork, 2002...... 39

12 Comparisons of Hominy and South Hominy Creeks, 2002 ...... 43

13 Comparisons of fish communities in Newfound Creek, 1997 vs. 2002 ...... 45

14 Data collected at Lake Kenilworth, Buncombe County, October 4, 2001...... 53

15 Land use in Subbasin 03...... 54

16 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 03 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002...... 55

17 Land use in Subbasin 04...... 57

18 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 04 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002...... 58

19 Land use in Subbasin 05...... 65

20 Mean conductivity in the Pigeon River watershed, 1981 – 2002...... 66

21 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 05 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002...... 67

22 Fish community data collected by Progress Energy from the Pigeon River, Haywood County in 1998 and 2001...... 76

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 4 LIST OF TABLES (continued)

Table Page

23 Surface water quality data collected by Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc. from Waterville Reservoir, August 15, 2000 ...... 80

24 Surface water quality data collected by Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc. from Waterville Reservoir, September 17, 2002 ...... 80

25 Land use in Subbasin 06...... 81

26 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 06 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002...... 82

27 Land use in Subbasin 07...... 89

28 Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 07 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002...... 90

29 Ambient monitoring system sites within the French Broad River basin...... 94

30 DWQ Laboratory Section reporting levels for nutrients during 2001 ...... 95

31 Stations with dissolved oxygen concentrations results less than or equal to 6.0 mg/ ...... 95

32 Summary of turbidity values for ambient monitoring stations in the French Broad River basin, 1997 – 2002...... 100

33 Total suspended solids in the French Broad River basin, 1997 – 2002 ...... 102

34 Concentrations of mercury, nickel, and lead that exceeded the reporting level in the French Broad River basin, 1997 – 2002 ...... 103

35 Summary of copper concentrations from ambient monitoring stations in the French Broad River basin, 1997 – 2002 ...... 105

36 Geometric means for fecal coliform bacteria by year in the French Broad River basin ...... 106

37 Summary of fecal coliform bacteria for ambient monitoring stations in the French Broad basin, September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002 ...... 106

38 Hourly measurements of dissolved oxygen in the Pigeon River at Brown’s Bridge, TN, June 01, 1997 to September 30, 2002...... 108

39 Facilities in the French Broad River basin required to perform whole effluent toxicity testing...... 113

40 Compliance record of facilities performing whole effluent toxicity testing in the French Broad River basin...... 115

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page

1 Geographical relationships of the French Broad River basin in North Carolina and Tennessee ...... 10

2 Subbasins of the French Broad River basin ...... 11

3 Fish community and benthic macroinvertebrate assessment sites rated Good or Excellent in the French Broad River basin, 2002 ...... 12

4 Fish community and benthic macroinvertebrate assessment sites rated Fair or Poor in the French Broad River basin, 2002 ...... 14

5 Distribution of bioclassifications for 103 benthic macroinvertebrate samples collected in the French Broad River basin, 2000 - 2002 ...... 16

6 Fish community assessment sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002 ...... 18

7 Bioclassifications of 23 fish community basinwide sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002 ...... 17

8 A comparison of the NCIBI score at 20 rateable fish community sites in the French Broad River basin between 2002 and 1997 ...... 19

9 Bioclassification changes between 1997 and 2002 at 20 fish community sites in the French Broad River basin...... 19

10 Relationships between habitat scores and NCIBI ratings in the French Broad River basin, 1997 – 2002 ...... 19

11 Explanation of box and whisker charts ...... 24

12 Sampling sites in Subbasin 01 in the French Broad River basin...... 26

13 Sampling sites in Subbasin 02 in the French Broad River basin...... 34

14 Downstream view of Turkey Creek at SR 1629, Buncombe County showing high turbidity in the stream after wading in the channel ...... 37

15 Excessive turbidity and high flows in Hominy Creek vs. South Hominy Creek at NC 151, Buncombe County, June 05, 2002...... 41

16 NCIBI scores from Reems Creek at NC 151, Buncombe County, 1993 – 2002 ...... 46

17 The three most abundant species of fish at Sandymush Creek, SR 1107, Madison County, 1993 – 2002 ...... 47

18 Sampling sites at Lake Julian, Buncombe County...... 51

19 Sampling sites at Burnett Reservoir, Buncombe County...... 52

20 Sampling sites at Lake Kenilworth, Buncombe County ...... 52

21 Sampling sites in Subbasin 03 in the French Broad River basin...... 54

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 6 LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure Page

22 Eroded banks at Boylston Creek, SR 1314, French Broad County...... 56

23 Sampling sites in Subbasin 04 in the French Broad River basin...... 57

24 Turbidity plume at the confluence of Big Laurel and Little Laurel Creeks at NC 208, Madison County ...... 62

25 Turbidity in Big Laurel Creek at NC 208, Madison County, June 20, 2002 ...... 62

26 Changes in the dominance of four of the most abundant species of fish at Shelton Laurel Creek, NC 208/212, Madison County, between 1997 and 2002 ...... 63

27 Sampling sites in Subbasin 05 in the French Broad River basin...... 65

28 EPT taxa richness at four sites along the Pigeon River, 1988 – 2002 ...... 66

29 Biotic Index at four sites along the Pigeon River, 1988 – 2002 ...... 66

30 Sediment from a gravel road washing into the West Fork Pigeon River at SR 1216, Haywood County, July 25, 2002 during a rain event ...... 68

31 Stream bank stabilization along the East Fork Pigeon River at US 276, Haywood County...... 69

32 Aquatic macrophytes in the Pigeon River at SR 1642, Haywood County ...... 69

33 EPT taxa richness and EPT abundance in the Pigeon River at SR 1642, Haywood County, 1984 – 2002 ...... 69

34 EPT taxonomic richness and Biotic Index at Richland Creek at US Business 23, Haywood County, 1992 – 2002...... 71

35 TCDD concentrations in common carp fillets collected from the Pigeon River upstream of the Town of Clyde and at NC 209, 1990 – 2002...... 77

36 TCDD concentrations in common carp fillets collected from Walters Lake,1990 – 2002...... 77

37 Sampling sites at Allen Creek Reservoir, Haywood County...... 78

38 Sampling sites at Lake Junaluska, Haywood County...... 78

39 Sampling sites at Waterville Reservoir, Haywood County...... 79

40 Sampling sites in Subbasin 06 in the French Broad River basin...... 81

41 Biotic Index values for the Nolichucky River at SR 1314, Mitchell County, 1983 - 2002...... 83

42 Sampling sites in Subbasin 07 in the French Broad River basin...... 89

43 EPT taxonomic richness and Biotic Index at the Cane River, US 19W, Yancey County, 1983 – 2002 ...... 90

44 Ambient monitoring system sites within the French Broad River basin...... 93

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 7 LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure Page

45 Box and whisker plots for dissolved oxygen and temperature collected from the French Broad River basin, September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002 ...... 96

46 Long-term pattern of dissolved oxygen in the Pigeon River at Clyde, 1981 - 2002...... 97

47 Box and whisker plots for pH and conductivity collected from the French Broad River basin; September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002 ...... 98

48 Long term patterns of pH in the French Broad River at Asheville, at Alexander, and at Blennerhassett Island, 1970 – 2002 ...... 97

49 Conductivity in the Pigeon River upstream and downstream of the Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc. mill, 1986 – 2002...... 99

50 Box and whisker plots for turbidity and total suspended solids collected from the French Broad River basin; September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002 ...... 101

51 Box and whisker plots for fecal coliform bacteria for ambient water quality data collected from the French Broad River basin, September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002...... 107

52 Box and whisker plots for ammonia nitrogen and nitrite+nitrate nitrogen collected from the French Broad River basin; September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002 ...... 109

53 Box and whisker plots for total Kjeldahl nitrogen and total phosphorus collected from the French Broad River basin; September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002 ...... 110

54 Dissolved oxygen in the Pigeon River near Brown’s Bridge, TN and near DWQ’s Station E6500000, 1997 – 2002...... 111

55 Facilities required to perform toxicity testing in the French Broad River basin...... 112

56 Whole effluent toxicity monitoring in the French Broad River basin, 1987 - 2002...... 114

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The water quality of the French Broad River basin 25 percent of the fish community sites were was evaluated for the period 1997 through 2002. related to watershed restoration efforts and The previous evaluation covered the period 1992 reduced non point source runoff from the through 1997. Assessments conducted by the prolonged drought. Declines in ratings at seven North Carolina Division of Water Quality included percent of the benthic macroinvertebrate sites and ambient chemistry, benthic macroinvertebrates, 10 percent of the fish community sites were fish community, fish tissue contaminants, fish kills, attributed to the drought. lakes, and whole effluent toxicity testing. External data were also examined. A fish consumption advisory for common carp in Walters Lake, an impoundment of the Pigeon The river basin experienced a prolonged drought River, remained in effect due to dioxin which started in 1998 and intensified during 2002. contaminated sediments. During the late 1980s The drought caused very low stream flows which the advisory had been applied to all fish species in reduced nonpoint source pollution impacts but the Pigeon River from the Town of Canton to the magnified the intensity of point source contribu- state line. Fish kills were rare in the French Broad tions because of the lack of dilution. Reduced River basin during the past five years. Reported tributary inflows into lakes resulted in increased kills were attributed to isolated chemical spills and water clarity and decreased sediment and nutrient suffocation from sediments following the rapid inputs. This temporarily reduced the level of draining of Lake Junaluska. eutrophication. Despite the drought, permitted wastewater and industrial facilities were compliant In general, testing for compliance with water with their whole effluent toxicity limits 90 to 95 quality standards during the most recent five year percent of the time, a compliance rate typical of period were similar to the previous assessment other regions in the state. period. Examining the data from the 1997 to 2002 period, dissolved oxygen and fecal coliform Based upon biological monitoring of benthic bacteria concentrations were not an issue at any macroinvertebrate and fish communities, more site in the basin. However in 2002, an than 50 percent of the evaluated streams in the exceptionally dry year, 5 of the 24 sites had French Broad River basin were rated Good or elevated bacterial measurements (geometric Excellent. These streams were associated with means greater than 200 colonies/100 ml). forested watersheds where there was quality instream and riparian habitats. Less than 25 Between 1997 and 2002 two of the nine percent of the evaluated streams were degraded waterbodies classified as Trout waters had more and rated Poor or Fair. These streams were often than 10 percent of the samples exceeding the associated with urban or agricultural watersheds. turbidity standard. Elevated nutrient Degradation was caused by poor land use concentrations were observed only in lower Muddy practices, sediment from road construction and and Hominy Creeks. Both of these streams drain farming and agricultural chemicals running off into urban and agricultural watersheds that are also the streams; and permitted point source effluents experiencing increasing development pressures. being discharged into low flowing streams that offered little dilution due to the drought. The Relative to other basins, water quality concerns remaining 25 percent of the evaluated streams (e.g., increasing nutrient enrichment, urbanization were rated Good-Fair. of once rural landscapes, instream sedimentation from nonpoint sources, and impacts from More than 90 percent of the streams based upon permitted dischargers) were not as pronounced in benthic macroinvertebrates and 65 percent of the the French Broad River basin. Overall, water streams based upon fish communities had no quality has neither declined nor improved despite change in their water quality ratings between 1997 pressure from increased development and natural and 2002. Improvements in ratings at nine disasters. Water quality has remained Good or percent of the benthic macroinvertebrate sites and Excellent throughout much of the basin.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 9 OVERVIEW OF THE WATER QUALITY OF THE FRENCH BROAD RIVER BASIN

Basin Description The French Broad River Drainage (Subbasins The French Broad River basin covers 2,842 01 - 04) square miles with 4,113 miles of streams and is The French Broad River originates at the the ninth largest river basin in the state (Figure 1). confluence of the West and North Forks of the It is located in the Blue Ridge Mountains and French Broad River near the Town of Rosman in contains these ecoregions: the Southern Transylvania County. The East Fork of the French Crystalline Ridges and Mountains, a tiny portion in Broad also flows into the French Broad River near each of the Southern Sedimentary Ridges and Rosman. These major tributaries generally are Southern Metasedimentary Mountains, High unstressed, high gradient streams that support Mountains, and Broad Basins. The basin includes viable trout populations. Major sections of these part or all of Transylvania, Buncombe, Henderson, forks, the Davidson River, and all of the Catheys Madison, Haywood, Yancey, Mitchell and Avery Creek watershed have been designated High counties (Figure 2). All waters from the basin Quality Waters. Benthic data have indicated drain to the Gulf of Mexico via the Tennessee, Excellent or Good water quality in all these Ohio, and Mississippi Rivers. streams and the river at Rosman (Figure 3). Below Rosman, the river is a much wider, lower The basin includes Mount Mitchell (elevation 6,684 gradient river, which meanders through a relatively feet), the highest mountain east of the Rocky undeveloped catchment to the Town of Brevard. Mountains. Much of the basin lies within the 1.2 Some agriculture and construction activities are million acre Pisgah National Forest or Pisgah present in this reach of the river. Game Lands. The northwest corner of Haywood County is in the Great Smoky Mountains National The Little River is another major tributary whose Park. Over one-half of the basin is forested and confluence with the French Broad River is below the steep slopes limit the area suitable for Brevard. A Good-Fair rating has been consistently development and crop production. The basin is assigned to a downstream site on the Little River composed of three major drainages, the French using fish and benthic macroinvertebrate data. Broad, Pigeon, and Nolichucky Rivers, that The sandy nature of this stream is due to local individually flow north into Tennessee. Finally, the geology and nonpoint source runoff. Streams in basin is subdivided by the Division of Water agricultural areas showed some changes in water Quality into seven subbasins coded as 040301 quality, although no bioclassification was less than through 040307 (Figure 2). Good-Fair (Tucker and Crab Creeks).

Figure 1. Geographical relationships of the French Broad River basin in North Carolina and Tennessee.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report – French Broad River Basin - June 2003 10

Figure 2. Subbasins of the French Broad River basin.

An intensive study of the Peter Weaver Creek The next downstream major tributary is Boylston catchment was conducted in 2000 - 2001 to Creek, which flows along the NC 280 corridor. It is determine the cause of impairment noted in the affected by nonpoint source runoff (agriculture) 1997 basinwide study. Undeveloped headwater and has been rated Good-Fair since 1992. The areas were in good condition, but more developed fish community was rated Good again in 2002. downstream sites showed habitat and water quality problems. Sites on Peter Weaver and The Mills River is formed by the confluence of the Morgan Mill Creeks reflected the effects of a trout North Fork and South Fork Mills River. From its farm discharge and nonpoint source runoff from source, the Mills River flows past the community of residential areas. Comparisons with a 1978 -1979 Mills River to the French Broad River below survey showed a change in habitat and species Boylston Creek, but above Mud Creek. Most of tolerance (towards sandier streams and more the South Fork Mills River is classified ORW. tolerant species). Trout farm discharges into other Excellent water quality also has been recorded in streams (e.g., West Fork French Broad River) the North Fork Mills River and the upper part of the resulted in heavy organic loading with effects very Mills River. In 2002 the upper Mills River declined similar to that of sewage effluent. to Good, likely due to the drought. Benthic

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 11

Figure 3. Fish community and benthic macroinvertebrate assessment sites rated Good or Excellent in the French Broad River basin, 2002. Stars = fish sites and circles = benthic macroinvertebrate sites. macroinvertebrate sampling in 1994 found sudden County. Major tributaries to the river include the severe water quality problems in the lower part of Swannanoa River and Mud, Cane, Hominy, the Mills River (had been Excellent), downstream Newfound, and Sandymush Creeks. The French of tomato farming areas, and in the reach of river Broad River in this subbasin is generally a very used for water supply. This site had a Good-Fair wide mountain river. This reach of river contains rating in 2002, but recovery appears to be short the urban areas of Hendersonville and Asheville, term, as the rating fluctuated quickly (Fair in 1998 but land use is mainly forest. Agriculture (dairy and 2001). operations, apple orchards, and row crops; including corn, tomatoes, and burley tobacco) and Downstream of the Mills River in Subbasin 02 are urbanization often affect the middle and lower 40 river miles of the French Broad River from the reaches of these tributaries. Henderson/Transylvania County line to the confluence of Sandymush Creek in Buncombe

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 12 Bioclassifications in the French Broad River at different times of the year (early vs. late summer) Skyland and Asheville were Good-Fair or Good or a difference in the sensitivity of these two over the last decade, depending on flow groups. conditions. Benthic data indicated that water quality improved at Asheville to a Good Lake assessment data were collected from Burnett bioclassification in 2002, although the community Reservoir, Beetree Reservoir, Lake Julian, and was very similar to that in 1997. The river at Lake Kenilworth. Burnett and Beetree Reservoirs Alexander usually was rated Fair, reflecting the are water supply lakes in protected catchments influence of point source dischargers (especially and are strongly oligotrophic. Lake Julian is the Buncombe County MSD WWTP ) and slightly more productive and is thermally nonpoint source runoff from the Asheville area. enhanced, but it is still generally evaluated as This site declined from Good-Fair in 1997 to Fair oligotrophic. Lake Kenilworth, within a very in 2002 following a period of low flow and low urbanized area, was evaluated as eutrophic. A dilution. These low flows also resulted in a slight special study also found high fecal coliform levels increase in median conductivity at three ambient in this lake. sites. Further downstream from the Alexander site, the Basinwide benthic monitoring and various special next ambient site on the French Broad River studies sampled nearly 60 tributary sites during mainstem is at Marshall in Madison County the last five years. Forested headwater streams (Subbasin 04). Benthos data indicate Good-Fair were most likely to be rated Good or Excellent with water quality in this portion of the river. Much of a decline in water quality for more developed the watershed in the immediate area is downstream segments. Highly urban and undeveloped land within the Pisgah National residential catchments had severe water quality Forest and most of the tributaries in this northern problems. These catchments included lower and western section have Good or Excellent water Ross, Canie, Sweeten, Gash, and Moore Creeks quality based on benthos data: Spring Creek, Big and Bat Fork. Larger streams often were affected Laurel Creek, Shelton Laurel Creek, and by point and nonpoint source problems, with Fair Puncheon Fork. In the southern section of the ratings recorded in Mud Creek, lower Hominy subbasin, there is more development around the Creek, and portions of the Swannanoa River. Towns of Marshall and Mars Hill, and more pasture lands. Ivy Creek (River) is a major Some streams in agricultural areas also had Fair tributary of the French Broad River above or Poor benthos ratings (Figure 4). Newfound Marshall. Based upon benthic data streams in the Creek previously was impacted by dairy wastes, Ivy Creek watershed have declined from Good or although implementation of Best Management Excellent to Fair or Good-Fair since 1992, and a Practices in this catchment produced a substantial major watershed study was undertaken in 2002 to improvement in water quality in 1997 (Good-Fair determine the major stressors on the benthos. rating). Surprisingly, in 2002 the fish community improved from Poor to Good, while the benthos Fish community monitoring conducted at (Big) Ivy declined slightly to Fair. Agricultural areas with and Shelton Laurel Creeks continued to be rated heavy insecticide use (especially orchards or Excellent. Bull Creek, a tributary to Ivy Creek, is tomato farming) often had Fair or Poor benthos located in a rural agricultural watershed and was ratings, including Clear Creek, Devil’s Fork and rated a low Good-Fair. upper Mud Creek. South Hominy Creek had declined sharply from Good-Fair in 1992 to Poor in The Pigeon River Drainage (Subbasin 05) 1997 but showed full recovery in 2002. Cane The discharge from Blue Ridge Paper Products Creek declined from Good-Fair in 1997 to Fair in (formerly Champion Paper) has been the most 2002. significant problem in this subbasin for many years, and water quality monitoring efforts have Fish community samples were collected by DWQ focused on sites on the Pigeon River above and from 11 tributaries in Subbasin 02 during 2002. below the Town of Canton. Water chemistry data Poor ratings were assigned to Mud Creek and Bat collected at four ambient sites on the Pigeon River Fork, similar to the ratings assigned with by DWQ showed large declines over time in macroinvertebrate data. Fish data, however, gave conductivity, fecal coliform bacteria, and nutrient higher ratings than benthos data for sites on Cane values for all sites downstream of the mill's and Newfound Creeks, reflecting sampling at discharge. However, mean conductivities were

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 13

Figure 4. Fish community and benthic macroinvertebrate assessment sites rated Fair or Poor in the French Broad River basin, 2002. Stars = fish sites and circles = benthic macroinvertebrate sites. high at Clyde, Hepco, and Waterville during the drought. The site near Hepco continued to be drought years (1998 - 2002) due to less dilution of rated Good-Fair. The Waterville site has been the effluent. rated Good since 1994. In 2002 the benthic community at this site was similar to a site The mill has undergone many upgrades to its upstream of the mill. This pattern supported the wastewater treatment since 1990. These conclusion that the declines documented in 2002 modifications have resulted in gradual were drought related. improvements in the benthic community. The site near Clyde was rated Good-Fair rating in 1997, The Pigeon River has several large tributaries: but decreased to Fair in 1999 and Poor in 2002. East and West Forks Pigeon River and Richland, The decline reflected the effects of a major Jonathans, Crabtree, Cataloochee, and Big discharge on a small river during a long-term Creeks. The Big Creek and Cataloochee Creek

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 14 watersheds are predominantly within the Great Ambient water quality data have been collected at Smoky Mountains National Park. The Pisgah four locations in this drainage: two sites on the National Forest and Pisgah Game Lands North Toe River and one site each on the South constitute much of the rest of the Pigeon River Toe and Nolichucky Rivers. Between 1997 and watershed. The Shining Rock Wilderness area is 2002 the median value for conductivity in the North located in the watersheds of the East Fork and Toe River near Penland was more than twice the Little East Fork Pigeon Rivers. The largest urban median value upstream at Ingalls (106 vs. 47 areas are Waynesville, Lake Junaluska, Clyde, µmhos/cm). In addition, the North Toe River near and Canton. Penland was one of two trout waters in the basin that had more than 10 percent of turbidity Benthic data since 1983 have indicated Good or measurements greater than the water quality Excellent water quality in many tributaries. standard for trout waters (10 NTU). Cataloochee Creek and its tributaries have been designated as ORW, while the Middle Prong West Benthic macroinvertebrate samples from seven Fork Pigeon River and its tributaries have been sites sampled in 2002 as part of the basin designated HQW. assessment program were rated Good or Excellent. The Nolichucky River may be showing Richland Creek, draining the City of Waynesville, water quality improvements. Big Rock Creek, a has shown signs of improving water quality in large tributary in northern Mitchell County, was recent years based upon benthic macroinverte- again rated Excellent. It had been rated Good in brates although fish community data from the 1997. The site is in an area of agricultural land lower part of the watershed rated the stream Poor. use, which may be affecting its rating. The South Some degradation, usually from nonpoint sources Toe River is classified as ORW and continued to such as dairy farms, also has been found in some be rated Excellent. The federally endangered of the smaller tributaries (e.g., Fines Creek). Fish mussel Alasmidonta raveleniana has been found community samples in 2002 resulted in a Poor in the Nolichucky, North Toe and Cane Rivers. rating at Richland Creek, Good-Fair at Crabtree Observations on the North Toe River included Creek, and Fair at Fines Creek. concerns for sedimentation, enrichment, and nonpoint pollution sources associated with the Allen Creek Reservoir is a water supply for the Town of Spruce Pine, but all three benthos sites City of Waynesville and has high water quality. were rated Good. Lake Junaluska is privately owned and formed by the impoundment of lower Richland Creek. In July Jacks Creek continued to be rated Fair based on 2002 this lake was classified as oligotrophic due to the fish community. Similar to other streams with unusually low sediment and nutrient inputs degraded riparian zones, the total species diversity resulting from the prolonged drought. Walters was low, darters were absent, and the trophic Lake, an impoundment of the lower Pigeon River, metrics were skewed. The fish community at is used for hydroelectric power generation. This Pigeonroost Creek rated Excellent. reservoir’s watershed encompasses most of Haywood County and includes numerous The major tributaries of the Cane River include municipal and industrial dischargers. Cattail, Price, Bald, and Bald Mountain Creeks. Consumption of common carp from Walters Lake Benthic macroinvertebrate samples have been continued to be restricted due to dioxin collected at the Cane River and Bald Mountain contamination. Creek since 1992. The Cane River has shown a steady improvement from Good-Fair (1983 - 1985) The Nolichucky River Drainage (Subbasins 06 to Excellent (1992 - 2002), even below the Town and 07) of Burnsville’s WWTP. Similarly, Bald Mountain The Nolichucky River watershed includes the Creek has also shown improvements from Good- Nolichucky, North Toe, South Toe and Cane Fair (1992) to Good (1997) to Excellent (2002). Rivers. Much of the watershed is undeveloped The fish community was rated Good in Price and within the Pisgah National Forest. The largest Creek in 2002; it had been rated Good-Fair in towns are Spruce Pine, Burnsville and Bakersville. 1997. Many of the streams in this area have a supplemental trout water classification. Overall water quality is very high.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 15 EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES BY PROGRAM AREA

BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES 01), apple orchard runoff (Clear Creek watershed, Bioclassifications and Water Quality Changes Subbasin 02), runoff from tomato farming (lower Benthic macroinvertebrates have been collected at Mills River, Subbasin 03), and highway more than 200 rated sites in the basin since 1983. construction (California Creek watershed, Since 2000, about 79 percent of the sites were Subbasin 04). rated as Good-Fair or better; 21 percent of the sites were rated Fair or Poor (Figure 5). In Table 1. Most recent ratings for all rateable addition to basinwide collections, there have been benthic macroinvertebrate sites in the French Broad River basin sampled a number of intensive surveys during the last few 1 years in watersheds with known water quality since 1983. problems. This may have inflated the proportion Bioclass of sites with Fair and Poor ratings. Subbasin P F G-F G E 01 --- 12 4 10 11 02 72 152 16 11 14 28 29 03 1 2 3 4 5 30 2 24 04 --- 1 5 11 10 05 1 3 7 8 25 20 06 --- 3 4 8 7 15 07 ------1 3 Total (#) 9 25 39 53 75 Total (%) 4 13 20 26 37 10 7 1

No. of sites of No. Some older ratings were not included, especially if there was an indication from other sites, or other data sources, that water 0 quality had improved. 2Samples from some small streams (classified as Not Rated) PFG-FGE also indicated water or habitat quality problems. Bioclassification Between-year changes in water quality were

evaluated at more than 70 sites, although some of Figure 5. Distribution of bioclassifications for these sites could only be evaluated for changes 103 benthic macroinvertebrate samples over the last five years. Sixty-three sites had no collected in the French Broad River change in water quality since the 1997 basinwide basin, 2000 - 2002. Abbreviations are: survey, other than flow-related changes in P = Poor, F = Fair, G-F = Good-Fair, G = bioclassification. Improving water quality was Good, and E = Excellent. observed at six sites, although low flow conditions during 2002 made it difficult to determine if these The distribution of the ratings for all sites sampled were true long-term changes (Table 2). Slight since 1983 (Table 1) was similar to the 2000 – improvements at many sites were expected due to 2002 distribution. The greater percentage of a reduction in nonpoint source runoff during a Excellent sites since 1983 (37 percent) reflected drought. more work conducted on streams in the Pisgah National Forest to help establish reference sites Table 2. Sites with improving or declining water than in 2000 – 2002 (28 percent). quality in the French Broad River basin.

Excellent ratings were found in all subbasins and Subbasin Waterbody usually associated with forested watersheds. Improving 02 Mud Cr, Henderson (two sites)1 Rare invertebrate species were most often found Clear Cr headwaters, Henderson1 in these areas, especially in the headwaters of the N Fk Swannanoa R, Buncombe1 French Broad, Davidson, West Fork Pigeon, South 04 Spring Cr, Madison Toe, and Nolichucky Rivers, the Mills River and its 05 upper Richland Cr, Haywood 07 Bald Mountain Cr, Yancey1 tributaries, and Cataloochee and Big Creeks Declining (Appendix 9). Poor and Fair ratings usually were 02 Cane Cr, Henderson found near the larger towns, reflecting the effects 04 Little Ivy Cr, Madison of urban runoff and point-source dischargers. In California Cr, Madison 05 Pigeon R at Clyde, Haywood less developed areas, problems were also 06 North Toe R below mining area, Mitchell associated with trout farm discharges (Subbasin 1Possible drought related improvement.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 16 Declining water quality was documented at five 11 sites. Low flow during 2002 resulted in less 12 dilution of discharges and reversed some of the improvement seen in prior years. This pattern was 8 observed for the French Broad River at Alexander, 4 3 3 the Pigeon River at Clyde, and the North Toe 4 2

River near Penland. The North Toe River site also No. of sites has been subject to spills events. 0 PFG-FGE Management or elimination of some dischargers in Bioclassification the late 1980’s and early 1990’s produced some long-term improvements in water quality, although these sites have been stable in the last few Figure 7. Bioclassifications of 23 fish community basinwide cycles. These sites included the basinwide sites in the French Broad French Broad River at Asheville, Bat Fork near River basin, 2002. Abbreviations as in Hendersonville, the lower Swannanoa River at Figure 5. Biltmore Forest, the Pigeon River at Brown’s Bridge, Richland Creek below Waynesville, and Of the 20 sites sampled in 2002 and 1997, 1 site’s the Cane River. Newfound Creek improved from score did not change, 10 sites had scores that Poor in the 1980s to Fair or Good-Fair due to increased, and 9 sites had scores that decreased better management of animal wastes. This between years (Figure 8). The range in the stream, however, was still rated as Fair in 2002. difference in the scores between 2002 and 1997 was from –10 to + 20 points (Figure 8). A majority Intensive work in the Peter Weaver watershed (55 percent) of the sites in 2002 had scores that (Subbasin 01) allowed a comparison between were different by only ± 4 points from the scores 1978 - 1980 and 2001 - 2002. Increasing received in 1997. development was associated with a decline at downstream sites on Peter Weaver and The bioclassifications did not change at 13 sites Cherryfield Creeks, while upstream control sites (Figure 9), increased at 5 sites, and decreased 1 were stable. These declines were also associated bioclassification at 2 sites (Hominy and Richland with a changes in substrate habitats during the Creeks). Although the bioclassifications did not past 20 years. change at several sites, streams that warrant further investigations due to observed FISHERIES sedimentation and elevated turbidity levels from Fish Community Assessment nonpoint source pollution or due to slight changes In 2002, 23 sites were sampled from early to mid- in the fish community included the Little River and June and in late September (Figure 6). All Reems, Flat, Turkey Creek, and Sandymush streams were evaluated using the North Carolina Creeks. Bioclassification increased at the Index of Biotic Integrity (Appendices 10 - 12). The Swannanoa River and at Cane, Newfound, ratings ranged from Poor to Excellent (Figure 7) Crabtree and at Price Creeks. The improvements with the scores ranging from 14 to 60. Based at Newfound and Crabtree Creeks were upon the fish community ratings, degraded attributable to watershed restoration efforts. streams (bioclassifications of Fair or Poor) included Mud, Bat Fork, Richland, Fines, and Jacks Creeks.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 17 Middle Fork Middle Fork East Fork North Fork West Fork West Fork East Fork

PIGEON RIVER FRENCH BROAD RIVER Crab Cr

Little R Cascade Lake Batfork Cr Bolyston Cr

Mud Cr NORTH TOE RIVER

Hominy Cr Cane Cr

S. Hominy Newfound Cr Jacks Cr Turkey Cr Swannanoa R

Richland Cr Reems Cr

Lake Junaluska Crabtree Cr Flat Cr Sandymush Cr Bull Cr

Ivy R

Fines Cr Shelton Laurel Cr Big Ivy Cr Big Laurel Cr

Walters Lake Pigeonroost Cr Price Cr

Cane R

NOLICHUCKY RIVER NORTH CAROLINA

TENNESSEE

Excellent Good

Good-Fair Douglas Lake Fair

Poor

TENNESSEE RIVER

Figure 6. Fish community assessment sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002. Map is not drawn to scale.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 18 22

18

14 Crabtree Cr 10 Swannanoa R

6 Price Cr Cane Cr Fines Cr Jacks Cr Mud Cr South Hominy Cr Big Ivy Cr Pigeonroost Cr Richland Cr Hominy Cr

2 Boylston Cr Bat Fork Cr Sandymush Cr Flat Cr Shelton Laurel Cr 2002 minus 1997 -2

Difference in the NCIBI Score, -6

-10 Cr Reems Newfound Cr Little R Waterbody

Figure 8. A comparison of the NCIBI scores at 20 rateable fish community sites in the French Broad River basin between 2002 and 1997.

100 13 14 12 80 10 8 6 3 60 4 2 No. of sites of No. 11 2 0 40 Habitat Score -10123 No. of bioclassification changes 20

Poor Fair Good-FairGood Excellent 0 Figure 9. Bioclassification rating changes 1 2 3 4 5 between 1997 and 2002 at 20 fish com- munity sites in the French Broad River Figure 10. Relationships between habitat scores basin. and NCIBI ratings in the French Broad River basin, 1997 - 2002. Fifty-nine fish community samples with associated habitat evaluations have been collected through- Fish Tissue Contaminants out the basin since 1997. In 2002, with a few There is one waterbody-specific consumption exceptions, fish communities rated Excellent and advisory in the basin (NCDHHS 2001): Good were found in streams with moderate to high “(Common) carp in Walters Lake (also known quality habitats. Sites rated Excellent (NCIBI as Waterville Reservoir) may contain low Score = 58 or 60) had the highest quality habitats; levels of dioxins. Women of childbearing age the median habitat score for Excellent rated and children should eat no carp taken from streams was 85.0 (Figure 10). this area until further notice. For all others, consumption of carp should be limited to no

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 19 more than one meal per month. Swimming, The prolonged drought in (1998 – 2002) may boating, and other recreational activities are have contributed to trophic states and water not affected by this advisory”. quality observations which did not reflect those conditions present under normal rainfall. In June 1997, the State Health Director issued a Secchi depths were greater for some lakes in statewide fish consumption advisory for bowfin 2002 than what had been observed in due to elevated mercury. However, bowfin are not previous years. Nutrient concentrations were found in the French Broad River basin. Additional also lower. In other situations, such as at information on consumption advisories in North Allen Creek Reservoir, decreasing water levels Carolina may be found at: increased turbidity and decreased Secchi http://www.schs.state.nc.us/epi/fish/current.html. depths in the upper ends of the reservoir. Lake Junaluska has historically had problems Fish Kills related to sediment loading from its urban The NC DWQ has systematically monitored and watershed. There have been very low Secchi reported on fish kill events across the state since depths and symptoms of nutrient enrichment 1996. Investigators reported six significant kills in (i.e., elevated dissolved oxygen and pH values the basin from 1998 to 2002 (NCDENR 2002). and periodic fish kills). This reservoir has Mortality counts ranged from 60 to 50,000 been dredged annually to remove the individuals. Three of these events were: accumulated sediment to improve water In November 1998, rapid draining of Lake quality and aesthetics. Because of the Junaluska (Subbasin 05, Haywood County) for drought, greater water clarity and decreased maintenance work caused a kill of 50,000 nutrient and chlorophyll a concentrations bass, sunfish, common carp, catfish, and resulted in an oligotrophic classification in goldfish. A drop in the lake level caused silt June and July. This was the first time that suspension, dissolved oxygen problems, and such low biological productivity had been resulted in a kill in the lake and in Richland observed. Creek from the dam to the Pigeon River. The Waterville Reservoir (Walters Lake) remains DWQ initiated enforcement action against the under a fish consumption advisory for common Junaluska Assembly, owners of the carp due to dioxin contamination. impoundment. The Lake Kenilworth Special Study was In September 1999 a large kill event on the conducted in 2001 due to nutrient loading and Swannanoa River (near the Town of Oteen, algal blooms resulting from a leaking sewer Subbasin 02, Buncombe County) was caused main. Public concern regarding the swimmers by a broken water main and resulted in the safety arose because the lake is classified as discharge of chlorinated water. More than B waters (suitable for swimming). Data 5,000 fish including catfish, sunfish, and collected during the summer of 2002, while smallmouth bass were involved. indicating that the lake was highly productive, A gasoline spill into Cane Creek (at the Town did not suggest nutrient loading from the of Bakersville, Subbasin 06, Mitchell County) sewer main. The lake’s urban watershed and during April 2002 killed more than 1,000 fish. drought conditions in 2002 may have reduced Most fish appeared to have died quickly from nutrient and bacteria loading via nonpoint the acute event. Many carcasses contained source runoff. Thus, conditions observed in residues of petroleum. 2002 might not have accurately reflected the Other fish kills reported in the basin were caused lake’s normal trophic state. by unknown factors. Fish kill activity in the basin is considered light when compared to other AMBIENT MONITORING SYSTEM regions of the state, especially coastal areas. Physical and chemical measurements were collected from 26 monitoring stations between LAKE ASSESSMENT September 01, 1997 and August 31, 2002. Seven In 2002, five lakes in the basin were monitored as of these sites were classified as water supplies part of the Lakes Assessment program. Lake and nine as trout waters. Kenilworth was also monitored as a Special Study. Each lake was sampled three times during the Significant findings during the assessment period summer. There were a variety of water quality included: concerns documented during this assessment: All stations met water quality standards for dissolved oxygen

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 20 Three monitoring stations on the French AQUATIC TOXICTY MONITORING Broad River showed an increase in pH during Forty-three facility permits in the basin currently the assessment period. require whole effluent toxicity (WET) monitoring. The North Toe River at Penland and the Cane Thirty-seven facility permits have a WET limit; the River near the Community of Sioux, both trout other six facility permits specify monitoring with no waters, were the only two stations that had limit. Since 1994 the compliance rate for those more that 10 percent of the samples facilities with a limit has stabilized at approximately exceeding the turbidity standard (10 NTU). 90 to 95 percent. Five facilities have had difficulty Six stations had more that 10 percent of the meeting their toxicity limits (Table 3). samples exceeding the copper action level (7.0 µg/L). Table 3. Facilities that have had difficulty No station exhibited problems with fecal meeting toxicity limits or targets in the coliform bacteria; high geometric means French Broad River basin. occurred primarily during the drought of 2002. Elevated nutrient concentrations were Subbasin Facility 01 Coats American WWTP observed primarily at Mud and Hominy 02 Christ School WWTP Creeks. 02 West Henderson High School WWTP 02 North Buncombe High School WWTP 05 Mt. Pisgah Lodge WWTP

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 21 INTRODUCTION TO PROGRAM METHODS

The WQ uses a basinwide approach to water highest quality information to apply a statistical quality management. Activities within the DWQ, level of significance to water quality observations. including permitting, monitoring, modeling, In addition to quantification limits, lower limits of nonpoint source assessments, and planning are detection, method detection limits, and coordinated and integrated for each of the 17 instrumentation detection limits must be evaluated major river basins within the state. All basins are on a continuing basis to ensure sound data and reassessed every five years and the French Broad information. Because each of these detection River basin was sampled by the Environmental limits can represent different levels of confidence, Sciences Branch in 2002. water quality evaluations may change from time to time based on improved laboratory instruments, The Environmental Sciences Branch collects a analytical methods, and improved quality variety of biological, chemical, and physical data assurance and quality control applications. that can be used in a myriad of ways within the basinwide planning program. In some areas there BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES may be adequate data from several program Benthic macroinvertebrates, or benthos, are areas to allow a fairly comprehensive analysis of organisms that live in and on the bottom ecological integrity or water quality. In other substrates of rivers and streams. These areas, data may be limited to one program area, organisms are primarily aquatic insect larvae. The such as only benthic macroinvertebrate data or use of benthos data has proven to be a reliable fisheries data, with no other information available. monitoring tool, as benthic macroinvertebrates are Such data may or may not be adequate to provide sensitive to subtle changes in water quality. a definitive assessment of water quality, but can Because many taxa in a community have life provide general indications of water quality. The cycles of six months to one year, the effects of primary program areas from which data were short term pollution (such as a spill) will generally drawn for the assessment of the French Broad not be overcome until the following generation River basin include benthic macroinvertebrates, appears. The benthic community also integrates fish community, lake assessment, ambient the effects of a wide array of potential stressors. monitoring, and aquatic toxicity monitoring. Sampling methods and criteria (Appendix 6) have QUALITY ASSURANCE been developed to assign bioclassifications Laboratory measurements play a key role in the ranging from Poor to Excellent to each benthic assessment and protection of water quality. sample from flowing fresh waters based on the Laboratory analyses are needed to identify number of taxa present in the intolerant groups problems and to monitor the effectiveness of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (EPT management strategies to abate these problems. S) and the value of the North Carolina Biotic Index The relative accuracy and precision of laboratory (NCBI or BI). This index summarizes tolerance data must be considered as part of any data data for all taxa in each collection. These interpretation or analysis of trends and use bioclassifications primarily reflect the influence of support. Absolute certainty in laboratory chemical pollutants. The major physical pollutant, measurements can never be achieved. However, sediment, is not assessed as well by a taxa it is the goal of quality assurance and quality richness analysis. Different criteria have been control efforts to quantify an acceptable amount of developed for different ecoregions (mountains, uncertainty. The evaluation of data quality is thus piedmont, and coastal) within North Carolina for a relative determination. What is high quality for freshwater flowing waterbodies. one situation could be unacceptable in another. Bioclassifications listed in this report (Appendix 7) The DWQ's Chemistry Laboratory has recently may differ from older reports because evaluation established rigorous internal quality assurance criteria have changed since 1983. Originally, Total evaluations. These evaluations may have S and EPT S criteria were used, then just EPT S, significant implications on interpretation of and now NCBI and EPT S criteria are used for historical data and how new data are generated flowing freshwater sites. Refinements of the and reviewed. DWQ will continue to work on criteria continue to occur as more data are ensuring the quality of water analyses in North gathered. Carolina. It is obviously beneficial to generate the

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 22 FISHERIES publicly accessible lakes, at lakes which supply Fish Community Structure domestic drinking water, and at lakes (public or The NCIBI is a modification of the Index of Biotic private) where water quality problems have been Integrity initially proposed by Karr (1981) and Karr, observed (Appendix 17). et al. (1986) (Appendix 10). The IBI method was developed for assessing a stream's biological AMBIENT MONITORING SYSTEM integrity by examining the structure and health of Assessments of water quality can be obtained its fish community. The scores derived from this from information about the fish and benthic index are a measure of the ecological health of the invertebrate communities present in a body of waterbody and may not directly correlate to water water or from chemical measurements of particular quality. For example, a stream with excellent water quality parameters. The Ambient Monitoring water quality, but with poor or fair fish habitat, System is a network of stream, lake, and estuarine would not be rated excellent with this index. stations strategically located for the collection of However, in many instances, a stream which rated physical and chemical water quality data. excellent on the NCIBI should be expected to have Parametric coverage is determined by freshwater excellent water quality. or saltwater waterbody classification and corresponding water quality standards. Under this The Index of Biological Integrity incorporates arrangement, core parameters are based on Class information about species richness and C waters with additional parameters appended composition, trophic composition, fish abundance, when justified (Table 4). and fish condition. The NCIBI summarizes the effects of all classes of factors influencing aquatic Table 4. Freshwater parametric coverage for the 1 faunal communities (water quality, energy source, ambient monitoring system. habitat quality, flow regime, and biotic interac- tions). While any change in a fish community can All Water Parameter freshwater Supply be caused by many factors, certain aspects of the Dissolved oxygen (s) a a community are generally more responsive to pH (s) a a specific influences. Species composition Specific conductance a a measurements reflect habitat quality effects. Temperature (s) a a

Information on trophic composition reflects the Total phosphorus a a effect of biotic interactions and energy supply. Ammonia as N a a Fish abundance and condition information indicate Total Kjeldahl as N a a additional water quality effects. It should be noted, Nitrate+nitrite as N (s) a a however, that these responses may overlap. For Total suspended solids a a example, a change in fish abundance may be due Turbidity (s) a a to decreased energy supply or a decline in habitat quality, not necessarily a change in water quality. Fecal coliform bacteria (s) a a

Aluminum a a Fish Kills Arsenic (s) a a Fish kills investigation protocols were established Cadmium (s) a a in 1996 to investigate, report, and track fish kill Chromium, total (s) a a Copper, total (s) a a events throughout the state. Fish kill and fish Iron (s) a a health data collected by trained NCDWQ and Lead (s) a a other resource agency personnel are recorded on Mercury (s) a a a standardized form. Fish kill investigation forms Nickel (s) a a Zinc (s) a a and supplemental information are compiled in a Manganese (s) --- a database where the data can be managed and retrieved for use in reporting to concerned parties. Chlorophyll a2 (s) a a Additional information on fish kills may be found 1A check (a) indicates the parameter is collected and an 's' indicates the parameter has a standard or action level. at: http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/. 2 Chlorophyll a is collected in Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW).

LAKE ASSESSMENT Water quality data collected at all sites were Lakes are valued for the multiple benefits they evaluated for the previous five year period. Some provide to the public, including recreational stations have little or no data for several boating, fishing, drinking water, and aesthetic parameters. However, for the purpose of enjoyment. Assessments have been made at

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 23 standardization, data summaries for each station standard, or an action level as specified in the include all parameters. These chemistry data North Carolina Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2B summaries are found at the end of the Ambient .0200 (Table 5). Zinc is included in the summaries Monitoring Section. for metals but recent (since April 1995) sampling or laboratory analyses may have been Data collected from January 1996 to September contaminated and the data may be unreliable. 2000 were displayed in box plots. Box plots In this report, conductivity is synonymous with provide measures of central tendency and specific conductance. It is reported in micromhos variation (Figure 11). The parameters presented per centimeter (µmhos/cm) at 25 ○C. in this report were also presented in the previous basin assessment report (NCDEHNR 1997). AQUATIC TOXICITY MONITORING Acute and/or chronic toxicity tests are used to determine toxicity of discharges to sensitive 14 aquatic species (usually fathead minnows or the water flea, Ceriodaphnia dubia). Results of these tests have been shown by several researchers to th 95 percentile be predictive of discharge effects on receiving 12 stream populations. 90th percentile Many facilities are required to monitor whole th 75 percentile effluent toxicity by their NPDES permit or by administrative letter. Facilities without monitoring 10 th 50 percentile (median) requirements may have their effluents evaluated for toxicity by the NC DWQ’s Aquatic Toxicology 25th percentile Laboratory. If toxicity is detected, NCDWQ may

Concentration include aquatic toxicity testing upon permit 8 10th percentile renewal.

5th percentile The NC DWQ's Aquatic Toxicology Unit maintains a compliance summary for all facilities required to perform tests and provides a monthly update of 6 this information to regional offices and NCDWQ administration. Ambient toxicity tests can be used to evaluate stream water quality relative to other stream sites and/or a point source discharge. Figure 11. Explanation of box and whisker charts.

The water quality reference value may be an ecological evaluation level, a narrative or numeric

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 24 Table 5. Selected water quality standards for parameters sampled as part of the ambient monitoring system.1

Standards for All Freshwater Standards to Support Additional Uses Aquatic Human Water Supply Trout Swamp Parameter (µg/L, unless noted) Life Health Classifications Water HQW Waters Arsenic 50 Cadmium 2.0 0.4 Chloride 230,0002 250,000 Chlorophyll a, corrected 403 153 Chromium, total 50 Coliform, total (MFTCC/100 ml)4 503 (WS-I only) Coliform, fecal (MFFCC/100 ml)5 2003 Copper, total 72 Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 5.06,7 6.0 3, 7 Hardness, total (mg/L) 100 Iron (mg/L) 12 Lead 253 Manganese 200 Mercury 0.012 Nickel 88 25 Nitrate nitrogen 10,000 pH (units) 6.0 - 9.03, 7 3, 7 Selenium 5 Solids, total dissolved (mg/L) 500 Solids, total suspended (mg/L) 10 Trout, 20 other8 Turbidity (NTU) 50, 253 103 Zinc 502 1Standards apply to all classifications. For the protection of water supply and supplemental classifications, standards listed under Standards to Support Additional Uses should be used unless standards for aquatic life or human health are listed and are more stringent. Standards are the same for all water supply classifications (Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2B 0200, eff. April 1, 2001). 2Action level. 3Refer to 2B .0211 for narrative description of limits. 4Membrane filter total coliform count per 100 ml of sample. 5Membrane filter fecal coliform count per 100 ml of sample. 6An instantaneous reading may be as low as 4.0 mg/L, but the daily average must be 5.0 mg/L or more. 7Designated swamp waters may have a dissolved oxygen less than 5.0 mg/L and a pH as low as 4.3, if due to natural conditions. 8For effluent limits only, refer to 2B .0224(1)(b)(ii).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 25 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 01

Description

This subbasin contains the headwater reaches of The headwaters of the Little River drain an area of the French Broad and Little Rivers in Transylvania Whiteside granite. This type of geology is County (Figure 12). The French Broad River associated with naturally sandy streams, although originates at the confluence of the West and North poor riparian buffers and nonpoint source runoff Forks of the French Broad River near the town of also contribute to the large amounts of sand and Rosman. The East Fork of the French Broad silt in the Little River. River also flows into the French Broad River near Rosman. These three headwater tributaries of the Brevard is the largest urban area in the subbasin. upper French Broad River are generally Although there are 14 NPDES dischargers in this unstressed, high gradient streams which are subbasin, only three have permitted discharges capable of supporting viable trout populations. greater than 1 MGD and two of these (Ecusta and Approximately 89 percent of this subbasin is Sterling Diagnostic Imaging) have greatly reduced forested (Table 6); 50 percent of the subbasin is their discharges due to the current economic contained in the Pisgah National Forest and conditions. Pisgah Game Lands. This portion of the watershed is therefore protected from most land Table 6. Land use in Subbasin 01. Based upon disturbing activities and has few permitted point CGIA coverage 1993 - 1995 (total area = source discharges. 215 square miles (NCDENR 1999).

Below Rosman, the French Broad River is a much Land use Percent Water < 1 wider, lower gradient river, which meanders Cultivated crop 3 through a relatively undeveloped catchment to the Pasture 6 Town of Brevard. Some agriculture and Urban 2 construction activities are present in this reach of Forest 89 the river.

Figure 12. Sampling sites in Subbasin 01 in the French Broad River basin.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 26 Overview of Water Quality

Water quality has not changed significantly in this Streams in agricultural areas showed some subbasin since the initial 1992 basinwide changes in water quality, although no bioclassifica- assessment. Most of the sites have been rated tion was less than Good-Fair (Tucker and Crab Good or Excellent, however, habitat and water Creeks). Residential and urban development quality problems have been found in some of the around the Towns of Brevard and Rosman were smaller tributary streams. associated with more severe problems, although many of these streams were too small to be rated. Ambient water quality data were collected at three locations in this subbasin: the French Broad River An intensive study of the Peter Weaver Creek at Rosman and Blantyre, plus the Little River near catchment was conducted in 2000 - 2001 to Cedar. There was good water quality with few determine the cause of impairment noted in the measurements exceeding water quality criteria. 1997 basinwide study. Undeveloped headwater areas were in good condition, but more developed Streams in this subbasin usually have high downstream sites showed habitat and water dissolved oxygen concentrations and low specific quality problems. Sites on Peter Weaver and conductance. Mean specific conductance Morgan Mill Creeks reflected the effects of a trout increased in a longitudinal manner from the farm discharge and nonpoint source runoff from French Broad River at Rosman to Blantyre. There residential areas. Comparisons with 1978 - 1979 has been a decline in the maximum conductivities survey showed a change in habitat and species for the French Broad River at Rosman and tolerance (towards sandier streams and more Blantyre, especially since 1991. These sites also tolerant species). showed elevated dissolved oxygen concentrations in the last five years, presumably due to high Trout farm discharges resulted in heavy organic periphyton and macrophyte productivity. loading to several streams with effects very similar to that of sewage effluent. Severe problems in the Benthic macroinvertebrate samples have been headwaters of the West Fork French Broad River collected from over 40 locations in this subbasin and Morgan Mill Creek have been documented. A since 1983. These investigations have found trout farm discharge to Tucker Creek also was Excellent or Good water quality conditions in the shown to have some impact on the upper part of French Broad River near Rosman and all the the North Fork French Broad River. larger headwater tributaries (West, North, and East Forks of the French Broad River) (Table 7). There are six wastewater treatment facilities in this These three tributary streams and Catheys Creek subbasin that currently monitor effluent toxicity as have been designated as HQW. part of their NPDES permit. Only Coats American (with a small discharge to Galloway Creek) has A Good-Fair rating has been consistently assigned had any toxicity problem in the last five years and to a downstream site on the Little River using fish it was addressed through operational changes. and benthic macroinvertebrate data. The sandy There have been no toxicity failures since nature of this stream is due to local geology and February 2002. nonpoint source runoff.

Table 7. Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 01 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002.

Map #1 Waterbody County Location 1997 2002 B-1 French Broad R2 Transylvania SR 1129 Excellent Excellent B-2 W Fk French Broad R2 Transylvania US 64 Excellent Excellent B-3 N Fk French Broad R2 Transylvania SR 1322 Excellent Excellent B-4 M Fk French Broad R Transylvania SR 1131 --- Excellent B-5 Little R Transylvania SR 1560 --- Good B-6 Little R2 Transylvania SR 1533 Good-Fair Good-Fair

F-1 Little R Transylvania SR 1533 Good-Fair Good-Fair F-2 Crab Cr Transylvania SR 1532 --- Good 1B = benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring sites; F = fish community monitoring sites. 2Data are available prior to 1997, refer to Appendix 7.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 27 River and Stream Assessment

The spring and summer of 2002 was a period of beneficial effect on the benthic community further drought in this subbasin (Appendix 1). The downstream. This increase in grazing pressure smallest streams might have experienced some may have affected the abundance of other stress through loss of flow, while larger streams grazers, especially Chironomidae. might have shown improvement during a period of low nonpoint source runoff. West Fork French Broad River, US 64 The lower section of this river is about 15 meters French Broad River, SR 1129 wide with a boulder-rubble substrate. As at the The French Broad River at Rosman has been site on the French Broad River at SR 1129, sampled seven times during the summer since Podostemum was very abundant in some areas. 1984. This site is about 30 meters wide with a very embedded gravel-rubble substrate and Podostemum was very abundant in some areas of the river. In recent years, there has been a subtle change in substrate composition with more gravel and less sand. Sediment deposition has produced a relatively uniform run habitat, with poorly defined riffle/pool sequences. Land adjacent to the river is primarily agricultural (especially sod farms) with a narrow riparian zone. During benthic macroin- vertebrate sampling in 1997 and 2002, the river had low conductivity (< 25 µmhos/cm). This part of the river can become very turbid after rainfall.

West Fork French Broad River at US 64, Transylvania County.

Impacts from trout farm dischargers in the headwater of this river have been documented (see Special Study section). However, the impacts do not extend downstream. The lower part of the river has rated Excellent since 1992.

Of the major river sites in this subbasin, the West Fork French Broad River had the best habitat (score = 84) and the most intolerant benthic

community. Relative to the lower North Fork French Broad River at SR 1129, Transylvania French Broad River, this site had greater County. abundances of Drunella, Pteronarcys, Micrasema wataga, and Brachycentrus spinae. Rare taxa The site has maintained an Excellent rating since includes Drunella lata, Micrasema rickeri, 1986, with EPT S usually within a narrow range of Rhyacophila atrata, and Setodes. Four EPT 47 - 51. The major change in the biota over this genera each had three species: Drunella, time has been an increase in the abundance of Rhyacophila, Micrasema, and Serratella. pleurocerid snails (Elimia). This taxon was rare in 1986 - 1988, common in 1990 - 1992, and North Fork French Broad River, SR 1322 abundant in 1997 - 2002. An upstream discharger The habitats at this site were similar to those at the in 1992 was suspected as causing the rarity of this French Broad River at SR 1129. Sand and gravel taxon observed in 1986 – 1988 (Biological comprised 60 percent of the substrate and rubble Assessment Unit Memorandum 19920225). It is areas were heavily embedded. Filling in of pools possible that elimination of this problem had a also produced a relatively uniform run habitat.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 28 granite and hornblend gneiss. This rock type is similar to the geology found in the upper Tuckasegee River (Panthertown Valley in the Little Tennessee River basin), another area with naturally sandy streams.

North Fork French Broad River at SR 1322, Transylvania County.

Some recovery was evident relative to the upstream site at SR 1326 (see Special Study section). This site has consistently received an Excellent rating since 1992 with an EPT S of 41 or Riffle at the bridge across the Little River at SR 42. Filter-feeders were dominant, with 1560, Transylvania County. Symphitopsyche sparna and Dolophilodes being very abundant. Erosion from developed areas may have contributed to the large amount of silt at this site Middle Fork French Broad River at SR 1131 (approximately 20 percent of the substrate). This This site is a new basinwide monitoring site, exceeded the normal proportion even for a although this stream was sampled in 1989. It is a naturally sandy stream. Severe bank erosion was fairly small stream (only five meters wide) with also observed, as well as poor riparian zones. some habitat problems. Although there were good rubble riffles, the substrate was embedded and there were infrequent pools, eroding banks, and a poor riparian buffer.

Although there is a potential for impacts from nonpoint source runoff during high flow years, no such impacts were observed during 2002, a low- flow year. EPT S was extremely high for a small stream (51) and produced an Excellent rating. Many highly intolerant taxa were abundant, including Drunella allegheniensis, Serratella carolina, Brachycentrus spinae, Lepidostoma, and Goera.

Little River, SR 1560 The upper Little River flows parallel to NC 276 in a highly developed area with many golf courses and Sandy area just downstream of the bridge across very poor riparian buffers. This new basin site the Little River at SR 1560, Transylvania County. was added to monitor the effects in this developed area. The river is seven meters wide with a very Another unusual characteristic at this site was the sandy substrate. The overall characteristics were abundance of Sparganium americanum along the similar to those of a Coastal Plain stream, but the margins of the stream. This macrophyte is usually sandy substrate may reflect, in part, local geology. found in Piedmont and Coastal Plain freshwater The upper watershed drains an area of Whiteside marshes.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 29 The specific conductance during fish community sampling, however, was the lowest of any site monitored in the basin in 2002 (22 µmhos/cm) (Appendix 14). Conductivity is an indicator of the amount of dissolved salts in the water. Generally, conductivities in mountain streams draining forested watersheds are low; elevated conductivities indicate point and nonpoint source pollution (see Ambient System Monitoring).

In 2002 and in 1997, the fish community was rated Good-Fair (NCIBI = 40 and 46, respectively). The six-point decline (from a high to a low Good-Fair) between 1997 and 2002 resulted from a loss of one intolerant species and an increase in the Sparganium growing along the stream margin of the percentage of tolerant fish from 9 to 20 percent. As Little River at SR 1560, Transylvania County. in 1997, this site in 2002 had the fewest number of fish (n = 75) than any other site monitored in the The community was rated Good. Unusual species basin (Appendix 12). There was also an absence collected included Dannella lita, Baetis armillatus, of stonerollers (the only site in the basin in 2002 Brachycentrus nigrosoma (abundant on lacking this species) and a loss of three species of macrophytes), and Pteronarcys proteus. darters (green fin, Swannanoa, and redline).

Little River, SR 1533 Field observations in 2002 noted that the substrate The Little River, a tributary to the French Broad which had been more cobble and gravel in 1997 River, drains the southern area of Transylvania was now mainly sand and thick silt with little County. Land use in the watershed is devoted to exposed cobble remaining. During benthic agriculture, forestry, rural residential development, macroinvertebrate sampling the substrate was and retirement homes. Below Cascade Lake, at estimated as 5% gravel, 65% sand, and 25% silt. SR 1533 the stream is low gradient with no riffles. Instream woody habitats (snags, roots, and There are two NPDES facilities in the watershed deadfalls) were still present. Most benthic above the fish community monitoring site, one is a invertebrates were associated with snag and leaf 3 MGD plant located approximately eight miles pack habitats. Although the sandy substrate upstream of the site; the other, a small reflects local geology and nonpoint source runoff, campground WWTP, is approximately 0.5 miles the source of the increased sediment should be upstream. Nearby in a broad agricultural valley further investigated as should the decline in the are large farms growing row crops separated from rating of the fish community. the stream by a narrow riparian zone. Benthic macroinvertebrate samples have been collected three times since 1992 from this site. The ratings have been consistently Good-Fair. EPT S has been very stable during this period (24 - 26), although there were minor between-year changes in the composition of the benthic community.

Crab Creek, SR 1532 Crab Creek was sampled for the first time for fish community assessment in 2002. Draining eastern Transylvania County, this stream is a tributary to the Little River. There are no NPDES facilities or municipalities within the rural agricultural and forested watershed. Like the site on the Little River, this site had one of the lowest conductivities of any site monitored in the basin in 2002 (25 Downstream view of the Little River at SR 1533, Transylvania County. µmhos/cm) (Appendix 14). This site was a

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 30 reference site for benthic macroinvertebrate so comparisons between late 1970s and early studies of the nearby Mud Creek watershed in 2000s data had to take into consideration Subbasin 02 (NCDENR 2002). sampling differences that might be due only to the more intensive collections used in the 2000s.

The 2000s investigations determined little or no impact to the headwater areas, moderate impacts in the middle portions of Peter Weaver and Morgan Mill Creeks, and more severe impacts to the lower portions of both creeks. Residential development and a trout farm discharge contributed to water quality and habitat quality problems.

Comparisons with the late 1970s data showed that the middle and lower portions of these streams had become sandier and the fauna had shifted towards more tolerant species. These changes were most apparent at the downstream site on Peter Weaver Creek. Upstream view of Crab Creek at SR 1532,

Transylvania County. Peter Weaver Creek, SR 1195

The fish community was rated Good (NCIBI = 50) This site was also sampled in 2000 and 2001 as and the dominant species was the central part of the Peter Weaver Watershed Assessment stoneroller. There was a high percentage of and Restoration Project. This stream’s watershed tolerant fish comprised of creek chub and drains a developed area between the Towns of redbreast sunfish. Rosman and Brevard. Land use includes residential areas, a trout farm (discharging to SPECIAL STUDIES Morgan Mill Creek), a catfish farm, and an Woodruff Branch recreation vehicle resort. Currently, the substrate Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected from is approximately 75 percent sand and gravel and Woodruff Branch in March 1998 to determine if 15 to 20 percent silt. In the late 1970s the there might be any relationship between the substrate was 40 to 60 percent boulder/rubble and Transylvania County landfill and a small January 40 to 50 percent sand/gravel. There was no silt fish kill in the West Fork French Broad River. The present. The shift to a sand/gravel/silt substrate in landfill has a leachate collection lagoon in the the 2000s corresponded to more extensive Woodruff Branch catchment, although there is no development within the watershed in recent years. permitted discharge to the stream. The invertebrate fauna of Woodruff Branch appeared normal for a small stream in this area, suggesting no effect of the landfill on stream fauna (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum 19980515).

Peter Weaver Creek Watershed Assessment and Restoration Project Ten sites on four creeks were sampled in the Peter Weaver Creek watershed as part of a Watershed Assessment and Restoration Project (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum 20011221). Most of these streams were less than four meters wide and were not rated.

This area had been sampled in 1978 and 1979 to determine the effects of road construction for US Downstream view of Peter Weaver Creek at SR 1195, 64. Kick-net samples were collected in the riffles, Transylvania County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 31 This site was rated Fair in 1997 based on the EPT biota in the North Fork French Broad River was of S (12) and a width of four meters. In the 2000s greater importance than any impact to the three collections were made during a period of low receiving stream. The North Fork French Broad flow and stream width never exceeded two River at SR 1326 was 14 meters wide with some meters. All 2000s bioclassifications have been good riffle habitats. “Not Rated”. The highest EPT S was recorded during spring, but two summer samples continue to show low EPT S and a benthic community dominated by tolerant species. There seemed to be no significant change in water quality or habitat quality at this site since 1997.

Trout Farm Studies - West Fork French Broad River Several trout farms discharge to the headwaters of the West Fork French Broad River. Studies in 1990 documented severe impacts with effects very similar to those from a sewage discharge. Three sites (off NC 281, at SR 1306, and at NC 281) were resurveyed in 2000 and 2001. Severe, localized impacts downstream of the discharges were again documented. Substantial recovery was documented within one mile of the discharge North Fork French Broad River at SR 1326, (Biological Assessment Unit Memoranda Transylvania County. 20000925; 20020125) This was the first summer collection from this site, Request from Asheville Regional Office although there one sample was collected in March To determine the effects of different kinds of land 1989. Both collections were rated Good. There use in Subbasin 01, four sites or three streams were signs of enrichment including very abundant (Flat Creek, Carson Creek, and North Fork French periphyton and dominance by Hydropsychidae, Broad River) were added to the 2002 basinwide Chironomidae, and Lumbriculidae. Although there benthic macroinvertebrate collections. These sites was a good diversity of stoneflies (eight taxa), were originally intended to be permanent none of these were abundant. Some intolerant basinwide sites, but they will not be repeated in taxa were still present, although most of them 2007. There is no separate memorandum were rare. This was the only site in the subbasin, prepared for these sites. however, where the rare mayfly Nixe spinosa was collected. Flat Creek, SR 1319 Flat Creek is one of the more developed Of the larger river sites sampled in this subbasin, watershed in the West Fork French Broad River this site had the poorest water quality with reduced area. Habitat problems noted in 2002 included EPT S and an elevated BI (Table 8). embedded substrate, infrequent pools, bank Table 8. Biotic Index (BI), EPT taxa richness erosion, and some breaks in the riparian zone. (EPT S), and habitat score for four sites There were still good riffle areas and many in Subbasin 01 of the French Broad leafpacks. This site was rated Excellent with an River basin, 2002. EPT S of 38. There were few highly intolerant taxa, however, and a lower bioclassification might Habitat be recorded during periods of higher runoff and Waterbody, Location BI EPT S Score flow. N Fk French Broad R, SR 1326 4.4 34 77 N Fk French Broad R, SR 1322 3.5 41 67 French Broad R, SR 1129 3.7 54 64 North Fork French Broad River, SR 1326, W Fk French Broad R, US 64 3.1 51 84 below Tucker Creek A large trout farm discharges to Tucker Creek, but Carson Creek, SR 1103 the discharge only affects about 50 meters of the Carson Creek is a medium-sized stream (seven stream before its confluence with the North Fork meters wide) flowing through a developed French Broad River. The potential impact to the watershed. Land use includes agriculture,

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 32 residences, and a summer camp. Habitat OTHER DATA problems were noted based upon the large Cascade Hydroelectric Project amount of sand (70 percent) and silt (20 percent), As part of Cascade Power Company’s FERC infrequent riffles, eroding banks, and poor riparian license to operate the Cascade Hydroelectric zones. Specific conductance, however, was low Project, the company was required to assess the at 18 µmhos/cm. aquatic communities in 1999 in Cascade Lake and in the Little River below Cascade Dam following implementation of minimum flows below the dam. The required 10 cfs flows were shown to have benefited the diversity and abundance of the downstream fishery (CPC 1999). As of July 2002, the project license was surrendered to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The facility will no longer generate electricity and the project will operate “run-of-river” with all the flow going into the old bypass section of the river (Steve Reed, NC Division of Water Resources, pers. com.).

Volunteer Water Information Network The Volunteer Water Information Network (VWIN) collects water chemistry data at 20 sites on the French Broad River and its tributaries in this subbasin (Maas et al., 2000a). Streams in Carson Creek at SR 1536, Transylvania County Transylvania County have low alkalinity, although pH values less than 6.0 were rare. Turbidity and This site was sampled for the first time in 2002 suspended solids were low at most sites, but and was rated Good. Intolerant species were elevated levels were recorded at downstream sites present, but most of these were only common or on the French Broad River. Lamb Creek (in the rare. This suggested that a lower rating might be Town of Brevard) also had high turbidity levels and observed under conditions of higher rainfall and the West Fork French Broad River had elevated flow and greater nonpoint source runoff. turbidity levels after major rainfall events.

Conductivity values were generally low. Nutrients were elevated in the North Fork French Broad, reflecting the influence of trout farms.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 33 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 02

Description

This subbasin contains approximately 40 river than 1 MGD (Basinwide Information Management miles of the French Broad River from the System, January 13, 2003). The largest Henderson/Transylvania County line to the discharges are the Buncombe County MSD (40 confluence of Sandymush Creek in Buncombe MGD to the French Broad River) and the County. Major tributaries to the river include the Henderson WWTP (4 MGD to Mud Creek). Swannanoa River and Mud, Cane, Hominy, Newfound, and Sandymush Creeks (Figure 13) Table 9. Land use in Subbasin 02. Based upon CGIA coverage 1993 - 1995 (total area = Agriculture (dairy operations, apple orchards, and 806 square miles (NCDENR 1999). row crops; including corn, tomatoes, and burley tobacco), and urbanization often affect the middle Land use Percent Water 1 and lower reaches of these tributaries. This reach Cultivated crop 1 of the river contains the metropolitan areas of Pasture 21 Asheville and Hendersonville, but the dominant Urban 3 land use is still forest (Table 9). Currently, there Forest 74 are about 65 NPDES dischargers in this subbasin, but only four of these facilities discharge more

Figure 13. Sampling sites in Subbasin 02 in the French Broad River basin.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 34 Overview of Water Quality

Ambient water quality data were collected from Basinwide sampling and various special studies eight monitoring locations in this subbasin, with sampled 40 rateable tributary sites (greater than three of these locations on the mainstem of the four meters wide) during the last five years. These French Broad River. Comparing water chemistry surveys produced 6 Excellent, 9 Good, 10 Good- data collected during 1998 - 2002 with data in the Fair, 10 Fair, and 5 Poor ratings. Twenty-six sites prior five year cycle (1993 - 1997), almost all sites were sampled that were less than four meters in showed a slight increase in median conductivity. width and could not be assigned a standard This change highlighted the very low flows bioclassification. Nine of these streams were recorded throughout the mountains during the last evaluated as “Not Impaired”, indicating they would five years. be given at least a Good-Fair rating using the criteria for larger streams. At least 7 of the In the French Broad River proper, several water remaining 17 sites had substantial water quality quality parameters increased in concentration from problems. Forested headwater streams were Blantyre (just upstream in Subbasin 01) through most likely to receive a Good or an Excellent Buncombe County to the Alexander site bioclassification with a decline in water quality for downstream of Asheville. Median conductivity and more developed downstream segments. total phosphorus and ammonia nitrogen concentrations increased progressively Streams in highly urban catchments showed downstream, with the largest changes between severe water quality problems. Poor ratings were Asheville and Alexander. The Asheville and given to lower Ross and Canie Creeks; substantial Alexander sites showed slightly greater dissolved water quality problems also were observed in Bat oxygen concentrations and greatest pH values in Fork and Sweeten and Gash Creeks. Streams in the last five years. These changes seemed to be residential areas such as Moore Creek also had related to the profuse growths of a macrophyte severe water quality problems. Larger streams (Elodea) in this segment of the river. often were affected by point and nonpoint source problems, with Fair ratings recorded in Mud Creek, Total phosphorus (median = 0.24 mg/L) and fecal lower Hominy Creek, and portions of the coliform bacteria (geometric mean = 117 Swannanoa River. colonies/100 mL) were greatest at Mud Creek. Many of these observations were corroborated by Some streams in agricultural areas also had Fair data collected by UNC-Asheville’s Institute of or Poor ratings. Newfound Creek is impacted by Environmental Quality’s VWIN program. This dairy wastes, although implementation of Best program also documented water quality problems Management Practices in this catchment produced in many other streams in Henderson and a substantial improvement in water quality since Buncombe counties. 1989. Agricultural areas with heavy insecticide use (especially orchards or tomato farming) often Benthic macroinvertebrate samples have been had Fair or Poor benthos ratings, including Clear collected from 99 locations in this subbasin since Creek, Devil’s Fork and upper Mud Creek. 1983 with three long-term sites on the French Broad River. Bioclassifications in the French Although many of the sites in this subbasin Broad River at Skyland and Asheville sites were changed bioclassification between 1997 and 2002 Good-Fair or Good over the last decade, (Table 10), more detailed analysis of the data depending on flow conditions. Benthic data often showed the changes were very small, and indicated that water quality improved at the did not indicate a significant change in water Asheville site from 1985 to 1997, but was relatively quality between 1992 and 2002. Stable water stable from 1997 to 2002. The French Broad quality was indicated at the French Broad River at River at Alexander usually was rated Fair, Skyland and Asheville, the Swannanoa River and reflecting the influence of point source dischargers Hominy Creek (two sites each), and at Reems, (especially from the Buncombe County MSD’s Mud, Newfound, Clear, and Sandymush Creeks. WWTP) and nonpoint source runoff from the Asheville area. The latter site declined from Two sites had showed evidence of sudden Good-Fair in 1997 to Fair in 2002 following a declines in water quality during the last 10 years, period of low flow and low dilution. possibly associated with instream toxicity. South Hominy Creek had declined sharply from Good-

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 35 Fair in 1992 to Poor in 1997 but showed full Lake Kenilworth. Beetree Reservoir, however, has recovery in 2002. Cane Creek declined from not been sampled since 1997. Burnett and Good-Fair in 1997 to Fair in 2002. Beetree Reservoirs are water supply lakes in protected catchments and are strongly Fish community samples were collected by DWQ oligotrophic. Lake Julian is slightly more from 11 tributary streams in this subbasin during productive and is thermally enhanced, but it is still 2002. Poor ratings were assigned to Mud Creek generally evaluated as oligotrophic. Lake and Bat Fork, similar to the ratings assigned with Kenilworth, however, is within an urban area and macroinvertebrate data. Fish data, however, gave was evaluated as eutrophic. There was a sewage higher ratings than benthos for sites on Cane spill into this lake in August 2001 and a blue-green Creek and Newfound Creek, reflecting sampling in algal bloom in October 2001. A special study also different times of the year (early summer vs. late found high fecal coliform levels in this lake. summer) or a difference in the sensitivity of these two groups. TVA fish data (2001 - 2002) indicated There are 15 wastewater treatment facilities in this problems in Mud Creek (two sites), Hominy Creek subbasin that currently monitor effluent toxicity as at NC 191, Flat Creek, Newfound Creek, and part of their NPDES permits, some with multiple Reems Creek at SR 1740. This information discharges. In the last five years, toxicity generally supported data obtained by other problems were observed only for three small programs, although TVA data produced a lower school dischargers: Christ School, West rating for Reems Creek relative to fish and Henderson High School, and North Buncombe macroinvertebrate samples collected by DWQ. High School. Christ School now sends its waste to the regional WWTP and the other two facilities did Lake assessment data were collected from Burnett not have any failures in the last year. Reservoir, Beetree Reservoir, Lake Julian, and

Table 10. Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 02 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002.

Map #1 Waterbody County Location 1997 2002 B-1 French Broad R2 Buncombe NC280 Good-Fair Good-Fair B-2 French Broad R2 Buncombe SR 1348 Good-Fair Good B-3 French Broad River2 Buncombe SR 1634 Good-Fair Fair B-4 Mud Cr Henderson US 25 Fair Poor (2000) B-5 Clear Cr2 Henderson SR 1513 Poor Fair (2001) B-6 Cane Cr2 Henderson SR 1006 Good-Fair Fair B-7 Hominy Cr2 Buncombe NC 151 Good-Fair Good3 B-8 Hominy Cr2 Buncombe SR 3412 Fair Fair3 B-9 S Hominy Cr2 Buncombe NC 151 Poor Good-Fair B-10 Swannanoa R2 Buncombe SR 2416 --- Fair B-11 Swannanoa R2 Buncombe US 25 Good-Fair Good-Fair B-12 Newfound Cr2 Buncombe SR 1622 Good-Fair Fair B-13 Reems Cr2 Buncombe NC 251 Good Good-Fair B-14 Sandymush Cr2 Madison SR 1114 Good Good

F-1 Mud Cr Henderson SR 1647 Poor Poor F-2 Bat Fork Henderson SR 1779 Poor Poor F-3 Cane Cr Henderson US 25 Good-Fair Good F-4 Hominy Cr Buncombe NC 151 Good Good-Fair F-5 South Hominy Cr Buncombe NC 151/SR 3449 Good Good F-6 Swannanoa R Buncombe SR 2435 Good-Fair Good F-7 Newfound Cr Buncombe SR 1641 Poor Good F-8 Reems Cr2 Buncombe NC 251 Good Good F-9 Flat Cr Buncombe SR 1742 Good Good F-10 Sandymush Cr Madison SR 1107 Good Good F-11 Turkey Cr Buncombe SR 1629 --- Good

L-1 Lake Julian Buncombe L-2 Burnett Reservoir Buncombe L-3 Lake Kenilworth Buncombe 1B = benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring sites; F = fish community monitoring sites; L = lake monitoring sites 2Data are available prior to 1997, refer to Appendices 7 and 11. 3Spring sample

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 36 River and Stream Assessment

Although the region experienced a prolonged drought over the past several years (Appendix 1), during fish community sampling it was observed at several streams that the turbidity was very high after walking in the stream bed and there were silt deposits in the pools and along the shorelines (Figure 14). Sources of turbidity in the Hominy, Reems, Flat, and Turkey Creeks watersheds should be investigated.

Upstream view of the French Broad River at NC 280, Buncombe County.

There did not seem to be any long-term change in water quality at this site. It was rated Good-Fair in 2002, the same rating it had received in 1997, 1990, and 1987. EPT S was lower in 2002 than in 1997 (32 vs. 41, respectively), although some taxa that were absent in September may have reflected emergence in July or August, for example, Figure 14. Downstream view of Turkey Creek at Perlesta, Serratella, and Micrasema wataga. SR 1629, Buncombe County showing Water quality problems continued at this site as high turbidity in the stream after evident by the rarity of long-lived stoneflies and wading in the channel. Promoresia elegans.

Tributary flows during the July 2002 French Broad River, SR 1348 macroinvertebrate collections usually were not low This site near the City of Asheville is about 70 enough to have a negative impact on the fauna. meters wide with good boulder-rubble substrate. Prolonged low flows in the French Broad River, In 2002 two macrophytes, Podostemum and however, encouraged profuse macrophytic growth Elodea, were abundant with profuse growths of (Elodea canadensis) and provided poor dilution for Elodea reaching nuisance levels. dischargers in the City of Asheville area.

French Broad River, NC 280 The French Broad River at Skyland is upstream of all major dischargers, so specific conductance was relatively low, about 30 - 50 µmhos/cm, during recent benthic collections:. This site is about 80 - 100 meters wide with large amounts of bedrock substrate. Elodea canadensis, an aquatic macrophyte was very abundant. High flows made it impossible to collect samples in July, so sampling was delayed until September.

French Broad River at SR 1348, Buncombe County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 37 This site has been sampled six times in the Tolerant taxa are dominant at this site, but the summer since 1983 and the bioclassifications abundance of some moderately intolerant taxa showed steady improvement over that period from including Symphitopsyche sparna and Stenonema Fair in 1983-1985 to Good in 2002. EPT S has mediopunctatum in 2002 was a positive sign. been fairly stable since 1992 (30 or 32), but a Collections made before 1997 indicated some slight decline in the BI in 2002 resulted in the nutrient problems (e.g. abundant Limnodrilus Good rating. Analysis of this data at the species hoffmeisteri and Chironomus), but in 2002 the level suggested a significant improvement from abundance of Cricotopus bicinctus was more 1992 to 1997, but relatively stable water quality indicative of toxicity than nutrients. from 1997 to 2002. The most important indicator of improving water quality was the abundance in Mud Creek, SR 1647 1997 and 2002 of Serratella deficiens and Mud Creek is a tributary to the French Broad River Lepidostoma. However, the rarity of long-lived and drains the City of Hendersonville and its stoneflies in all collections suggested some metropolitan area. There are four NPDES facilities continuing water quality problems at this site. in the watershed above the monitoring site. This urban stream was sampled upstream of French Broad River, SR 1634 Hendersonville’s Mud Creek Wetlands Park. The French Broad River at Alexander is similar to the SR 1348 site in size and substrate, but it has much lower abundance of macrophytes. This site is downstream of the City of Asheville’s WWTP (40 MGD) and there was an subsequent increase in the specific conductance from ~ 50 µmhos/cm at SR 1348 to ~90 µmhos/cm at this site.

Side view of Mud Creek at SR 1647, Henderson County.

The fish community was rated Poor in 2002 and 1997 (NCIBI = 22 and 20, respectively). In 2002 and 1997, the community was dominated by the introduced bluehead chub. In 2002, 4 of the 14 French Broad River, SR 1634, Buncombe County. species and 118 of the 180 fish collected at this site were introduced. These four introduced This site was rated Fair in 1990 and 1992, but species (chain pickerel, bluehead chub, flat improved to Good-Fair in 1997. This improvement bullhead, and redbreast sunfish) are native to was associated with better operation of the Atlantic Slope streams and not Tennessee River WWTP. During the summer of 2002, however, the drainage streams. There were low diversities of rating decreased to Fair again. However, EPT S darters and cyprinids and high percentages of has been extremely stable over the last four tolerant fish and omnivores+herbivores. collections (18 or 19). The decline in 2002 seemed to be related to the extreme low flow Mud Creek, US 25 conditions that meant low dilution of upstream The Mud Creek catchment was intensively dischargers with greater potential for impacts to sampled in 2000 and 2001 (see Special Study the aquatic fauna. No long-term changes in water section), but this downstream location was treated quality were evident. as a basinwide monitoring site. The site is very sandy and has a mean width of 19 meters.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 38 The fish community was rated Poor in 2002 and 1997 (NCIBI = 14 and 24, respectively). Only nine species were collected in 2002, the fewest of any site in the basin (Appendix 12). Like Mud Creek, the community was dominated by the introduced bluehead chub in 2002 and 1997. In 2002, 4 of the 9 species and 99 of the 131 fish collected at this site were introduced. The introduced species were chain pickerel, bluehead chub, redbreast sunfish, and swamp darter. Bluehead chub accounted for 74 percent of the introduced fish. There was an absence of intolerant species, low diversities of darters and cyprinids, and high percentages of tolerant fish (the second highest in the basin) and omnivores+herbivores. Mud Creek at US 25, Buncombe County

Bat Fork and Crab Creek (Subbasin 01) are similar The site was rated Fair in 1997 and Poor in 2002. in terms of drainage area size and elevation. Between-year changes, however, were small and However, the land use, habitats, fish communities, there was no evidence of any significant decline in and ratings were very different (Table 11 and water quality. The benthic community was more Appendix 12). indicative of toxic stress than organic loading.

Table 11. Comparisons of Crab Creek Bat Fork, SR 1779 (Transylvania County) and Bat Fork Bat Fork, a tributary to Mud Creek, drains the (Henderson County), 2002. southeastern corner of Henderson County. Major land uses within its watershed include forested Waterbody (31%), residential (24%), pasture (15%), commer- Variable Crab Cr Bat Fork cial/industrial (10%), and row crop/orchard (8%). Land use Agriculture Agriculture (row (pasture and crops, orchards, Approximately 15 percent of the area has forested and pasture), impervious surfaces and 45 percent of the streams headwaters), suburban in the watershed were channelized with only 15 rural percent having adequate buffers on both banks Habitat score 65 40 No. species 20 9 (NCDENR 2002). There are two NPDES facilities No. fish 402 131 approximately 2.5 and 3 miles above the site – a No. darter species 4 1 small recreational vehicle resort (0.015 MGD) and No. RST 2 0 the General Electric Lighting facility (0.5 MGD). No. cyprinid species 7 3 No. intolerant species 2 0 This site had the lowest scoring habitat in the % tolerants 11 32 basin in 2002 (Appendices 2 and 3). % omni.+herb. 30 60 % insect. 64 37 % multiple ages 80 56 NCIBI score 50 14 NCIBI rating Good Poor

Clear Creek, SR 1513 Clear Creek was intensively sampled in 2000 and 2001 as part of the Mud Creek WARP Study (see Special Study section), but this site is treated as a basinwide site to allow comparisons with data collected in 1992 and 1997. Clear Creek’s catchment contains numerous apple orchards and water quality problems are thought to be associated with improper pesticide use.

Downstream view of Bat Fork at SR 1779, Henderson County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 39 Broad and Broad River basins. There are six NPDES facilities in the watershed and the site is located in a broad valley with agricultural and commercial land uses. The recent widening of US 25 and construction of a new bridge across the stream seemed to have contributed a greater amount of sediment in the pools and along the shorelines than that observed in 1997. The Cane Creek watershed was the largest watershed evaluated for fish community assessments in 2002 (82.1 square miles).

Clear Creek at SR 1513, Buncombe County.

The site has been classified as Fair or Poor since 1992 with no trend in water quality.

Cane Creek, SR 1006 At this site Cane Creek is a sandy stream with a mean width of 12 meters. Although the overall habitat score was low (55), this site had adequate riffles, plus good leafpack and rootmat habitats.

Downstream view of Cane Creek at US 25, Henderson County.

In 2002, the fish community was rated Good, in 1997 it was rated Good-Fair (NCIBI = 50 and 46, respectively). A decrease in the total number of fish was compensated by the collection of an additional intolerant species, a decrease in the percentage of omnivores+herbivores, and an increase in the percentage of species with multiple age classes. The community still has a higher percentage of tolerant fish (11 percent) than that which would be found at a reference site (less than 2 percent). The dominant species was the redline darter which was abundant in the two large riffles Cane Creek at SR 1006, Buncombe County. at the site.

Collections in 1992 and 1997 were rated Good- As in 1997, more species were found at this site Fair based on EPT S (26 or 27). In 2002, and at Boylston Creek (Subbasin 03) than at any however, this site rated only Fair based on the of the other site in 2002 (n = 24) (Appendix 12). EPT S (11). This decline indicated serious water Six species which were collected in 1997 were quality problems. absent in 2002; thus the total number of species known from this sites is 30 - a high diversity of fish. Cane Creek, US 25 Cane Creek, a tributary to the French Broad River, Hominy Cr, NC 151 drains northern Henderson and southeast Hominy Creek, a tributary to the French Broad Buncombe counties. Its watershed is adjacent to River, was sampled in its upper reaches where it those of the Swannanoa River and the French drains the Town of East Canton and the

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 40 commercial areas transected by Interstate 40 and the US 19/23/74 corridor. This site is above its confluence with South Hominy Creek. Here, in the middle part of the watershed, the stream is high gradient with riffles, runs, and a few pools. The riparian zone along the right shoreline is very narrow with residential and commercial land uses. During high flows the stream carries a very high sediment burden (Figure 15). The substrate and pools seemed to be covered with more fine sands and silts in 2002 than in 1997. Much of the watershed is in agricultural and residential land use in close proximity to the stream, although some tributaries drain forested areas. There are three NPDES facilities in its watershed with a total discharge of 0.06 MGD. Downstream view of Hominy Creek at NC 151, Buncombe County, May 2002.

Benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected in May 2002 during an intensive survey of the Hominy Creek watershed (see Special Studies). It is a new basin site, because information from the downstream site at SR 3412 did not adequately reflect water quality in the entire catchment.

This site was rated Good in July 1992, Good-Fair in September 1997, and Good in May 2002. All samples (after seasonal correction and adjustment for collection method) had EPT S between 32 and 34, and a BI between 4.7 and 5.2. This pattern suggested fairly stable water quality with a high

Good-Fair or low Good rating. Continuing water Figure 15. Excessive turbidity and high flows in quality problems were indicated by the abundance Hominy Creek (orange flow) vs. South of three tolerant species in 2002 -- Hominy Creek (brown flow) at NC 151, Cheumatopsyche, Hydropsyche betteni, and Buncombe County, June 05, 2002. Cricotopus triannulatus group. Also, stoneflies were not abundant at this site.

In 2002, the fish community was rated Good-Fair, in 1997 it had been rated Good (NCIBI = 40 and 50, respectively). This 10-point decline between 1997 and 2002 resulted from a decrease in the number of fish collected (from 723 to 266), a loss of one species of cyprinid, and an increase in the percentage of tolerant fish (from 2 to 13 percent). In 1997 the fish community was dominated (26 percent of all fish) by the mottled sculpin, a species preferring swift streams with riffles and a clean substrate. In 2002, this species had declined to 10 percent of all the fish. The dominant species in 2002 were the river chub, warpaint shiner, and saffron shiner. The fish community also had a low diversity of intolerant Upstream view of Hominy Creek at NC 151, species. Buncombe County, under normal flows, September

24, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 41 Hominy Creek, SR 3412 with Hominy Creek. Above the site, there is one Benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected small NPDES facility (0.002 MGD) about 3.5 miles in May 2002 during an intensive survey of the away on Beaverdam Creek. Repeated sampling Hominy Creek watershed (see Special Studies). and observations at this site have suggested less This site near the Town of Enka is a basinwide erosion in this watershed relative to the upper monitoring site and is about 11 meters wide. It is Hominy Creek watershed (Figure 15). located below the discharge from the BASF Corporation (1.25 MGD). Specific conductance increased from 60 µmhos/cm above the discharge (at NC 112) to 81 µmhos/cm at this site. The stream is very entrenched and sandy with severe bank erosion and a poor riparian buffer.

Upstream view of South Hominy Creek at NC 151/SR 3449, Buncombe County.

This site was sampled for benthic macroinvertebrates during an intensive survey of the Hominy Creek catchment in May 2002 (see Hominy Creek at SR 3412, Buncombe County. Special Studies); it is also part of the routine basinwide monitoring program. Although the NC 112 site and this site had very similar habitats, corrected EPT S declined Prior benthic collections indicated this site should between sites (from 27 to 20) and there was an usually have a Good rating in spring and a Good- increase in the BI( from 5.3 to 6.1). The BASF Fair rating in summer. In May 2002 the site was discharge and urban runoff may contribute to this rated Good. The EPT S and BI were almost decline in water quality observed between the two identical to those observed in May 2000 (35 and sites. 34; 3.17 and 3.77, respectively)

This site rated Fair in May 2002, contrasted to Fair This site was resampled in August 2002 and rated and Poor ratings produced from three previous Good-Fair. This site was rated Poor in September collections made during the summer. The greater 1997 and reflected an unknown toxic impact. The EPT S in May 2002 (20) relative to the summer substantial late summer decrease was not collections (9 and 13) may have reflected lower repeated in 2002. stress during the spring. Although both streams (at NC 151) had similar Very high numbers of Cricotopus triannulatus ratings, the benthic community indicated better group were found at this site, suggesting some water quality in South Hominy Creek than in toxic impacts. Elimia had been abundant at the Hominy Creek. Intolerant taxa found mainly at next upstream site on Hominy Creek, but this South Hominy Creek during the 2000 - 2002 taxon was only rare at this site. collections included Epeorus rubidus, Alloperla/Suwallia, Pteronarcys, Neophylax, and South Hominy Creek, NC 151/SR 3449 Blepharicera. South Hominy Creek is a tributary to Hominy Creek and was sampled for benthic The fish community was rated Good in 2002 and macroinvertebrates and fish above its confluence 1997 (NCIBI = 50 and 48, respectively). Although

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 42 there was a slight increase in the NCIBI score, In 2002, the fish community was rated Good, in changes in the fish community, such as the 1997 it had been rated Good-Fair (NCIBI = 48 and collection of tolerant redbreast and green sunfish 40, respectively). This 8-point increase resulted and a slight shift in the trophic metrics, bear from greater diversities of cyprinids (due to the watching in the future at this reference site. addition of the silver shiner, mirror shiner, and blacknose dace) and intolerant species (due to the Hominy and South Hominy Creeks are very similar addition of the silver shiner and rainbow trout) and in terms of drainage area size and elevation. a slightly greater percentage of insectivores in However, the land use, conductivity, fish 2002 than in 1997. The dominant species in 1997 communities, and ratings were slightly different was the central stoneroller; in 2002 the dominant (Table 12 and Appendices 12 and 14). There is a species were the central stoneroller and the low diversity of intolerant species at both sites saffron shiner.

Table 12. Comparisons of Hominy and South Swannanoa River, SR 2416 Hominy Creeks (Buncombe County), This site near Warren Wilson College monitors 2002. water quality in the upper part of the Swannanoa River catchment, including runoff from developed Waterbody areas around the Towns of Black Mountain and Variable Hominy S Hominy Land use Agriculture, rural, Agriculture, Swannanoa. Urban runoff is the most likely the commercial rural cause of any problems in this portion of the river. Conductivity (µmhos/cm) 98 35 No. species 16 19 The stream is about 15 meters wide with good No. fish 266 386 No. cyprinid species 7 8 boulder-rubble substrate. Some Podostemum % tolerants 13 6 occurs at this site, but it was found only in the % multiple ages 56 68 areas of fastest current. Very abundant periphyton NCIBI score 40 50 suggested some enrichment. Pool areas were NCIBI rating Good-Fair Good filled in with sediment producing a relatively

uniform run habitat. Swannanoa River, SR 2435

The Swannanoa River, a tributary to the French Broad River, drains southeastern and eastern Buncombe County. The Towns of Black Mountain and Swannanoa and the commercial and industrial corridors along Interstate 40 and US 70 drain into the river at this site. There is one NPDES facility in the watershed -- a water treatment plant on the North Fork Swannanoa River below Burnett Reservoir.

Swannanoa River at SR 2416, Buncombe County.

Although last sampled in October 1987, but there seemed to have been little change in water quality since then. The site rated Fair in 1987 and in 2002. Chironomidae were the dominant macroinvertebrates and the most abundant species, Cricotopus bicinctus and Polypedilum convictum, suggested toxic problems. There was little indication that organic loading was a problem Upstream view of the Swannanoa River at SR 2435, in this part of the watershed. Buncombe County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 43 Swannanoa River, US 25 Stream size and habitat quality for this site near the Town of Biltmore Forest were similar to that of the river at SR 2416. Much of the stream is sandy and channelized, but the area downstream of the railroad bridge had good rubble-boulder riffles.

Eroded bank along Newfound Creek at SR 1622, Buncombe County.

This site was rated Poor or Fair from 1986 to 1989, but improved to Good-Fair in 1997. This improvement was probably due to a watershed

improvement project that assisted local farmers Swannanoa River at US 25, Buncombe County. with erosion control and better management of dairy wastes. Although the August 2002 sample This site has been intensively sampled with six was rated Fair, no recent decline in water quality summer collections made since 1985. It has been was indicated. The EPT S (corrected for collection rated Good-Fair since 1992. In 2002 there were method) was identical for the 1997 and 2002 only slight improvements between this site and the summer samples. upstream site at SR 2416 site (EPT S 26 and BI 5.79 vs. EPT S 24 and BI 5.86, respectively). The low flow in 2002 might have limited the amount of water quality improvements, but there Two species occurred here that are more was some indication that water quality had characteristic of large river habitats -- improved. Several EPT taxa appeared for the first Heterocloeon petersi and Stenonema time in 2002 or increased in abundance relative to mediopunctatum. Their presence may have 1997: Isonychia, Stenonema ithaca, and reflected the site’s close proximity to the French Stenonema modestum (all abundant); Leucrocuta, Broad River. Serratella deficiens, Nectopsyche, Neophylax, and Neureclipsis (all common). Very tolerant taxa Newfound Creek, SR 1622 remained dominant: Baetis flavistriga, Newfound Creek is located in an area of dairy Cheumatopsyche, Hydropsyche betteni, farming. Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys Symphitopsyche sparna, and Simuliidae. Filter- between 1986 and 1989 documented severe feeders and grazers were very abundant, water quality problems associated primarily with indicating this stream still receives large amounts organic loading and nutrient enrichment. of nutrients and particulate organic matter. Sediment also contributed to the observed Specific conductance for the last three collections problems. was elevated with a mean value of 113 µmhos/cm.

At this site, the creek is five wide with a Dairy wastes management has been effective in sand/gravel substrate. Rubble and boulder were reducing the organic loading and increasing found only in a few spots where rip-rap stabilized dissolved oxygen concentrations. Sewage the banks. There was evidence of severe bank associated organisms were abundant only in erosion with embedded substrate, infrequent samples collected prior to 1997. The continuing pools, and a poor riparian buffer. abundance of Physella suggested that low dissolved oxygen may still occur in some microhabitats.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 44 Newfound Creek, SR 1641 Although the fish community improved from Poor Draining rural, agricultural, western Buncombe to Good, the NCIBI score, 48, was at the low end County, Newfound Creek is a tributary to the of the Good rating (48 – 56). Seven of the 14 French Broad River. There are two small NPDES species (rockbass, smallmouth bass, river chub, facilities in the watershed (total discharge = 0.013 blacknose dace, creek chub, flat bullhead, and MGD). During fish community sampling, the greenside darter) were represented by only 1 or 2 conductivity was the highest (113 µmhos/cm) of fish per species. any site in the basin in 2002. In 1998 a citizen monitoring and clean-up effort was funded for this watershed by the Pigeon River Trust Fund (www.pigeonriverfund.org). Other watershed improvements that may have led to the improved fish community have been: several dairies and their discharges have ceased operations; cattle exclusions from the stream has been an on-going effort; and septic tank improvements (Linda Wiggs, Asheville Regional Office, pers. com.).

Reems Cr, NC 251 Downstream from Newfound Creek and across the French Broad River, Reems Creek drains northwestern Buncombe County including the Town of Weaverville. The site at NC 251 is just Downstream view (above the bridge) of Newfound above the stream’s confluence with the French Creek at SR 1641, Buncombe County. Broad River. This portion of the stream flows through a deep gorge and the steep gradient The fish community improved dramatically results in a rockier substrate than observed in between 1997 and 2002 (Table 13). This 20-point other parts of watershed. There is only one increase was the greatest change at any site in NPDES discharger in the watershed. A water the basin in 2002. treatment plant, below Woodfin Reservoir, has no limit to its flow to Reems Creek. Table 13. Comparisons of fish communities in

Newfound Creek, 1997 vs. 2002 (Buncombe County).

Year Variable 1997 2002 No. species 10 14 No. fish 310 444 No. darter species 0 2 No. RST species 0 2 No. intolerant species 0 2 % tolerants 30 2 NCIBI score 28 48 NCIBI rating Poor Good

Species that were collected in 2002 but not in 1997 were rockbass, smallmouth bass, bigeye chub, Swannanoa darter, and greenside darter.

The dominant species in 1997 were creek chub and central stoneroller; in 2002 the dominant Upstream view of Reems Creek at NC 151, species were central stoneroller, whitetail shiner, Buncombe, County. Note boulder-rubble substrate and bigeye chub. Only one tolerant creek chub in this high gradient section. was present in 2002 and the bigeye chub which was absent in 1997 was represented by 113 fish. Benthic EPT samples have rated this site Good- Fair (in 1992 and 2002) or Good (1997). There is

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 45 no evidence of a long-term change in water quality. Gains in the number of mayfly species over time have been offset by a decline in the abundance of stoneflies.

The stream has been sampled for fish community assessments in every basin cycle – 1993, 1997, and 2002; the last two ratings have been Good (Figure 16).

60 52 50 52 44 44

36 28 Upstream view of Flat Creek at SR 1742, Buncombe

NCIBI Score NCIBI County. 20

12 In 2002 and 1997, the fish community was rated 1993 1997 2002 Good (NCIBI = 50 and 56, respectively). Despite Year no change in rating, this 6-point decline was due to a decrease in the number of fish collected (from 685 to 254), a loss of three species of cyprinids (saffron shiner, mirror shiner, and longnose dace), Figure 16. NCIBI scores from Reems Creek at NC 151, Buncombe County, 1993 – 2002. and an increase in the percentage of tolerant fish (from 0.1 to 4.3 percent, primarily due to the This stream has a high species diversity (25 have increased abundance of redbreast sunfish). This been collected at this site), including high fish community warrants watching in the future. diversities of darters, cyprinids, and intolerant species. As in 1993 and 1997, the fish community Sandymush Creek, SR 1107 in 2002 had a slightly skewed trophic structure Sandymush Creek drains the extreme northwest with a greater percentage of insectivores and a corner of Buncombe County and a small portion of lesser percentage of omnivores+herbivores than southwest Madison County before entering the expected. The warpaint shiner was the dominant French Broad River. There are no NPDES species in 1997 and 2002. facilities in its watershed. The pH and dissolved oxygen were elevated (8.9 s.u. and 107 percent Flat Creek, SR 1742 saturation, respectively) during the late afternoon The Flat Creek watershed is adjacent to and north sampling due to photosynthetic activity by the of the Reems Creek watershed. Draining the periphyton (Appendix 14). The lower one-half of extreme northwest corner of Buncombe County, the site lacks a canopy along the northern the watershed is dissected by US 19/23 and US shoreline; the riparian zone serves as a horse 25/70. There are five NPDES facilities in the pasture. watershed with a combined discharge of 0.13 MGD.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 46

Upstream view of Sandymush Creek at SR 1107, Sandymush Creek at SR 1114, Madison County Madison, County. The site was rated Good in 2002 and 1997 based The stream has been sampled for fish community on EPT S of 32 and 3o. The site was rated assessments in every basin cycle since 1993 and Excellent in 1992, but examination of data at the it has always rated Good (NCIBI = 48 or 50). The species level did not suggest any long-term dominant species have been fairly consistent over change in water quality. This is a very productive this time period, also (Figure 17). However. the site, but lacks any highly intolerant species. community has lost four species of cyprinids since 1993 (blotched chub, Tennessee shiner, longnose Turkey Creek, SR 1629 dace, and creek chub). As in 1997, there was also The fish community of Turkey Creek was sampled an abundance of large suckers (white sucker, for the first time in 2002. Although its watershed is northern hogsucker, and black redhorse), adjacent to and similar in size to that of Newfound smallmouth bass, and rock bass. Creek, Turkey Creek is a tributary to Sandymush Creek. There are no NPDES facilities in the watershed, but livestock have access to the 25 stream. Land use in the watershed includes 20 pasture and row crops (burley tobacco, corn, and 15 tomatoes).

10 5 0 1993 1997 2002

Bigeye chub Whitetail shiner Northern hogsucker

Figure 17. The three most abundant species of fish at Sandymush Creek, SR 1107, Madison County, 1993 – 2002.

Sandymush Creek, SR 1114 Sandymush Creek was about 10 meters wide with good rubble-boulder riffles; the substrate is Upstream view of Turkey Creek at SR 1629, severely embedded. This area is heavily Buncombe County. agricultural, but there was a good riparian buffer at this site.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 47 The fish community was rated Good (NCIBI = 48). Reems Creek seemed to have a more normal The dominant species was the bigeye chub of riffle-pool sequences than many of the other sites which many were infected with yellow grub examined in this subbasin. (Appendix 10). The community had a slightly lower than expected total species diversity and diversities of daters and cyprinids. The percentage of tolerant fish was also elevated due to the abundance of redbreast and green sunfish. There was excellent reproduction by 13 of the 14 species (Appendix 12).

SPECIAL STUDIES 303 (d) Studies Gash and Mill Pond Creeks in Henderson County were on the 303(d) list of impaired streams based on studies conducted in 1996. At that time, Gash Creek was rated Poor and Mill Pond Creek was rated Fair. Neither stream is large enough to be rated using current DWQ criteria. But benthic macroinvertebrate sampling in 2002 still demonstrated severe impacts (Biological Reems Creek off SR 1003, Buncombe County. Assessment Unit Memorandum 20030321). Although there were few highly intolerant taxa at Newfound Creek, SR 1622 this site, it was rated Excellent based on the EPT In 1999 the Basinwide and Estuary Planning Unit S (38). requested a Full scale benthic macroinvertebrate sample be collected from Newfound Creek to Flat Creek, SR 1740 confirm the Good-Fair rating found in 1997. In This stream was sampled at the request of the May 1999, during a period when lower stress and Asheville Regional Office. The Flat Creek greater EPT S were to be expected than in the watershed includes large amounts of pasture summer months, the community was again rated (used for cattle grazing) and portions of the Town Good-Fair (DWQ unpublished data). of Weaverville. There are also a few small dischargers in the upper portion of the catchment, Requests from Asheville Regional Office including two schools and two mobile home parks. To determine the effects of different kinds of land Specific conductance was elevated in July 2002 at use in this subbasin, two sites on Reems Creek 109 µmhos/cm. This stream was sampled in April and Flat Creek were added to the 2002 benthic 1986 as a comparison site to Newfound Creek. macroinvertebrate basinwide collections. These sites were originally intended to be permanent The site is about five meters wide with a sandy basinwide sites, but they will not be repeated in substrate. Bedrock outcrops produced infrequent 2007. There is no separate memorandum riffles. Pools were filled in with sand and silt and prepared for these sites. there were frequent breaks in the riparian zone.

Reems Creek, off SR 1003 Asheville Regional Office staff believed that the downstream site on Reems Creek at NC 251, with its high gradient, boulder substrate, did not represent the watershed’s true water quality. The downstream site was rated Good-Fair in 2002 and Good in 1997.

A new site above the Town of Weaverville off SR 1003 was sampled in 2002. This portion of the stream was about five meters wide with good riffle and rootmat habitats. Adjacent land use was agricultural, especially pasture. The upper part of

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 48 and sediment chemistry, especially nutrients and pesticides.

The primary cause of water quality problems in the upper Mud Creek, Clear Creek, and upper Devil’s Fork watersheds was toxicants (most likely pesticides from tomato farming and apple orchards); sediment, habitat degradation, and elevated nutrients were also contributing factors. Multiple stressors were found in lower Mud Creek, Lower Devil’s Fork, and Bat Fork.

Stress in Mud Creek increased longitudinally with the highest EPT S at the headwater sites. Stations downstream of a tomato farming area showed a sharp decrease in water quality, Flat Creek at SR 1740, Buncombe County. especially late in the growing season. Additional declines in water quality occurred in the developed This site rated Good-Fair in 1986 and 2002. section within the City of Henderson. Bat and Tolerant species were dominant, especially Devils Forks had severe water quality problems, Hydropsyche betteni and Symphitopsyche sparna. although conditions were slightly better in the The rarity of stoneflies and Philopotamidae also headwaters of each stream. suggested water quality problems at this upper site. Clear Creek and its tributaries had Fair or Poor ratings downstream of orchard areas, although Mud Creek Watershed Assessment and upstream control sites were rated Good (Laurel Restoration Project Fork and Harper and Crab Creeks). Data from DWQ data demonstrated poor water quality in the sites that bracketed orchards suggested that Mud Creek watershed and was often associated orchard runoff was responsible for the change in with runoff from apple orchards or tomato farming. the invertebrate communities. This type of stress is highly variable dependent upon the timing of pesticide applications and TMDL Projects recent rainfall. Sites often showed the most stress Hominy Creek late in the growing season and years with higher Four samples were collected from Hominy and rainfall and runoff had lower ratings than years South Hominy Creeks in September 1997. For with low rainfall and runoff. Many of these most of the Hominy Creek watershed, water streams are in a continuous cycle of stress and quality was stable with Good-Fair ratings at the recovery (NCDENR 2002). two upstream sites and a Fair rating at the most downstream site. South Hominy Creek was rated Water quality problems were often accompanied Poor. There are no dischargers above this site at by poor habitats and/or elevated nutrient NC 151, so the decline seemed to be related to concentrations. Many of the streams in this part of nonpoint source runoff (Biological Assessment the subbasin are low gradient sandy streams, with Unit Memorandum 19970211). This problem has a long history of channel modification and not been observed since then in South Hominy sedimentation. More than 20 percent of the steam Creek. miles have been channelized with more than 40 percent channelization in the Bat Fork and Devil’s A more extensive survey, including 4 sites on Fork watersheds. Less than 15 percent of the Hominy Creek, 4 on northern tributaries and 6 on stream miles have adequate riparian buffers. southern tributaries, of the Hominy Creek watershed was conducted in May 2002 (Biological During 2000 and 2001, 26 sites were sampled in Assessment Unit Memorandum 20021018). the Mud Creek and Crab Creek (Subbasin 01) Hominy Creek continued to be rated Good in an watersheds (Biological Assessment Unit upstream segment, Good-Fair in a middle Memorandum 20021022). Some of these sites segment, and Fair rating near its mouth. Tributary were sampled as many as four times for benthic sites ranged from Excellent in the headwaters of macroinvertebrates, Also assessed were water

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 49 Beaverdam Creek to severely stressed in two The Swannanoa River sites received a high Fair or urban streams (Canie and Moore Creeks). low Good-Fair rating with only slight differences between sites. The middle segments were Ross Creek enriched, but other water quality problems were Ross Creek was sampled in 2002 off Chunn’s evident at all sites. Long-lived stoneflies or Cove Road (in a residential area) and at a Philopotamidae were collected only at a site on the downstream location off US 70 (in a highly urban North Fork Swannanoa River (Biological area). The upstream site was Not Impaired and Assessment Unit Memorandum 20030124). the downstream site was rated Not Rated (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum Bent Creek, November 2001 20030311). Six sites were sampled in the Bent Creek watershed in November 2001 to determine if any Swannanoa River Tributaries problems resulted from the use of high-sulfur Six streams were evaluated because of their bearing rocks as rip-rap adjacent to Wesley placement on the impaired streams list or at the Branch (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum request of the Land of Sky Regional Council of 20020123). With the exception of the most Governments because of potential urban impacts downstream site on Bent Creek, all sites were less to the streams (Biological Assessment Unit than four meters wide and could not be rated using Memoranda 1990125 and 19991222). These the normal criteria for mountain streams. Two streams were Flat, Grassy, Haw, Sweeten, Ross, sites in the headwaters of Bent Creek and one site and Christian Creeks. on Boyd’s Creek were rated Excellent using special criteria for small streams in undisturbed Flat Creek was the only stream large enough to be catchments. Sites on Wesley Branch were rated rated; it received a Good-Fair rating based on as “Not Impaired” with no differences detected benthic macroinvertebrate data. Sweeten and between the sites located above and below the lower Ross Creeks had severe water quality high-sulfur bearing rocks. Bent Creek below Lake problems with very low EPT S and elevated Powhatan and below a small wastewater conductivity (100 - 163 µmhos/cm). Although both treatment plant was rated Good-Fair. streams had some habitat problems, poor water quality seemed to be the limiting factor for the Additional Data aquatic community. This contrasted sharply with Volunteer Water Information Network data from Christian Creek, a stream with a largely The Volunteer Water Information Network (VWIN) forested catchment. collects water chemistry data at 20 sites on the French Broad River and its tributaries in this Upper Ross, Grassy, and Haw Creeks were subbasin (Maas et al., 2000b; Maas et al., 2000c). located in residential areas. Water quality problems were intermediate between those found In Henderson County high levels of turbidity and at the forested site (Christian Creek) and the those suspended solids were found in the French Broad found at the heavily urbanized sites. Habitat and River and in the Mud and Cane Creeks water quality problems (conductivity = 63 to 93 watersheds. Conductivity was elevated in some µmhos/cm) contributed to reduced taxa richness in Mud Creek tributaries, including Bat Fork, Brittain these streams. Creek, and Devils Fork. Bat Fork, however, seemed to be improving over time. Lower Mud Swannanoa River Creek had the worst water quality in Henderson At the request of the Asheville Regional Office and County, but significant problems were also to assist a technical subcommittee that is observed in the middle portion of Mud Creek, and prioritizing conservation and restoration efforts in lower Cane Creek. the Swannanoa River watershed, six on the Swannanoa River and the North Fork Swannanoa Like Henderson County, many sites in Buncombe River were sampled for benthic County had high levels of turbidity and suspended macroinvertebrates in August 2002. Although solids. The greatest problems were noted in samples were collected during the basinwide Newfound, Sandymush, Turkey, Hominy, Flat, and monitoring survey, only two of these sites were Cane Creeks and the Swannanoa River. Higher part of this program. turbidity was associated with agriculture (especially in high gradient areas), development, and road construction. Highest levels of

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 50 conductivity were associated with urban land use, sites), Lower Flat Creek, Swannanoa River (two especially in Red, Glen, Haw, South, and Ross sites), North Turkey Creek, and South Mill Creek. Creeks. Many of these sites also had elevated metals concentrations. Clear Creek Watershed Assessment and Restoration Project Stream which were rated Poor using the VWIN The fish communities at three sites on Clear Creek criteria included Grassy Branch, Haw, South (Henderson County) were assessed in October Turkey, Flat, and Glenn Creeks, upper Newfound 2001 as part of a larger study of impaired aquatic Creek, and the most downstream reach of Hominy communities (NCDENR 2002). The lower and Creek. Fair ratings using the VWIN criteria upper sites (at SR 1513 and 1587) were rated included Beetree Creek at Lake Owen, South Good-Fair and the middle site (at SR 1586) was Creek, Ross Creek (three sites), Beaverdam rated Fair. The uppermost site continued to Creek, Cane Creek (two sites), lower Reems support a small, healthy, reproducing population of Creek (two sites), Avery’s Creek, lower naturalized rainbow trout (Biological Assessment Sandymush Creek, upper Hominy Creek, Unit Memorandum 20011023). Ashworth Creek, lower Newfound Creek (two

Lake Assessment

Lake Julian and upper piedmont lakes. Because the reservoir Lake Julian was constructed in 1963 by Progress is the source of and receiving body (mixing zone) Energy (formerly Carolina Power and Light for the power plant’s once-through cooling system, Company) to serve as a source of cooling water a thermal variance has been granted as part of the for the coal-fired Asheville Steam Electric Plant. NPDES permit under Section 316(a) of the Clean The lake is used for boating and fishing; contact Water Act. recreation is prohibited. The watershed is primarily urban and residential (Figure 18). The Total phosphorus and chlorophyll a concentrations reservoir has been sampled five times by DWQ were low; nitrogen values ranged from low to although the water quality and fishery has been elevated (Appendix 18). The reservoir was extensively monitored by the utility since the classified as oligotrophic and the NCTSI scores 1970s. were the lowest ever calculated for this reservoir. Drought conditions in 2002 may have contributed to the exceptionally low biological productivity and increased Secchi depths by reducing nonpoint source runoff of nutrients and sediments usually associated with rainfall events.

The reservoir was previously monitored by DWQ in 1992. Secchi depths ranged from 2.2 to 2.4 meters, indicating very good water clarity. Nutrient concentrations were low with the exception of nitrite+nitrate, which was extremely elevated. In response to the low nutrient concentrations, chlorophyll a values were also low. Surface metals were within applicable water quality standards. Based on the NCTSI (-2.8), the reservoir was classified as oligotrophic.

Figure 18. Sampling sites at Lake Julian, Progress Energy also conducts water quality Buncombe County. monitoring as an NPDES permit requirement. In 2000 and 2001 nutrient, chlorophyll a and physical In 2002 Secchi depths were consistently greater water quality measurements were similar to those than two meters and measurements in June and observed by DWQ. The studies concluded that August were greater than any previously the biological community has remained relatively observed. Water temperatures were greater than stable over the past several years (CP&L 2001; the water quality standard of 29°C for mountain 2002a).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 51 Burnett Reservoir metals were within applicable water quality Burnett Reservoir was constructed in 1954 to standards. provide drinking water for the City of Asheville. The protected and undeveloped, forested The reservoir was previously monitored by DWQ watershed is approximately two square miles and in 1997. Secchi depth ranged from 5.0 to 10.0 is drained by the North Fork Swannanoa River, meters. A pH value (6.0 s.u.) recorded at the most Sugar Fork, and several unnamed tributaries upstream sampling site (Station FRBBUR2) was at (Figure 19). Because of its designation as WS-I, the water quality lower limit. Nutrient the reservoir is also classified a High Quality concentrations were also low with the exception of Waters. These waters are rated as excellent nitrite+nitrate, which was extremely elevated. The based on biological and physical/chemical values for surface metals were within the characteristics. The reservoir has been sampled applicable water quality standards. eight times by DWQ. Lake Kenilworth Lake Kenilworth is an 18 acre reservoir located on Ross Creek in the City of Asheville. The creek and reservoir are designated suitable for swimming. Land use in the upper watershed of Ross Creek consists of established residential areas and pasture. The middle part of the watershed consists of a heavily urbanized area along US 70 (Tunnel Road). The lower watershed consists of residential areas around the reservoir as well as an older warehouse area. An inactive landfill is downstream from the lake near NC 81 just prior to the creek’s confluence with the Swannanoa River (Figure 20).

Figure 19. Sampling sites at Burnett Reservoir, Buncombe County.

As was observed in 1997 this reservoir had low biological productivity, exceptional water clarity, and limited nutrient availability. In 2002 the reservoir was again classified as oligotrophic. Secchi depths ranged from 5.3 to 12.0 meters; the Secchi depths in June were the greatest ever measured at this reservoir (Appendix 18). Nutrient concentrations were generally low with the exception of nitrite+nitrate, which was elevated. In Figure 20. Sampling sites at Lake Kenilworth, addition to the protection afforded this reservoir, Buncombe County. the drought conditions may have contributed to the exceptional water clarity by reducing nonpoint In August 2001, untreated wastewater overflowed source runoff of nutrients and sediment. Surface from a nearby sewer main and entered the lake.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 52 On October 4, 2001, the lake experienced a blue- dam, total organic nitrogen and total Kjeldahl green algal bloom. During the algal bloom, water nitrogen were elevated in July and August. samples were collected at the boat dock (Figure Surface dissolved oxygen concentrations were 20). Total phosphorus, ammonia and total elevated on all three dates. In July, the surface Kjeldahl nitrogen concentrations were elevated. percent dissolved oxygen saturation at Station The chlorophyll a concentration was greater than LK2 (120 percent) was greater than the water the water quality standard (40 µg/L). Metals were quality standard (110 percent) for dissolved within applicable water quality standards (Table gasses. Surface pH values were elevated in July 14). and August, suggesting increased algal photosynthetic activity. Chlorophyll a Table 14. Data collected at Lake Kenilworth, concentrations at the dam ranged from moderate Buncombe County, October 4, 2001. to elevated, but were not greater than the water quality standard. Variable Value Temperature (ºC) 21.0 Total fecal coliform bacteria in reservoir samples Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 8.5 Ammonia nitrogen (mg/L) 0.13 ranged from < 2 to 40 colonies/100 ml. Although Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (mg/L) 0.44 these counts were low, fecal coliform bacteria for 3 NO2+NO (mg/L) < 0.01 Class B waters should not exceed a geometric Total nitrogen (mg/L) 0.45 mean of 200 colonies/100 ml based on at least Total organic nitrogen (mg/L) 0.31 Total inorganic nitrogen (mg/L) 0.14 five consecutive samples examined during a 30- Total phosphorus (mg/L) 0.12 day period and not exceed 400 colonies/100 ml in Chlorophyll a (µg/L) 44 not more than 20 percent of the samples Cadmium (µg/L) < 2.0 examined during that period (NCAC 2002). In Chromium (µg/L) < 25 Copper (µg/L) < 2.0 Ross Creek fecal coliform bacterial concentrations Nickel (µg/L) < 10 ranged from 330 to 510 colonies/100ml at the site Lead (µg/L) < 10 located upstream of the lake and ranged from 200 Zinc (µg/L) 11 to 220 colonies/100 ml downstream of the reservoir. These counts may indicate potential These events and data raised public concern health problems for swimmers. regarding water quality and potential health risks associated with swimming in the lake. This Overt indications of nutrient loading from the concern lead to the Asheville Regional Office previously leaking sewer main were not observed requesting further assistance in 2002 to evaluate in the reservoir. Nonpoint source nutrient loading conditions in Ross Creek and the reservoir from the watershed may have been reduced in following the repair of the leaking sewer main. 2002 due to the drought. The trophic conditions were not different from other urban lakes which In 2002 trophic conditions ranged from tend to be moderate to highly productive. The mesotrophic in June to eutrophic in July and Asheville Regional Office will conduct additional August. Total phosphorus concentrations were sampling in the 2003 in Ross Creek and Lake elevated in Ross Creek and the reservoir in July Kenilworth. and August (Appendix 18). At the site near the

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 53 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 03

Description

This subbasin includes the Mills and Davidson Table 15. Land use in Subbasin 03. Based upon Rivers catchments (Figure 21). Much of the land CGIA coverage 1993 - 1995 (total area = remains forested and lies within the Pisgah 141 square miles (NCDENR 1999). National Forest or Game Lands. There are no large urban areas within the subbasin, although Land use Percent Water < 1 some development exists along NC 280 and NC Cultivated crop 2 191. Outside of the national forest, approximately Pasture 8 10 percent of the land is in agricultural use such Urban < 1 as pasture and row crops (Table 15). This Forest 89 subbasin contains eight permitted dischargers, but none with a discharge greater than 0.2 MGD.

Figure 21. Sampling sites in Subbasin 03 in the French Broad River basin.

Overview of Water Quality

Ambient water quality data are collected from two the North Fork Mills River and the upper part of the sites in this subbasin: the Davidson River near Mills River. Brevard and the Mills River near Mills River. Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling in 1994 found Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected at five severe water quality problems in the lower part of sites in 2002 (15 sites since 1983) (Table 16). the Mills River, downstream of tomato farming Due to the lack of development in the Pisgah areas. This site has since recovered to a Good- National Forest, many of the streams were rated Fair rating from Poor in 1994. Boylston Creek, as Excellent. Most of the South Fork Mills River which flows along the NC 280 corridor, is affected catchment is classified ORW and most of the by nonpoint source runoff (agriculture) and has Davidson River catchment is classified HQW. maintained a Good-Fair rating since 1992. Fish Excellent water quality also has been recorded in community monitoring was also conducted at this stream and the community was rated Good.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 54 Table 16. Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 03 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002.

Map #1 Waterbody County Location 1997 2002 B-1 Davidson R2 Transylvania US 276 Excellent Excellent B-2 Boylston Cr2 Henderson SR 1314 Good-Fair Good-Fair B-3 Mills R2 Henderson SR 1337 Excellent Good 2 B-4 N Fk Mills R Henderson FS RD 1206 Excellent Excellent B-5 Mills R2 Henderson SR 1353 Good-Fair* Good-Fair

F-1 Boylston Henderson SR 1314 Good Good 1B = benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring sites; F = fish community monitoring sites. 2Data are available prior to 1997, refer to Appendix 7.

River and Stream Assessment

Stream flows were generally very low for at least in 2002. The long-term drought conditions in the one to two years prior to the 2002 sampling and western part of the state were most likely remained low during the summer of 2002. The responsible for the decline in taxa richness. effects of this long term drought can be seen in some of the data collected in 2002. Boylston Creek, SR 1314 Boylston Creek drains a very narrow valley Davidson River, US 276 bordered by Forge Mountain to the northeast and The Davidson River drains largely undisturbed Bolyston Ridge to the southeast. The stream portions of the Pisgah National Forest, although flows in a northeasterly direction, dissected by NC portions of this catchment have heavy recreational 280, towards the French Broad River. There are use. no NPDES facilities in the watershed but there are intensively managed agricultural areas, including row crops and feedlots. Despite this the conductivity was relatively low (35 µmhos/cm) during the fish community assessment.

The fish community was rated Good in 2002 and 1997 (NCIBI = 52 and 56, respectively). Twenty four species, including six species of darters, were collected in 2002. Both of these species diversities were the highest of any site in the basin in 2002 (Appendix 12). Twenty eight species of fish are now known from this site. The saffron shiner and warpaint shiner were co-dominant species in 2002. The river chub which was the dominant species in 1997 declined from 20 to 9 percent of the fauna in 2002 and thereby Upstream view of the Davidson River at US 276, decreased the percentages of omnivores+ Henderson County. herbivores from 38 to 19 percent between 1997 and 2002. This site has been rated Excellent since 1992. All samples were characterized by high EPT S with At the benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring site dominance by intolerant EPT taxa. However, near the bridge the substrate is largely sand and there was a decrease in EPT S from 52 in 1997 to gravel, although some rocky riffles are present in a 36 taxa in 2002. A Full Scale sample was higher gradient section about 100 meters collected in 1997 and an EPT sample was upstream. Some bank erosion is also evident collected in 2002. However, the magnitude of the (Figure 22). Benthic samples have been collected difference in the EPT S would not be expected at this site as part of the basinwide monitoring between the two sampling methods. program since 1992. This site also was sampled in 1977 and 1978 to investigate the effects of The width of this site has steadily declined from 21 nonpoint source runoff on stream biota (Lenat et meters in 1992, to 13 meters in 1997, to 9 meters al. 1979).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 55 Mills River, SR 1353 This site has been investigated by DWQ since 1994 when it was sampled to determine the extent of the HQW reach. At that time, it was discovered that the benthic community had decreased substantially from a borderline Good-Excellent in 1993 to Poor, clearly indicating a toxic event had occurred. Intolerant EPT taxa had disappeared apparently due to pesticides from mixing stations associated with nearby tomato-farming areas (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum 19971001). In 1997 some improvement was noted (to Good-Fair), but the EPT N (76) was within the range expected for a Fair rating (45 - 91). When sampled in 1998 the community had Figure 22. Eroded banks at Boylston Creek, SR declined again and no improvement was 1314, Henderson County. documented in 2001. In 2002 the site once again rated Good-Fair. The site has consistently been rated Good-Fair with all collections characterized by low EPT S (23 All insect species were affected in 1994, - 27). However, EPT S increased from 23 in 1997 regardless of their pollution tolerance. In 1997 this to 27 in 2002 and the BI also decreased. These site became dominated by tolerant Chironomidae. changes reflected a more intolerant community EPT numbers increased from 6 in 2001 to 28 in due to the decrease in runoff from the surrounding 2002, indicating very good recovery. Some agricultural land during a drought. intolerant species that were absent in 1994 but have recovered since then included Heterocloeon, Mills River, SR 1337 Isonychia, Serratella deficiens, and Lepidostoma. This site has been sampled for benthic macroinvertebrates nine times since 1984 and has SPECIAL STUDIES been rated Excellent seven of those times. It was Mills River Watershed TMDL Study rated Good in 1988 and 2002. Except for some Along with the two Mills River basinwide sites, the declines observed in 1988, there have been few North Fork Mills River (above Rocky Branch) and long-term changes in community structure. the South Fork Mills River (at SR 1340) were Symphitopsyche morosa has declined since 1986; sampled as part of a larger TMDL study of the S. sparna, Paragnetina immarginata, Micrasema Mills River watershed (Biological Assessment Unit bennetti, and Paraleptophlebia were not collected Memorandum 20030423). in 2002. Other taxa that decreased in 2002 from abundant to rare were Epeorus and Brachycentrus appalachia.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 56 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 04

Description

This subbasin includes the section of the French Table 17. Land use in Subbasin 04. Based upon Broad River in Madison County. The largest CGIA coverage 1993 - 1995 (total area = tributaries in the northern portion of the subbasin 496 square miles (NCDENR 1999). are Spring Creek, which is entirely within the Pisgah National Forest, and Big Laurel Creek, Land use Percent Water < 1 which creates the southern border of the Pisgah Cultivated crop < 1 National Forest. In the southern section of the Pasture 14 subbasin, there is more development around the Urban < 1 Towns of Marshall and Mars Hill, and more Forest 85 pasture lands (Table 17). The largest tributary in this part of the subbasin is Ivy Creek (River).

Figure 23. Sampling sites in Subbasin 04 in the French Broad River basin.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 57 Overview of Water Quality

Ambient water quality data are collected at one Creek at SR 208 could not be sampled due to high site in this subbasin: the French Broad River at turbidity on the day of the scheduled sampling. Marshall. Data did not indicate any significant Bull Creek, a tributary to Ivy Creek, is located in a changes since 1997. Water quality impacts were rural agricultural watershed and was rated a low largely nonpoint and reflected in occasionally Good-Fair. elevated total suspended solids and fecal coliform concentrations. Only one discharger, the Town of Marshall’s WWTP, is required to perform whole effluent Benthic macroinvertebrate samples have been toxicity testing in its NPDES permit. Since 1991, collected at 36 sites in this subbasin since 1983. this facility has had only two tests which have Nine sites were sampled in 2002 as part of the failed to achieve compliance with its 90 percent basin assessment program (Table 18). The acute toxicity limit. French Broad River at Marshall has been sampled nine times and was rated Good-Fair each time, Observations noted during benthic and fish except in 1988 when it was rated Fair. In general, sampling indicated that sedimentation and turbidity streams in the northern and western sections of are concerns in the Big Laurel Creek and Shelton the subbasin (which are in the Pisgah National Laurel Creek drainages. Other watersheds that Forest) had consistently been rated Good or appeared to be experiencing increased turbidity, Excellent. Streams in the Ivy Creek watershed elevated conductivity, increased silt, and declining have declined from Good or Excellent to Fair or benthic communities are in California Creek Good-Fair since 1992. (including several tributaries) and Little Ivy Creek. These concerns have been documented in Fish community monitoring was conducted at sampling by, North Carolina Department of three sites; (Big) Ivy and Shelton Laurel Creeks Transportation, and the Institute for Environmental continued to be rated as Excellent. Big Laurel Quality (VWIN Program) at UNC-Asheville.

Table 18. Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 04 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002.

Map #1 Waterbody County Location 1997 2002 B-1 French Broad R2 Madison NC 213 Good-Fair Good-Fair B-2 Ivy Cr2 Buncombe SR 2150 Good-Fair Good B-3 Little Ivy Cr2 Madison SR 1610 Fair Good-Fair B-4 Ivy Cr2 Madison US 25/70 Good-Fair Good-Fair B-5 Big Laurel Cr Madison SR 1503 Good Excellent B-6 Big Laurel Cr2 Madison SR NC 208 Excellent Good B-7 Puncheon Fork Madison SR 1503 Good Excellent B-8 Shelton Laurel Cr Madison NC 208 Good Good B-9 Spring Cr2 Madison NC 209 Good Excellent

F-1 (Big) Ivy Cr2 Buncombe SR 2150 Excellent Excellent F-2 Bull Cr Madison SR 1574 --- Good-Fair F-3 Shelton Laurel Cr Madison NC 208/212 Excellent Excellent 1B = benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring sites; F = fish community monitoring sites. 2Data are available prior to 1997, refer to Appendices7 and 11.

River and Stream Assessment

The spring and summer of 2002 was a period of 1997 (prior to sampling), was at the high end of drought in Subbasin 04 (Appendix1). The smallest the normal range. High flows could have streams might have experienced some stress contributed to the lower ratings seen at many through low flows, while larger streams might have stations in areas largely affected by nonpoint shown improvements during a period of low sources. nonpoint source runoff. In fact, comparisons of 1997 and 2002 data indicated the benthic The typical substrate for streams in this subbasin communities in numerous streams improved in was comprised of a mix of boulder, cobble, and 2002. Historical flow data indicated that June gravel. Cobble riffles provided the best habitat for

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 58 benthic macroinvertebrates and margin habitats site. At the SR 2150 crossing, the stream is (root mats and undercut banks) were less characterized as having high quality instream numerous and provided fewer taxa. This was habitats consisting of sequences of cobble riffles especially true in drought years such as 2002 and runs and boulder pools. During benthic when the water receded, leaving undercut banks sampling in 2002, the water was noticeably turbid. and root mats dry.

French Broad River, NC 213 The French Broad River at the Town of Marshall is approximately 40 meters wide. Flow is influenced by Progress Energy’s Marshall Hydroelectric Plant located immediately upstream. The riparian zone at the site is minimal. In 2002, the aquatic plants Podostemum ceratophyllum and Elodea canadenis were abundant and the algae, Pithophora was also observed.

Upstream view of Big Ivy Creek at SR 2510, Buncombe County.

The stream has been sampled for fish community assessments in every basin cycle – 1993, 1997, and 2002 and the site has always rated Excellent (NCIBI = 58 or 60). As a regional reference site, the fish community has a high total species diversity, high diversities of darters, cyprinids, and intolerant species, most species with multiple age classes, and an absence of tolerant species. As in Upstream view of the French Broad River at NC 213, 1997, large specimens of black redhorse sucker, Madison County. northern hogsucker, smallmouth bass, and rockbass were present in 2002. The dominant This site has consistently been assigned a species in 2002 was the mottled sculpin. benthos classification of Good-Fair since 1983, with the exception of 1988 (Fair). In 1997 a The stream has also been sampled for benthic marked decrease in the number of chironomid macroinvertebrates in every basin cycle. This site taxa was observed which indicated scour from was rated Excellent in 1992, Good-Fair in 1997, increased flows may have occurred prior to and Good in 2002. Although the rating improved sampling. Although EPT S has remained constant in 2002 to Good, this site has experienced a shift (~25) since 1992, Total S and EPT N declined in in the benthic fauna from intolerant to a more 1997. tolerant community. This change is demonstrated by decreases in mayflies (Serratella deficiens and (Big) Ivy Creek, SR 2150 Isonychia) and an increase in the caddisfly, Big Ivy Creek, a tributary to the French Broad Cheumatopsyche, which is a tolerant filter feeder. River, drains southeastern Madison and northeastern Buncombe counties. This site is Little Ivy Creek, SR 1610 within the upper portion of Ivy Creek that is Little Ivy Creek is designated WS II and HQW for designated WS II and HQW and is located just its entire length but is listed on the 303 (d) upstream of its confluence with Little Ivy Creek. impaired streams list from SR 1547 to Ivy Creek There is only one small NPDES discharger due to nonpoint source contributions from (0.0025 MGD) in the watershed and is located agriculture and non-urban development (NCDENR about seven miles upstream from the monitoring 2000a). There is a large amount of agricultural

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 59 land use and pasture animals in the watershed, although the livestock operations seemed to be on a small scale. The small farming plots planted near the streams left minimal or no buffers. At this site the stream is approximately eight meters wide with an embedded substrate. Pools are infrequent, riffles are frequent, and breaks are common in the riparian zone.

Downstream view of Ivy Creek at US 25/70, Madison County.

This site was rated Good in 1992, and Good-Fair in 1997 and 2002. EPT S and abundance declined from 36 and 225 in 1992 to 30 and 170 in 2002, respectively.

Bull Creek, SR 1574 Little Ivy Creek at SR 1610, Madison County. Bull Creek, a tributary to Ivy Creek, is located west of the Town of Mars Hill in central Madison In 1992, this site rated Good; in 1997 it was rated County. There are no dischargers in the rural, Fair. Comparing 1992 to 1997, the EPT S agricultural watershed. During sampling in the declined from 35 to 16 and the EPT N decreased very early afternoon, the pH was elevated (8.2 from 203 to 48. s.u.) due to photosynthetic activity by the periphyton (Appendix 14). There are limited In 2002 this site was rated Good-Fair. However, canopied riparian zones in the lower part of the the benthic community did not show any sampling reach. The conductivity was also improvement over 1997. The 2002 sample was relatively high (95 µmhos/cm). collected in May and seasonal adjustments decreased the EPT S. In fact the sample barely missed a Fair bioclassification by one EPT taxa. A midge deformity test indicated polluted/nontoxic conditions. Other organic indicators were also abundant, including Physella, and taxa of oligochaetes.

Ivy Creek, US 25/70 This site on Ivy Creek is located approximately one mile above its confluence with the French Broad River. The streambed width was 20 meters, twice the size of the upstream site at SR 2150. The riparian zone was wider at this location than upstream and resulted in an improved habitat score (77). Turbidity was still noticeable at this site. Upstream view of Bull Creek at SR 1574 73, Madison

County.

The fish community was sampled for the first time in 2002; it was rated a low Good-Fair (NCIBI = 40).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 60 More fish were collected at this site (n = 1372) than at any other site in 2002 (Appendix 12), 53 percent of which were central stoneroller. The total diversity and other diversity metrics of this community are only moderate compared to those at the reference sites.

Big Laurel Creek, SR 1503 This site on Big Laurel Creek was sampled in 1997 and 2002. In 1997, it was rated Good and in 2002, it was rated Excellent. Although several taxa (Isonychia and Symphitopsyche slossonae) declined in 2002, many intolerant taxa increased in abundance (Leucrocuta, Serratella carolina, Malirekus hastatus, Glossosoma, and Lepidostoma). Also, nine more mayfly taxa were collected in 2002 than in 1997. Much of this Upstream view of Big Laurel Creek at NC 208, increase, however, can be attributed to a greater Madison County. Note road and erosion potential diversity within the family Baetidae in 2002 than in along right bank. 1997. This increased diversity may be partially explained by differences in flow conditions in 1997 In 2002 the benthic macroinvertebrate rating and 2002. The site seemed to be influenced by declined to Good, it had been Excellent in 1997 nonpoint sources and a low flow year such as and 1992. However, the stream continued to 2002 was expected to result in better water supported an intolerant benthic community. After quality. seasonal corrections (the 2002 sample was collected in May), the EPT richness has remained Big Laurel Creek, NC 208 constant since 1992. This is the most downstream benthic macroinvertebrate site on Big Laurel Creek before A fish community sample was scheduled to have its confluence with the French Broad River. The been collected in mid-June 2002 from this site stream is a riffle/run system with small pools, and near the confluence of Big Laurel and Shelton its width is 15 meters. There are no permitted Laurel Creeks. However, on this date (June 20, dischargers in the watershed, but Asheville 2002), the turbidity in the stream was exceedingly Regional Office staff confirmed there are many high (Figures 24 and 25) and prevented a fish homes “straight piping” (discharging) to the community sample from being collected. These stream. The thick filamentous green algae observations were made two weeks after a rainfall covering the substrate in 1997 was not observed event across the watershed. The Asheville in 2002. In 2002 road work was being conducted Regional Office staff and other agencies have along the right bank of the stream. Erosion investigated numerous turbidity complaints in this potential was high due to the steep gradient in the area, but the exact sources of the turbidity could riparian zone. not be found. The turbidity is believed to be coming from headwater reaches in both streams (Wanda Frazier, pers. com.).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 61

Figure 24. Turbidity plume at the confluence of Upstream view of Puncheon Fork at SR 1503, Big Laurel and Little Laurel Creeks at Madison County. Note close proximity of church on NC 208, Madison County. right bank.

In 1997 and 2002, the benthos community was primarily composed of intolerant organisms (Drunella conestee, Rhithrogena, and Dolophilodes). In 1997, the bioclassification was Good and in 2002, the rating was Excellent. Several additional intolerant taxa including Serratella carolina, S. serrata, Malirekus hastatus, and Lepidostoma were collected in 2002. This trend was similar to that observed at other sites in this subbasin where nonpoint source pollution is the primary concern.

NC DOT and DWQ have concluded that Puncheon Fork maintains an intolerant and diverse benthic community.

Figure 25. Turbidity in Big Laurel Creek at NC 208, Shelton Laurel Creek, NC 208/212 Madison County, June 20, 2002. The watershed of Shelton Laurel Creek in northern Madison County is primarily forested. There is Although the French Broad River basin one small discharger (an elementary school with a experienced a prolonged drought over the past discharge of 0.005 MGD) in the watershed. The several years, this localized area of Madison flash flooding in this watershed during the past two County also experienced at least two devastating years has altered the riparian zone near the end of flash floods during 2000 and 2001. Eroded areas the sampling reach and increased the stream’s may still be contributing sediment to the streams in turbidity and conductivity. In 1997 the habitat was these watersheds and sediment deposits may scored a 81, however in 2002 it was 67 due to have increased at the time of the floods. instability and loss of riparian vegetation along the left bank and an opening up of the canopy at the Puncheon Fork, SR 1503 upper end (Appendices 3 and 4). Exposed soils This location is a control site that NC Department and damaged septic systems may be increasing of Transportation has been using since 1996 to the conductivity (24 µmhos/cm in 1997 vs. 52 assess corridor impacts from the construction of µmhos/cm in 2002) and turbidity of the stream. Interstate 26 (NCDOT 2002). DWQ has determined that the greatest threat to this stream were the very narrow riparian zones, although bank erosion was minimal.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 62 the substrate was estimated to have 10 percent sand and 20 percent silt. This was a much higher estimation of silt than in previous years, indicating sediment concerns in this watershed. The benthic community was been rated Good since 1992. A spring sample in 1990 rated the community Excellent.

Spring Creek, NC 209 This site on Spring Creek is near the Town of Hot Springs. Land use near the site is largely residential and in some sections, the riparian zone and streambank were cleared of any large, woody vegetation. The substrate was estimated to contain 30 percent sand with a moderate to high amount of embeddedness of the larger cobble and Upstream view of Shelton Creek at NC 208/212, boulder. The amount of estimated sand in 2002 Madison County. had increased from the 1992 estimate, indicating nonpoint sediment concerns. Despite the catastrophic floods, the overall fish community was very resilient. The community was rated Excellent in 2002 and 1997 (NCIBI = 58 in both years). In 2002, a slight increase in the diversity of cyprinids was offset by a slight increase in the percentage of omnivores+ herbivores. There was also a slight shift in the dominant species between 1997 and 2002 (Figure 26). The percent similarity however, between the two years was 67.6 percent. Whether the river chub and stoneroller continue to become more abundant and shift the community’s trophic structure due to the altered habitats in the upper reach will bear watching in future years.

30 25 Upstream view of Spring Creek at NC 209, Madison 20 County. 15 10 In 1992, the site was rated Good-Fair (26 EPT S), 5 in 1997 Good (31 EPT S), and in 2002 Excellent 0 (37 EPT S). The community in 2002 was 1997 2002 dominated by moderately tolerant Isonychia, Tricorythodes, Stenonema ithaca, and Redline darter River chub Symphitopsyche sparna, but less tolerant taxa such as Eurylophella minimella, Heptagenia Central stoneroller Tennessee shiner marginalis, Leucrocuta, and Acroneuria abnormis were also abundant. The steady improvement in Figure 26. Changes in the dominance of four of ratings since 1992 suggested that water quality the most abundant species of fish at was improving at this site. Shelton Laurel Creek, NC 208/212, Madison County, between 1997 and SPECIAL STUDIES 2002. Fish Community Reference Streams In 1998 and 1999, Little Laurel Creek at NC 208, At the time of benthic sampling in 2002, the water Madison County, was evaluated as a regional fish was turbid from an isolated rain event the night community reference site. The fish community before. In addition to boulder, rubble, and gravel,

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 63 was rated Excellent (NCIBI = 60 and 58) Fair in 2002. Paint Fork (up- and downstream (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum sites) and upstream sites on California and Middle 20000922). The stream will again become a Fork Little Ivy Creeks would have been considered basinwide monitoring site in 2007. not impaired (at least Good-Fair according to EPT richness values) had they been ratable, though Follow-up Assessment of the I-26 Corridor they did exhibit stress from human encroachment. The construction of Interstate 26 from the Town of Downstream sites on California and Middle Creeks Mars Hill to Sams Gap traverses through this and UT Big Branch were clearly degraded. These subbasin and potentially impacts numerous streams were located in more densely populated streams and their tributaries. In response to areas of the watershed,with major roads running environmental concerns, North Carolina parallel to them allowing access for pollutants to Department of Transportation has conducted the stream and further development in the stream biological surveys to assess construction-related watershed. Drought conditions may have masked impacts (NCDOT 2002). Annual surveys have runoff effects, but the presence of considerable been conducted since 1996 and will continue for amounts of sand and silt at every site sampled three years after completion of the project during this survey suggests that sedimentation (estimated to be in 2003). was a concern (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum 20030516). Benthic data collected between 1996 and 2000 clearly indicated declining taxa richness and Additional Data diversity in one-half of the sites sampled. The Volunteer Water Information Network 2001 - 2002 data indicated recovery in some of The Volunteer Water Information Network (VWIN) the streams, while others remain impacted. There samples 21 sites on the French Broad River and was a positive relationship between declining its tributaries in this subbasin. Each site is benthic communities and increasing conductivity sampled monthly for a suite of parameters and silt measurements. including pH, alkalinity, turbidity, total suspended solids, conductivity, metals (copper, lead, and DWQ conducted a pre-construction survey of the zinc), and nutrients. The VWIN data (from 1992 to corridor in 1997 (Biological Assessment Unit 2000) corroborated many of the DWQ conclusions Memorandum 19970217) and follow-up sampling based upon benthic data regarding water quality in was conducted in 2002. Data showed that sites the Ivy Creek and Little Ivy Creek watersheds within the Big Laurel Creek drainage continued to (Maas et al 2000C; Maas et al 2001). The Ivy contain more taxa and in greater abundance than Creek watershed exhibited the highest pH and those of the California Creek drainage. A site on alkalinity concentrations of any watershed in the the upper reaches of California Creek continued to seven county VWIN program; conductivity and support a diverse and intolerant community. nutrient levels were also elevated. Water quality However, EPT S at a downstream site in California deteriorated below the confluence of Ivy Creek Creek and in Sprinkle Creek and Jarvis Branch and Little Ivy Creek, indicating that Little Ivy Creek (tributaries to California Creek) continued to and its tributaries were significant contributors of experience depressed EPT S (Biological pollutants to Ivy Creek. Since 1992, DWQ data Assessment Unit Memorandum 20030325). indicated overall declining benthic communities in the Ivy Creek watershed. Little Ivy Creek TMDL The 2.6 stream miles of Little Ivy Creek from SR The VWIN data also showed elevated turbidity 1547 to the confluence with Ivy Creek was 303 (d) levels on a regular basis in Big Laurel Creek listed due to biological impairment with fecal resulting from I-26 construction activities. The coliform, nutrients, sediments, and possibly entire Laurel Creek watershed is very vulnerable pesticides from agriculture and non-urban to sediment runoff during rain events. The development as suspected contributors of decline construction of I-26 has affected California Creek (NCDENR 2002). and its tributaries which are major contributors of sediment to Little Ivy Creek. DWQ data did not Only 2 of the 11 study sites sampled in May 2002 indicate declining benthic communities on Big were large enough to be rated. Little Ivy Creek at Laurel Creek at SR 1503 just downstream of I-26 SR 1547 declined from Good-Fair in 1993 and construction. However, the downstream site on 1997 to Fair in 2002. Little Ivy Creek at SR 1610 Big Laurel Creek at NC 208 declined from was rated Good in 1992, Fair in 1997, and Good- Excellent to Good.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 64 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 05

Description

This subbasin encompasses the Pigeon River Valley’s WWTP (1 MGD), and Blue Ridge Paper watershed (Figure 27). Many of the undeveloped Products, Inc. (29.9 MGD). watersheds are in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park or the Pisgah National Forest. The Table 19. Land use in Subbasin 05. Based upon Shining Rock and Middle Prong Wilderness areas CGIA coverage 1993 - 1995 (total area = are located in the watersheds of the Middle Fork, 532 square miles (NCDENR 1999). East Fork, and Little East Fork Pigeon Rivers. Land use Percent Water < 1 Most of the subbasin is forested (Table 19). The Cultivated crop < 1 largest urban areas are the City of Waynesville Pasture 14 and the Towns of Clyde and Canton. There are Urban < 1 more than 20 dischargers in this subbasin, Forest 84 including Waynesville’s WWTP (6 MGD), Maggie

Figure 27. Sampling sites in Subbasin 05 in the French Broad River basin.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 65 Overview of Water Quality

Ambient water quality data were collected from 9 four sites on the Pigeon River plus sites on Richland, Jonathans, and Cataloochee Creeks. Overall, the Pigeon River has shown substantial,

long-term declines in conductivity, fecal coliform BI 6 bacteria, and nutrient concentration at all sites downstream of Blue Ridge Paper Products mill’s discharge. However, mean conductivities were 3 high at Clyde, Hepco, and Waterville during the August August July 1997 July 2002 drought years (1998 - 2002) due to less dilution of 1988 1994 the effluent (Table 20). Date above Canton at Clyde Table 20. Mean conductivity (µmhos/cm) in the at Hepco at Waterville Pigeon River watershed, 1981 – 2002.

Year Figure 29. Biotic Index (BI) at four sites along the Waterbody 1981 – 1986 – 1991 – 1994 – 1998 – Pigeon River, 1988 – 2002. 1985 1990 1993 1997 2002 Cataloochee Cr 20 19 18 16 16 The site near Clyde was rated Good-Fair rating in in GSMNP Pigeon R 23 25 29 24 23 1997, but decreased to Fair in 1999 and Poor in at Canton 2002. The decline reflected the effects of a major Pigeon R 1,190 1,030 670 290 699 discharge on a small river during a long-term at Clyde drought. The site near Hepco continued to be Pigeon R 670 510 360 190 344 rated Good-Fair. The Waterville site has been at Hepco Pigeon R 290 290 200 135 224 rated Good since 1994. In 2002 at this site, the at Waterville EPT S was greater than and the BI equal to that of the site upstream of the mill at Canton. This The mill has undergone many upgrades to its pattern supported the conclusion that the declines wastewater treatment since 1990. These documented in 2002 were drought related. modifications have resulted in gradual improvements in the benthic macroinvertebrate Since 1983, benthic macroinvertebrates have community (Figures 28 and 29). been collected from 44 sites in this subbasin, including 18 samples collected during 2002 (Table 21). These data indicated Good to Excellent water 45 quality in many tributary streams. Cataloochee Creek and its tributaries have been designated as 30 ORW, while the Middle Prong West Fork Pigeon River and its tributaries have been designated EPT S 15 HQW. Other waters designated as Native and Special Native Trout Waters (and thus also HQW) 0 include the upper portion of the Little East Fork August August July 1997 July 2002 Pigeon River and tributaries, the upper portion of 1988 1994 East Fork Pigeon River and tributaries, portions of Date Rough Creek, and Rocky Branch. above Canton at Clyde at Hepco at Waterville Richland Creek near the City of Waynesville has shown signs of improving water quality in recent Figure 28. EPT taxa richness (EPT S) at four sites years based upon benthic macroinvertebrates along the Pigeon River, 1988 – 2002. although fish community data from the lower part of the watershed rates the stream Poor. Some degradation, usually from nonpoint sources such as dairy farms, also has been found in some of the smaller tributaries (e.g., Fines Creek).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 66 Fish community samples were collected from impoundment of lower Richland Creek. In July three sites during 2002 resulting in ratings of Poor 2002 this lake was classified as oligotrophic due to at Richland Creek, Good-Fair at Crabtree Creek, unusually low sediment and nutrient inputs and Fair at Fines Creek. resulting from the prolonged drought . Walters Lake, an impoundment of the lower Pigeon River, Lake assessment data have been collected from is used for hydroelectric power generation. This Allen Creek Reservoir, Lake Junaluska, and reservoir’s watershed encompasses most of Walters Lake. Allen Creek Reservoir is a water Haywood County and includes numerous supply for the City of Waynesville. This water is municipal and industrial dischargers. rated excellent based on biological and Consumption of common carp from Walters Lake physical/chemical characteristics. Lake Junaluska continues to be restricted due to dioxin is privately owned and formed by the contamination.

Table 21. Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 05 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002.

Map #1 Waterbody County Location 1997 2002 B-1 Pigeon R2 Haywood NC 215 Excellent Good-Fair B-2 W Fk Pigeon R2 Haywood SR 1216 Excellent Excellent B-3 E Fk Pigeon R2 Haywood US 276 Excellent Excellent B-4 Pigeon R2 Haywood SR 1642 Good-Fair Poor B-5 Pigeon R2 Haywood SR 1338 Good-Fair Good-Fair B-6 Pigeon R2 Cocke Co, TN At Browns Bridge Good Good B-7 Richland Cr2 Haywood US 23 Good-Fair Good B-8 Richland Cr2 Haywood SR 1184 Good-Fair Good-Fair B-9 Richland Cr Haywood SR 1519 Fair Good-Fair B-10 Jonathans Cr2 Haywood SR 1306 Excellent Excellent B-11 Jonathans Cr2 Haywood SR 1322 Excellent Excellent B-12 Jonathans Cr2 Haywood SR 1349 Excellent Good B-13 Fines Cr Haywood SR 1355 Good-Fair Good-Fair B-14 Cataloochee Cr2 Haywood SR 1395 Excellent Excellent

F-1 Richland Cr Haywood Walnut Trail Fair Poor F-2 Crabtree Cr Haywood NC 209 Poor Good-Fair F-3 Fines Cr Haywood SR 1355 Fair Fair

L-1 Allen Creek Reservoir Haywood L-2 Lake Junaluska Haywood L-3 Walters Lake Haywood 1B = benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring sites; F = fish community monitoring sites; L = lake monitoring sites 2Data are available prior to 1997, refer to Appendix7.

River and Stream Assessment

Jonathan Creek was not sampled for fish community assessment in 2002 due to inclement weather conditions and high flows encountered during both sampling weeks.

Pigeon River, NC 215 This site above the Town of Canton has been sampled 13 times since 1983, including 10 times during the summer. Much of the nearby land is used for agriculture (especially tomato farming) and an increasing number of vacation homes are being built in the upper Pigeon River catchment outside of national forest lands. This site is characterized by heavy growths of Podostemum with some indications of increasing biomass in recent years. Podostemum provides a refuge from scour for many macroinvertebrates. Pigeon River at NC 215, Haywood County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 67 Staff described flow during 2002 as high because the middle section of the river could not be reached. Benthic collections from large river sites are more subject to flow-related variation because the sites are physically difficult to sample under high flow and more habitat is available for sampling during low flow conditions.

An analysis of long-term changes in water quality was complicated by between-year differences in flow and habitat (especially Podostemum growths). The ratings have varied from Good-Fair and Good bioclassification from 1983 to 1988, Good from 1992 to 1994, Excellent in 1997, Good in 1999, and Good-Fair in 2002.

In 2002 Total S was the lowest on record and the Figure 30. Sediment from a gravel road washing into the West Fork Pigeon River at SR BI was the greatest measured since 1988. A 1216, Haywood County, July 25, 2002 decrease or disappearance of some intolerant during a rain event. taxa was observed since 1997: Heterocloeon, Hydropsyche venularis, and Micrasema bennetti. East Fork Pigeon River, US 276 The East Fork Pigeon River near the community of West Fork Pigeon River, SR 1216 Crusoe has been sampled three times during the The West Fork Pigeon River has a largely summer months. Relative to the West Fork undisturbed catchment with diverse, high quality Pigeon River, this river has a narrower riparian habitats. The only potential water quality problem zone with some erosion and more sedimentation. might be occasional pulses of low pH during the The habitat score of 83 reflected a left bank that fall and winter associated with acid precipitation had been stripped clear of vegetation and and a low buffering capacity of the soils and stabilized with logs and rocks (Figure 31). Several sediment runoff after rain events from nearby trout farms are located above this site and gravel roads (Figure 30). Since 1990, this site has agricultural and residential land uses are common always been rated Excellent. along the river corridor. This site rated Excellent in 1997 and 2002.

West Fork Pigeon River at SR 1216, Haywood County. East Fork Pigeon River at US 276, Haywood County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 68

Figure 32. Aquatic macrophytes in the Pigeon Figure 31. Stream bank stabilization along the River at SR 1642, Haywood County. East Fork Pigeon River at US 276,

Haywood County. In 2002 at the time of sampling the conductivity Pigeon River, SR 1642 was 1,990 µmhos/cm. Ambient monitoring data This site near the Town of Clyde has been showed the mean conductivity increasing from 290 sampled 12 times since 1984, including 10 times µmhos/cm (1994 to 1997) to 699 µmhos/cm (1998 during the summer. The site is located to 2002). This site has suffered dramatically from approximately five miles downstream of Blue the effects of the mill’s discharge under long-term Ridge Paper Products outfall. The improvements low flow and low dilution conditions. Flows were made in this facility’s processes over the years are below normal from June through December 2001 reflected in the changes to the macroinvertebrate and also from June through late September 2002 community. The most significant changes came (Appendix 1). during the periods 1989 to 1992 and 1995 to 1997. EPT S and EPT N decreased substantially in 2002 At this site the river is about 25 meters wide with (Figure 33); concomitantly the BI increased from an average depth of only 0.2 meters during the 6.0 to 6.9 between 1997 and 2002. The ratings 2002 drought. There were prolific growths of have decreased from Good-Fair in 1997 to Poor in aquatic weeds (Figure 32), instream habitats were 2002. The abundance of midges, such as Cricotopus bincintus, Conchapelopia, reduced, pools were absent, and riffle areas were Dicrotendipes neomedestus, and Polypedilum reduced because of the low flow. illinoense, also suggested some toxic effects.

30 140 25 120 20 100 80 15 60 EPT S 10 40 EPT N 5 20 0 0 1984 1986 1988 1989 1992 1994 1995 1997 2002 Year EPTS EPTN

Figure 33. EPT taxa richness (EPT S) and EPT Pigeon River at SR 1642, Haywood County. abundance (EPT N) in the Pigeon River at SR 1642, Haywood County, 1984 – 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 69 Pigeon River, SR 1338 The substrate at this site near Hepco was dominated by large boulders, fast water, and many riffle areas. This was in contrast to the site at SR 1642 where there was mostly sand, slow moving water, and few riffle areas.

This site has been sampled four times during summer since 1983. The bioclassification improved from Fair in 1988 to Good-Fair since 1994. Toxic indicator taxa such as Cricotopus bicinctus and Eurorthocladius were abundant in 2002. The City of Waynesville’s WWTP discharges between here and the SR 1642 site, potentially adding to the adverse effect of the mill’s discharge. However, Jonathans Creek and a distance of about four miles have apparently Pigeon River at Browns Bridge (Waterville), Cocke County, TN. diluted the pollutants causing the poor water quality observed at the SR 1642 site. Ratings of early collections from this site ranged

from Fair to Good. The 1997 and 2002 collections resulted in the highest EPT S and EPT N for the period of record. The bioclassification has remained Good since 1994. This improvement in water quality may be associated with modifications to the paper mill upstream at the Town of Canton, more stable flows from the powerhouse, and a greater abundance of Podostemum. This macrophyte now covers about 5 to 10 percent of the stream bottom since 1997. Because of the regulated flows, this is the only benthic macroinvertebrate site that did not show any adverse effects from the drought.

Dominant taxa at this site included the filter- feeders Hydropsyche venularis, two species of Pigeon River at SR 1338, Haywood County. Symphitopsyche, Simulium, and three species of grazing Baetis. In spite of the Good rating, the Pigeon River at Waterville midge community is still dominated by toxic The Pigeon River at Waterville (specifically at indictor taxa such as Cricotopus bicinctus, Brown’s Bridge, one mile below the NC/TN state Conchapelopia, and Polypedilum illinoense. line) has been sampled 11 times since 1983. This site is downstream of Progress Energy’s Walters Richland Creek Hydroelectric Plant where river flow is dictated by Richland Creek is a large tributary to the Pigeon the daily power generation needs and a River. Flowing through an urban region, Richland seasonally-adjusted minimum flows for white Creek and its tributaries drain the US 19/23/74, US water rafting. When power is not being generated 19/276, US 276, US 23/74, Business US 23, and or water is not need for recreational uses, the flow NC 209 corridors of the City of Waynesville and consists largely of clean water from tributary the Town of Hazelwood. It is impounded in the streams such as Big Creek. lower part of its watershed to create Lake Junaluska. The substrate, like at the SR 1338 site is dominated by boulders with little other instream There are four monitoring sites along its course – habitat such as leaf packs or snags. one fish community site (at Walnut Trail) and three benthic macroinvertebrate sites (at US 23 Business, SR 1184, and at SR 1519). The stream

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 70 width increases from five meters wide at the most 32 4 upstream site (at US 23 Business) to 8 to 13 meters wide at the two downstream sites. The 24 3.5 upstream and two most downstream sites had

16 3 BI mostly boulder rubble substrates with only a small percentage of sand/silt. However, the site at SR EPT S 8 2.5 1184 had less boulder/rubble substrate and more sand/silt. 0 2 1992 1997 2002 Richland Creek, US 23 Business Year This upper site is located in a commercial and residential area and shows signs of habitat EPT S BI degradation. Portions of the stream appeared to have been channelized, pools were absent, and Figure 34. EPT taxa richness (EPT S) and Biotic there was a narrow riparian zone on the right Index (BI) at Richland Creek at US bank. The right bank was also stabilized with rock Business 23, Haywood County, 1992 - rip-rap. Two industrial facilities, Lee and Dayco 2002. Industries, were previously located in this portion of the watershed but have since closed. Richland Creek, SR 1184 This site has been sampled six times since 1983, and showed an improvement from Poor in 1983 to Good-Fair since 1992. The continued rarity of stoneflies at this site indicated some water quality problems. There is more sedimentation at this site than the other two benthic sites and pools were absent.

Richland Creek at US 23, Haywood County.

The bioclassification has improved from Fair in 1992, to Good-Fair in 1997, and to Good in 2002. EPT S and BI have generally improved over the years (Figure 34). Some intolerant taxa that were collected for the first time here in 2002 were Drunella cornutella, Isoperla holochlora, Richland Creek at SR 1184, Haywood County. Pteronarcys, and Lepidostoma. Richland Creek, Walnut Trail In 2002 and 1997, Richland Creek was monitored for fish community assessments approximately 1.5 miles above its confluence with the Pigeon River and one mile below Lake Junaluska. The instream habitats are of moderately high quality (habitat score = 73 and 79 in 2002 and 1997, respectively) (Appendices 3 and 4). The instream habitats consist of gravel, cobble, and boulders, shallow and deep riffles and runs, and pools of a variety of sizes.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 71

Upstream view of Richland Creek at Walnut Trail, Richland Creek at SR 1519, Haywood County. Haywood County. This site was rated Fair in 1992 and 1997, but Despite the habitats, the fish community shows improved to Good-Fair in 2002. The increase in evidence of chronic impairment – low total EPT S from 15 taxa in 1997 to 20 taxa in 2002 abundance, low total species diversity, low was most likely the result of the difference in diversity of cyprinids, an absence of darters, and a collection methods between years and not a real very high percentage of tolerant fish. Only three improvement in water quality. Also, stoneflies, species of cyprinids were found at this site – the have historically been absent from this site. fewest number of any site in the basin (Appendix 12). The percentage of tolerant fish, primarily the Jonathans Creek introduced redbreast sunfish and green sunfish, Jonathans Creek has been sampled at three was also the highest of any site in the basin. The locations during each of the basinwide monitoring redbreast sunfish was the dominant species in cycles. This stream originates above the Town of 2002, increasing from 14 to 33 percent of the Maggie Valley and flows through a heavily fauna between 1997 and 2002. The community commercialized and agricultural catchment, was rated Poor in 2002 and Fair in 1997 (NCIBI = including many dairy farms. Habitat was very 32 and 38, respectively). similar at all three sites (boulder/rubble dominated), with the only differences being in the The fish communities in Richland Creek upstream quality of the riparian zones. The upstream site is from Lake Junaluska at Boyd Avenue and at SR in the Town of Maggie Valley and the most 1884 have also been rated Poor (Biological downstream site flows through a residential area Assessment Unit Memorandum 20010906). of manicured lawns along the banks. The middle site is primarily agricultural with fields adjacent to Richland Creek, SR 1519 the creek. A short segment of Richland Creek, from Junaluska dam to the Pigeon River is on the 303 Jonathans Creek, SR 1305 (d) impaired streams list (NCDENR 2000a). This This upstream site on Jonathan’s Creek was site is located near its mouth. moved in 2002 from SR 1306 to SR 1305 due to private property access problems.

Although located within an urban section of the Town of Maggie Valley, this site has consistently been assigned an Excellent rating. The low BI EPT values (1.5 - 1.9) indicated a highly intolerant community. The large decrease in EPT S from 1997 to 2002 was similar to the decreases observed at many other sites in the Pigeon River watershed and was attributed to the drought.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 72 2002 and 1997, respectively) (Appendices 3 and 4). The riparian areas are degraded (i.e., breaks in the riparian zone, eroded areas, and a fairly open canopy) and cattle have access to the stream.

Jonathans Creek at SR 1305, Haywood County.

Jonathans Creek, SR 1322 A five taxa decrease in EPT S (from 41 to 36 taxa) was observed at this site between 1997 and 2002. However, both collections were rated Excellent, indicating no real change in water quality at this Upstream view of the upper reach of Crabtree Creek site. at NC 209, Haywood County.

Jonathans Creek, SR 1349 In 2002, the fish community was rated Good-Fair, This site is located one mile below the Town of in 1997 it had been rated Poor (NCIBI = 40 and Maggie Valley’s WWTP discharge. The site was 28, respectively). This 12-point increase resulted rated Good in 2002 whereas it had been rated from greater diversities of rockbass, smallmouth Excellent in 1997. The decline in water quality bass, and trout and intolerant species, a decrease was attributed to the lack of dilution of the in the percentage of omnivores+herbivores, and discharge because of the low stream flows. an increase in the percentage of insectivores. The fish community has a low total species diversity and an absence of darters. The dominant species shifted from the central stoneroller in 1997 to the whitetail shiner in 2002.

In 1996 a dairy waste management model for local dairy farms was funded by the Pigeon River Trust Fund for application within the Crabtree Creek watershed (www.pigeonriverfund.org). It is not known whether its implementation may have contributed to the improvement in the stream.

Fines Creek, SR 1355 Fines Creek is the last tributary to join the Pigeon River above Walters Lake. The creek’s watershed is primarily agricultural (dairy and cultivation) draining an area near the Haywood, Madison, and Jonathans Creek at SR 1349, Haywood County. Buncombe county lines. Throughout most of its length the stream and its tributaries are paralleled Crabtree Creek, NC 209 by roads. There are no dischargers in the Crabtree Creek is a tributary to the lower part of watershed although the conductivity was elevated the Pigeon River in northeastern Haywood for a mountain stream (~75 µmhos/cm) during County. There are no NPDES dischargers in the biological sampling in 2002. The gorge-like setting watershed. The habitat scores bordered between moderate and low quality (scores = 64 and 66 in

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 73 affords the creek high quality habitats (Appendices 3 and 4).

Cataloochee Creek at SR 1395, Haywood County.

SPECIAL STUDIES Upstream view of Fines Creek at SR 1355, Haywood Hurricane Creek, USFS Road off I-40 County. This stream was placed on the 303(d) impaired streams list with no supporting data (NCDENR This site was consistently dominated by facultative 2000a). The majority of the watershed is in the filter-feeders (especially Symphitopsyche sparna), Pisgah National Forest, but there are pockets of suggesting some enrichment. Since 1992 the site land along the stream that are privately owned and has been rated Good-Fair based on benthic frequented by all terrain vehicle activity. In 2002, macroinvertebrates. the stream was four meters wide with a mostly boulder substrate. There was a fair amount of Despite the high quality habitats, the fish sand/silt indicating the effects of land disturbing community shows evidence of chronic impairment activities in the watershed. There was an area – low total abundance, low diversity of intolerant downstream of the site that was used for fording species, and a high percentage of tolerant fish the stream. (white sucker, redbreast sunfish, and green sunfish) . The community was rated Fair in 2002 and 1997 (NCIBI = 38 and 34, respectively). The stream, however, does support small reproducing populations of rainbow trout and brown trout.

Cataloochee Creek, SR 1395 This stream, which is located within the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, has been rated Excellent for nearly 20 years of sampling. Highly intolerant species were dominant in all samples. This stream is an Outstanding Resource Waters and is used as a reference location.

Hurricane Creek at USFS Road, Haywood County.

Based on the EPT S (32), this site was rated Good. This rating was low compared to what would normally be found in a stream draining a protected area such as a national forest. This and the accumulation of sediments was an indication that some activity is impacting the stream

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 74 (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum supported reproducing trout populations but only 20030108). at SR 1160/1168, at Business US 23, and at Boyd Avenue. Streams not supporting reclassification Chestnut Branch, SR 1322 were Factory Branch, Raccoon Branch, Shelton This site in the Great Smoky Mountains National Branch, Farmer Branch, Hyatt Creek, and Park was mistakenly sampled in July 2002. An Richland Creek at SR 1184. These sites are all EPT sample rated this small stream as Good located above the fish community basinwide (DWQ unpublished data). monitoring site on Richland Creek at Walnut Trail.

Hyatt Creek TMDL NCIBI ratings were also derived for three of these Two sites on Hyatt Creek (at SR 1161 and at SR sites – Richland Creek at Boyd Avenue (Poor), 1165) were sampled for benthic macroinverte- Richland Creek at SR 1884 (Poor), and Raccoon brates as part of a TMDL investigation. This Branch (Fair) (Appendix 11). stream is a small tributary to Richland Creek just south of the City of Waynesville. The stream is OTHER DATA located in an area of intense agricultural land use As part of Blue Ridge Paper Products’ (formerly and has severe habitat degradation, heavy Champion International Corporation) NPDES sediment load, and a total lack of riparian buffers. permit for the bleached Kraft paper mill in the Land use in the watershed includes row crops, Town of Canton, the facility was required to pasture, and hog farms. Although too small to be conduct a balanced and indigenous species study rated, both sites had degraded macroinvertebrate at several sites on the Pigeon River. The purpose communities. Nolen Creek, off SR 1158, was of the study was to justify the continued used as the regional reference site for the study temperature variance granted in the permit (BRP (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum 2001). Biological Assessment Unit staff did not 20021018). support the mill’s contention that the river support balanced and indigenous aquatic populations. Rough Creek, above the Canton Reservoir However, the thermal variance was issued Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected in because, besides temperature, additional September 1997 from a single location on Rough pollutants continued to affect the current state of Creek to assess the potential for supplemental the communities in the river (Biological classification to Outstanding Resource Waters Assessment Unit Memoranda 20010712, (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum 20010614, and 20010612). 19971120).. The stream was reclassified in August 2000. Progress Energy (formerly Carolina Power & Light Company) is required by the Federal Energy UT Richland Creek Regulatory Commission to monitor the monitor the Two sites were sampled on this very small (one biological communities and water quality in the meter wide) stream to investigate possible Pigeon River at four locations every three years pesticide contamination from the abandoned beginning in 1995 (CP&L 2000, PE 2002). Fish Barber’s apple orchard. The benthic communities and benthic communities are monitored at NC 215 indicated toxic stress during this survey (Biological (above the Town of Canton), SR 1338 (Hepco Assessment Unit Memorandum 19990601). Bridge), near Harmon Den and Interstate 40, and above the powerhouse near SR 1332. Although SPECIAL STUDIES an index of biotic integrity is applied to the fish Richland Creek Watershed Use Attainability data, the collection methods, index, and ratings Study are not comparable to DWQ methods. However, Fifteen sites within the Richland Creek watershed some summaries can be gleaned from the data. (above Lake Junaluska) were evaluated in July The 1998 and 2001 data showed that fish 2002 for their ability to support reproducing abundance, total species diversity, diversities of populations of trout and to determine whether the darters and cyprinids, and number of intolerant streams should be supplementally classified as Tr species were greater above Canton (at NC 215) (trout waters) (Biological Assessment Unit than at Hepco Bridge (at SR 1338) and Harmon Memorandum 20010906). Streams supporting Den. The percentage of tolerant fish was greater reclassification were Shiny Creek, Old Bald Creek, at Hepco Bridge and at Harmon Den than above Cherry Cove Creek, Winchester Creek, Medford Canton and at the powerhouse (near SR 1332) Branch, Rocky Branch. Richland Creek also (Table 22).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 75 Table 22. Fish community data collected by Progress Energy from the Pigeon River, Haywood County, 1998 and 2001.

Sampling Location Year/ Harmon near Variable1, 2 NC 215 SR 1338 Den SR 1332 1998 No. fish 661 257 382 350 No. species 18 15 9 16 No. darters 3 1 1 3 No. cyprinids 6 4 2 1 No. RST 3 1 3 2 No. intols. 4 1 2 2 Tols. (%) 2 45 14 7 2001 No. fish 695 166 529 479 No. species 19 16 8 15 No. darters 4 1 1 2 No. cyprinids 6 4 2 4 No. RST 3 3 2 2 No. intols. 6 2 2 3 Tols. (%) 5 23 31 13 1Variables were adjusted to show data based only upon juvenile and adult fish. 2Abbreviations are RST = number of species of rockbass, smallmouth bass, and trouts, intols. = intolerants; Tols. = tolerant fish.

Fish Tissue Contaminants

Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc. (formerly smallmouth bass) have remained at non- Champion International Corporation) and Progress detectable concentrations or at concentrations Energy (formerly Carolina Power & Light much less than the North Carolina limit for issuing Company) perform annual monitoring of fish tissue a consumption advisory. Dioxin levels in common for dioxins in the Pigeon River watershed including carp have decreased as much as 80 percent Walters Lake. The purpose of this long-term downstream of the mill but remained greater than monitoring program is to determine if the limit in Walters Lake. concentrations of dioxin (TCDD) and furan in several fish species would decline after the A consumption advisory on all fish species in the implementation in 1989 of the dioxin reduction Pigeon River between Canton and the North program at Blue Ridge Paper 's bleached Kraft Carolina - Tennessee state line was put into effect pulp and paper mill. The mill is located on the in 1988. The advisory was revised in 1994 to a Pigeon River in the Town of Canton, 20.7 miles limited consumption advisory just for common carp upstream of Walters Lake. Monitoring is required and catfish species (bullhead species, channel as part of the mill’s NPDES permit and as a FERC catfish, and flathead catfish). In August 2001, this license requirement for Progress Energy. advisory was again revised due to continuing Although the US EPA has suggested a screening declining dioxin concentrations in all species value of 7.0 x 10-7 ppm (7.0 ppt) for dioxins, the (NCDHHS 2001). Only common carp in Walters North Carolina Department of Health and Human Lake remain under the advisory. Recent data Services currently uses a value of 4.0 ppt in continued to show composite fillet concentrations issuing fish consumption advisories. greater than 4 ppt (pg/gm) (Figure 36).

Dioxin concentrations in fish collected from the Monitoring of common carp and catfish in the Pigeon River and Walters Lake have generally Pigeon River will continue for at least two more declined since the early 1990’s (Figures 35 and years to ensure a downward trend in dioxin 36), although concentrations in certain species concentrations. Catfish in Walters Lake will be have fluctuated depending on sample times, monitored for an additional two years to ensure station, and the size of the fish collected. Dioxin minimal dioxin concentrations. Monitoring dioxin concentrations in sport fishes (redbreast sunfish, concentrations in common carp in Walters Lake rock bass, black crappie, largemouth bass, and will continue until the advisory is lifted.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 76 20

16

12

8

TCDD (parts per trillion) 4

0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year

Pigeon R. upstream of Clyde Pigeon R. at NC 209

Figure 35. TCDD concentrations in common carp fillets collected from the Pigeon River upstream of the Town of Clyde and at NC 209, 1990 – 2002. Data provided by Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc., Canton, NC.

70

60

50

40

30

20 TCDD (parts per trillion) 10

0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year

Upper Walters Lake Lower Walters Lake

Figure 36. TCDD concentrations in common carp fillets collected from Walters Lake,1990 – 2002. Data provided by Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc., Canton, NC.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 77

Lake Assessment

Allen Creek Reservoir NTU) for a reservoir. Staff observed that the lake Allen Creek Reservoir is a small water supply level appeared to have decreased one foot and reservoir in southwestern Haywood County recent showers may have contributed to (Figure 37). The reservoir and most of the suspended sediment in the water column. Nutrient forested watershed are owned by The City of and chlorophyll a concentrations however, were Waynesville. There is no public access to the low with the exception of nitrite+nitrate. The reservoir. Because of its designation as WS-I, the reservoir has been oligotrophic since 1990 and reservoir is also classified a High Quality Waters. has consistently supported it’s designated use. These waters are rated as excellent based on biological and physical/chemical characteristics. Allen Creek Reservoir was last monitored in The reservoir has been sampled 13 times by August 1993. Secchi depth averaged 3.8 meters, DWQ. indicating very good water clarity and pH ranged from 6.0 to 6.7 s.u. Nutrient concentrations were generally low as were chlorophyll a concentrations (range = < 1 to 6 µg/L).

Lake Junaluska This privately-owned lake was built in 1914 and impounds lower Richland Creek (Figure 38). The immediate watershed consists of residential, urban, industrial, and commercial land uses. The reservoir has been sampled 12 times by DWQ.

Figure 37. Sampling sites at Allen Creek Reservoir, Haywood County.

In 2002, nutrient concentrations were low with the Figure 38. Sampling sites at Lake Junaluska, Haywood County. exception of nitrite+nitrate, which was elevated in

June and July and moderate in August (Appendix For the first time since this reservoir was 18). Secchi depths indicated very clear water. monitored in 1981, the trophic states in June and Surface metals were within applicable water July 2002 were oligotrophic and mesotrophic in quality standards. August. In the past, the reservoir has been

classified as mesotrophic and eutrophic. In August at Station FRBACR2 the concentration

of total suspended solids (73 mg/L) was greater Secchi depths were consistently greater in 2002 than the water quality standard (20 mg/L) for a than in previous years. Nutrient and chlorophyll a lake designated as HQW. Turbidity (33 NTU) was concentrations ranged from low to moderate with also greater than the water quality standard (25 the exception of nitrite+nitrate which was elevated.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 78 Surface dissolved oxygen and pH values however, Waterville Reservoir were elevated suggesting increased algal Waterville Reservoir (also known as Walters Lake) productivity. Surface percent dissolved oxygen is an impoundment on the lower Pigeon River in saturation was also elevated (range = 113 - 128%) north central Haywood County (Figure 39). Built in and greater than the water quality standard (110 the 1920s the reservoir generates hydroelectric percent for a dissolved gas). power for Progress Energy (formerly Carolina Power & Light Company). The reservoir’s The reservoir has had chronic sediment problems watershed encompasses most of Haywood County associated with development and poor land use and includes numerous municipal and industrial practices within the watershed. This has dischargers. The largest discharger in the necessitated annual dredging. Drought conditions watershed with the greatest impact to the in 2002 may have reduced sediment and nutrient reservoir’s water quality is Blue Ridge Paper loading and improved water clarity which Products, Inc. (formerly Champion International ultimately resulted in the lower trophic ratings. Corporation). Water quality studies on the Pigeon River and Walters Lake pre-date the 1920s. In 1997 surface dissolved oxygen values were generally elevated while pH values were not. The The reservoir was most recently monitored by Secchi depths at the head of the reservoir (Station DWQ in 2002. Secchi depths decreased from FRB047A) were consistently less than one meter June to August as the water level decreased due indicating poor water clarity. Total phosphorus to the drought conditions. By August, Station concentrations were also greater at this station as FRBWL2 was too shallow to be reached by boat. contrasted to the two other stations. Sediment and nutrient loading may have contributed to these problems.

Figure 39. Sampling sites at Waterville Reservoir, Haywood County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 79 Nutrient concentrations ranged from low to Data collected in September 2002 by Blue Ridge elevated and chlorophyll a values ranged from Paper Products were similar to that collected by moderate to elevated. Chlorophyll a values at DWQ in August 2002. Secchi depths were greater Station FRBWL4 in July and August were greater than those measured in August 2000, suggesting than the water quality standard (40 µg/L) an improvement in water clarity. This may have (Appendix 18). Increased algal productivity was been due to the drought in 2001 and 2002 which also indicated by elevated surface dissolved reduced nonpoint source runoff to the reservoir oxygen and pH values in June and July. The (BRP 2000; BRP 2002). Conductivity and pH percent dissolved oxygen saturation values (range were elevated in 2000 and 2002; chlorophyll a 132 to 177 percent) were greater than the water concentrations exceeded the water quality quality standard for dissolved gasses (110 standard at two sites in 2000, and pH was greater percent). Based upon the NCTSI, the reservoir than the water quality standard in 2000 at one site was classified as mesotrophic in June and and at all sites in 2002 (Tables 23 and 24). eutrophic in July and August. In 1992 the reservoir was eutrophic (NCTSI = 1.0) based upon Table 23. Surface water quality data collected by elevated total phosphorus and total organic Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc. from nitrogen concentrations. Waterville Reservoir, August 15, 2000.

Consumption of common carp from Waterville Location Reservoir continues to be restricted due to dioxin prior to near near Variable Laurel Br Wilkins Cr dam contamination (NCDHHS 2001) (see Fish Tissue Temperature (ºC) 25.5 24.8 24.6 Contaminants section). Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 13.2 7.5 7.3 Conductivity (µmhos/cm) 392 351 352 The reservoir is also monitored by Progress pH (s.u.) 9.0 7.9 8.3 Energy and Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc TN (mg/L) 1.1 1.0 1.0 because of FERC license and NPDES NO2+NO3 (mg/L) < 0.10 0.10 & 0.12 < 0.10 & 0.10 TKN (mg/L) 1.1 0.9 0.9 requirements, respectively. In October 1998 NH3-N (mg/L) < 0.10 < 0.10 0.11 dissolved oxygen concentrations near the dam PO4 (mg/L) 0.06 < 0.02 < 0.02 were less than 5 mg/L throughout the water TP (mg/L) 0.1 0.03 0.04 column. Below average rainfall, low inflow, low Chlorophyll a (µg/L) 45.4 43.4 29.8 dilution of effluents in the Pigeon River, and Secchi depth (m) 0.6 1.0 1.0 increased oxygen demand may have contributed to the low dissolved oxygen levels. However, no Table 24. Surface water quality data collected by fish kills were reported. Chlorophyll a in August Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc. from 1998 was greater than the water quality standard Waterville Reservoir, September 17, 2002. (40 µg/L) and was dominated by the blue-green algae Oscillatoria (CP&L 2000). Location at RM 40 near Water quality conditions in 2001 were improved Variable Laurel Br "Middle" Wilkins Cr over those observed in 1998. Chlorophyll a Temperature (ºC) 22.8 25 24.8 concentrations were low to moderate and no Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 7.7 6.5 5.9 concentration was greater than the water quality Conductivity (µmhos/cm) 263 557 553 standard. Near the dam, dissolved oxygen pH (s.u.) 9.4 9.1 9.2 concentrations were greater than 5.0 mg/L TN (mg/L) 0.76 0.94 0.87 NO2+NO3 (mg/L) 0.45 0.26 0.25 throughout the water column from January through TKN (mg/L) 0.31 0.68 0.62 June. From July through September, dissolved NH3-N (mg/L) < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10

oxygen concentrations below a depth of 4 to 7 PO4 (mg/L) 0.11 0.044 0.046 meters were less than 5.0 mg/L. With turnover, TP (mg/L) 0.17 0.09 0.06 dissolved oxygen increased throughout the water Chlorophyll a (µg/L) 2.8 15.5 11.8 column (CP&L 2002b). Secchi depth (m) 0.6 1.2 1.4

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 80 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 06

Description

This subbasin includes the Nolichucky River and 2 Table 25. Land use in Subbasin 06. Based upon of its 3 main tributaries -- the North and South Toe CGIA coverage 1993 - 1995 (total area = Rivers (Figure 40). The other main tributary, the 466 square miles (NCDENR 1999). Cane River, is in Subbasin 07. Much of the land is forested (Table 25) and within the Pisgah National Land use Percent Water < 1 Forest, although there are scattered agricultural Cultivated crop < 1 and industrial activities throughout the subbasin. Pasture 11 The largest town is Spruce Pine. Six mining Urban < 1 companies and one WWTP currently monitor Forest 87 effluent toxicity under their NPDES permit.

Figure 40. Sampling sites in Subbasin 06 in the French Broad River basin.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 81 Overview of Water Quality

Ambient water quality data have been collected at and continued to have an Excellent rating. four locations in this subbasin: two sites on the Observations on the North Toe River included North Toe River and one site each on the South concerns for sedimentation, enrichment, and Toe and Nolichucky Rivers. Between 1997 and nonpoint pollution sources associated with the 2002 the median value for conductivity in the Town of Spruce Pine. North Toe River near Penland was more than twice the median value upstream at Ingalls (106 Fish community samples were collected at Jacks vs. 47 µmhos/cm). In addition, the North Toe and Pigeonroost Creeks. Jacks Creek continued River near Penland was one of two trout waters in to be rated Fair. Similar to other streams with the basin that had more than 10 percent of degraded riparian zones, the total species diversity turbidity measurements greater than the water was low, darters were absent, and the trophic quality standard for trout waters (10 NTU). metrics were skewed. The fish community at Pigeonroost Creek rated Excellent. As at other Benthic macroinvertebrate samples have been Excellent, streams, there was an absence of collected at 25 sites since 1983. Seven sites were tolerant fish. sampled in 2002 as part of the basin assessment program and rated Good or Excellent (Table 26). There are seven facilities (six mine processors and The Nolichucky River may be showing water one WWTP) that discharge to the North Toe River quality improvements (based on increased EPT S and all are required to perform whole effluent and lower BI’s) since the mid 1980’s. Big Rock toxicity testing. Since the last basinwide Creek, a large tributary in northern Mitchell assessment report in 1997, data suggested that, County, was again rated Excellent. It had been for the most part, the seven facilities were rated Good in 1997. The site is in an area of achieving compliance with their respective permit agricultural land use, which may be affecting its limits. Only occasional, non-consecutive fails have rating. The South Toe River is classified as ORW occurred at any of the facilities.

Table 26. Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 06 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 and 2002.

Map #1 Waterbody County Location 1997 2002 B-1 Nolichucky R2 Mitchell SR 1321 Good Good B-2 North Toe R2 Avery US 19E Good Good B-3 North Toe R2 Mitchell SR 1162 Fair Good B-4 North Toe R2 Yancey SR 1314 Good Good B-5 Big Crabtree Cr Mitchell US 19E Excellent Excellent B-6 South Toe R2 Yancey SR 1167 Excellent Excellent B-7 Big Rock Cr2 Mitchell NC 197 Good Excellent

F-1 Jacks Cr Yancey SR 1337 Fair Fair F-2 Pigeonroost Cr Mitchell SR 1349/NC 197 Excellent Excellent 1B = benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring sites; F = fish community monitoring sites. 2Data are available prior to 1997, refer to Appendix 7.

River and Stream Assessment

Cane Creek and the North Toe River were not in 2002, a drought year, when the water receded sampled for fish community assessments in 2002 and left undercut banks and root mats dry. due to insufficient manpower resources. Nolichucky River, SR 1321 At the benthic macroinvertebrate sites, the typical The Nolichucky River at this location is wide and stream substrate in this subbasin was comprised very sandy, probably contributing to scour during of boulder, cobble, and gravel. Cobble riffles high flows. provided the best habitats; edge habitats (root mats and undercut banks) were less numerous and provided fewer taxa. This was especially true

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 82 North Toe River, US 19E This site near the community of Ingalls has consistently been rated Good since 1984. EPT richness values have also been stable during this time. As in previous years, the benthic community in 2002 was a combination of intolerant and tolerant taxa.

There are several minor dischargers (<1 MGD) upstream of this site which may be having an impact on the benthic community. Since 1984 the site has been characterized as having a sandy/silty substrate and abundant periphyton on the rocks. In 2002, the periphyton was a mixture of diatoms (Cymbella and Synedra), filamentous bluegreens (Lyngbya, Homeothrix, and Downstream view of the Nolichucky River at SR Stigonema) and a filamentous green algae 1314, Mitchell County. (Chaetophora). These taxa produce a slippery mucilage. In 1997 this site showed evidence of The community has consistently rated Good nutrient enrichment. The facultative filter feeders except one Good-Fair rating in 1985. The EPT S Ceratopsyche bronta and C. sparna were very increased from 33 in 1997 to 41 from 2002, but the abundant. BI value also increased slightly from 4.03 to 4.37, thus yielding another Good bioclassification. Since 1990 the BI values have generally decreased (Figure 44), possibly indicating improving water quality.

5

4.5

BI 4

3.5

3

1983 1984 1985 1986 1988 1990 1992 1997 2002 Year Downstream view of the North Toe River at US 19E, Avery County.

Figure 41. Biotic Index (BI) values for the North Toe River, SR 1162 Nolichucky River at SR 1314, Mitchell This location near Penland is potentially affected County, 1983 - 2002. by runoff from the Town of Spruce Pine. There are also four major facilities (mine processors) that The dominant taxa since 1992 have been a discharge to the river upstream of this site. All combination of intolerant (Ephoron leukon, facilities have toxicity testing requirements in their Heptagenia marginalis, Micrasema wataga, and NPDES permits. Since 1997, the four facilities for Ceratopsyche morosa) to moderately tolerant the most part were achieving compliance with their organisms (Stenonema mediopunctatum, respective whole effluent toxicity permit limits. Tricorythodes, and Hydropsyche venularis). The Only occasional, non-consecutive tests have Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana), an failed. endangered mussel, has been found in the Nolichucky River near this site (Appendix 9).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 83

Downstream view of the North Toe River at SR 1162, Upstream view of the North Toe River at SR 1314, Mitchell County. Yancey County.

At the time of sampling of this site in 2002, there The Good bioclassifications since 1992 indicated was a noticeable petroleum odor, a sheen on the that the biota has recovered from the impacts from underside of rocks, and leafpacks were saturated around the Town of Penland. The dominant EPT with the same substance. According to the taxa since 1992 were a combination of mostly Asheville Regional Office staff, there was a 1,500 facultative taxa (Isonychia, Tricorythodes, and gallon spill of Number 2 fuel oil several days prior Perlesta) and a few intolerant taxa (Heptagenia to the sampling. US EPA was the primary marginalis and Acroneuria abnormis). The responder and coordinated the cleanup. Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana), an endangered mussel, has been found in the North The bioclassification reflected this incident and Toe River near this site (Appendix 9). declined to Fair, the lowest since 1988. In 2002, EPT taxa were sparse, and only three EPT taxa Big Crabtree Creek, US 19E were abundant. Midges were the dominant taxa in Big Crabtree Creek has been sampled twice for the benthic community. benthic macroinvertebrates at this location. Riffles and pools were frequent, and embeddedness was In 1997 the site had been rated Good, the highest moderate. This station received an Excellent rating ever achieved at this site. A Poor bioclassification in 1997 and 2002. The EPT S, classification in 1988 resulted from an acid spill EPT N, and EPT BI values were similar for both that occurred in the Town of Spruce Pine one year. week prior to that sampling. The oil spill in 2002 made it impossible to determine whether water quality was continuing to improve at this site.

North Toe River, SR 1314 The North Toe River at this location is approximately 18 miles downstream of the major dischargers in the watershed. The substrate was composed mainly of bedrock.

Big Crabtree Creek at US 19E, Yancey County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 84 South Toe River, SR 1167 Virtually the entire length of the South Toe River and its tributaries have been designated as Outstanding Resource Waters. This site is located in the middle reaches of the watershed. Podostemum is common and much of the substrate is bedrock.

Upstream view of Jacks Creek at SR 1337, Yancey County.

The community was rated Fair in 2002 and 1997 (NCIBI = 38 and 34, respectively). Similar to other streams with degraded riparian zones, the total species diversity was low, darters were absent, and the trophic metrics were skewed. The Upstream view of South Toe River at SR 1167, percentage of omnivores+herbivores (77 percent) Mitchell County was the highest of any site in the basin in 2002 (Appendix 12), conversely, the percentage of The community has consistently been rated insectivores was the lowest of all sites (20 Excellent since 1985. Intolerant taxa (Epeorus, percent). The dominant species again was the Dolophilodes, and Brachycentrus) have been central stoneroller. abundant since 1992. In addition, several intolerant and fairly uncommon taxa were Big Rock Creek, NC 197 collected in 2002 -- Eurylophella minimella, Big Rock Creek is a large tributary to the North Serratella spiculosa, Micrasema wataga, M. Toe River. Land use near the site is mostly bennett, Brachycentrus appalachia and B. spinae. agriculture and forest with a small amount of residential. The riparian zone is fairly narrow with Jacks Creek, SR 1337 some breaks and there is little shading of the Jacks Creek, a tributary to the North Toe River, stream. The rocks were slippery with periphyton drains a watershed bordered by Cane Mountain and Podostemum growth was moderate. The and the Green Mountains in north-central Yancey stream width was only nine meters, as compared County, northwest of the Town of Burnsville. to 20 meters in 1997. Although there are no dischargers in the watershed, the conductivity was high (107 µmhos/cm) as it was in 1997. At SR 1337 the stream had an open canopy with shallow, cobble riffles and runs, abundant periphyton, and narrow riparian zones.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 85 species and 11 cyprinid species were found at this site, the greatest numbers at any site in 2002 (Appendix 12). As at other streams rated Excellent, there was an absence of tolerant fish. The dominant species in 2002 and 1997 were the mottled sculpin and the central stoneroller. Although not resulting in a change in scores, a slight shift in the trophic metrics and a pronounced decline in the abundance of the whitetail shiner bear watching at this regional reference site.

SPECIAL STUDIES Fish Community Reference Streams In 1998 and 1999, Big Crabtree at SR 1002, Mitchell County was evaluated as a regional fish community reference site. The community was Upstream view of Big Rock Creek at NC 197, rated Excellent (NCIBI = 58). In 1998, Big Rock Mitchell County. Creek at NC 226 was also evaluated as a reference site. The fish community was rated The bioclassification improved to Excellent in 2002 Good (NCIBI = 50) (Biological Assessment Unit from Good in 1997. EPT S (34 and 36) and Memorandum 20000922). These streams will abundance (150 and 164) were similar for both become basinwide monitoring sites in 2007. years. The 1997 sample missed an Excellent rating by two taxa. The community remained Roaring Creek, US 19E intolerant, but fewer total EPT taxa were collected The Asheville Regional Office and Planning in 1997 and 2002 than in 1992. . In 1992, the Branch requested a benthic macroinvertebrate bioclassification was also Excellent (EPT S = 43). sample be collected from this tributary to the North Toe River. Severe erosion was reported due to Pigeonroost Creek, SR 1349/NC 197 flooding approximately three years ago. The Pigeonroost Creek is one of the last tributaries to NRCS has attempted to repair the damaged the North Toe River before the North Toe River is areas. Rock mining nearby also has been joined by the Cane River to become the reported. Nolichucky River. Draining northwestern Mitchell County, there are no dischargers in the watershed. At this site, bedrock comprised 50 percent of the substrate; the remainder was gravel and rubble. The habitat score, 92, reflected the frequent riffles, pools, stable banks and wide and intact riparian zone.

Downstream view of Pigeonroost Creek at SR 1349/NC 197, Mitchell County.

The fish community was rated Excellent in 2002 and 1997 (NCIBI = 58 and 60, respectively). The Downstream view of Roaring Creek at US 19E, Avery fish community is very diverse – 7 intolerant County

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 86 This site was rated Excellent based on EPT S and EPT N. This site supported an intolerant community such as Rhithrogena, Drunella conestee, Serratella carolina, Lepidostoma, and Brachycentrus spinae and did not reflect the watershed concerns (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum 20030325).

Little Crabtree Creek, SR 1144 The Asheville Regional Office requested a benthic macroinvertebrate sample be collected from Little Crabtree Creek off US 19E prior to the widening of US 19E. This stream begins around the Town of Burnsville and the stream flows parallel to US 19E until it turns north to join the North Toe River. The substrate was mostly rubble and gravel with a fair amount of sand (25 percent). The rocks were Downstream view of Little Crabtree Creek at SR slippery due to the abundant periphyton growth 1144, Yancey County. Note the narrow riparian zone on the right bank. and a sewage-type odor was detected. The habitat score, 57, reflected the narrow riparian The site was rated Good-Fair; low EPT N values zone, infrequent riffles and pools, and severe bank contributed to this rating rather than a Good erosion. bioclassification. Although the dominant midges

(Conchapelopia and Cricotopus bicinctus) are considered toxic indicators and/or very tolerant, intolerant taxa were also present. Some of the more intolerant and abundant EPT taxa that were collected were Baetis tricaudatus, Neophylax oligus, and N. consimilis. The only other EPT taxa that were abundant were Ceratopsyche sparna (a facultative species) and Baetis intercalaris (tolerant). However, six taxa of stoneflies were collected, including very intolerant taxa (Suwallia and Malirekus hastatus). None of the stonefly taxa were abundant. The Asheville Regional Office and BAU staffs will need to decide when to resample this site to determine effects on the benthic community during and after the widening of US

19E (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum Upstream view of Little Crabtree Creek at SR 1144, 20030325). just off US 19E, Yancey County. Right Fork Cane Creek at SR 1206 Right Fork Cane Creek was sampled in 2002 due to its listing on 303 (d) impaired streams list (NCDENR 2000a). This stream is listed as biologically impaired from its source to Cane Creek based on evaluated data.

At this site the banks were steep and erosion was moderate to severe. The stream was basically a riffle/run system with few pools.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 87

Upstream view of Right Fork Cane Creek at SR 1206, Mitchell County.

EPT S (41) and EPT N (223) were high, and the site was rated Excellent. Intolerant taxa (Epeorus rubidus, Drunella conestee, Serratella carolina, Glossosoma, and Lepidostoma) were collected. Six taxa of stoneflies were collected, including long lived taxa (Pteronarcys and Paragnetina immarginata). The benthic community was diverse and tolerant and reflected no water quality problems although a few habitat concerns were noted such as bank erosion potential and riparian zone width. (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum 20030321).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 88 FRENCH BROAD RIVER SUBBASIN 07

Description

This subbasin contains the Cane River and its Table 27. Land use in Subbasin 07. Based upon tributaries: Cattail, Price, Bald, and Bald Mountain CGIA coverage 1993 - 1995 (total area = Creeks (Figure 42). As with other subbasins, 496 square miles (NCDENR 1999). most of the land is forested (Table 27) with the southern section of the subbasin in the Pisgah Land use Percent Water < 1 National Forest. The only area of concentrated Cultivated crop < 1 development is around the Town of Burnsville. Pasture 12 Urban < 1 Forest 87

Figure 42. Sampling sites in Subbasin 07 in the French Broad River basin.

Overview of Water Quality

Ambient water quality data have been collected at the Cane River was one of two trout waters in the only one site in this subbasin: the Cane River basin that had more than 10 percent of turbidity near Sioux. The data did not indicate any results greater than the water quality standard for concerns or significant changes since 1997. Like trout waters (10 NTU). the North Toe River near Penland (Subbasin 06),

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 89 Benthic macroinvertebrate samples have been Price Creek was sampled in 2002 for fish collected at the Cane River and Bald Mountain community assessment. The community was Creek since 1992. The Cane River has shown a rated Good in 2002; it had been rated Good-Fair in steady improvement from Good-Fair (1983 - 1985) 1997. In 2002, the sample reflected a more to Excellent (1992 - 2002). Similarly, Bald balanced trophic structure and greater diversities Mountain Creek has also shown improvements of rockbass, smallmouth bass and trout and from Good-Fair (1992) to Good (1997) to Excellent intolerant species. (2002) (Table 28). The Town of Burnsville’s WWTP is the only facility Special benthic sampling was conducted at the in this subbasin that is required to perform whole request of the Asheville Regional Office on the effluent toxicity testing. This facility is currently Cane River below the Town of Burnsville’s WWTP. meeting all its permit limits. It was determined that the WWTP did not seem to be detrimentally impacting the benthic community.

Table 28. Waterbodies monitored in Subbasin 07 in the French Broad River basin for basinwide assessment, 1997 - 2002.

Map #1 Waterbody County Location 1997 2002 B-1 Cane R2 Yancey US 19W Excellent Excellent B-2 Bald Mountain Cr2 Yancey SR 1408 Good Excellent

F-1 Price Creek Yancey SR 1126/1136 Good-Fair Good 1B = benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring sites; F = fish community monitoring sites. 2Data are available prior to 1997, refer to Appendix 7.

River and Stream Assessment

Cane River, US 19W The substrate estimates have remained the same The Cane River at this location has exhibited a since 1992, thus indicating that the amount of steady improvement in water quality from Good- sand/silt has not increased from any land Fair in 1983 to Excellent in 1992 and beyond. disturbing activities. The water was very turbid at EPT S, EPT N, Total S, and the BI have not varied the time of sampling in 2002 following an localized greatly since 1992 (Figure 43). The improvements rain shower the night before. The turbidity in water quality were related to modifications made appeared fairly isolated near the site (turbidity was in 1985 to the Town of Burnsville’s WWTP. This not as apparent one-half mile upstream or facility (0.8 MGD) is approximately eight miles downstream of the site). Podostemum was upstream of this site. abundant on the rocks.

50 5.2

40 5 4.8 30

4.6 BI

EPT S EPT 20 4.4

10 4.2

0 4 1983 1985 1987 1989 1992 1997 2002 Year

EPT S BI

Figure 43. EPT taxonomic richness (EPT S) and Biotic Index (BI) at the Cane River, US Upstream view of the Cane River at US 19W, Yancey 19W, Yancey County, 1983 – 2002. County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 90 The 2002 benthic community contained intolerant Bald Mountain Creek, SR 1408 taxa such as Heterocloeon petersi, Anthopotamus Bald Mountain Creek is a rocky, high gradient distinctus, Micrasema wataga, and Paragnetina tributary to the Cane River. The greatest potential ichusa. Promoresia elegans, Lepidostoma, and impact on this stream is runoff from SR 1408, Micrasema wataga, which are associated with which parallels the stream for most of its length. Podostemum, were abundant.

Price Creek, SR 1126/1136 Price Creek, a tributary to the Cane River, drains an area bordered by Yancey, Madison, and Buncombe counties in west-central Yancey County. There are no dischargers in its watershed. The overall habitats are of moderate to high quality (Appendices 3 and 4).

Bald Mountain Creek at SR 1408, Yancey County.

Benthic sampling has been conducted at this site during every basinwide monitoring cycle. The bioclassification has improved with each successive sampling event. In 1992, the rating was Good-Fair; in 1997, the rating was Good; and in 2002, the rating improved to Excellent. The increase in EPT taxa in 2002 was due to a higher Downstream view of Price Creek at SR 1126/1136, number of mayfly taxa (15 taxa in 1997 and 23 in Yancey County. 2002). The new taxa collected in 2002 were a combination of intolerant (Heptagenia, Leucrocuta, The fish community was rated Good in 2002; it Rhithrogena, and Serratella carolina) and tolerant had been rated Good-Fair in 1997 (NCIBI = 52 taxa (Baetis flavistriga, and B. frondalis). Given and 46, respectively). The 6-point increase the number of new intolerant taxa, the Excellent resulted from a more balanced trophic structure bioclassification may truly reflect an improvement and greater diversities of rockbass, smallmouth in the benthic community at this site. Bald bass and trout and intolerant species. The Mountain Creek seemed to be mostly influenced dominant species in 2002 and 1997 was the by nonpoint sources and a low flow year such as central stoneroller. 2002 was expected to result in better water quality.

The fish community is diverse (24 species are now Additional Data known from this stream), but in 2002, 10 of the 22 A review of biological, chemical, and toxicity data species (white sucker, black redhorse, rock bass, was performed in response to fishermen’s redbreast sunfish, telescope shiner, fatlips perception that a deterioration in the water quality minnow, greenside darter, gilt darter, mountain in the Nolichucky and Cane Rivers was brook lamprey, and rainbow trout) were responsible for a decline in the channel and represented by only 1 or 2 fish per species. The flathead catfish fishery. No deterioration was rarity of these 10 species also lowered the concluded and the decline may be due to an percentage of species with multiple age classes improvement in water quality which has benefited from 79 to 50 percent between 1997 and 2002. the smallmouth bass fishery (Biological This was the lowest percentage at any site in the Assessment Unit Memorandum 20000607). basin in 2002, except for at Newfound Creek (Subbasin 02) (Appendix 12).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 91 SPECIAL STUDIES Banks Creek, SR 1118 Cane River, US 19E The Asheville Regional Office requested that a The Asheville Regional Office and the Planning benthic macroinvertebrate sample be collected Branch requested that a benthic from this very small stream prior to expansion of macroinvertebrate sample be collected below the the Mountain Aire County Club golf course. It was Town of Burnsville’s WWTP to assess suspected BAU’s intent to sample Banks Creek upstream and dissolved oxygen sag impacts on the Cane River. downstream of the new golf course, however, the This site is approximately 1.5 miles below the stream’s small size prohibited an upstream sample facility. On the date sampled, the conductivity was from being collected. not elevated (39 µmhos/cm) and the dissolved oxygen was 10.7 mg/l (122 percent of saturation) At this location Banks Creek was only about 1.5 at 0930 hours. The substrate was mostly rubble meters wide. The substrate was a mixture of with only 10 percent sand. Pools and riffles were boulder, rubble, and gravel, with some sand. A infrequent, bank erosion was minimal, and the small farm is located upstream of the sampling site moderate riparian zone contained some breaks. and the stream flows through open fields below the site. Adjacent to the site, the stream was bordered by a cow pasture on the right bank and SR 1118 on the left.

Cane River at US 19E, Yancey County.

The Total S (105), total EPT richness (49), and EPT N (227) were high, and the stream was rated Banks Creek at SR 1118, Yancey County. Excellent. Intolerant taxa such as Epeorus rubidus, Leucrocuta, Serratella serratoides, Due to the small stream size, a Qual 5 sample was Micrasema wataga, and Paragnetina ichusa were collected and hence can not be given a rating. abundant. When compared to the site at US 19W, However, based on EPT S for larger streams, which is eight miles below the WWTP, the midge Banks Creek was considered Not Impaired. The community at this site seemed to be somewhat sample contained 25 EPT S and 36 Total S. The more tolerant. Physella, which is tolerant of low EPT N was fairly low (88). The stream size may dissolved oxygen was abundant but only common be a limiting factor for the number of taxa collected at the 19W site. and for the low abundance.. The EPT taxa that were abundant were intolerant and/or small, clean Considering the high number of EPT taxa and the stream taxa such as Epeorus rubidus, Serratella abundance of intolerant taxa, the WWTP did not deficiens, Diplectrona modesta, Tallaperla, and seem to be having a detrimental impact on the Leuctra. benthic community at this location. In addition, the 2002 sample was collected during low flow Considering that 25 EPT taxa were collected in (drought conditions) when a point source such a small stream, including many intolerants, discharge would have the greatest impact on suggested that Banks Creek supported a water quality (Biological Assessment Unit minimally impacted benthic community (Biological Memorandum 20030325). Assessment Unit Memorandum 20030325).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 92 AMBIENT MONITORING SYSTEM

An understanding of human activities and natural August 31, 2002) 26 stations were monitored forces that affect pollution loads and their potential within basin (Figure 44 and Table 29.) Seven of impacts on water quality can be obtained through the 26 waterbodies have water quality routine sampling from fixed monitoring stations. classifications representing water supplies and Routine (i.e. monthly) sampling is referred to as nine have a trout water (Tr) supplemental ambient water quality monitoring and during this classification. five year assessment period (September 1, 1997 –

Figure 44. Ambient monitoring system sites within the French Broad River basin. The map numbers A-1, A-2, A-3, . . ., and A-26 correspond to Stations E0150000, E1130000, E1270000, . . ., and E9800000 in Table 29.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 93 Table 29. Ambient monitoring system sites within the French Broad River basin, 1997 - 2002.

Subbasin/ Station Map Code1 Number Waterbody/Location County Class 04-03-01 E0150000 French Broad R at NC 178 at Rosman Transylvania B Tr E1130000 Little R near Cedar Transylvania C Tr E1270000 French Broad R at SR 1503 at Blantyre Transylvania WS-IV&B 04-03-02 E2120000 Mud Cr at SR 1508 near Balfour Henderson C E2730000 French Broad R at SR 3495 near Skyland Buncombe B E3520000 Hominy Cr at SR 3413 near Asheville Buncombe C E4030000 Beetree Cr near Swannanoa Buncombe WS-I HQW E4170000 Swannanoa R at NC 25 at Asheville Buncombe C E4280000 French Broad R at SR 1348 at Asheville Buncombe B E4770000 French Broad R at SR 1634 at Alexander Buncombe B 04-03-03 E0850000 Davidson R at US 64 near Brevard Transylvania WS-V &B Tr E1490000 Mills R at End of SR 1337 near Mills River Henderson WS-II Tr HQW 04-03-04 E5120000 French Broad R at Blennerhassett Island at Marshall Madison B 04-03-05 E5410000 W Fk Pigeon R upstream Lake Logan near Hazelwood Haywood WS-III Tr E5495000 Pigeon R at NC 215 near Canton Haywood WS-III Tr CA E5600000 Pigeon R at SR 1642 at Clyde Haywood C E6110000 Richland Cr at SR 1184 near Waynesville Haywood B E6300000 Jonathans Cr at US 276 near Cove Creek Haywood C Tr E6450000 Cataloochee Cr at SR 1395 near Cataloochee Haywood C Tr ORW E6480000 Pigeon R at SR 1338 near Hepco Haywood C E6500000 Pigeon R at Waterville Haywood C 04-03-06 E7000000 N Toe R at US 19E near Ingalls Avery WS-IV Tr E8100000 N Toe R at SR 1162 at Penland Mitchell C Tr E8200000 S Toe R at SR 1168 near Celo Yancey B Tr ORW E9990000 Nolichucky R beside SR 1321 at Poplar Mitchell B 04-03-07 E9800000 Cane R at SR 1417 near Sioux Yancey C Tr

The Ambient Monitoring System is based on a data. Percentiles were calculated using network of fixed stations established at convenient Microsoft® Excel 2000; values less than the access points (e.g., bridge crossings) and minimum reporting level were evaluated as equal sampled on a monthly basis. These locations to the reporting level. Box and whisker plots have been chosen to characterize the effects of (constructed using SigmaPlot® 2002 version 8.02) point source dischargers and non-point sources are presented only for those water quality such as agriculture, animal operations, and characteristics that showed significant variation urbanization within watersheds. Currently, DWQ among the stations. does not conduct random or probabilistic monitoring. Data from the program is used to Analytical Considerations identify long term trends within watersheds, to Two issues were noted as part of the analytical develop Total Maximum Daily Loads, and to laboratory process during this assessment period: compare measured values with water quality 1) laboratory or sampling related contamination standards to identify possible areas of impairment. may have produced higher than expected values of zinc beginning in April 1995 and Data Assessment and Interpretation ending in March 1999; and Monitoring and sampling results considered in this 2) reporting levels for nutrients changed during report represent samples collected or 2002 during the initiation of new quality measurements taken at less than one meter in assurance procedures (Table 30). depth to establish a consistent comparison among 3) Due to quality assurance problems with the stations throughout the basin. Median and nitrogen and phosphorus parameters percentile statistics are calculated for most of the discovered in early 2001, ammonia (NH3),

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 94 nitrate+nitrite nitrogen (NO2+NO3-N) and total Table 31. Stations with dissolved oxygen phosphorus results less than 0.05 mg/L and concentrations results less than or total Kjeldahl nitrogen results less than 1.0 equal to 6.0 mg/L.

mg/L., did not meet desired quality assurance DO measures. Neither the accuracy nor bias of Station Location Class Date (mg/L those results is known. The results therefore E1130000 Little R C Tr 08/13/1998 5.5 are presented as reported but should be near Cedar considered with a great deal of uncertainty. E2730000 French C 07/02/2001 6.0 Broad R at SR 3495 Table 30. DWQ Laboratory Section reporting E5495000 Pigeon R at WS-III 09/15/1998 5.9 levels for nutrients during 2001. NC 215 Tr CA E5600000 Pigeon R at C 07/23/2001 5.8 Nutrient SR 1642 E6480000 Pigeon R at C 04/16/2002 5.9 NH3 TKN NO2+NO3 Time Period as N as N as N TP SR 1338 pre 2001 0.01 0.1 0.01 0.01 03/13 – 29/2001 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.5 No long term decreases were noted at any site. A 03/30 – 07/24/2001 0.2 0.6 0.15 0.1 few stations, in particular the Pigeon River at since 07/25/2001 0.01 0.2 0.01 0.02 Clyde, showed long term increases (Figure 46).

Use Support Assessment Considerations pH 1) The dissolved freshwater oxygen Throughout North Carolina, the pH of natural concentrations of 5.0 and 4.0 mg/L are waters can vary. Low values (<< 7.0 s.u.) can be presented as evaluation levels. Instantaneous found in waters rich in dissolved organic matter, concentrations of 4.0 mg/L or less can occur such as wetlands, whereas high values (>> 7.0 and may be acceptable if caused by natural s.u.) are found during algal blooms. Point source (e.g. swampy) conditions. dischargers can also influence the pH of a stream. 2) Action levels (copper, iron, and zinc) are used The measurement of pH is relatively easy, primarily as evaluation guidelines because however extremely accurate measurements are results include fractions that may have little difficult to make under field conditions. This is effect on aquatic life. Where appropriate, due, in part, because the scale for measuring pH follow-up toxicological work will need to be is logarithmic (i.e. a pH of 8 is ten times less conducted before use support determination concentrated in hydrogen ions than a pH of 7). can be made for these parameters.

3) The geometric mean and median statistics The water quality standards for pH in freshwaters were calculated for fecal coliform results for consider values less than 6.0 s.u. or greater than each station. 9.0 s.u. to warrant attention. During this

assessment period, there were no stations in Specific information on water quality standards which 10% of the values were outside these limits and action levels is found in the NCAC (2002). (Figure 47).

Dissolved Oxygen There were no long term increases or decreases No issues with dissolved oxygen were noted in pH except at three stations located on the during this assessment period (Figure 45). Only French Broad River (Figure 48). Since 1998 pH five measurements were less than or equal to 6.0 results greater than 8.0 s.u. increased in frequency mg/L; two of these occurred at stations with a trout at these three site. An increase of aquatic plants (Tr) water supplemental classification (Table 31). (Elodea spp.) has also been observed during the

past few years during the drought. Since photosynthesis can change (increase) pH, these increases may be the result of a greater abundance of aquatic plants.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E015000 E113000 E127000 E212000 E273000 E352000 E403000 E417000 E428000 E477000 E085000 E149000 E512000 E541000 E549500 E560000 E611000 E630000 E645000 E648000 E650000 E700000 E810000 E820000 E999000 E980000 16

14

12

10

8

6 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) Oxygen Dissolved

25

20

15

10

Temperature (C) 5

0 Mills R. - SR 1337 N Toe N Toe R. - US 19E Mud Mud Cr. SR 1508 - Cane R. - SR 1417 Little R. - High Falls N Toe R. - SR 1162N Toe S Toe R. - SR 1168 Davidson R. 64 - US Pigeon R. - SR 1642 Pigeon R. - SR 1338 Pigeon R. - NC 215 Pigeon R. - Waterville Hominy Cr.Hominy - SR 3413 Jonathans Cr.- 276 US Swannanoa R. - NC 25 Richland Cr. - SR 1184 Fr. Broad R. at Marshall Nolichucky R. - SR 1321 French Broad R. 178NC Cataloochee Cr. - SR 1395 French Broad R.- SR 1503 French Broad R. - SR 3495 French Broad R. - SR 1348 French Broad R. - SR 1634 Beetree Cr. near Swannanoa W Fk Pigeon R. - Lake Logan

Figure 45. Box and whisker plots for dissolved oxygen and temperature collected from the French Broad River basin, September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 96 18 16 DO (mg/L) Linear Regression

(mg/L) 14 12 10 8 6 4 Dissolved Oxygen 2 1980 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year

Figure 46. Long-term pattern of dissolved oxygen in the Pigeon River at Clyde, 1981 - 2002.

10

9

8

7 pH (s.u.)

6 E4280000 E4770000 E5120000 5 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year

Figure 48. Long-term patterns of pH in the French Broad River at Asheville, at Alexander, and at Blennerhassett Island (Stations E4280000, E4770000, E5120000, respectively), 1970 - 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E700000 E810000 E820000 E999000 E980000 E015000 E113000 E127000 E212000 E273000 E352000 E403000 E417000 E428000 E477000 E085000 E149000 E512000 E541000 E549500 E560000 E611000 E630000 E645000 E648000 E650000 10

9

8

7

pH (s.u.) 6

5 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 2000 1500 1000 500 Axis break at 150 mhos/cm)

µ 150

100

50

Conductivity ( 0 Mills R. - SR 1337 - SR R. Mills N Toe - R. US 19E Mud Cr. - SR 1508 - SR Cr. Mud Cane R. - SR 1417 - SR R. Cane Little R. - High Falls High - R. Little N Toe R.N - SR 1162 S Toe R. - SR 1168 1168 - SR R. Toe S Davidson R. - US 64 - US R. Davidson Pigeon R. - SR 1338 - SR R. Pigeon Pigeon R. - SR 1642 - SR R. Pigeon Pigeon R. - NC 215 NC - R. Pigeon Pigeon R. - Waterville R. Pigeon Hominy Cr. - SR 3413 3413 - SR Cr. Hominy Jonathans Cr.- US 276 US Cr.- Jonathans Swannanoa R. - NC 25 - NC R. Swannanoa Richland Cr. - SR 1184 1184 - SR Cr. Richland Fr. Broad R. at Marshall at R. Broad Fr. Nolichucky R. - SR 1321 - SR R. Nolichucky French Broad R. NC 178 NC R. Broad French Cataloochee Cr. - SR 1395 - SR Cr. Cataloochee French Broad R. - SR 3495 - SR R. Broad French 1348 - SR R. Broad French 1634 - SR R. Broad French French Broad R.- SR 1503 1503 SR R.- Broad French Beetree Cr. near Swannanoa Swannanoa near Cr. Beetree W Fk Pigeon R. - Lake Logan Logan Lake - W R. Pigeon Fk

Figure 47. Box and whisker plots for pH and conductivity collected from the French Broad River basin; September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 98 Conductivity These can often be the result of intense or Conductivity is a measure of the ability of water to sustained rainfall events; however, elevated conduct an electric current. The presence of ions values can occur at other times. All available and temperature are major factors in the ability of turbidity data were examined for long term water to conduct a current. Clean, freshwater has changes; but no patterns were evident. a low conductivity, whereas high conductivities may indicate polluted water. Measurements are Only two sites classified as trout waters (Tr) had corrected for temperature, thus the range of more than 10 percent of the results greater than values reported over a period of time indicate the the water quality standard for trout waters (10 relative presence of ions in water. NTU). These sites were the North Toe River at Penland and the Cane River near Sioux (Table 32 The conductivity in US waters vary between 50 to and Figure 50). No long term changes were noted 1,500 µmhos/cm (APHA 1998). Three stations on at these sites and both sites had comparable the Pigeon River (at Clyde, near Hepco, and at percentages of results greater than 10 NTU in Waterville) downstream from the Blue Ridge previous assessment reports. Paper Products mill (at Canton) had elevated conductivities (Figures 47 and 49). Median Total Suspended Solids values at these three stations were 564, 283, and Summaries of total suspended solids are provided 196 µmhos/cm respectively between September in Table 33 and Figure 50. The water quality 01, 1997 and August 31, 2002. A measurement standard for total suspended solids applies only to as great as 2,045 µmhos/cm occurred at Clyde. waters with a High Quality Water (HQW) supplemental classification: “Discharges of total Among the remaining stations, 95 percent of the suspended solids shall be limited to effluent values were between 12 and 122 µmhos/cm, with concentrations of 10 mg/L for trout waters and a median of 45 µmhos/cm and a maximum value Primary Nurse Areas and 20 mg/L for all other of 169 µmhos/cm. No long term changes were High Quality Waters.” (NCAC 2002). observed at any site. Only Beetree Creek and the Mills River have HQW Turbidity supplemental water quality classifications, and Turbidity data may denote episodic high values on neither of these sites had any results greater than particular dates or within narrow time periods 10 mg/L (Table 33).

5000 Canton Clyde 4000 3000 2000 mhos/cm) µ

( 1000

50 40 30

Conductivity Conductivity 20 10 0 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Year

Figure 49. Conductivity in the Pigeon River upstream (above Canton) and downstream (at Clyde) of the Blue Ridge Paper Products Inc. mill, 1986 – 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 99 Table 32. Summary of turbidity values for ambient monitoring stations in the French Broad River basin, 1997 - 2002. Number in bold font indicates the percentage of samples above water quality standards (10 NTU for Trout waters and 50 NTU for the remaining stations).

Station Waterbody/Location Class N1 Min1 Median Max1 %>50 NTU %>25 NTU %>10 NTU 04-03-01 E0150000 French Broad R at NC 178 at Rosman C Tr 57 1.0 2.8 40 --- 3.5 5.3 E1130000 Little R near Cedar C Tr 52 1.1 2.4 9.6 ------E1270000 French Broad R at SR 1503 at Blantyre WS-IV 56 1.1 6.4 58 1.8 7.1 21.4 04-04-02 E2120000 Mud Cr at SR 1508 near Balfour C 55 2.3 7.2 83 3.6 10.9 27.3 E3520000 Hominy Cr at SR 3413 near Asheville C 54 1.8 8.2 290 7.4 13.0 27.8 E4030000 Beetree Cr near Swannanoa WS-I HQW 20 1.0 2.0 2.6 ------E4170000 Swannanoa R at NC 25 at Asheville C 54 1.3 6.1 140 7.4 11.1 20.4 E4280000 French Broad R at SR 1348 at Asheville C 55 1.2 7.6 56 3.6 10.9 27.3 E4770000 French Broad R at SR 1634 at Alexander C 53 1.8 8.1 64 3.8 11.3 34.0 04-04-03 E0850000 Davidson R at US 64 WS-V Tr 57 1.0 1.5 19 ------1.8 E1490000 Mills R at end of SR 1337 near Mills River WS-II Tr 55 1.0 2.0 30 . 1.8 3.6 04-04-04 E5120000 French Broad R at Blennerhassett Island at Marsh C 53 1.9 9.1 240 5.7 11.3 34.0 04-04-05 E5410000 W Fk Pigeon R near Hazelwood WS-III Tr 31 1.0 2.0 4.1 ------E5495000 Pigeon R at NC 215 near Canton WS-III Tr CA 57 1.0 2.0 51 1.8 3.5 7.0 E5600000 Pigeon R at SR 1642 at Clyde C 57 1.0 4.3 74 1.8 5.3 7.0 E6110000 Richland Cr at SR 1184 near Waynesville B 54 1.2 4.7 19 ------7.4 E6300000 Jonathans Cr at US 276 near Cove Creek C Tr 56 1.1 3.7 14 ------3.6 E6450000 Cataloochee Cr at SR 1395 C Tr ORW 51 1.0 1.7 4.1 ------E6480000 Pigeon R at SR 1338 near Hepco C 57 1.2 4.5 20 ------10.5 E6500000 Pigeon R at Waterville C 57 1.2 3.5 23 ------5.3 04-04-06 E7000000 N Toe R at US 19E near Ingalls WS-IV Tr 54 1.0 2.5 110 1.9 1.9 7.4 E8100000 N Toe R at SR 1162 at Penland C Tr 49 1.2 3.2 75 2.0 6.1 14.3 E8200000 S Toe R at SR 1168 near Celo B Tr ORW 54 1.0 1.4 10 ------E9990000 Nolichucky R beside SR 1321 at Poplar C 38 1.0 5.6 170 2.6 7.9 15.8 04-04-07 E9800000 Cane R at SR 1417 C Tr 54 1.0 4.3 230 7.4 11.1 20.4 1N=Number of samples; Min = minimum, Max = maximum.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 100 E0150000 E1130000 E1270000 E2120000 E2730000 E3520000 E4030000 E4170000 E4280000 E4770000 E0850000 E1490000 E5120000 E5410000 E5495000 E5600000 E6110000 E6300000 E6450000 E6480000 E6500000 E7000000 E8100000 E8200000 E9990000 E9800000

100

80

60

40

Turbidity (NTU) 20

140 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 120 100 Note axis 60 break

40

TSS (mg/L) TSS 20 Mills R. SR 1337 R. - Mills Mud Cr. - SR 1508 - Cr. Mud N Toe R. - US 19E US - R. N Toe Cane R. - SRCane 1417 R. - Little R. - High Falls N SR R. 1162 - Toe S Toe R. - SR 1168 1168 SR - R. Toe S Davidson R. US R. - 64 Davidson Pigeon R. - SR 1642 R. - Pigeon Pigeon R. - SR 1338 R. - Pigeon Pigeon R. - R. - NC Pigeon 215 Pigeon R. Waterville R. - Pigeon Hominy Cr. - SR 3413 3413 SR - Cr. Hominy Jonathans Cr.- US 276 Cr.- Jonathans Swannanoa R. NC R. - 25 Swannanoa Richland Cr. - SR 1184 1184 SR - Cr. Richland Fr. Broad R. at Marshall R. at Broad Fr. Nolichucky R. - SR 1321 R. - Nolichucky French Broad R. NC 178 Broad French Cataloochee Cr. - SR 1395 - Cr. Cataloochee French Broad R. - SR R. 1348 - Broad French SR R. 1634 - Broad French French Broad R.- SR 1503 1503 SR R.- Broad French French Broad R. - SR R. 3495 - Broad French Beetree Cr. near Swannanoa Swannanoa near Cr. Beetree W Lake Fk R. Logan - Pigeon

Figure 50. Box and whisker plots for turbidity. and total suspended solids collected from the French Broad River basin; September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 101 Table 33. Total suspended solids in the French Broad River basin, 1997 – 2002.

Percentiles Station Waterbody/Location Class N1 25% 50% 75% 90% Max1 %>10 mg/L %>20 mg/L 04-03-01 E0150000 French Broad R at NC 178 at Rosman C Tr 39 2.0 2.0 3.0 6.0 22 2.6 2.6 E1130000 Little R near Cedar C Tr 36 1.0 2.0 2.0 4.3 7 ------E1270000 French Broad R at SR 1503 at Blantyre WS-IV 38 4.8 7.0 12.0 19.3 69 26.3 7.9 04-04-02 E2120000 Mud Cr at SR 1508 near Balfour C 39 4.0 8.0 11.0 25.0 41 28.2 12.8 E2730000 French Broad R at SR 3495 near Skyland C 39 3.0 7.0 12.0 25.0 28 30.8 12.8 E3520000 Hominy Cr at SR 3413 near Asheville C 37 4.0 7.0 13.5 24.0 32 32.4 10.8 E4030000 Beetree Cr near Swannanoa WS-I HQW 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2 ------E4170000 Swannanoa R at NC 25 at Asheville C 38 2.4 4.0 8.0 23.1 89 21.1 10.5 E4280000 French Broad R at SR 1348 at Asheville C 39 4.0 8.0 12.0 34.0 46 35.9 12.8 E4770000 French Broad R at SR 1634 at Alexander C 39 5.0 9.0 16.0 44.0 56 43.6 15.4 04-04-03 E0850000 Davidson R at US 64 WS-V Tr 38 1.0 2.0 2.0 4.5 20 5.3 --- E1490000 Mills R at end of SR 1337 near Mills River WS-II Tr HQW 39 1.0 2.0 3.0 5.0 10 ------04-04-04 E5120000 French Broad R at Blennerhassett Island at Marsh C 38 3.8 10.5 19.3 45.5 53 50.0 21.1 04-04-05 E5410000 W Fk Pigeon R near Hazelwood WS-III Tr 30 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 6 ------E5495000 Pigeon R at NC 215 near Canton WS-III Tr CA 40 2.0 2.0 3.1 6.8 51 5.0 2.5 E5600000 Pigeon R at SR 1642 at Clyde C 39 2.0 4.0 7.0 12.0 79 15.4 7.7 E6110000 Richland Cr at SR 1184 near Waynesville B 40 2.1 5.5 11.0 14.0 22 27.5 2.5 E6300000 Jonathans Cr at US 276 near Cove Creek C Tr 40 2.6 4.5 9.8 11.0 18 17.5 --- E6450000 Cataloochee Cr at SR 1395 C Tr ORW 37 1.0 2.0 2.5 5.0 13 2.7 --- E6480000 Pigeon R at SR 1338 near Hepco C 40 3.0 5.0 12.0 23.3 38 30.0 10.0 E6500000 Pigeon R at Waterville C 40 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.9 20 2.5 --- 04-04-06 E7000000 N Toe R at US 19E near Ingalls WS-IV Tr 39 2.0 3.0 7.0 11.0 250 12.8 2.6 E8100000 N Toe R at SR 1162 at Penland C Tr 34 2.0 3.0 5.3 33.0 100 14.7 11.8 E8200000 S Toe R at SR 1168 near Celo B Tr ORW 39 1.0 2.0 2.1 5.0 8 ------E9990000 Nolichucky R beside SR 1321 at Poplar C 28 2.2 7.5 14.0 38.0 150 32.1 14.3 04-04-07 E9800000 Cane R at SR 1417 C Tr 39 2.0 5.0 13.0 35.0 250 30.8 15.4 1N = Number of samples; Max.= maximum.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 102 Only Beetree Creek and the Mills River have HQW No station had more than 10 percent of the zinc supplemental water quality classifications, and concentrations greater than the action level of 50 neither of these sites had any results greater than µg/L. However, the Laboratory Section noted 10 mg/L/ (Table 33). analytical issues with zinc for the early portion of this assessment period and began block digestion Metals for metals in April 1999. Since April 1999, no For most stations, arsenic, cadmium, lead, station had more than 10 percent of the zinc mercury and nickel rarely exceeded the analytical concentrations greater than the action level. reporting level. Samples that had concentrations greater than the reporting level were generally too Five stations had more than 10 percent of the few to interpret statistically. Almost 6,000 copper concentrations greater than the action level analyses for these six metals were reported during of 7.0 µg/L (Table 34). Medians (50th percentile) at this assessment period and only 76 analyses (~ 1 these stations were equal to or less than 2.5 µg/L percent) were greater than the analytical reporting and means were equal to or less than 4.2 µg/L. levels (Table 34). Monthly sampling occurred up to mid-year 2000; afterwards quarterly sampling was initiated.

Table 34. Concentrations of mercury (HG), nickel (Ni), and lead (Pb) that exceeded the reporting level in the French Broad River basin, 1997 – 2002. Values in bold type exceeded a water quality standard or action level (Hg=0.012 µg/L; Ni=88 µg/L in non water supplies, 25 µg/L in water supplies; and Pb=25 µg/L).

Subbasin/ Metal (µg/L) Station Waterbody/Location Class Date Hg Ni Pb 04-03-01 E0150000 French Broad R at NC 178 at Rosman C Tr 06/16/1998 . . 16 10/22/1998 . . 13 11/17/1998 . . 11 03/25/1999 . . 14 04/20/1999 . . 23 E1130000 Little R near Cedar C Tr 11/17/1998 . . 15 03/25/1999 . . 17 04/20/1999 . . 16 E1270000 French Broad R at SR 1503 at Blantyre WS-IV 11/17/1998 . . 14 02/17/1999 . . 10 03/25/1999 . . 16 05/04/1999 . . 25 04-03-02 E2120000 Mud Cr at SR 1508 near Balfour C 07/22/1998 . . 16 10/21/1998 . . 18 E2730000 French Broad R at SR 3495 near Skyland C 07/22/1998 . . 11 01/07/1999 . . 15 02/25/1999 . . 19 E3520000 Hominy Cr at SR 3413 near Asheville C 09/30/1998 . . 16 10/21/1998 . . 17 12/14/1998 . . 11 09/23/1999 0.2 .. E4030000 Beetree Cr near Swannanoa WS-I HQW 02/26/1999 . . 14 05/21/1998 . . 24 11/20/1998 . 84 . 04/29/1999 . . 16 08/27/2002 . 12 . E4170000 Swannanoa R at NC 25 at Asheville C 07/22/1998 . . 24 01/07/1999 . . 15 E4280000 French Broad R at SR 1348 at Asheville C 01/07/1999 . . 10 E4770000 French Broad R at SR 1634 at Alexander C 10/21/1998 . . 21 01/07/1999 . . 25 03/18/1999 . . 12

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 103 Table 34 (continued).

Subbasin/ Metal (µg/L) Station Waterbody/Location Class Date Hg Ni Pb 04-03-03 E1490000 Mills R at End of SR 1337 near Mills River WS-II Tr 03/12/1998 . . 10 11/30/1998 . . 16 04-03-04 E5120000 French Broad R at Blennerhassett Island at Marshall C 12/14/1998 . . 10 01/07/1999 . . 15 04-03-05 E5410000 W Fk Pigeon R upstream Lake Logan near Hazelwood WS-III Tr 06/29/1998 . . 14 11/16/1998 . . 17 02/22/1999 . . 24 03/23/1999 . . 13 E5495000 Pigeon R at NC 215 near Canton WS-III Tr CA 05/26/1998 . . 26 06/29/1998 . . 18 11/16/1998 . . 14 12/08/1998 . . 18 01/25/1999 . . 13 E5600000 Pigeon R at SR 1642 at Clyde C 06/29/1998 . . 14 08/24/1998 . . 11 07/31/2000 0.4 .. E6110000 Richland Cr at SR 1184 near Waynesville B 07/21/1998 . . 12 03/30/1999 . . 10 E6300000 Jonathans Cr at US 276 near Cove Creek C Tr 02/16/1999 . . 11 03/30/1999 . . 11 E6450000 Cataloochee Cr at SR 1395 near Cataloochee C Tr ORW 09/16/1998 . . 18 04/14/1999 . . 36 E6480000 Pigeon R at SR 1338 near Hepco C 06/03/1998 . . 12 07/21/1998 . . 15 09/16/1998 . . 14 02/16/1999 . . 13 03/30/1999 . . 26 04/14/1999 . . 20 E6500000 Pigeon R at Waterville C 11/04/1998 . . 12 12/02/1998 . . 12 03/30/1999 . . 30 04-03-06 E7000000 N Toe R at US 19E near Ingalls WS-IV Tr 05/21/1998 . . 14 06/10/1998 . . 21 07/30/1998 . . 11 11/20/1998 . . 13 01/21/1999 . . 13 02/18/1999 . . 28 03/11/1999 . . 12 04/29/1999 . . 18 E8100000 N Toe R at SR 1162 at Penland C Tr 05/21/1998 . . 17 09/24/1998 . . 12 E8200000 S Toe R at SR 1168 near Celo B Tr ORW 03/11/1999 . . 10 04/29/1999 . . 16 E9990000 Nolichucky R beside SR 1321 at Poplar C 04/29/1999 . . 16 1The table summarizes the 76 out of 5,988 analyses (1.3%) for arsenic, cadmium chromium, mercury, nickel, and lead that exceeded the analytical reporting level. Metals not listed in the table did not have any results greater than the reporting level.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 104 Table 35. Summary of copper concentrations from ambient monitoring stations in the French Broad River basin, 1997 – 2002.

Station Waterbody/Location Class N1 Median Mean Max1 No. > 71 % > 71 04-03-01 E0150000 French Broad R at NC 178 at Rosman C Tr 39 2 3.3 12 5 12.8 E1130000 Little R near Cedar C Tr 36 2 3.2 12 4 11.1 E1270000 French Broad R at SR 1503 at Blantyre WS-IV 39 2 3.3 12 4 10.3 04-03-02 E2120000 Mud Cr at SR 1508 near Balfour C 41 2 2.8 9.9 2 4.9 E2730000 French Broad R at SR 3495 near Skyland C 41 2 3.4 10 6 14.6 E3520000 Hominy Cr at SR 3413 near Asheville C 40 2.1 3 7.6 1 2.5 E4030000 Beetree Cr near Swannanoa WS-I HQW 22 2 2.8 8.2 1 4.5 E4170000 Swannanoa R at NC 25 at Asheville C 41 2 3.2 16 3 7.3 E4280000 French Broad R at SR 1348 at Asheville C 41 2 3 12 3 7.3 E4770000 French Broad R at SR 1634 at Alexander C 41 2.6 3.2 7.1 1 2.4 04-03-03 E0850000 Davidson R at US 64 near Brevard WS-V Tr 38 2 3.1 15 2 5.3 E1490000 Mills R at End of SR 1337 near Mills River WS-II Tr 40 2 3 22 2 5.0 04-03-04 E5120000 French Broad R at Blennerhassett Island at Marshall C 40 2.5 3.5 17 4 10.0 04-03-05 E5410000 W Fk Pigeon R upstream Lake Logan near Hazelwood WS-III Tr 32 2 3.2 7.7 2 6.3 E5495000 Pigeon R at NC 215 near Canton WS-III Tr CA 41 2 2.7 16 1 2.4 E5600000 Pigeon R at SR 1642 at Clyde C 41 2.5 3.9 17 7 17.1 E6110000 Richland Cr at SR 1184 near Waynesville B 41 2 2.7 8.6 2 4.9 E6300000 Jonathans Cr at US 276 near Cove Creek C Tr 41 2 3.5 23 3 7.3 E6450000 Cataloochee Cr at SR 1395 near Cataloochee C Tr ORW 38 2 3.4 25 3 7.9 E6480000 Pigeon R at SR 1338 near Hepco C 40 2.1 3 18 1 2.5 E6500000 Pigeon R at Waterville C 41 2 3.2 21 3 7.3 04-03-06 E7000000 N Toe R at US 19E near Ingalls WS-IV Tr 38 2 3.3 20 3 7.9 E8100000 N Toe R at SR 1162 at Penland C Tr 39 2 3.1 8.3 3 7.7 E8200000 S Toe R at SR 1168 near Celo B Tr ORW 39 2 2.2 6.5 . . E9990000 Nolichucky R beside SR 1321 at Poplar C 28 2.3 3.2 15 1 3.6 04-03-07 E9800000 Cane R at SR 1417 near Sioux C Tr 39 2.4 4.2 23 5 12.8 1N = number of samples, Max = maximum, No. > AL = number greater than the action level (7.0 µg/L), % > AL = proportion (%) greater than the action level.

Fecal Coliform Bacteria necessitate the tube dilution method; in case of Fecal coliform bacteria concentrations can vary controversy over results, the MPN 5-tube dilution greatly. The descriptive statistics used to gage technique shall be used as the reference method.” these concentrations include the geometric mean or the median and these depend on the The applicability of this standard is often hindered classification of the waterbody. Basically for all because the monthly (circa 30 day) sampling freshwater bodies the standard specified in NCAC frequency employed for ambient monitoring (2002) is applicable: "Organisms of the coliform usually does not provide for more than one sample group: fecal coliforms shall not exceed a per 30 day period. However water quality geometric mean of 200/100ml (MF count) based problems can be discerned using monthly upon at least five consecutive samples examined sampling (Table 36 and Figure 51). during any 30 day period, nor exceed 400/100ml in more than 20 percent of the samples examined No station exceeded the geometric mean of 200 during such period; violations of the fecal coliform colonies/100 ml reference level and no station had standard are expected during rainfall events and, more than 20 percent of the samples exceeding in some cases, this violation is expected to be 400 colonies/100ml. The greatest geometric caused by uncontrollable nonpoint source means for most stations occurred during 2002, a pollution; all coliform concentrations are to be year that was exceptionally dry (Table 37and analyzed using the membrane filter technique Appendix 1). unless high turbidity or other adverse conditions

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 105 Table 36. Geometric means for fecal coliform bacteria by year in the French Broad River basin1. Numbers in bold type represent the highest geometric means.

Subbasin Geometric mean (no. colonies/100 ml) Station Waterbody/Location 1998 1999 2000 2001 20022 04-03-01 E0150000 French Broad R at NC 178 at Rosman 3.6 4.6 3.2 2.9 25.5 E1130000 Little R near Cedar 3.8 5.6 2.2 1.7 27.4 E1270000 French Broad R at SR 1503 at Blantyre 24.6 18.1 37.9 15.1 141.8 04-03-02 E2120000 Mud Cr at SR 1508 near Balfour 47.7 65.0 86.2 189.0 1129.0 E2730000 French Broad R at SR 3495 near Skyland 14.5 5.8 8.9 27.8 459.8 E3520000 Hominy Cr at SR 3413 near Asheville 25.5 30.3 65.7 40.6 622.3 E4030000 Beetree Cr near Swannanoa 1.9 1.7 1.8 ------E4170000 Swannanoa R at NC 25 at Asheville 51.2 72.6 67.4 65.7 324.0 E4280000 French Broad R at SR 1348 at Asheville 8.6 10.3 6.3 12.4 139.9 E4770000 French Broad R at SR 1634 at Alexander 11.3 7.3 7.4 4.9 122.7 04-03-03 E0850000 Davidson R at US 64 near Brevard 5.3 5.0 3.7 1.7 22.2 E1490000 Mills R at End of SR 1337 near Mills River 3.0 3.3 3.5 5.4 59.2 04-03-04 E5120000 French Broad R at Blennerhassett Island at Marshall 8.4 6.2 10.8 12.9 148.0 04-03-05 E5410000 W Fk Pigeon R upstream Lake Logan near Hazelwood 1 1.8 3 1.8 --- E5495000 Pigeon R at NC 215 near Canton 10.7 5.1 8.7 5.3 41.5 E5600000 Pigeon R at SR 1642 at Clyde 77.7 22.1 46.6 49.8 84.4 E6110000 Richland Cr at SR 1184 near Waynesville 27.5 41.0 39.6 102.5 238.6 E6300000 Jonathans Cr at US 276 near Cove Creek 35.1 26.0 20.3 24.1 126.2 E6450000 Cataloochee Cr at SR 1395 near Cataloochee 1.7 3.9 2.6 1.4 4.9 E6480000 Pigeon R at SR 1338 near Hepco 37.5 21.4 16.2 34.8 88.4 E6500000 Pigeon R at Waterville 8.6 5.9 6.5 2.4 30.1 04-03-06 E7000000 N Toe R at US 19E near Ingalls 4.6 11.3 4.6 1.8 38.9 E8100000 N Toe R at SR 1162 at Penland 11.3 18.6 7.4 8.2 60.5 E8200000 S Toe R at SR 1168 near Celo 1.9 4.8 1.5 1.3 29.0 E9990000 Nolichucky R beside SR 1321 at Poplar 7.8 25.2 5.2 2.8 15.6 04-03-07 E9800000 Cane R at SR 1417 near Sioux 9.4 32.2 6.4 3.8 52.4 11997 data were limited to Sept – December and geometric means were not calculated for that year. 22002 data ended August 31, 2002.

Table 37. Summary of fecal coliform bacteria for ambient monitoring stations in the French Broad basin, September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002.

Geometric Proportion (%) of Station Waterbody/Location N Mean samples > 400 04-03-01 E0150000 French Broad R at NC 178 at Rosman 57 4.3 3.5 E1130000 Little R near Cedar 52 4.1 1.9 E1270000 French Broad R at SR 1503 at Blantyre 56 28.8 8.9 04-03-02 E2120000 Mud Cr at SR 1508 near Balfour 54 117.3 14.8 E2730000 French Broad R at SR 3495 near Skyland 54 19.8 9.3 E3520000 Hominy Cr at SR 3413 near Asheville 53 56.6 15.1 E4030000 Beetree Cr near Swannanoa 20 1.8 --- E4170000 Swannanoa R at NC 25 at Asheville 53 76.7 17 E4280000 French Broad R at SR 1348 at Asheville 54 13.5 5.6 E4770000 French Broad R at SR 1634 at Alexander 53 10.1 3.8 04-03-03 E0850000 Davidson R at US 64 near Brevard 57 4.4 1.8 E1490000 Mills R at End of SR 1337 near Mills River 54 5.3 3.7 04-03-04 E5120000 French Broad R at Blennerhassett Island at Marshall 52 13.1 5.8

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 106 Table 37 (continued).

Geometric Proportion (%) of Station Waterbody/Location N Mean samples > 400 04-03-05 E5410000 W Fk Pigeon R upstream Lake Logan near Hazelwood 31 1.9 --- E5495000 Pigeon R at NC 215 near Canton 57 8 --- E5600000 Pigeon R at SR 1642 at Clyde 57 49.1 1.8 E6110000 Richland Cr at SR 1184 near Waynesville 56 50.8 10.7 E6300000 Jonathans Cr at US 276 near Cove Creek 57 29.6 5.3 E6450000 Cataloochee Cr at SR 1395 near Cataloochee 51 2.4 2 E6480000 Pigeon R at SR 1338 near Hepco 57 30.5 1.8 E6500000 Pigeon R at Waterville 56 6.7 1.8 04-03-06 E7000000 N Toe R at US 19E near Ingalls 54 6 3.7 E8100000 N Toe R at SR 1162 at Penland 49 14.8 6.1 E8200000 S Toe R at SR 1168 near Celo 54 2.9 3.7 E9990000 Nolichucky R beside SR 1321 at Poplar 39 9 --- 04-03-07 E9800000 Cane R at SR 1417 near Sioux 54 11.6 3.7

104 200 reference line Geometric Mean 103

102

101 (no. colonies/100 ml) Fecal Coliform Bacteria

100 Mills R. - SR 1337 Mud Cr. - SR 1508 N Toe R. - US 19E Cane R. - SR 1417 Little R. - High Falls N Toe R. - SR 1162 S Toe R. - SR 1168 Davidson R. - US 64 Pigeon R. - SR 1338 Pigeon R. - SR 1642 Pigeon R. - NC 215 Pigeon R. - Waterville Hominy Cr. - SR 3413 Jonathans Cr.- US 276 Swannanoa R. - NC 25 Richland Cr. - SR 1184 Fr. Broad R. at Marshall Nolichucky R. - SR 1321 French Broad R. NC 178 Cataloochee Cr. - SR 1395 French Broad R. - SR 3495 French Broad R. - SR 1348 French Broad R. - SR 1634 French Broad R.- SR 1503 Beetree Cr. near Swannanoa W Fk Pigeon R. - Lake Logan

Figure 51. Box and whisker plots for fecal coliform bacteria for ambient water quality data collected from the French Broad River basin, September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 107 Nutrients Table 38. Hourly measurements of dissolved Generally, nutrient concentrations were low oxygen (mg/L) in the Pigeon River at (Figures 52 and 53). Mud and Hominy Creeks Brown’s Bridge, TN, June 01, 1997 to showed elevated concentrations of nitrogen or September 30, 2002. Data collected in 2002 were provisional and subject to phosphorus and these streams have major point revision. source dischargers. The outfall from the City of Hendersonville’s wastewater treatment plant on Year Mud Creek was relocated in March 2002 and is 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 now located downstream of the ambient No. of samples 1,594 881 2,927 1,808 2,756 2,791 monitoring site. Minimum 5 3.9 5.2 4 5.3 4.4 5th 5.6 4.7 6.3 6.1 6.3 5.6 10th 5.8 5.2 6.5 6.5 6.8 5.8 Additional Data Sources th As a license requirement issued by the Federal 25 6.3 5.8 7.1 7.1 7.3 6.3 50th 6.7 6.6 7.7 7.8 8 6.9 Energy Regulatory Commission to Progress 75th 7.1 7.3 8.3 8.4 8.7 7.6 Energy to operate the Walters Hydroelectric Maximum 8.6 9 10.5 11 11.4 10 Project, dissolved oxygen concentrations must be N < 4 mg/L1 --- 1 ------monitored in the Pigeon River near Brown’s N < 5 mg/L2 2 63 0 4 0 7 No. Days Bridge, TN from June 01 through September 30 of 3 4 each year. This location is equivalent to DWQ’s Avg < 5 mg/L --- 1 ------1N < 4 = number of samples less than 4.0 mg/L. Station E6500000 (Pigeon River at Waterville). 2N < 5 = number of samples less than 5.0 mg/L. 3No. Days Avg < 5 = number of days where the daily average Dissolved oxygen concentrations generally was less than 5.0 mg/L. 4 declined throughout the summer and approached Sept 3, 1998 or fell below 5 mg/L (Figure 54). The concentrations increased towards the end of September of each year. Concentrations less than 5 mg/L were measured 63 times in 1998 (7 percent of all observations) although only 30 percent of the possible number of observations were recorded that summer (Table 38). Since 1998 there have been no days where the daily average has been less than 5 mg/L.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 108 E0150000 E1130000 E1270000 E2120000 E2730000 E3520000 E4030000 E4170000 E4280000 E4770000 E0850000 E1490000 E5120000 E5410000 E5495000 E5600000 E6110000 E6300000 E6450000 E6480000 E6500000 E7000000 E8100000 E8200000 E9990000 E9800000 1.0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 0.8

(mg/L) 0.6

as N 0.4 3

NH 0.2

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 2.0 (mg/L)

1.5 as N 3 1.0 + NO 2 0.5 NO 0.0 Mills 1337 - SR Mills R. Mud Cr. - SR 1508 Cr. Mud N Toe R. - US 19E Toe R. - N Cane - SR 1417 R. Cane Little R. - Falls Little R.High - N Toe N - SR 1162 Toe R. S Toe R. S - SR Toe 1168 Davidson R. - US 64 Davidson Pigeon - SR 1338 Pigeon R. Pigeon - SR 1642 Pigeon R. Pigeon R. - Pigeon R. NC 215 - Pigeon R.Pigeon - Waterville Hominy Cr. - SR 3413 - SR 3413 Cr. Hominy Jonathans Cr.- US 276 Jonathans Cr.- Swannanoa R. - NC 25 Swannanoa Richland Cr. - SR 1184 - SRRichland 1184 Cr. Fr. Broad at Fr. Broad R. Marshall Nolichucky Nolichucky 1321 - SR R. French R.French NC 178 Broad Cataloochee Cr. - SR 1395 Cr. Cataloochee French Broad - SR 1348 Broad R. French - SR 1634 Broad R. French French Broad SR Broad R.- 1503 French - SR 3495 Broad R. French Beetree Cr. near Swannanoa Swannanoa Cr. near Beetree W Fk - Lake Logan Pigeon R.

Figure 52. Box and whisker plots for ammonia nitrogen (NH3) and nitrite+nitrate nitrogen (NO2+NO3) collected from the French Broad River basin; September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 109 E0150000 E1130000 E1270000 E2120000 E2730000 E3520000 E4030000 E4170000 E4280000 E4770000 E0850000 E1490000 E5120000 E5410000 E5495000 E5600000 E6110000 E6300000 E6450000 E6480000 E6500000 E7000000 E8100000 E8200000 E9990000 E9800000 3.0 2.5 2.0 Note axis 1.5 break

as N 1.0 (mg/L) TKN 0.5

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 0.8

0.6 (mg/L) 0.4

Total Phoshorus 0.2

0.0 Mills R. - SR 1337 - SR R. Mills Mud Cr.- SR 1508 N Toe R. - US 19E - R. N Toe Cane R.- SR 1417 Little R. - High Falls - High R. Little N ToeN R.- SR 1162 S Toe R. - SR 1168 Davidson R. - US 64 R. - Davidson Pigeon R.- SR 1642 Pigeon R.- SR 1338 Pigeon R. - NC 215 215 NC R. - Pigeon Pigeon R. - Waterville R. - Pigeon Hominy Cr. - SR 3413 3413 SR - Cr. Hominy Jonathans Cr.- US 276 US Cr.- Jonathans Swannanoa R. - NC 25 Richland Cr. - SR 1184 1184 SR - Cr. Richland Fr. Broad R. at Marshall at R. Broad Fr. Nolichucky R.- SR 1321 French Broad R. NC 178 R. NC Broad French Cataloochee Cr.- SR 1395 French Broad R.- SR 1503 French Broad R.- SR 3495 French Broad R.- SR 1348 French Broad R.- SR 1634 Beetree Cr. near Swannanoa W Fk Pigeon R. - Lake Logan

Figure 53. Box and whisker plots for total Kjeldahl nitrogen and total phosphorus collected from the French Broad River basin; September 01, 1997 to August 31, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 110 12 4 mg/L reference line 5 mg/L reference line 10 (mg/L)

8

6 Dissolved Oxygen Oxygen Dissolved 4

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Year

Figure 54. Dissolved oxygen in the Pigeon River near Brown’s Bridge, TN (USGS Gauge Station 03460795) and near DWQ’s Station E6500000 (Pigeon River at Waterville), 1997 – 2002. Data are recorded hourly from June 01 to September 30 each year. Gaps with the summer periods of record represent missing data. Data collected in 2002 were provisional and subject to revision.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 111 AQUATIC TOXICITY MONITORING

Forty-three facility permits in the French Broad Thirty-seven facility permits have a WET limit; the River basin currently require whole effluent toxicity other six facility permits specify monitoring with no (WET) monitoring (Figure 55 and Table 39). limit.

Figure 55. Facilities required to perform toxicity testing in the French Broad River basin.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 112 Table 39. Facilities in the French Broad River basin required to perform whole effluent toxicity testing.

NPDES Receiving Flow IWC 7Q10 Subbasin/Facility Permit No. Stream County (MGD) (%) (cfs) 04-03-01 AGFA Corporation NC0000337/001 Little R Transylvania 2.4 24 14.4 Brevard WWTP NC0060534/001 French Broad R Transylvania 2.5 2.4 161.0 Coats American NC0000108/001 Galloway Cr Transylvania NA NA 0.43 Coats American NC0000108/002 Galloway Cr Transylvania NA NA 0.43 Ecusta Division NC0000078/001 French Broad R Transylvania 27.5 21 154 MB Industries-001 NC0000311/001 W Fk French Broad R Transylvania 0.030 0.17 27.9 NC Dept. of Transportation NC0085979/001 French Broad R Transylvania 0.0288 0.01 725 04-03-02 Asheville Beetree WTP NC0056961/001 Beetree Cr Buncombe 0.1 12.3 1.1 Asheville Northfork WTP NC0035807/001 N Fk Swannanoa R Buncombe 0.8 42.2 1.7 Buncombe County MSD NC0024911/001 French Broad R Buncombe 40.0 12.0 466.0 Carolina Water Service-Bent Creek NC0036684/001 Wesley Cr Buncombe 0.1 28 0.4 Christ School WWTP NC0033693/001 UT Robinson Cr Buncombe 0.02 100 0.0 Communications Instruments Inc NC0033227/004 Cane Cr Buncombe 0.288 5.6 7.5 CP&L - Asheville Ash Pond/001 NC0000396/001 French Broad R Buncombe NA NA 375.0 GE Lighting Systems NC0000507/008 Bat Fork Cr Henderson VAR NA 0.3 GE Lighting Systems NC0000507/006 Bat Fork Cr Henderson VAR NA 0.3 GE Lighting Systems NC0000507/005 Bat Fork Cr Henderson VAR NA 0.3 GE Lighting Systems NC0000507/004 Bat Fork Cr Henderson VAR NA 0.3 GE Lighting Systems NC0000507/002 Bat Fork Cr Henderson VAR NA 0.3 GE Lighting Systems NC0000507/009 Bat Fork Cr Henderson 0.3 61.0 0.3 GE Lighting Systems NC0000507/001 Bat Fork Cr Henderson 0.50 72.1 0.30 Henderson Co. Schools NC0066681/001 Mill Pond Cr Henderson 0.0099 13 0.1 Hendersonville WWTP NC0025534/001 Mud Cr Henderson 4.8 22 17 N. Buncombe High School NC0061182/001 Stanfield Br Buncombe 0.025 100 0.0 Ridgeview Acres Mobile Home Park NC0060283/001 UT Smith Mill Cr Buncombe 0.0078 100 0.0 Silver Line Plastics Corp. NC0023591/001 French Broad R Buncombe 0.096 0.03 460 Silver Line Plastics Corp. NC0023591/002 French Broad R Buncombe 0.144 0.05 460 SKF USA Incorporated NC0086088/001 Gashes Cr Buncombe 0.108 15 0.94 Woodfin Sanitary WTP NC0083178/001 Reems Cr Buncombe .03375 8.0 0.61 04-03-03 Camp Highlander WWTP NC0033251/001 UT S Fk Mills R Henderson 0.0074 100 0.0 04-03-04 Marshall WWTP NC0021733/001 French Broad R Madison 0.40 0.12 535 04-03-05 Blue Ridge Paper Products NC0000272/001 Pigeon R Haywood 29.9 100 0 Maggie Valley WWTP NC0056561/001 Jonathans Cr Haywood 1.0 6.3 23.0 Mt. Pisgah Lodge/Recreation Area NC0072729/001 UT Pisgah Cr Haywood 0.032 25 0.15 Waynesville WWTP NC0025321/001 Pigeon R Haywood 6.0 8.91 95.0 04-03-06 Feldspar Corp. NC0000353/001 North Toe R Mitchell 3.5 11.18 43 K-T Feldspar NC0000400/001 North Toe R Mitchell 1.73 5.73 44.0 Spruce Pine WWTP NC0021423/001 North Toe R Mitchell 2.0 6.6 44.0 Unimin Corp-Mica Operations (001) NC0000361/001 North Toe R Avery 2.16 10 30 Unimin Corp. NC0000175/001 North Toe R Mitchell 3.61 11 45.0 Unimin Corp. Red Hill Plant NC0085839/001 North Toe R Mitchell 0.682 1.2 90.7 Unimin Corp. - Crystal Operation NC0084620/001 North Toe R Mitchell 0.36 1.3 41 04-03-07 Burnsville WWTP NC0020290/001 Cane R Yancey 0.8 6.0 19.0

The number of facilities in this basin monitoring The Coats American facility (Subbasin 01) has had whole effluent toxicity has increased from 1987, intermittent failures since it began discharging in the year that WET monitoring began in this basin. 1996. Actions taken by the facility include (Figure 56). Whole effluent toxicity limits were reducing flows over time, cleaning of collection written into permits in North Carolina beginning in system, and substitution of a less toxic cooling 1987. The compliance rate of those facilities has tower biocide. The facility’s last noncompliance generally risen since the inception of the program. was in February 2002. Since 1994 the compliance rate has stabilized at approximately 90 to 95 percent (Figure 56 and The Christ School WWTP (Subbasin 02) Table 40). experienced sporadic whole effluent toxicity limit

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 113 noncompliances since it began discharging in 1999 through October 2001. The facility’s 1995. The school connected to the Buncombe operators speculate that occasionally high County MSD in November 2002. ammonia levels are responsible for the failures. The facility has been compliant with its WET limit The West Henderson High School WWTP since October 2001. (Subbasin 02) has been intermittently noncompliant with its WET limit since 2000. The The Mt. Pisgah Lodge WWTP (Subbasin 05) has facility treatment works consist of a sand filter; had intermittent failures of its WET limit since high ammonia is a likely source of toxicity. The 1996. Activities associated with start-up and shut- facility has been compliant with its WET limit since down of this seasonally used facility as well as January 2002. possible polymer toxicity have been suggested as causes of noncompliance. The facility has been The North Buncombe High School WWTP compliant since July 2002. (Subbasin 02) had intermittent failures from July

40 100

90 35 80 30 70 25 60

20 50

40 15 Compliance (%) Compliance

Facilities Monitoring Facilities 30 10 20 5 10

0 0

7 3 4 5 2 8 88 9 9 9 96 97 0 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1989 1990 1991 1992 19 19 1 1 1 1998 1999 2000 2001 20 Year

No. Facilities % Meeting Permit Limit

Figure 56. Whole effluent toxicity monitoring in the French Broad River basin, 1987 - 2002. The compliance values were calculated by determining whether a facility was meeting its ultimate permit limit during the given time period, regardless of any SOCs in force.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 114 Table 40. Compliance record of facilities performing whole effluent toxicity testing in the French Broad River basin.

NPDES Pre 2002 Pre 2002 2002 2002 Subbasin Facility Permit No. Passes1 Fails Passes Fails 04-03-01 AGFA Corporation NC0000337/001 17 2 5 1 Brevard WWTP NC0060534/001 17 1 4 Coats American NC0000108/001 16 6 4 1 Coats American NC0000108/002 16 3 4 0 Ecusta Division NC0000078/001 16 0 4 0 MB Industries-001 NC0000311/001 16 0 4 0 NC Dept. of Transportation NC0085979/001 14 1 4 0 04-03-02 Asheville Beetree WTP NC0056961/001 7 1 0 0 Asheville Northfork WTP NC0035807/001 16 1 4 0 Buncombe County MSD NC0024911/001 21 2 5 1 Carolina Water Service-Bent Creek NC0036684/001 15 4 4 0 Christ School WWTP NC0033693/001 18 8 3 0 Communications Instruments Inc NC0033227/004 17 1 4 0 CP&L - Asheville Ash Pond/ 001 NC0000396/001 17 0 5 0 GE Lighting Systems-001 NC0000507/001 4 0 0 1 GE Lighting Systems-002 NC0000507/002 3 1 1 0 GE Lighting Systems-004 NC0000507/004 4 0 1 0 GE Lighting Systems-005 NC0000507/005 4 0 1 0 GE Lighting Systems-006 NC0000507/006 4 0 1 0 GE Lighting Systems-008 NC0000507/008 4 0 1 0 GE Lighting Systems-009 NC0000507/009 7 2 0 0 Henderson Co. Schools NC0066681/001 18 3 4 1 Hendersonville WWTP NC0025534/001 17 1 5 0 N. Buncombe High School NC0061182/001 17 7 4 0 Silver Line Plastics Corp. NC0023591/001 4 0 4 0 Silver Line Plastics Corp. NC0023591/002 1 1 0 0 SKF USA Incorporated NC0086088/001 15 0 5 1 Woodfin Sanitary WTP NC0083178/001 15 3 4 0 04-03-03 Camp Highlander WWTP NC0033251/001 4 2 0 1 04-03-04 Marshall WWTP NC0021733/001 15 1 4 0 04-03-05 Blue Ridge Paper Products NC0000272/001 17 1 4 0 Maggie Valley WWTP NC0056561/001 16 0 4 0 Mt. Pisgah Lodge/Recreation Area NC0072729/001 13 3 4 2 Waynesville WWTP NC0025321/001 17 1 4 0 04-03-06 Feldspar Corp. NC0000353/001 16 0 4 0 K-T Feldspar NC0000400/001 16 1 4 0 Spruce Pine WWTP NC0021423/001 18 2 4 0 Unimin Corp-Mica Operations (001) NC0000361/001 18 4 4 0 Unimin Corp. NC0000175/001 17 1 5 1 Unimin Corp. Red Hill Plant NC0085839/001 16 0 4 0 04-03-07 Burnsville WWTP NC0020290/001 16 1 4 0 1Note that “pass” denotes meeting a permit limit or, for those facilities with a monitoring requirement, meeting a target value. The actual test result may be a “pass” (from a pass/fail acute or chronic test), LC50, or chronic value. Conversely, “fail” means failing to meet a permit limit or target value.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 115 REFERENCES

BRP. 2000. Results of August 15, 2000 sampling of Waterville Reservoir. Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc., Canton, NC.

BRP. 2001. Canton mill. Balanced and indigenous species study for the Pigeon River. Prepared for Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc., Canton, NC. Prepared by EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Deerfield, IL.

BRP. 2002. Results of September 17, 2002 sampling of Waterville Reservoir. Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc., Canton, NC.

CPC. 1999. Fishery resource monitoring. Little River and Cascade Lake monitoring project, Brevard, NC. FERC No. 2541-033. Annual report. November 1999. Prepared for Cascade Power Company. Prepared by Fish and Wildlife Associates, Whittier, NC.

CP&L. 2000. Walters hydroelectric plant. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project No. 432. 1998 water quality and biotic indicies studies. Appendix A requirements. Carolina Power & Light Company. Raleigh, NC.

_____. 2001. Asheville Steam Electric Plant 2000 environmental monitoring report. Carolina Power & Light Company. New Hill, NC.

_____. 2002a. Asheville Steam Electric Plant 2001 environmental monitoring report. Carolina Power & Light Company. New Hill, NC.

_____. 2002b. Walters hydroelectric plant. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project No. 432. 2001 water quality and biotic indicies studies. Appendix A requirements. Carolina Power & Light Company. Raleigh, NC.

Fels, J. 1997. North Carolina watersheds map. North Carolina State University Cooperative Extension Service. Raleigh, NC.

Griffith, G., Omernik, J. and J. Comstock. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Research and Development. NHEERL. Western Ecology Division. Corvallis, OR.

Karr, J. R. 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries. 6: 21 - 27.

_____, Fausch, K. D., Angermeier, P. L., Yant, P. R., and I. J. Schlosser. 1986. Assessing Biological Integrity in Running Water: A Method and Its Rationale. Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv. Spec. Publ. 5. 28 pp.

LeGrand, H. E., Hall, S. P. and J. T. Finnegan. 2001. Natural Heritage Program list of the rare animal species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC.

Lenat, D. R., Penrose, D. L., and K. W. Eagleson. 1979. Biological evaluation of non-point source pollutants in North Carolina. Biological Series No. 102. North Carolina Division of Environmental Management. Raleigh, NC.

Menhinick, E. F. 1991. The freshwater fishes of North Carolina. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. Raleigh, NC. 227 pp.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 116 _____ and A. L. Braswell (eds). 1997. Endangered, threatened, and rare fauna of North Carolina. Part IV. A reevaluation of the freshwater fishes. Occas. Papers N.C. State Mus. Nat. Sci. and N.C. Biol. Surv. No. 11. Raleigh, NC.

Maas, R. P., Patch, S. C, Westphal, M. J., Cook, E. A., Maurer, C. C. and C .J. Walker. 2000a. Stream water quality in western North Carolina: Transylvania County. Year Four Report. Technical Report #00-071. Environmental Quality Institute. University of North Carolina-Asheville. Asheville, NC.

_____. 2000b. Stream water quality in western North Carolina: Henderson County. Year Four Report. Technical Report #00-069. Ibid.

Maas, R. P., Patch, S. C, Westphal, M. J., Cook, E. A., Lisowski, C. and C. C. Maurer. 2000c. Stream water quality in western North Carolina: Buncombe County. Year Four Report. Technical Report #00-073. Ibid.

Maas, R. P., Patch, S. C, Westphal, M. J., Cook, E. A., Alford, A. L. and C. T. Glendenning. 2001. Water quality trends of Madison County: Year Four Report. Technical Report #01-077. Ibid.

NCAC. 2002. North Carolina administrative code. Effective August 1, 2002. Environmental Management Commission. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Division of Water Quality. Raleigh, NC.

NCDEHNR. 1996. Standard operating procedures manual. Physical and chemical monitoring. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources. Division of Water Quality. Water Quality Section. Raleigh, NC.

_____. 1997a. Standard operating procedures. Biological Monitoring. Environmental Sciences Branch. Ecosystems Analysis Unit. Biological Assessment Group. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources. Division of Water Quality. Water Quality Section. Raleigh, NC.

_____. 1998. Basinwide assessment report support document. French Broad River basin. Ibid.

NCDENR. 1999. French Broad River basinwide water quality plan. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources. Division of Water Quality. Water Quality Section. Raleigh, NC.

_____. 2000a. North Carolina's 2000 Section 303(d) List. April 3, 2000 (final submitted to EPA). Ibid.

_____. 2000b. Water quality progress in North Carolina, 1998 – 1999. 305(b) Report. Ibid.

_____. 2001a. Standard operating procedures for benthic macroinvertebrates. Biological Assessment Unit. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Division of Water Quality. Water Quality Section. Environmental Sciences Branch. Raleigh, NC.

_____. 2001b. Standard operating procedure. Biological monitoring. Stream fish community assessment and fish tissue. Ibid.

_____. 2001c. Annual report of fish kill events. December 2001. Ibid.

_____. 2002. Assessment report: biological impairment in the Mud Creek watershed. French Broad River basin, Henderson county. Internal Review Draft. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources. Division of Water Quality. Water Quality Section. Raleigh, NC.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 117 NCDHHS. 2001. Fish consumption advisory for Walters Lake/Waterville Reservoir. August 2001. North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. Epidemiology Section. Raleigh, NC.

NCDOT. 2002. Environmental monitoring for the Interstate 26 alignment from Mars Hill to Sams Gap. North Carolina Department of Transportation. Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch. Raleigh, N.C.

Noga, E. J. 1996. Fish disease. Diagnosis and treatment. Mosby-Year Book, Inc.. St. Louis, MO.

PE. 2002. Walters hydroelectric plant. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project No. 432. 2001 water quality and biotic indicies studies. Appendix A requirements. Progress Energy. Raleigh, NC.

Sanders, R. E., Miltner, R. J., Yoder, C. O., and E. T. Rankin. 1999. The use of external deformities, erosion, lesions, and tumors (DELT anomalies) in fish assemblages for characterizing aquatic resources: a case study of seven Ohio streams. pp. 25-246. In Simon, T. P. (ed.). Assessing the sustainability and biological integrity of water resources using fish communities. CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL.

Steedman, R. J. 1991. Occurrence and environmental correlates of blackspot disease in stream fishes near Toronto, Ontario. Trans. American Fisheries Soc. 120: 494 - 499.

USEPA. 1995. Guidance for assessing chemical contaminant data for use in fish advisories. Vol. 1: Fish sampling and analysis. 2nd Edition. Washington, D.C. Office of Science and Technology. EPA 823-R-95-007.

USFDA. 1980. Action levels for poisonous or deleterious substances in human food and animal feed. Shellfish Sanitation Branch, Washington, D. C.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 118 Appendix 1. Flow measurement and flow conditions in the French Broad River basin, 2002.

Although the French Broad River basin was runoff are expected to have a decline in water already in a drought which had started several quality after high flow, but may improve during years earlier (Figure 1), the drought intensified low flow. An exception is in smaller headwater during much of 2002 (Figures 2 – 4). A drought streams, which may cease flowing during may be defined in many ways. One definition is “. extreme droughts. Streams affected by point . . a condition of moisture deficit sufficient to have source dischargers may improve after high an adverse effect on vegetation, animals, and man flow (with dilution of the effluent) and decline over a sizeable area” after low flows. These changes, however, (http://md.water.usgs.gov/drought/define.html). usually produce a between-year change of During fish community sampling (early – mid June only one bioclassification. 2002), mean daily flows, based upon USGS gauge Changes throughout the subbasin. Flow- sites, were approximately 35 to 80 percent of the related changes usually affect several sites, historical median flows. During sampling in late not just a single site. September 2002, the mean daily flows were from Changes in species composition. Real 50 to 200 percent of the historical median flows. changes in water quality are usually reflected in a significant change in the composition of Changes in the benthic macroinvertebrate the invertebrate community. community are often used to help assess between-year changes in water quality. Some All between-year changes are considered in light between-year changes in the communities, of flow conditions for one month prior to the however, may be due to changes in flow. High sampling date. Flow information is obtained flows magnify the potential effects of nonpoint gauge sites and compared to the long-term source runoff, leading to scour, substrate median flows. High flow is defined as a median instability, and reduced periphyton. Low flows flow greater than 140 percent of the long-term accentuate the effect of point source dischargers median for that time period, low flow is a median by providing less dilution of wastes. Flow-related flow less than 60 percent of the long-term median; changes are decided on a site-by-site basis by and normal flow is 60 to 140 percent of the looking at: median. Although regional patterns are often Flow. In the three months prior to collection, observed, there may be large geographical daily flow patterns are examined from gauge variation within the state and a single sampling sites. Areas affected by nonpoint source period.

10000 French Broad R. at Rosman Cataloochee Cr.

1000 Flow *(cfs)Flow 100

10 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year

Figure 1. Daily average flows (every five days) for the French Broad River and Cataloochee Creek (USGS Stations 034390000 and 03460000, respectively), 1980 – 2003.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 119

Figure 2. Flows of the French Broad River (top) and the Mills River (bottom), January 01, 2002 – October 28, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 120

Figure 3. Flows of Newfound Creek (top) and the South Toe River (bottom), January 01, 2002 – October 28, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 121

Figure 4. Flows of the Pigeon River (top) and Cataloochee Creek (bottom), January 01, 2002 – October 28, 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 122 Appendix 2. Habitat evaluations and stream and riparian habitats at fish community monitoring sites in the French Broad River basin.

An assessment form has been developed by the stable banks with a good tree canopy and a Biological Assessment Unit to better evaluate the medium to wide riparian zone with no or rare physical habitat of a stream (NCDENR 2001a). breaks in the riparian zone (Figure 2). The habitat score, which ranges between 1 and 100, is based on the evaluation of channel modification, amount of instream habitat, type of bottom substrate, pool variety, bank stability, light penetration, and riparian zone width. Higher numbers suggest better habitat quality, but no criteria have been developed to assign impairment ratings. Habitat metric scores for all benthic macroinvertebrate and fish community sites in the French Broad River basin which were evaluated in 2002 and 1997 are listed in Appendices 3 - 5.

In 2002, fish community sampling was conducted at 23 sites. Habitat scores ranged from 40 to 92 (Bat Fork and Pigeonroost Creek, respectively) (Appendix 4). Seventeen streams had overall moderate to high quality habitats (score ≥ 65) whereas six streams had overall low to poor Figure 1. Instream habitats composed of rocks, quality habitats (score < 65). Major differences sticks, leafpacks, snags and logs, and root mats, Flat Creek, SR 1742, between the two types of habitats were in the Buncombe County. instream habitats, substrates, riffles, and bank stabilities (Table 1). Low scores were attributable to erosion and nonpoint source sedimentation or urban runoff.

Table 1. Mean habitat scores for 23 fish community sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002.

Low - Poor Moderate - Habitat Quality High Quality Max. characteristics Habitat Habitat score Channel 3.5 4.4 5 modification Instream habitat 13.3 16.3 20 Substrate 6.5 9.4 15 Pool 6.0 8.1 10 Riffle 5.7 13.1 16 Bank stability 7.7 10.4 14 (right and left) Shade 7.3 7.9 10 Figure 2. Stable banks with a good tree canopy Riparian width 4.0 6.2 10 and a wide riparian zone, Flat Creek, SR (right and left) 1742, Buncombe County.

Characteristics of moderate to high quality habitat Characteristics of low to poor quality habitat streams are: streams are: instream habitats composed of rocks, sticks, an absence of cobble riffles; if present, they leafpacks, snags and logs, and undercut are usually caused by embedded, coarse banks and root mats (Figure 1); woody debris in the current; a substrate of gravel, cobble, and boulders an open canopy and the riparian zone has with low embeddedness (Figure 1); been cleared of native vegetation and frequent pools and riffles of varying depths replaced with a lawn (Figure 3); and and widths; and

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 123 livestock frequently having access to the stream causing bank erosion, trampling of riparian vegetation, fecal contamination, and nutrient deposition (Figures 4 and 5).

Figure 5. Fencing excluding cattle from mainstem channel but allowing wastes to enter the stream and the continuance of riparian degradation.

Figure 3. Grass covered riparian zones, Jack Creek, SR 1337, Yancey County.

Figure 6. White goods, tires, and wooden pallets illegally disposed, Reems Creek, NC 251, Buncombe County.

Figure 4. Loss of riparian vegetation due to livestock access to stream, Crabtree Creek, NC 209, Haywood County.

Other instream and riparian habitat degradations and water quality problems observed within the French Broad River basin at fish community sites included: disposal of white goods, mattresses, household refuse, livestock and barn waste, and tires down the stream bank (Figures 6 and 7);

excessive turbidity following heavy downpours (Figure 8); and Figure 7. Riparian zone encroachment by conveyance of urban runoff from industrial illegally disposed of woody debris and sites into the stream (Figure 9). barn wastes, Jonathan Creek, US 276, Haywood County.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 124 100

80

60

40 Habitat Score

20

Poor Fair Good-FairGood Excellent 0 1 2 3 4 5

Figure 10. Relationships between habitat scores Figure 8. Turbidity in Hominy and South Hominy and NCIBI ratings in the French Broad Creeks at NC 151 (Buncombe County) River basin, 1997 - 2002. after a heavy rainstorm, June 05, 2002. One of the fish community responses to the loss of tree canopy in the riparian zone and nutrient addition is an increase in the percentage of omnivores+herbivores (Metric No. 8). The 1997 – 2002 data set showed that sites with minimal shading had a greater median percentage of omnivores+ herbivores than sites with partial or good canopy (Figure 11). These median percentages (56, 28, and 23%, respectively) corresponded to NCIBI metric scores of 1, 5, and 5, respectively (Table 4 in Appendix 10).

100

80

60 Figure 9. Conveyance device for industrial urban runoff, Mud Creek at SR 1647, Henderson County. 40

% Omni.+Herb. Fifty-nine fish community samples with associated 20 habitat evaluations have been collected throughout the basin since 1997 (one sample was 0 excluded from the analysis because the site was Good Minimal Partial located below a dam with no minimum flow Shading requirements). This data set showed that the fish community sites rated Excellent (NCIBI Score = Figure 11. Relationships between the percentage 58 or 60) had the highest quality habitats (Figure of omnivores+herbivores and 10). The median habitat score for Excellent rated streamside shading in the French streams was 85.0; the other ratings had median Broad River basin, 1997 - 2002. scores ranging from 66.0 to 75.5. A more intact and wider riparian zone was also significantly correlated with a decrease in the percentage of omnivores+herbivores (Figure 12).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 125 Table 2. NCIBI ratings and habitat quality in the 100 French Broad River basin, 2002. 90 80 Waterbodies with Waterbodies with Low to Poor Quality Moderate to High 70 NCIBI Habitat Quality Habitat 60 Rating (Score < 65) (Score ≥ 65) 50 Excellent Big Ivy, Pigeonroost Shelton Laurel, 40 Good Newfound Crab, Boylston, Cane,

% Omni.+Herb. 30 Flat, Reems, Turkey, 20 Swannanoa, South Hominy, Sandymush, 10 Price 0 Good-Fair Little R, Crabtree Bull, Hominy 0 2 4 6 8 10 Fair Jacks Fines Riparian Score Poor Mud, Batfork Richland

Figure 12. Relationship between the percentage of Fines Creek and Richland Creek had moderate to omnivores+herbivores and the riparian high quality habitats but the fish communities were scores in the French Broad River basin, rated Fair or Poor. Both streams are tributaries to 1997 - 2002. the Pigeon River and recolonization of the tributaries and the river have been hampered by In 2002, with a few exceptions, fish communities long-term water quality problems such as industrial rated Excellent and Good were found in streams wastes, urban runoff, dairy operations, and with moderate to high quality habitats (Table 2 and excessive turbidity and sedimentation from poor Appendix 3). Communities rated Good-Fair, Fair, land use practices. or Poor were generally found in streams with a variety of habitat qualities. Hominy Creek was rated Good in 1997 but declined to Good-Fair in 2002. This watershed is undergoing increasing development along the Interstate 40 and US 19/23/74 corridors (refer to the Subbasin 02 section).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 126 Appendix 3. Habitat evaluations at 23 basinwide fish community sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002.

Width Instream Bank Bank Riparian Riparian Total Subbasin Stream Location County (m) Channel Habitat Substrate Pools Riffles Stability-L Stability-R Shade Zone-L Zone-R Score 04-03-01 Little R SR 1533 Transylvania 13 4 14 4 10 0 3 3 10 3 3 54 Crab Cr SR 1532 Transylvania 8 5 16 6 9 14 3 3 7 1 1 65 04-03-02 Mud Cr SR 1647 Henderson 8 2 12 6 5 4 4 4 10 1 1 49 Bat Fork SR 1779 Henderson 5 2 10 3 4 2 4 4 7 2 2 40 Cane Cr US 25 Henderson 15 4 14 6 10 5 6 6 8 3 3 65 Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 6 4 16 8 4 14 7 3 7 4 2 69 South Hominy Cr NC 151/SR 3449 Buncombe 11 5 18 8 10 12 5 5 7 2 3 75 Swannanoa R SR 2435 Buncombe 12 4 16 8 9 14 6 4 7 3 2 73 Newfound Cr SR 1641 Buncombe 7 4 14 6 3 7 6 6 9 4 3 62 Reems Cr NC 251 Buncombe 8 4 16 10 6 14 6 7 10 3 5 81 Flat Cr SR 1742 Buncombe 8 5 18 12 10 14 7 7 10 5 4 92 Sandymush Cr SR 1107 Madison 10 4 14 8 10 10 4 4 7 3 1 65 Turkey Cr SR 1629 Buncombe 7 5 14 8 6 12 6 3 7 3 3 67 04-03-03 Bolyston Cr SR 1314 Henderson 9 4 16 8 8 12 6 4 10 5 3 76 04-03-04 Big Ivy Cr SR 2150 Buncombe 15 4 18 10 10 16 6 6 9 4 4 87 Bull Cr SR 1574 Madison 8 4 14 8 4 14 5 5 7 2 3 66 Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208/212 Madison 12 4 16 10 9 14 3 3 4 1 3 67 04-03-05 Richland Cr Walnut Trail Rd Haywood 13 5 16 10 6 12 5 5 8 3 3 73 Crabtree Cr NC 209 Haywood 8 5 16 12 10 7 2 2 4 0 0 58 Fines Cr SR 1355 Haywood 6 5 17 12 10 14 6 6 10 3 5 88 04-03-06 Jacks Cr SR 1337 Yancey 8 4 14 8 4 14 3 5 4 2 3 61 Pigeonroost Cr SR 1349/NC 197 Mitchell 8 4 20 15 10 16 6 7 9 4 5 96 04-03-07 Price Cr SR 1126/1136 Yancey 7 4 18 12 6 16 6 5 7 5 2 81

Maximum possible score 5 20 15 10 16 7 7 10 5 5 100

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 127 Appendix 4. Habitat evaluations at 20 basinwide fish community sites in the French Broad River basin, 1997. Note: the metrics and the possible scores were changed between 1997 and 2002.

Bank Bank Riparian Riparian Width Instream Bank Vegetation Vegetation Zone Zone Total Subbasin/ Stream Location County (m) Channel Habitat Substrate Pools Riffles Stability Left Right Shade Left Right Score 04-03-01 Little R SR 1533 Transylvania 11 9 14 4 8 0 6 3 3 10 2 2 61 04-03-02 Mud Cr SR 1647 Henderson 8 8 10 3 4 6 5 3 3 10 0 1 43 Bat Fork SR 1779 Henderson 3 3 10 3 7 0 10 4 4 7 1 1 50 Cane Cr US 25 Henderson 14 8 10 3 8 5 10 4 4 10 5 3 72 Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 7 8 16 6 7 10 4 3 3 10 2 1 70 South Hominy Cr NC 151/SR 3449 Buncombe 12 8 16 8 5 8 8 4 4 10 0 3 74 Swannanoa R SR 2435 Buncombe 13 8 10 6 10 10 10 4 4 10 2 1 75 Newfound Cr SR 1641 Buncombe 7 6 16 3 8 8 10 4 4 9 3 3 74 Reems Cr NC 251 Buncombe 7 8 16 8 6 10 10 5 5 10 3 5 86 Flat Cr SR 1742 Buncombe 10 10 16 6 10 10 10 4 3 10 5 5 89 Sandymush Cr SR 1107 Madison 8 9 14 5 10 7 10 4 4 7 2 2 74 04-03-03 Bolyston Cr SR 1314 Henderson 7 8 10 4 4 8 6 4 4 10 4 2 64 04-03-04 (Big) Ivy Cr SR 2150 Buncombe 12 9 16 7 10 10 10 4 4 7 4 3 84 Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208/212 Madison 12 8 15 8 6 10 14 4 4 7 2 3 81 04-03-05 Richland Cr Walnut Trail Rd Haywood 10 8 16 8 10 8 10 4 4 7 2 2 79 Crabtree Cr NC 209 Haywood 8 10 14 8 10 8 10 2 2 4 0 0 66 Fines Cr SR 1355 Haywood 7 10 14 8 10 9 12 4 4 10 4 5 90 04-03-06 Jacks Cr SR 1337 Yancey 8 8 14 8 4 10 10 3 5 4 2 3 71 Pigeonroost Cr SR 1349/NC 197 Mitchell 9 8 14 8 8 10 10 5 5 10 2 5 85 04-03-07 Price Cr SR 1126/1136 Yancey 9 8 14 6 8 9 8 4 4 7 2 1 71

Maximum possible score 10 16 10 10 10 14 5 5 10 5 5 100

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 128 Appendix 5. Habitat evaluations at 54 basinwide benthic macroinvertebrate community sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002.

Width Instream Bank Bank Riparian Riparian Total Subbasin Stream Location County (m) Channel Habitat Substrate Pools Riffles Stability-L Stability-R Shade Zone-L Zone-R Score 04-03-01 French Broad R SR 1129 Transylvania 30 4 15 11 6 6 5 5 5 2 1 64 W Fk French Broad R US 64 Transylvania 15 5 18 8 10 14 6 7 10 2 4 84 N Fk French Broad R SR 1322 Transylvania 14 5 14 8 6 12 7 7 10 5 5 77 M Fk French Broad R SR 1131 Transylvania 5 5 12 8 2 7 3 2 7 1 0 51 Little R SR 1560 Transylvania 7 5 11 6 10 5 1 2 7 2 3 52 Little R SR 1533 Transylvania 14 5 13 3 6 0 2 2 10 0 1 42 04-03-02 French Broad R NC 280 Buncombe 100 5 19 4 0 10 7 7 2 5 3 62 French Broad R SR 1348 Buncombe 70 4 17 10 10 14 6 6 2 1 5 75 French Broad R SR 1634 Buncombe 60 4 13 8 6 14 6 7 2 0 5 65 Cane Cr SR 1006 Henderson 9 5 14 5 6 12 2 2 9 0 0 55 Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 6 5 16 6 4 16 7 7 10 3 3 77 Hominy Cr SR 3412 Buncombe 10 4 10 3 6 0 2 2 7 5 3 43 S Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 7 5 16 12 6 16 5 6 7 3 1 77 Swannanoa R SR 2416 Buncombe 12 4 16 8 4 10 6 7 4 4 0 63 Swannanoa R US 25 Buncombe 15 4 16 8 4 7 6 6 5 1 1 58 Newfound Cr SR 1622 Buncombe 5 5 11 6 4 13 2 1 4 0 0 46 Reems Cr NC 251 Buncombe 5 4 13 5 4 16 6 6 10 0 5 62 Sandymush Cr SR 1114 Madison 10 5 15 8 6 16 6 6 10 4 4 80 04-03-03 Davidson R US 276 Transylvania 8 5 20 15 10 14 7 7 10 5 3 96 Boylston Cr SR 1314 Henderson 8 5 20 6 4 16 5 2 10 2 2 72 Mills R SR 1337 Henderson 30 5 12 12 4 16 7 7 7 4 4 78 Mills R SR 1353 Henderson 15 5 12 8 4 9 6 6 7 2 2 61 04-03-04 French Broad R NC 213 Madison 40 5 16 12 6 7 5 5 2 2 0 60 Ivy Cr (R) SR 2150 Buncombe 9 5 14 12 4 14 4 4 7 3 1 68 Little Ivy Cr SR 1610 Madison 8 4 11 8 6 14 4 6 7 2 3 65 Ivy Cr (R) US 25/70 Madison 4 5 16 13 6 16 5 5 10 1 1 78 Big Laurel Cr SR 1503 Madison 15 4 17 12 4 16 7 2 5 5 0 72 Big Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 5 5 14 13 6 16 5 6 10 3 0 78 Puncheon Fk SR 1503 Madison 10 5 17 12 6 7 5 5 7 0 1 65 Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 12 4 16 10 9 14 3 3 4 1 3 67 Spring Cr NC 209 Madison 15 4 16 8 6 16 3 5 7 0 1 66 04-03-05 Pigeon R NC 215 Haywood 25 5 15 8 8 7 7 7 2 5 5 69 W Fk Pigeon R SR 1216 Haywood 10 5 19 12 0 16 7 7 7 5 5 83 E Fk Pigeon R US 276 Haywood 12 5 20 15 4 16 2 7 7 2 5 83 Pigeon R SR 1642 Haywood 30 4 10 6 0 4 5 5 7 2 1 44 Pigeon R SR 1338 Haywood 25 5 18 3 4 16 7 7 2 5 5 72 Pigeon R off I-40 Haywood 30 5 13 15 4 16 7 7 10 5 5 87 Richland Cr Bus 23 Haywood 5 4 19 8 0 16 7 7 10 5 2 78 Richland Cr SR 1184 Haywood 8 5 19 11 0 14 7 7 10 5 3 81 Richland Cr SR 1519 Haywood 12 5 19 12 6 14 7 7 10 5 5 90 Jonathans Cr SR 1305 Haywood 7 5 19 14 0 16 7 7 10 1 1 80

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 129 Appendix 5 (continued).

Width Instream Bank Bank Riparian Riparian Total Subbasin Stream Location County (m) Channel Habitat Substrate Pools Riffles Stability-L Stability-R Shade Zone-L Zone-R Score Jonathans Cr SR 1322 Haywood 10 5 18 8 0 16 7 7 10 3 3 77 Jonathans Cr SR 1349 Haywood 7 5 20 8 10 16 7 7 10 1 1 85 Fines Cr SR 1355 Haywood 7 5 14 3 4 14 7 7 10 5 2 71 Cataloochee Cr SR 1395 Haywood 20 5 19 15 4 16 7 7 10 5 5 93 04-03-06 Nolichucky R SR 1321 Mitchell 40 5 16 12 6 16 6 6 2 2 5 76 N Toe R US 19E Avery 20 5 16 14 8 14 5 5 2 3 4 76 N Toe R SR 1162 Mitchell 18 5 16 14 6 14 16 6 2 4 3 76 N Toe R SR 1314 Yancey 50 5 16 6 4 7 5 5 2 2 5 57 Big Crabtree Cr US 19E Mitchell 9 5 15 12 10 16 6 6 10 2 4 86 S Toe R SR 1167 Yancey 20 5 16 10 10 14 16 6 2 3 5 77 Big Rock Cr NC 197 Mitchell 9 5 18 13 6 16 6 6 2 2 4 78 04-03-07 Cane R US 19W Yancey 15 5 18 12 4 14 6 6 2 4 2 63 Bald Mountain Cr SR 1408 Yancey 5 5 18 13 6 16 6 6 10 4 0 86

Maximum possible scores 5 20 15 10 16 7 7 10 5 5 100

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 130 Appendix 6. Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling methods and criteria.

Freshwater wadeable and flowing waters Table 1. Benthos classification criteria for Benthic macroinvertebrates can be collected from flowing water systems in the mountain wadeable, freshwater, flowing waters using two ecoregion. sampling procedures. The Biological Assessment Sample Unit's standard qualitative sampling procedure Metric type Bioclass Score includes 10 composite samples: two kick-net EPT S 10-sample Excellent > 41 samples, three bank sweeps, two rock or log Qualitative Good 32 - 41 washes, one sand sample, one leafpack sample, Good-Fair 22 - 31 Fair 12 - 21 and visual collections from large rocks and logs Poor 0 - 11 (NCDENR 2001a). The samples are picked "on- site". The purpose of these collections is to 4-sample EPT Excellent > 35 inventory the aquatic fauna and produce an Good 28 - 35 Good-Fair 19 - 27 indication of relative abundance for each taxon. Fair 11 - 18 Organisms are classified as Rare (1 - 2 Poor 0 - 10 specimens), Common (3 - 9 specimens), or Abundant (≥ 10 specimens). BI 10-sample Excellent < 4.05 (range 0 – 10) Qualitative Good 4.06 - 4.88 Good-Fair 4.89 - 5.74 Benthic macroinvertebrates can also be collected Fair 5.75 - 7.00 using an EPT sampling procedure. [Note: "EPT" Poor > 7.00 is an abbreviation for Ephemeroptera + Plecoptera + Trichoptera, insect groups that are generally Tolerance values for individual species and the intolerant of many kinds of pollution.] Four rather final BI values have a range of 0 - 10, with higher than 10 composite qualitative samples are taken numbers indicating more tolerant species or more at each site: 1 kick, 1 sweep, 1 leafpack and polluted conditions. Water quality scores assigned visual collections. Only EPT groups are collected with the BI numbers are combined with EPT S and identified, and only EPT criteria are used to scores to produce a final bioclassification, using assign a bioclassification. criteria for coastal plain streams. EPT N (EPT N) and Total S calculations also are used to help Several data-analysis summaries (metrics) can be examine between-site differences in water quality. produced from standard qualitative and EPT If the EPT S score and the BI differ by one, the samples to detect water quality problems (Table EPT N value is used to determine the final site 1). These metrics are based on the idea that rating. unstressed streams and rivers have many invertebrate taxa and are dominated by intolerant EPT S and BI values also can be affected by species. Conversely, polluted streams have fewer seasonal changes. DWQ criteria for assigning numbers of invertebrate taxa and are dominated bioclassification are based on summer sampling: by tolerant species. The diversity of the June - September. For samples collected outside invertebrate fauna is evaluated using taxa summer, EPT S can be adjusted by subtracting richness counts; the tolerance of the stream out winter/spring Plecoptera or other adjustment community is evaluated using a biotic index. based on resampling of summer site. The BI values also are seasonally adjusted for samples For standard qualitative samples, EPT taxa outside the summer season. richness (EPT S) is used with NCDWQ criteria to assign water quality scores. Higher EPT S values Criteria have been developed to assign usually indicate better water quality. Water quality bioclassifications ranging from Poor to Excellent to ratings also are based on the relative tolerance of each benthic sample. These bioclassifications the macroinvertebrate community as summarized primarily reflect the influence of chemical by the North Carolina Biotic Index (NCBI or BI). pollutants. The major physical pollutant, sediment, is not assessed as well by a taxa richness analysis.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 131 Small Streams using standard EPT criteria. Because such ratings Benthic studies in unimpacted mountain ecoregion are minimum ratings (no stream size correction watersheds have shown naturally reduced EPT S factor has yet been developed), small stream sites in small streams (less than four meters wide), but that would be at least Poor or Fair, are listed as similar studies have not been done in piedmont Not Rated to reflect the possibility that such sites small streams or small streams that have might have higher ratings if a size correction was disturbance in the watershed. For this reason, used. In Appendix 7, this Not Impaired or Not samples taken from sites with a width less than Rated terminology is applied to data that will be four meters are currently being listed as Not used for use support (collected since September Impaired for use support evaluations, if the 1996) and has not been retrofitted to all of the bioclassification would be Good-Fair or better older data from small streams.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 132 Appendix 7. Benthic macroinvertebrate data, French River basin, 1983 - 2002. Current basinwide sites are in bold font.

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 04-03-01 French Broad R SR 1129 Transylvania 6-(1) 07/08/02 96 54 3.62 2.99 Excellent 07/08/97 92 51 3.48 2.76 Excellent 07/06/92 108 51 3.84 2.59 Excellent 08/07/90 98 43 3.90 2.82 Excellent 03/15/89 107 57 3.53 2.54 Excellent 08/09/88 96 48 4.11 3.13 Excellent 07/21/86 98 47 4.00 2.89 Excellent 08/24/84 87 37 4.03 3.03 Good 08/22/84 83 31 4.19 3.22 Good W Fk French off NC 281 Transylvania 6-2-(0.5) 10/01/01 43 28 2.45 1.85 Not Rated Broad R 09/12/00 45 29 2.13 1.82 Excellent 08/06/90 82 45 2.67 1.96 Excellent 05/14/90 96 55 2.67 1.79 Excellent W Fk French SR 1306 Transylvania 6-2-(0.5) 10/01/01 59 19 5.82 2.77 Fair Broad R 09/12/00 69 15 6.47 3.09 Fair 08/06/90 51 15 5.97 3.70 Fair 05/14/90 72 33 4.95 2.89 Good-Fair W Fk French NC 281 Transylvania 6-2-(0.5) 10/01/01 93 41 4.46 2.66 Good Broad R 08/06/90 78 32 4.95 3.85 Good-Fair 05/14/90 97 44 4.54 3.13 Good 03/15/89 --- 27 --- 3.54 Good-Fair W Fk French SR 1312 Transylvania 6-2-(0.5) 02/11/92 99 53 3.14 1.97 Excellent Broad R 05/21/87 49 49 2.49 2.49 Excellent 10/31/84 94 42 3.89 2.72 Good W Fk French US 64 Transylvania 6-2-(7.5) 07/09/02 91 51 3.02 2.32 Excellent Broad R 07/07/97 94 50 3 2.13 Excellent 07/06/92 87 47 3.49 2.35 Excellent 02/11/92 110 57 3.45 2.37 Excellent 03/14/89 87 50 3.36 2.49 Excellent Parker Cr SR 1310 Transylvania 6-2-4 03/15/89 --- 44 --- 2.56 Good Flat Cr SR 1319 Transylvania 6-2-10 07/08/02 --- 38 --- 2.44 Excellent N Flat Cr SR 1319 Transylvania 6-2-10-1 03/14/89 --- 38 --- 2.77 Good Woodruff Br near US 64 Transylvania 6-2-12 03/22/98 --- 22 --- 1.82 Not Rated N Fk French NC 215 Transylvania 6-3-(6.5) 03/13/89 --- 45 --- 1.98 Excellent Broad R N Fk French SR 1326 Transylvania 6-3-(6.5) 07/09/02 76 34 4.38 2.98 Good Broad R 03/13/89 --- 36 --- 2.84 Good N Fk French SR 1322 Transylvania 6-3-(6.5) 07/09/02 79 41 3.52 2.74 Excellent Broad R 07/07/97 76 41 3.34 2.54 Excellent 07/06/92 85 42 3.41 2.46 Excellent 03/14/89 89 44 3.65 2.72 Excellent Tucker Cr SR 1325 Transylvania 6-3-10 03/14/89 --- 35 --- 2.69 Good-Fair M Fk French NC 178 Transylvania 6-5 03/14/89 --- 35 --- 1.75 Good Broad R M Fk French SR 1131 Transylvania 6-5 07/08/02 --- 51 --- 2.15 Excellent Broad R E Fk French SR 1105 Transylvania 6-6 03/16/89 --- 51 --- 1.96 Excellent Broad R E Fk French SR 1107 Transylvania 6-6 03/16/89 107 54 3.04 2.25 Excellent Broad R S Pr Glady Fk SR 1105 Transylvania 6-6-7-1 05/21/87 --- 29 --- 3.13 Good-Fair Galloway Cr US 64, ab Transylvania 6-8 05/21/87 --- 16 --- 2.61 Not Rated landfill Galloway Cr US 64, be Transylvania 6-8 05/21/87 --- 10 --- 3.00 Not Rated landfill Peter Weaver Cr SR 1329 Transylvania 6-10 07/24/01 44 24 2.44 1.93 Not Rated

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 133 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Peter Weaver Cr P-W Creek Transylvania 6-10 08/30/00 37 16 4.58 4.15 Not Rated Rd Peter Weaver Cr Ab SR 1195 Transylvania 6-10 07/24/01 60 24 5.41 4.48 Not Rated Peter Weaver Cr SR 1195 Transylvania 6-10 07/24/01 43 10 5.82 4.79 Not Rated 08/30/00 57 18 5.90 5.19 Not Rated 05/16/00 60 25 5.88 4.67 Not Rated 07/07/97 --- 12 --- 5.35 Fair Morgan Mill Cr SR 1331 Transylvania 6-10-1 08/30/00 44 24 3.00 2.29 Not Rated Morgan Mill Cr SR 1388 Transylvania 6-10-1 08/30/00 58 20 5.74 3.99 Not Rated Morgan Mill Cr SR 1195 Transylvania 6-10-1 07/24/01 45 14 6.18 5.38 Not Rated Cherryfield Cr SR 1332 Transylvania 6-11 08/31/00 60 36 2.46 2.09 Not Rated Cherryfield Cr SR 1128 Transylvania 6-11 07/24/01 83 41 4.24 3.20 Not Rated 08/31/00 69 30 3.89 2.85 Not Rated Mason Cr SR 1392 Transylvania 6-11-3 07/23/01 62 31 2.94 1.52 Not Rated 08/31/00 51 31 2.38 1.88 Not Rated Catheys Cr SR 1338, Transylvania 6-16-(8.5) 03/13/89 --- 58 --- 2.02 Excellent 05/21/87 --- 49 --- 1.79 Excellent Carson Cr SR 1103 Transylvania 6-20 07/09/02 --- 35 --- 3.12 Good Norton Cr US 64 Transylvania 6-28-2 05/21/87 --- 14 --- 4.82 Not Rated Williamson Cr SR 1541 Transylvania 6-32 05/21/87 --- 44 --- 2.42 Good Little R US 276 Transylvania 6-38-(1) 05/21/87 --- 38 --- 3.02 Good Little R SR 1560 Transylvania 6-38-(1) 07/09/02 --- 35 --- 3.50 Good Little R off SR 1536, Transylvania 6-38-(20) 08/04/87 83 19 6.41 4.97 Fair above High Falls 08/05/85 82 22 5.85 4.66 Fair Laurel Cr SR 1536 Transylvania 6-38-17 05/22/87 --- 44 --- 2.10 Good Little R Be High Transylvania 6-38-(20) 07/24/89 81 32 4.63 3.87 Good Falls Little R SR 1533 Transylvania 6-38-(20) 07/11/02 --- 24 --- 4.23 Good-Fair 07/08/97 --- 25 --- 4.25 Good-Fair 07/07/92 --- 26 --- 4.18 Good-Fair Crab Cr SR 1532 Transylvania 6-38-23 10/03/01 76 30 4.97 4.08 Good-Fair 10/26/00 95 43 4.71 3.62 Good 05/22/87 --- 38 --- 2.94 Good UT Crab Cr SR 1127 Henderson 6-38-23 10/26/00 53 29 3.46 2.35 Not Rated 04-03-02 French Broad R SR 1503 Transylvania 6-(27) 07/22/86 57 21 5.77 4.30 Fair 08/18/83 55 20 5.85 4.44 Fair Gash Cr SR 1322 Henderson 6-47 09/18/86 40 5 7.58 5.94 Not Rated Gash Cr US 64 Henderson 6-47 09/18/86 21 1 8.07 5.77 Not Rated Gash Cr SR 1203 Henderson 6-47 09/18/86 26 1 8.31 6.22 Not Rated Gash Cr SR 1205 Henderson 6-47 08/28/02 34 3 7.42 6.6 Not Rated 06/04/96 50 6 7.21 5.28 Not Rated 08/18/86 19 7 6.12 4.54 Not Rated Mill Pond Cr SR 1309 Henderson 6-51 08/28/02 35 6 5.64 5.14 Not Rated 06/04/96 47 14 6.07 5.01 Not Rated French Broad R NC 280 Buncombe 6-(54.5) 09/10/02 65 25 5.60 4.46 Good-Fair 07/08/97 76 32 5.38 4.48 Good-Fair 07/08/92 86 41 5.08 4.17 Good 07/26/90 79 33 5.35 3.98 Good-Fair 08/04/87 77 29 5.46 4.29 Good-Fair French Broad R SR 1348 Buncombe 6-(54.5) 07/10/02 73 30 4.76 3.97 Good 07/09/97 72 32 5.02 4.02 Good-Fair 07/23/92 73 32 5.23 4.30 Good-Fair 08/03/87 70 23 5.25 4.01 Good-Fair 08/13/85 52 18 5.74 4.37 Fair 08/18/83 55 18 6.11 4.66 Fair French Broad R SR 1634 Buncombe 6-(54.5) 07/10/02 57 18 5.79 4.85 Fair 07/09/97 55 18 5.55 4.68 Good-Fair 07/23/92 53 19 6.08 4.79 Fair 07/24/90 61 19 5.73 4.33 Fair 08/03/87 67 25 5.72 4.17 Good-Fair Mud Cr SR 1125 Henderson 6-55 10/03/01 53 22 4.42 4.08 Not Rated 10/25/00 52 24 4.25 3.65 Not Rated

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 134 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Mud Cr SR 1126 Henderson 6-55 10/03/01 44 15 5.56 5.11 Not Rated 10/25/00 37 6 6.66 4.61 Not Rated 07/11/00 61 16 6.21 5.34 Not Rated 09/08/97 --- 2 --- 6.99 Not Rated Mud Cr SR 1164 Henderson 6-55 10/04/01 49 11 6.29 5.71 Fair Mud Cr SR 1647 Henderson 6-55 10/03/01 39 10 6.69 5.92 Poor 07/11/00 68 22 5.79 4.74 Fair 09/08/97 43 5 6.82 6.28 Poor Mud Cr SR 1508, ab Henderson 6-55 07/11/00 59 14 6.35 5.31 Fair WWTP 09/08/97 40 5 7.09 6.24 Poor 07/07/92 --- 10 --- 5.52 Poor 09/12/85 53 10 6.99 5.59 Poor Mud Cr SR 1508, be Henderson 6-55 07/12/00 46 12 6.59 5.46 Fair WWTP 09/08/97 47 8 7.08 5.84 Poor 07/07/92 --- 7 --- 6.36 Poor 09/12/85 31 3 7.74 7.17 Poor Mud Cr US 25 Henderson 6-55 07/13/00 57 10 7.06 5.70 Poor 09/09/97 54 12 6.71 5.70 Fair Bat Fk SR 1807 Henderson 6-55-8-1 04/11/89 --- 2 --- 2.55 Not Rated Bat Fk US 176 Henderson 6-55-8-1 04/11/89 44 6 7.61 5.99 Not Rated Bat Fk SR 1809 Henderson 6-55-8-1 07/10/00 37 14 5.48 5.08 Not Rated 04/11/89 19 2 8.61 1.29 Not Rated Bat Fk SR 1803 Henderson 6-55-8-1 04/12/89 25 4 7.73 6.65 Not Rated Bat Fk be Dunn Cr Henderson 6-55-8-1 07/23/01 45 9 6.33 6.12 Not Rated Bat Fk SR 1779 Henderson 6-55-8-1 07/23/01 49 7 6.92 6.02 Not Rated 07/10/00 50 9 6.93 6.06 Fair 09/09/97 48 7 6.97 6.31 Fair 04/11/89 --- 2 --- 7.64 Poor King Cr US 25 Henderson 6-55-8-1-2-(2) 10/25/00 36 10 5.25 5.36 Not Rated Devils Fk SR 1006 Henderson 6-55-8-2 10/04/01 27 4 5.80 5.61 Not Rated 03/03/01 51 7 6.30 5.95 Not Rated 07/13/00 46 8 6.06 5.29 Not Rated 10/25/00 36 8 6.25 6.48 Not Rated Devils Fk US 64 Henderson 6-55-8-2 07/13/00 43 5 7.83 6.24 Poor Clear Cr SR 1591 Henderson 6-55-11-(1) 10/23/00 47 14 4.71 3.82 Not Rated 06/15/93 38 10 5.52 2.85 Not Rated Clear Cr SR 1587 Henderson 6-55-11-(1) 10/24/00 65 23 4.52 3.29 Good-Fair 06/15/93 35 12 5.53 4.37 Fair Clear Cr SR 1586 Henderson 6-55-11-(1) 10/03/01 38 4 6.84 6.38 Poor 03/14/01 54 8 6.27 5.07 Poor 07/12/00 42 5 6.26 5.04 Poor 06/15/93 47 12 6.26 4.79 Fair Laurel Fk Nr SR 1592 Henderson 6-55-11-2 10/03/01 43 21 3.28 2.11 Good 10/24/00 53 28 3.08 2.70 Excellent 06/15/93 31 31 2.19 2.19 Good Cox Cr off SR 1569 Henderson 6-55-11-3 10/23/00 46 22 3.20 2.43 Not Rated Cox Cr SR 1587 Henderson 6-55-11-3 10/03/01 50 14 5.27 4.21 Not Rated 03/14/01 48 13 4.53 3.16 Not Rated 10/23/00 57 16 4.82 2.84 Not Rated 06/16/93 --- 10 --- 3.17 Poor Puncheon Camp SR 1591 Henderson 6-55-11-4 06/16/93 22 22 3.12 3.12 Not Rated Cr Clear Cr SR 1513 Henderson 6-55-11-(5) 10/03/01 48 10 6.17 5.04 Fair 03/13/01 71 15 6.11 4.47 Fair 10/26/00 36 8 5.44 4.50 Poor 07/12/00 56 14 5.95 5.30 Fair 07/08/97 --- 8 --- 5.10 Poor 07/07/92 --- 9 --- 5.28 Poor Mill Cr SR 1586 Henderson 6-55-11-7 10/03/01 42 8 5.13 4.27 Not Rated 03/14/01 46 10 5.56 4.65 Not Rated 10/23/00 25 11 4.90 4.54 Not Rated Kyles Cr SR 1579 Henderson 6-55-11-8 10/03/01 60 17 4.72 3.22 Not Rated 03/14/01 88 37 4.35 3.11 Not Rated Harper Cr SR 1582 Henderson 6-55-11-11 10/24/00 56 26 3.62 2.68 Excellent

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 135 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Cane Cr SR 2800 Buncombe 6-57-(1) 08/25/99 80 36 4.43 3.82 Good Cane Cr SR 1006 Henderson 6-57-(9) 07/11/02 --- 11 --- 4.27 Fair 07/08/97 26 26 4.22 4.22 Good-Fair 07/07/92 27 27 4.34 4.34 Good-Fair Bent Cr ab Boyd’s Br Buncombe 6-67-(1) 11/05/01 35 35 2.55 2.55 Excellent Bent Cr be Boyd's Br Buncombe 6-67-(1) 11/07/01 31 31 2.53 2.53 Excellent Boyd's Br near mouth Buncombe 6-67-6 11/05/01 30 30 1.98 1.98 Excellent Bent Cr be WWTP Buncombe 6-67-(7) 11/07/01 51 18 4.39 2.83 Good-Fair Wesley Cr ab rip-rap Buncombe 6-67-10 11/06/01 48 21 4.13 3.04 Not Rated area Wesley Cr be rip-rap Buncombe 6-67-10 11/07/01 48 22 4.05 2.90 Not Rated area Dingle Cr US 25 ab Buncombe 6-71 02/10/87 --- 10 --- 5.22 Not Rated Gerber Dingle Cr US 25 be Buncombe 6-71 02/10/87 --- 2 --- 4.34 Not Rated Gerber UT Dingle Cr Blue Ridge Buncombe 6-71 02/10/87 --- 16 --- 2.12 Not Rated Parkway #1 Dingle Cr Blue Ridge Buncombe 6-71 02/10/87 --- 14 --- 3.03 Fair Parkway #2 Hominy Cr US 19/23 Buncombe 6-76 05/15/02 62 35 4.27 3.97 Good Hominy Cr SR 1141 Buncombe 6-76 01/18/89 --- 18 --- 3.19 Fair Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 6-76 05/14/02 71 36 4.37 3.90 Good 09/10/97 71 32 5.18 4.13 Good-Fair 07/09/92 --- 28 --- 3.31 Good Hominy Cr NC 112 Buncombe 6-76 05/16/02 60 29 4.82 4.28 Good-Fair 09/09/97 63 16 5.84 4.84 Fair 07/09/92 --- 11 --- 3.94 Fair Hominy Cr SR 3412 Buncombe 6-76 05/16/02 65 21 5.62 4.95 Fair 09/09/97 63 13 6.48 5.19 Fair 07/10/97 --- 13 --- 4.12 Fair 07/09/92 --- 8 --- 3.76 Poor Web Br SR 1130 Buncombe 6-76-4 05/14/02 --- 24 --- 4.26 Not Rated S Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 6-76-5 05/15/02 --- 38 --- 2.99 Good S Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 6-76-5 08/28/02 --- 26 --- 2.72 Good-Fair 05/14/02 72 35 3.76 3.17 Good 05/15/00 64 34 4.10 3.77 Good 09/10/97 38 8 6.34 5.31 Poor 07/09/92 --- 20 --- 3.24 Good-Fair Stony Fk NC 151 Buncombe 6-76-5-3 05/15/02 65 39 2.49 2 Good Beaverdam Cr SR 3449 Buncombe 6-76-5-8 05/15/02 63 44 2.25 1.83 Excellent Beaverdam Cr off SR 3449 Buncombe 6-76-5-8 05/15/02 62 34 3.97 3.25 Good Pole Cr SR 1220 Buncombe 6-76-6 05/14/02 --- 23 --- 3.16 Not Rated Bill Moore Cr SR 3439 Buncombe 6-76-7 05/14/02 67 38 2.94 2.60 Not Rated Moore Cr Brookside Buncombe 6-76-8 05/14/02 30 9 5.63 4.75 Fair Circle Canie Cr Bear Cr Rd Buncombe 6-76-12 05/16/02 33 3 7.51 7.51 Poor Swannanoa R SR 2500 Buncombe 6-78 08/27/02 62 19 5.42 4.22 Fair 10/06/87 56 19 5.82 4.68 Fair Swannanoa R SR 2436 Buncombe 6-78 08/27/02 --- 22 --- 4.75 Good-Fair 10/07/87 50 18 5.49 4.65 Good-Fair Swannanoa R SR 2416 Buncombe 6-78 08/27/02 75 24 5.86 4.58 Fair 10/07/87 60 22 5.17 4.26 Fair Swannanoa R Azalea Rd Buncombe 6-78 01/11/93 78 31 5.24 4.33 Good-Fair Swannanoa R Azalea Park Buncombe 6-78 08/27/02 21 21 4.36 4.36 Good-Fair Swannanoa R NC 81/240 Buncombe 6-78 03/24/88 70 24 5.88 4.18 Fair at River Rd 10/06/87 68 24 5.87 4.42 Good-Fair 07/24/87 76 29 5.62 4.57 Good-Fair

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 136 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Swannanoa R US 25 Buncombe 6-78 08/28/02 73 26 5.79 4.70 Good-Fair 07/09/97 62 28 5.44 4.26 Good-Fair 07/08/92 72 27 5.74 4.43 Good-Fair 07/27/89 60 15 6.28 4.47 Fair 03/24/88 47 8 7 5.96 Poor 10/05/87 54 17 6.40 5.07 Fair 07/24/87 73 33 5.25 4.21 Good-Fair 08/12/85 41 9 7.44 5.48 Poor Flat Cr above Big Buncombe 6-78-6-(1) 12/11/91 35 35 1.54 1.54 Excellent Piney Br Flat Cr US 70 Buncombe 6-78-6-(4) 12/14/99 62 31 4.10 3.03 Good-Fair 10/06/87 --- 15 --- 4.02 Fair Big Slaty Br near NC 9 Buncombe 6-78-6-2 12/11/91 --- 34 --- 1.50 Excellent Little Slaty Br near NC 9 Buncombe 6-78-6-3 12/11/91 --- 37 --- 1.55 Excellent Big Piney Br near NC 9 Buncombe 6-78-6-5 12/11/91 --- 32 --- 1.37 Excellent Wolfpit Br near High Buncombe 6-78-10-(1) 12/10/91 --- 26 --- 1.35 Excellent Top Colony Rd N Fk Swannanoa SR 2576, ab Buncombe 6-78-11-(13) 10/08/87 --- 14 --- 3.85 Fair R Grovestone N Fk Swannanoa US 70, be Buncombe 6-78-11-(13) 08/27/02 --- 22 --- 4.01 Good-Fair R Grovestone 10/07/87 --- 12 --- 4.46 Fair Laurel Br Private road Buncombe 6-78-11-16 02/13/92 58 32 2.88 1.70 Excellent Beetree Cr SR 2416 Buncombe 6-78-15-(1) 10/06/87 --- 19 --- 3.72 Good-Fair Beetree Cr SR 2427 Buncombe 6-78-15-(1) 03/17/86 72 39 3.59 2.83 Excellent Beetree Cr SR 2429 Buncombe 6-78-15-(6) 10/07/87 --- 15 --- 3.01 Good-Fair Bull Cr SR 2408 Buncombe 6-78-18 10/08/87 --- 27 --- 3.47 Good Christian Cr Buckeye Buncombe 6-78-19 01/12/99 55 32 2.95 2.16 Good Cove Rd SR 2838 Buncombe 10/05/87 --- 17 --- 4.53 Good-Fair Grassy Br off SR 2403 Buncombe 6-78-20 12/14/99 --- 14 --- 4.10 Not Rated Gashes Cr SR 3071 Buncombe 6-78-21 05/25/94 61 20 4.71 2.93 Good-Fair Haw Cr Ab US 70 Buncombe 6-78-22 12/15/99 --- 12 --- 3.54 Not Rated Ross Cr Chunn's Buncombe 6-78-23 06/26/02 43 16 4.33 3.26 Not Rated Cove Rd. 01/12/99 34 15 3.75 2.94 Not Rated Ross Cr US 70 Buncombe 6-78-23 06/26/02 29 6 7.03 5.57 Not Rated 01/12/99 21 2 8.07 6.16 Poor Sweeten Cr Biltmore Buncombe 6-78-24 12/15/99 --- 3 --- 6.42 Not Rated Village Sweeten Cr US 25A Buncombe 6-78-24 10/05/87 --- 1 --- 5.50 Not Rated Newfound Cr SR 1296 Buncombe 6-84 06/12/89 74 38 3.93 3.02 Excellent 06/09/88 94 39 4.29 3.53 Excellent Newfound Cr SR 1297 Buncombe 6-84 06/12/89 56 16 6.63 4.90 Not Rated 06/09/88 62 17 6.46 4.87 Not Rated Newfound Cr SR 1378 Buncombe 6-84 04/23/86 50 12 6.72 4.76 Fair Newfound Cr SR 1622 Buncombe 6-84 07/12/02 70 23 6.16 4.97 Fair 05/18/99 98 38 5.35 4.34 Good-Fair 07/09/97 --- 20 --- 4.97 Good-Fair 07/27/89 59 17 7.10 5.50 Fair 06/12/89 52 7 7.64 6.28 Poor 04/10/89 47 7 7.31 5.65 Poor 02/15/89 40 3 7.96 6.77 Poor 06/09/88 65 13 7.33 6.18 Poor 04/23/86 43 10 6.62 5.13 Poor Reems Cr off SR 1003 Buncombe 6-87-(1) 07/10/02 --- 38 --- 3.30 Excellent Reems Cr NC 251 Buncombe 6-87-(10) 07/10/02 --- 27 --- 3.69 Good-Fair 07/09/97 --- 30 --- 3.33 Good 07/23/92 --- 20 --- 3.37 Good-Fair Flat Cr SR 1740 Buncombe 6-88 07/11/02 --- 22 --- 3.91 Good-Fair 04/24/86 75 24 4.94 3.55 Good-Fair Sandymush Cr SR 1114 Madison 6-92-(9) 07/10/02 --- 32 --- 3.50 Good 07/10/97 --- 30 --- 4.02 Good 07/22/92 --- 36 --- 4.30 Excellent 07/22/92 --- 36 --- 4.30 Excellent

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 137 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 04-03-03 Davidson R US 276 Transylvania 6-54-(15.5) 7/22/02 36 36 3.35 3.35 Excellent Transylvania 7/22/97 113 52 3.76 2.65 Excellent Transylvania 7/7/92 45 45 1.83 1.83 Excellent Boylston Cr SR 1314 Henderson 6-52-(0.5) 7/22/02 59 27 4.62 3.56 Good-Fair Henderson 7/21/97 71 23 5.53 4.36 Good-Fair Henderson 7/7/92 --- 26 --- 4.65 Good-Fair Mills R SR 1337 Henderson 6-54-(1) 6/25/02 74 39 4.39 3.12 Good Henderson 7/21/97 115 53 3.46 2.35 Excellent Henderson 8/2/94 --- 43 --- 2.45 Excellent Henderson 7/8/92 88 51 3.21 2.31 Excellent Henderson 7/24/90 105 51 3.68 2.52 Excellent Henderson 8/8/88 84 37 4.04 2.82 Excellent Henderson 8/11/88 --- 32 --- 2.34 Good Henderson 7/22/86 90 48 3.62 2.81 Excellent Henderson 8/20/84 90 45 3.44 2.57 Excellent N Fk Mills R FS Rd 5000 Henderson 6-54-2-(4) 9/10/97 54 34 3.17 2.63 Good N Fk Mills R FS Rd 1206, Henderson 6-54-2-(4) 6/25/02 --- 40 --- 1.94 Excellent Ab Rocky Br At Rocky Br Henderson 6-54-2-(4) 7/21/97 --- 41 --- 1.66 Excellent FS Rd 1206, Henderson 6-54-2-(4) 6/14/93 93 47 3.03 2.03 Excellent Ab Rocky Br Wash Cr off SR 1345 Henderson 6-54-2-6 6/14/93 73 47 2.22 1.80 Excellent N Fk Mills R SR 1341 Henderson 6-54-2-(9) 6/25/02 70 31 4.62 3.3 Good Henderson 6/14/93 102 50 2.99 2.19 Excellent Henderson 7/12/85 91 37 3.92 2.81 Excellent Bradley Cr FS Rd 1206 Transylvania 6-54-3-17 4/16/91 --- 55 --- 1.68 Excellent FS Rd 1206 Transylvania 4/16/91 --- 47 --- 1.85 Excellent ab State Rock Cr FS Rd 1206 Transylvania 7/10/91 --- 38 --- 1.52 Excellent ab Yellow Gap Cr FS Rd 1206 Transylvania 4/16/91 --- 60 --- 1.61 Excellent Bradley Fk FS Rd be Henderson 6-54-3-17 9/10/97 66 40 2.43 1.75 Excellent Laurel Cr S Fk Mills R SR 1340 Henderson 6-54-3-(17.5) 6/25/02 70 35 4.35 3.08 Good Henderson 6/15/93 113 57 3.12 2.31 Excellent Mills R SR 1353 Henderson 6-54-(5) 6/24/02 58 28 5.54 3.95 Good-Fair Henderson 11/7/01 --- 6 --- 5.08 Poor Henderson 10/7/98 19 2 6.69 5.96 Poor Henderson 7/21/97 78 24 5.17 3.31 Good-Fair Henderson 8/2/94 31 5 6.04 4.43 Poor Henderson 6/15/93 90 40 4.18 2.80 Good Henderson 7/8/92 81 35 4.19 3.14 Good UT Mills R SR 1336 Henderson 6-54-(5) 10/18/94 19 19 2.65 2.65 Good-Fair UT Mills R Greenhouse Henderson 6-54-(5) 12/15/92 4 0 8.43 0 Poor UT Mills R SR 1338 Henderson 6-54-(5) 12/15/92 43 15 5.63 3.85 Fair Brandy Br NC 191, ab Henderson 6-54-6 10/18/94 49 10 6.62 5.70 Fair WTP 04-03-04 French Broad R NC 213 Madison 6-(54.5) 6/26/02 81 26 5.86 4.59 Good-Fair 7/7/97 52 25 4.81 3.94 Good-Fair 7/23/92 67 25 5.39 4.64 Good-Fair 7/24/90 49 18 5.54 4.73 Good-Fair 8/9/88 71 22 5.90 4.76 Fair 7/23/86 79 31 5.45 3.98 Good-Fair 8/13/85 62 18 5.68 4.52 Good-Fair 8/29/84 41 16 5.38 4.45 Good-Fair 8/18/83 54 19 5.61 4.37 Good-Fair Ivy Cr (R) SR 2150 Buncombe 6-96-(0.5) 7/9/02 --- 32 --- 4.13 Good 7/7/97 --- 27 --- 2.78 Good-Fair 7/22/92 --- 38 --- 3.47 Excellent Ivy Cr (R) SR 2153 Buncombe 6-96-(0.5) 8/31/93 100 41 4.67 3.75 Good Dillingham Cr SR 2173 ab Buncombe 6-96-1-(1) 8/31/93 --- 31 --- 2.32 Good Stoney Cr

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 138 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Dillingham Cr SR 2173, be Buncombe 6-96-1-(1) 8/31/93 86 36 4.40 3.17 Good Stoney Cr Stony Cr SR 2178 Buncombe 6-96-1-5 8/30/93 77 33 3.35 2.38 Good

Carter Cr At mouth, ab Buncombe 6-96-1-5-1 8/30/93 --- 29 --- 1.92 Excellent confl w Mineral Cr Mineral Cr off SR 2178 Buncombe 6-96-1-5-2 8/30/93 --- 29 --- 1.39 Excellent Paint Fk SR 1531 Madison 6-96-2 5/30/02 68 29 4.86 3.76 Not Rated Paint Fk SR 1539 Madison 6-96-2 5/30/02 70 29 5.09 4.01 Not Rated N Fk Ivy Cr SR 2027 Buncombe 6-96-3 9/1/93 --- 35 --- 2.70 Good Little Ivy Cr SR 1547 Madison 6-96-10 5/29/02 62 15 6.49 4.97 Fair 1/21/97 --- 24 --- 3.52 Good-Fair 8/31/93 --- 27 --- 4.21 Good-Fair Little Ivy Cr SR 1610 Madison 6-96-10 5/29/02 78 27 6.19 4.60 Good-Fair 7/7/97 --- 16 --- 3.91 Fair 7/22/92 --- 35 --- 3.87 Good M Fk Little Ivy Cr SR 1526 Madison 6-96-10-1 5/30/02 61 27 4.90 3.60 Not Rated M Fk Little Ivy Cr US 19 Madison 6-96-10-1 5/29/02 48 19 6.29 4.43 Not Rated California Cr SR 1348 Madison 6-96-10-2 5/28/02 52 28 3.03 2.24 Not Rated California Cr SR 1349 Madison 6-96-10-2 1/22/97 --- 31 --- 2.28 Good California Cr SR 1541 Madison 6-96-10-2 5/28/02 42 13 5.77 4.26 Not Rated 1/22/97 53 29 3.91 2.97 Good-Fair Big Br off SR 1540 Madison 6-96-10-5 5/29/02 45 15 5.52 4.73 Big Br SR 1549 Madison 6-96-10-5 5/29/02 36 9 5.74 4.68 Not Rated UT Big Br NC 213 Madison 6-96-10-5 5/28/02 32 6 7.03 4.76 Not Rated Ivy Cr (R) SR 1565 Madison 6-96-(11.7) 8/31/93 85 39 5.10 3.90 Good Ivy Cr (R) US 25/70 Madison 6-96-(11.7) 6/26/02 80 30 4.92 3.77 Good-Fair 7/7/97 59 28 4.72 3.54 Good-Fair 9/2/93 --- 33 --- 3.31 Good 7/22/92 87 36 4.67 3.63 Good Gabriel Cr SR 1559. Madison 6-96-12 8/31/93 --- 21 --- 3.86 Good-Fair last bridge Bull Cr NC 213 Madison 6-96-16 8/31/93 --- 25 --- 3.46 Good-Fair Hunter Cr Ab old Madison 6-106-2-(1) 12/10/91 --- 30 --- 1.65 Excellent reservoir Big Laurel Cr SR 1503 Madison 6-112 7/8/02 --- 45 --- 2.37 Excellent 7/8/97 --- 33 --- 2.31 Good Big Laurel Cr SR 1318 Madison 6-112 7/8/02 80 42 3.31 2.86 Excellent 1/21/97 65 37 2.73 2.39 Excellent Big Laurel Cr SR Madison 6-112 1/21/97 --- 33 --- 1.98 Good 1318/1314 Big Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 6-112 5/30/02 90 46 4.68 3.55 Good 7/8/97 --- 36 --- 2.66 Excellent 8/19/92 --- 38 --- 3.00 Excellent Puncheon Fk SR 1503 Madison 6-112-5 7/8/02 --- 40 --- 2.83 Excellent 7/8/97 --- 31 --- 2.24 Good Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 6-112-26 6/27/02 --- 32 --- 3.64 Good 7/8/97 --- 31 --- 3.13 Good 8/19/92 --- 32 --- 2.90 Good 5/16/90 --- 44 --- 2.55 Excellent Hickory Fk SR 1310 Madison 6-112-26-7 5/16/90 --- 43 --- 1.90 Excellent W Pr Hickory Fk SR 1310 Madison 6-112-26-7-1 5/16/90 --- 38 --- 1.62 Excellent E Pr Hickory Fk FS Rd 465 Madison 6-112-26-7-2 5/16/90 --- 32 --- 1.35 Excellent L Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 6-112-26-13 5/31/02 59 32 2.77 2.00 Not Rated Spring Cr NC 209 Madison 6-118-(27) 6/27/02 --- 37 --- 3.33 Excellent 7/8/97 --- 31 --- 3.04 Good 8/19/92 --- 26 --- 2.75 Good-Fair

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 139 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 04-03-05 Pigeon R off NC 215 Haywood 5- (1) 7/24/84 87 37 4.63 3.49 Good

Pigeon R NC 215 Haywood 5- (1) 7/25/02 59 30 4.93 3.82 Good-Fair Haywood 12/15/99 69 36 4.33 3.50 Good Haywood 7/22/97 94 44 3.82 2.94 Excellent Haywood 9/7/95 74 29 4.59 3.04 Good-Fair Haywood 8/2/94 70 30 4.47 3.36 Good Haywood 1/10/93 86 34 4.41 2.95 Good Haywood 8/19/92 84 37 4.52 3.45 Good Haywood 8/11/88 --- 34 --- 3.25 Good Haywood 8/10/88 85 33 5.15 3.69 Good-Fair Haywood 2/22/88 87 35 4.56 3.56 Good Haywood 7/25/86 80 38 4.77 3.82 Good Haywood 7/24/84 82 32 4.30 2.71 Good Haywood 8/17/83 86 29 5.13 3.73 Good-Fair W Fk Pigeon R SR 1216 Haywood 5-2 7/25/02 37 37 2.47 2.47 Excellent Haywood 7/22/97 50 50 1.58 1.58 Excellent Haywood 1/12/93 81 47 2.52 1.73 Excellent Haywood 7/11/91 --- 44 --- 1.85 Excellent Haywood 5/16/90 48 48 1.83 1.83 Excellent UT W Fk Pigeon R near NC 215 Haywood 5-2 5/16/90 --- 34 --- 1.26 Excellent Tom Cr near NC 215 Haywood 5-2-5 12/9/91 --- 35 --- 1.52 Excellent Haywood 7/11/91 --- 30 --- 1.13 Excellent M Pr W Fk Pigeon at mouth Haywood 7/11/91 --- 39 --- 1.55 Excellent R Haywood 4/17/91 --- 42 --- 1.40 Excellent Haywood 5-2-7 5/16/90 --- 42 --- 1.70 Excellent R Pr M Pr W Fk At road Haywood 5-2-7-7 4/17/91 --- 42 --- 1.37 Excellent Pigeon R crossing, mouth Haywood 12/9/91 --- 36 --- 1.75 Excellent Haywood 7/11/91 --- 34 --- 1.65 Excellent Haywood 5/16/90 --- 36 --- 1.50 Excellent UT L E Fk Pigeon near Shining Haywood 5-2-12-(0.5) 4/17/91 --- 38 --- 1.45 Excellent R Rock Wilderness L E Fk Pigeon R SR 1129 Haywood 5-2-12-(5.5) 4/17/91 --- 51 --- 1.50 Excellent E Fk Pigeon R US 276 Haywood 5-3-(6.5) 7/22/02 --- 40 --- 2.80 Excellent Haywood 7/22/97 109 50 3.54 2.43 Excellent Haywood 7/25/84 86 38 4.22 2.81 Good Pigeon R SR 1642 Haywood 5-(7) 9/10/02 49 9 6.84 5.27 Poor Haywood 12/15/99 55 18 5.94 4.34 Fair Haywood 7/23/97 78 25 5.96 4.42 Good-Fair Haywood 9/7/95 44 16 6.02 5.38 Fair Haywood 8/2/94 44 13 6.14 5.29 Fair Haywood 8/19/92 63 16 6.74 4.41 Fair Haywood 9/11/89 47 7 6.80 4.39 Poor Haywood 9/11/89 --- 5 --- 5.21 Poor Haywood 8/10/88 31 4 7.83 5.19 Poor Haywood 2/22/88 51 12 6.86 4.70 Poor Haywood 7/24/86 34 2 8.23 3.59 Poor Haywood 8/25/84 39 5 7.65 5 Poor Pigeon R SR 1625, be Haywood 5-(7) 8/3/94 54 15 6.11 4.77 Fair Richland Cr Pigeon R near Haywood 5-(7) 2/22/88 53 16 6.24 4.11 Fair Crabtree Pigeon R SR 1338 Haywood 5-(7) 9/9/02 56 19 5.60 4.36 Good-Fair Haywood 7/23/97 78 27 5.44 4.18 Good-Fair Haywood 8/3/94 57 22 5.40 4.71 Good-Fair Haywood 8/10/88 49 14 6.11 4.01 Fair Haywood 2/23/88 46 24 4.95 3.99 Good-Fair Pigeon R at Haywood 5-(7) 3/18/92 77 41 4.25 2.97 Good Counterfeit Br Haywood 4/22/92 94 43 4.46 2.90 Good

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 140 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Pigeon R at Hurricane Haywood 5-(7) 3/18/92 74 30 5.59 3.82 Good-Fair Cr Haywood 4/22/92 74 28 5.80 4.50 Good-Fair Pigeon R off I-40 Haywood 5-(7) 7/25/02 75 38 4.96 3.98 Good Haywood 7/24/97 81 40 4.77 3.13 Good Haywood 8/3/94 58 27 4.37 3.61 Good Haywood 7/25/90 57 22 4.76 3.97 Good-Fair Haywood 7/27/89 62 28 5.24 4.31 Good-Fair Haywood 8/10/88 67 24 4.89 3.61 Good-Fair Haywood 8/7/87 58 25 5.06 3.75 Good-Fair Haywood 7/24/86 67 28 4.77 3.95 Good-Fair Haywood 8/12/85 57 17 5.85 4.06 Fair Haywood 8/24/84 68 30 4.82 3.58 Good Haywood 8/17/83 66 24 5.41 3.68 Good-Fair Rough Cr near SR Haywood 5-8-4-(1) 9/11/97 --- 29 --- 1.22 Excellent 1616 Richland Cr Bus 23 Haywood 5-16-(1) 7/29/02 --- 31 --- 2.91 Good Haywood 7/25/97 --- 23 --- 2.79 Good-Fair Haywood 8/18/92 --- 17 --- 3.51 Fair Richland Cr SR 1184 Haywood 5-16-(1) 7/24/02 --- 19 --- 4.29 Good-Fair Haywood 7/24/97 --- 24 --- 3.22 Good-Fair Haywood 8/18/92 --- 26 --- 3.38 Good-Fair Haywood 8/10/88 42 11 6.24 5.30 Fair Haywood 8/12/85 28 9 6.07 4.07 Poor Haywood 8/17/83 42 9 7.19 4.10 Poor

UT Richland Cr J&J Farm Haywood 5/18/99 11 2 6.40 4.99 Not Rated Rd UT Richland Cr off SR 1157 Haywood 5/18/99 --- 26 --- 1.87 Good Nolen Cr off SR 1158 Haywood 5-16-4 5/15/02 42 29 2.32 2.21 Not Rated Hyatt Cr SR 1159, ds Haywood 5-16-6 4/18/84 30 10 6.21 4.09 Fair SR 1159, us Haywood 4/18/84 41 17 5.65 3.87 Good-Fair SR 1161 Haywood 5/13/02 36 20 3.29 2.63 Not Rated SR 1165 Haywood 5/13/02 40 22 4.25 3.91 Not Rated Shiny Cr Ab Allen Haywood 5-16-7-3 7/25/97 --- 43 --- 1.30 Excellent Res. Rocky Br SR 1219 Haywood 5-16-7-9 (1) 12/9/91 --- 35 --- 1.38 Excellent Richland Cr SR 1519 Haywood 5-16-(16) 7/25/02 45 20 5.42 4.46 Good-Fair Haywood 7/25/97 --- 15 --- 4.42 Fair Haywood 8/18/92 --- 14 --- 4.47 Fair Jonathans Cr SR 1306 Haywood 5-26-(7) 7/24/97 --- 46 --- 1.50 Excellent Haywood 8/18/92 --- 41 --- 1.85 Excellent Jonathans Cr SR 1305 Haywood 5-26-(7) 7/24/02 --- 36 --- 1.89 Excellent Jonathans Cr SR 1322 Haywood 5-26-(7) 7/25/02 --- 36 --- 3.57 Excellent Haywood 7/24/97 --- 41 --- 2.67 Excellent Haywood 8/18/92 --- 33 --- 3.30 Good Jonathans Cr SR 1349 Haywood 5-26-(7) 9/9/02 --- 34 --- 3.84 Good Haywood 7/24/97 --- 39 --- 3.11 Excellent Haywood 8/18/92 --- 23 --- 3.70 Good-Fair Fines Cr SR 1355 Haywood 5-32 7/24/02 --- 24 --- 3.52 Good-Fair Haywood 7/23/97 --- 27 --- 2.63 Good-Fair Haywood 8/17/92 --- 19 --- 3.74 Good-Fair Cataloochee Cr SR 1395 Haywood 5-41 7/24/02 --- 45 --- 1.64 Excellent Haywood 7/23/97 102 50 2.72 1.68 Excellent Haywood 8/17/92 84 42 3.03 1.87 Excellent Haywood 7/11/91 80 48 2.72 2.02 Excellent Haywood 7/27/89 43 43 1.90 1.90 Excellent Haywood 7/27/89 101 53 3.02 1.94 Excellent Haywood 1/24/90 85 51 2.34 1.83 Excellent Haywood 1/24/90 47 47 1.68 1.68 Excellent Haywood 4/11/90 86 56 2.30 1.85 Excellent Haywood 7/25/90 95 51 3.16 1.86 Excellent Haywood 10/23/90 86 47 2.74 1.82 Excellent Haywood 7/24/86 102 47 3.51 2.09 Excellent Haywood 8/24/84 96 42 3.37 1.92 Excellent

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 141 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Cataloochee Cr near SR Haywood 5-41 1/24/90 --- 45 --- 1.52 Excellent 1395, ab Palmer Cr UT Rough Fk near SR Haywood 5-41-1 4/18/91 --- 47 --- 1.66 Excellent 1395 Palmer Cr near SR Haywood 5-41-2 4/18/91 --- 46 --- 1.51 Excellent 1395 Pretty Hollow Cr near SR Haywood 5-41-2-4 4/18/91 --- 47 --- 1.56 Excellent 1395 Lower Double Br ab Haywood 5-41-6 1/24/90 57 36 1.94 1.34 Excellent Cataloochee Cr Haywood 4/11/90 57 36 2.25 1.41 Excellent Haywood 7/25/90 54 31 2.89 1.73 Excellent Haywood 10/23/90 63 37 2.64 1.48 Excellent L Cataloochee Cr SR 1397 Haywood 5-41-10 1/24/90 --- 40 --- 1.95 Excellent Hurricane Cr FS Rd off I- Haywood 5-44 7/23/02 --- 32 --- 1.93 Good 40 at Mile Marker 13 Cold Springs Cr Gov't Rd, Haywood 5-45 3/18/92 78 45 2.89 1.80 Excellent near Cmpgd. Haywood 4/23/92 84 48 2.98 2.13 Excellent Big Cr SR 1322 in Haywood 5-59 7/24/97 --- 47 --- 1.38 Excellent GSMNP Chestnut Br SR 1322 in Haywood 7/23/02 --- 28 --- 1.93 Good GSMNP 04-03-06 Nolichucky R SR 1321 Mitchell 7 7/9/02 89 43 4.37 3.62 Good 7/9/97 71 37 4.03 3.62 Good 7/21/92 87 41 4.23 3.41 Good 7/23/90 83 38 4.44 3.41 Good 8/9/88 93 35 4.95 3.89 Good 7/23/86 84 37 4.95 3.74 Good 8/14/85 72 28 4.79 3.53 Good-Fair 8/29/84 68 31 4.55 3.89 Good 8/9/83 78 34 4.60 3.96 Good Roaring Cr US 19E Avery 7-2-15 7/10/02 --- 37 --- 1.73 Excellent Jones Cr SR 1100 Avery 7-2-24 9/11/85 75 29 3.75 2.23 Good N Toe R US 19E Avery 7-2-(27.3) 7/10/02 89 39 4.92 3.86 Good 7/10/97 72 42 4.06 3.56 Good 7/21/92 99 41 4.32 3.24 Good 8/8/89 93 34 4.50 3.78 Good 2/14/89 58 29 4.50 3.23 Good 8/8/88 34 34 2.83 2.83 Good 8/4/87 92 38 4.67 3.36 Good 8/15/85 85 35 4.89 3.57 Good 8/28/84 84 36 4.28 3.17 Good N Toe R be Brushy Avery 7-2-(27.7) 2/14/89 59 35 4.19 2.99 Good Cr N Toe R be indusmin Mitchell 7-2-(27.7) 9/11/85 50 18 5.71 3.50 Fair N Toe R NC 226, Mitchell 7-2-(27.7) 9/11/85 64 22 5.27 3.87 Good-Fair below Feldspar N Toe R SR 1121, ab Mitchell 7-2-(27.7) 9/11/85 83 31 4.78 3.26 Good Feldspar N Toe R SR 1151 Mitchell 7-2-(27.7) 8/15/85 61 17 6.30 3.92 Fair N Toe R SR 1162 Mitchell 7-2-(27.7) 7/10/02 60 22 5.90 4.15 Fair 7/9/97 70 34 4.74 3.72 Good 7/20/92 78 23 5.25 3.36 Good-Fair 8/7/89 63 24 5.58 3.50 Good-Fair 8/3/87 61 20 5.95 3.72 Fair 8/8/88 --- 10 --- 2.88 Poor 7/23/86 70 22 5.93 3.71 Fair 8/14/85 46 12 6.20 3.67 Fair 8/28/84 63 22 5.42 3.43 Good-Fair

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 142 Appendix 7 (continued).

Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating N Toe R SR 1314 Yancey 7-2-(27.7) 7/9/02 75 36 4.88 3.81 Good 7/9/97 74 40 4.66 4.17 Good 7/21/92 94 42 4.83 4.07 Good Brushy Cr ab landfill Avery 7-2-29 2/14/89 --- 27 --- 2.36 Good-Fair Brushy Cr be landfill Avery 7-2-29 2/14/89 --- 24 --- 3.40 Good-Fair Little Bear Cr be Indusmin Mitchell 7-2-46-1 9/10/85 9 2 7.60 4.30 Poor Little Bear Cr near NC 226 Mitchell 7-2-46-1 9/10/85 31 8 4.74 2.76 Fair ab Indusmin Big Crabtree Cr SR 1002 Mitchell 7-2-48 7/20/92 --- 32 --- 2.06 Good Big Crabtree Cr US 19E Mitchell 7-2-48 7/11/02 --- 37 --- 3.02 Excellent 7/10/97 --- 40 --- 2.24 Excellent S Toe R ab NC 80 Yancey 7-2-52-(1) 1/17/91 --- 51 --- 2.01 Excellent S Toe R 6/18/90 --- 41 --- 2.05 Excellent S Toe R be NC 80 Yancey 7-2-52-(1) 1/17/91 --- 44 --- 1.70 Good S Toe R 6/18/90 --- 46 --- 2.12 Excellent S Toe R SR 1167 Yancey 7-2-52-(1) 7/11/02 100 50 3.49 2.57 Excellent 7/10/97 82 40 3.24 2.49 Excellent 7/20/92 102 48 3.55 2.56 Excellent 8/9/88 113 48 4.10 2.87 Excellent 8/13/85 99 42 3.97 3.21 Excellent 8/19/83 100 41 4.30 3.23 Good S Toe R SR 1168 Yancey 7-2-52-(1) 1/29/96 71 48 2.32 1.90 Excellent S Toe R SR 1205 Yancey 7-2-52-(1) 1/29/96 43 35 1.85 1.55 Excellent 1/29/96 56 44 2.04 1.54 Excellent L Crabtree Cr SR 1144 Yancey 7-2-52-33 7/10/02 68 29 4.67 2.95 Good-Fair R Fk Cane Cr SR 1206 Mitchell 7-2-59-1 7/11/02 76 41 3.27 2.48 Excellent Big Rock Cr NC 197 Mitchell 7-2-64 7/9/02 --- 36 --- 2.97 Excellent 7/9/97 --- 34 --- 2.38 Good 7/21/92 --- 43 --- 2.71 Excellent 04-03-07 Cattail Cr SR 1102 Yancey 7-3-9 1/30/96 39 26 2.27 1.51 Good Cane R US 19W Yancey 7-3-(13.7) 7/9/02 91 46 4.38 3.63 Excellent 7/9/97 84 46 4.35 3.54 Excellent 7/21/92 93 48 4.36 3.48 Excellent 8/7/89 81 37 4.44 3.72 Good 8/3/87 77 34 4.55 3.65 Good 8/14/85 62 23 5.17 3.63 Good-Fair 8/19/83 70 27 5.11 3.81 Good-Fair Cane R US 19E Yancey 7-3-(13.7) 7/10/02 105 49 4.77 3.59 Excellent Banks Cr SR 1118 Yancey 7-3-21-4 7/11/02 37 25 2.92 2.10 Not Rated Bald Mountain Cr SR 1408 Yancey 7-3-32 7/9/02 --- 40 --- 2.77 Excellent 7/8/97 --- 32 --- 2.47 Good 7/21/92 --- 26 --- 3.37 Good-Fair

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 143 Appendix 8. Water quality measurements at benthic macroinvertebrate basinwide sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002.

Specific Dissolved Subbasin/ Temperature conductance oxygen pH Waterbody Location County Date (ûC) (µmhos/cm) (mg/L) (s.u.) 04-03-01 French Broad R SR 1129 Transylvania 07/08/02 22 21 8.2 7.7 W Fk French Broad R US 64 Transylvania 07/09/02 18 18 8.2 7.4 N Fk French Broad R SR 1322 Transylvania 07/09/02 22 19 --- 7.5 M Fk French Broad R SR 1131 Transylvania 07/08/02 20 21 --- 7.5 Little R SR 1560 Transylvania 07/08/02 21 18 --- 7.3 Little R SR 1533 Transylvania 07/08/02 21 26 --- 7.8 04-03-02 French Broad R NC 146 Buncombe 09/10/02 23 51 9.3 8.0 French Broad R SR 1348 Buncombe 07/10/02 26 53 --- 7.5 French Broad R SR 1634 Buncombe 07/10/02 27 91 --- 7.8 Cane Cr SR 1006 Henderson 07/11/02 22 67 --- 7.6 Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 05/14/02 16 67 9.5 7.0 Hominy Cr SR 3412 Buncombe 05/16/02 14 81 9.4 7.1 S Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 05/14/02 17 30 9.3 7.0 S Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 08/28/02 19 36 8.8 7.2 Swannanoa R SR 2416 Buncombe 08/27/02 24 62 7.3 7.0 Swannanoa R US 25 Buncombe 08/28/02 21 78 6.6 7.0 Newfound Cr SR 1622 Buncombe 07/12/02 19 128 6.3 6.6 Reems Cr NC 251 Buncombe 07/10/02 21 77 --- 7.5 Sandymush Cr SR 1114 Madison 07/10/02 24 86 ------04-03-03 Davidson R US 276 Transylvania 7/22/02 21 96 8.6 7.1 Boylston Cr SR 1314 Henderson 7/22/02 23 25 7.5 7.0 Mills R SR 1337 Henderson 6/25/02 19 15 11.6 7.3 N Fk Mills R FS RD 1206 Henderson 6/25/02 19 13 11.4 7.6 Mills R SR 1353 Henderson 6/24/02 21 17 10.8 7.6 04-03-04 French Broad R NC 213 Madison 06/26/02 27 100 6.3 8.2 Ivy Cr (R) SR 2150 Buncombe 07/09/02 23 47 8.8 7.7 Little Ivy Cr SR 1610 Madison 05/29/02 22 131 8.8 8.9 Ivy Cr (R) US 25/70 Madison 06/26/02 24 88 9.3 7.4 Big Laurel Cr SR 1503 Madison 07/08/02 22 47 7.7 7.4 Big Laurel Cr SR NC 208 Madison 05/30/02 21 51 6.5 8.3 Puncheon Fork SR 1503 Madison 07/08/02 21 22 7.6 7.4 Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 06/07/02 22 56 11.1 7.7 Spring Cr NC 209 Madison 06/27/02 23 44 9.5 7.6 04-03-05 Pigeon R NC 215 Haywood 7/25/02 23 18 8.2 7.1 W Fk Pigeon R SR 1216 Haywood 7/25/02 ------E Fk Pigeon R US 276 Haywood 7/22/02 24 16 7.4 6.9 Pigeon R SR 1642 Haywood 9/10/02 24 1,990 4.9 8.1 Pigeon R SR 1338 Haywood 9/9/02 22 924 8.4 8.3 Pigeon R I-40 Cocke, TN 7/23/02 21 159 8.0 7.0 Richland Cr US 23 Haywood 7/29/02 19 40 8.7 6.8 Richland Cr SR 1184 Haywood 7/24/02 22 85 7.9 7.3 Richland Cr SR 1519 Haywood 7/25/02 24 95 7.0 7.0 Jonathans Cr SR 1306 Haywood 7/24/02 17 24 8.8 6.8 Jonathans Cr SR 1322 Haywood 7/25/02 18 34 7.8 7.0 Jonathans Cr SR 1349 Haywood 9/9/02 21 49 8.5 7.3 Fines Cr SR 1322 Haywood 7/24/02 21 72 8.2 7.2 Cataloochee Cr SR 1395 Haywood 7/24/02 18 16 9.0 6.9 04-03-06 Nolichucky R SR 1321 Mitchell 07/09/02 27 67 8.1 8.3 N Toe R US 19E Avery 07/10/02 22 43 11.6 7.7 N Toe R SR 1162 Mitchell 07/10/02 24 117 11.7 7.7 N Toe R SR 1314 Yancey 07/09/02 20 70 11.4 8.2 Big Crabtree Cr US 19E Mitchell 07/11/02 20 36 10.3 7.1 S Toe R SR 1167 Yancey 07/11/02 20 17 11.7 6.9 Big Rock Cr NC 197 Mitchell 07/09/02 25 53 12 8.3 04-03-07 Cane R US 19W Yancey 07/09/02 24 53 7.3 7.7 Bald Mountain Cr SR 1408 Yancey 07/09/02 18 38 8.7 7.3

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 144 Appendix 9. New species and distributional records for the benthic macroinvertebrate fauna of the French Broad River basin.

Records are compiled mainly from DWQ the North Carolina Nongame and Endangered collections (Table 1), but also include data from Wildlife Program (http://www.ncwildlife.org), other sources such as the Natural Heritage including distribution maps. At least four species Program (dragonflies). Streams draining the in need of protection occur in the basin (Table 2). Pisgah National Forest or the Great Smoky Mountains National Park were most likely to Table 2. Species of mussels listed as contain rare species or large numbers of intolerant endangered, threatened, or of special species. The most significant areas include: concern in the French Broad River Subbasin 01 -- The headwaters of the French basin. Broad River (especially the West Fork French Species Common Name Status1 Broad River) Alasmidonta raveneliana Appalachian Elktoe FE Subbasin 03 -- Mills River and tributaries Alasmidonta viridus Slippershell mussel SE (North Fork and South Fork Mills River and Stophitus undulatus Creeper ST Bradley Fork) and the Davidson River Lampsilis fasciola Wavy-rayed spike SC 1FE = federally endangered; SE = state endangered; ST = state Subbasin 05 -- Cataloochee and Big Creeks, threatened, and SC = special concern. and West Fork Pigeon River Subbasin 06 -- South Toe River. The The Appalachian Elktoe is known from a short Nolichucky River, although it is not as pristine section of the Pigeon River (above Canton), the as the South Toe River, is the best large-river Nolichucky River, the Little River, the North and habitat in the basin. South Toe Rivers ,and the Cane River. The Slippershell mussel occurs in the Mills River, and Freshwater mussels can be difficult to collect the Wavy-rayed spike occurs in the Nolichucky during routine water quality surveys. The most River. complete source of information is summarized by

Table 1. Rare species and distributional records for the benthic macroinvertebrate fauna of the French Broad River basin.

No. No. DWQ Group/ DWQ Basin Taxon Records Records Locales in French Broad River basin Mayflies Barbaetis benfieldi 4 2 Newfound Creek and the French Broad River (Transylvania County) Drunella longicornis 14 9 French Broad River in Transylvania County Eurylophella minimella 15 7 Madison, Haywood, Yancey and Transylvania counties Nixe c.f. spinosa 50 37 Davidson River, Cataloochee Creek; headwaters of the Pigeon River Litobrancha recurvata 30 15 Especially small streams in Transylvania County Ephemerella aurivillii 6 2 Haywood County Heterocloeon n. sp. 10 2 Mills and Nolichucky Rivers Heterocloeon petersi 17 6 Only abundant in the Cane River Serratella spiculosa 6 2 Carson Creek (Transylvania County) and the South Toe River Centroptilum n. sp. Little Ivy Creek Stoneflies Bolotoperla rossi 8 1 West Fork French Broad River Attaneuria ruralis 7 2 Cataloochee Creek and West Fork Pigeon River Megaleuctra williamsae Seeps in Big Creek (Subbasin 5) (B. Kondratieff, Colorado State Univ, pers. com.) Oconoperla innubila Seeps in Cataloochee Creek (Subbasin 5) (D. Etnier, Univ. Tennessee and B. Kondratieff, Colorado State Univ., pers. com.) Isoperla lata 9 5 Bradley Fork, West Fork Pigeon River, and South Toe River Caddisflies Matrioptila jeanae 16 8 Most abundant in Laurel Creek and the West Fork French Broad River Micrasema burksi 16 4 Tributary of Cataloochee Creek and the South Toe River Micrasema sprulesi 15 5 South Toe River and a small stream in Subbasin 01 Homoplectra flinti Seeps in Big Creek (Subbasin 5) (B. Kondratieff, Colorado State Univ, pers. com.) Parapsyche apicalis 8 Small tributaries of the West Fork Pigeon River Symphitopsyche bifida 9 North Toe, Nolichucky, and Cane Rivers

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 145 Table 1 (continued).

No. No. DWQ Group/ DWQ Basin Taxon Records Records Locales in French Broad River basin Dragonflies Macromia margarita Transylvania County Neurocordulia yamaskanensis Madison County Crayfish Cambarus reburrus Largely in French Broad River basin, endemic NC species Cambarus (Puncticambarus) n sp. Cataloochee Creek

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 146 Appendix 10. Fish community sampling methods and criteria.

In 2002, fish community assessments were Sampling Methods performed at 23 sites in the French Broad River At each sample site, a 600 ft. section of stream basin. Twenty of the 29 sites which had been was selected and measured. The fish in the previously sampled in 1997 were sampled again, delineated stretch of stream were then collected including some which were on the 2000 303 (d) using two backpack electrofishing units and two impaired streams list (Table 1). persons netting the stunned fish. After collection, all readily identifiable fish were examined for Table 1. Fish community sites monitored in sores, lesions, fin damage, or skeletal anomalies, 2002 that are on the state's 303(d) list measured (total length to the nearest 1 mm), and of impaired waters (NCDENR 2000). then released. Those fish that were not readily identifiable were preserved and returned to the Subbasin/ Reach Suspected Waterbody Affected Cause laboratory for identification, examination, and total 04-03-02 length measurement. Detailed descriptions of the Bat Fork From source Habitat degradation and causes sampling methods may be found at: to Johnson unknown from potential sources http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/BAU.html. Drainage such as agriculture, urban runoff, Ditch storm sewers, and non-urban development NCIBI Analysis Mud Cr From source Turbidity from potential sources The assessment of biological integrity using the to Byers Cr such as agriculture, urban runoff, North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity (NCIBI) is and storm sewers provided by the cumulative assessment of 12 South Hominy From source Habitat degradation from Cr to Hominy potential sources such as parameters or metrics. The values provided by Cr agriculture and specialty crop the metrics are converted into scores on a 1, 3, or production. 5 scale. A score of 5 represents conditions which Newfound Cr From SR Fecal coliform from potential would be expected for undisturbed reference 1296 to sources such as pasture grazing French in riparian or upland areas and streams in the specific river basin or ecoregion, Broad R non-urban development while a score of 1 indicates that the conditions 04-03-05 deviate greatly from those expected in undisturbed Richland Cr From Lake Historical listing for “sediment” streams of the region. Each metric is designed to Junaluska based on biological impairment Dam to from potential sources such as contribute unique information to the overall Pigeon R agriculture, urban runoff, storm assessment. The scores for all metrics are then sewers, and non-urban summed to obtain the overall NCIBI score. Finally, development the score (an even number between 12 and 60) is then used to determine the ecological integrity The three new sites (Crab, Turkey, and Bull class of the stream from which the sample was Creeks) were selected to represent typical collected. streams draining agricultural and forested watersheds and which may be impacted primarily The NCIBI has recently been revised (NCDENR by nonpoint source pollution. 2001b). Currently, the focus of using and applying the NCIBI has been restricted to wadeable Some sites that were sampled during the second streams that can be sampled by a crew of four cycle of basinwide monitoring in 1997 were not persons. The bioclassifications and criteria have resampled in 2002 because: also been recalibrated against regional reference there were already sufficient data collected site data (Biological Assessment Unit since 1998 to assess these streams; Memorandum 20010105) (Tables 2 – 5). the stream is considered a Southern Appalachian trout stream and currently not rateable, effective sampling could only be done under low flow conditions, the stream is below a reservoir with no minimum flow requirements, insufficient manpower resources, or inclement weather conditions.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 147 Table 2. Revised scores and classes for evaluating the fish community of a wadeable stream using the North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity in the Western and Northern Mountains (French Broad, Hiwassee, Little Tennessee, New, and Watauga River basins).

NCIBI Scores NCIBI Classes 58 or 60 Excellent 48, 50, 52, 54, or 56 Good 40, 42, 44, or 46 Good-Fair 34, 36, or 38 Fair ≤ 32 Poor

Table 3. Regional reference sites/samples used Figure 1. Heavy infestation of blackspot disease in calibrating the North Carolina Index in creek chub. of Biotic Integrity in the French Broad River basin.

Subbasin/ Waterbody Station County Date 04-03-02 South Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 04/09/97 04-03-03 Mills R SR 1337 Henderson 06/29/93 Mills R SR 1337 Henderson 10/19/94 Mills R SR 1337 Henderson 09/15/97 04-03-04 Big Ivy Cr SR 2150 Buncombe 11/17/93 Big Ivy Cr SR 2150 Buncombe 09/18/97 Little Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 09/29/98 Little Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 05/04/99 Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208/212 Madison 06/03/97 04-03-06 Big Crabtree Cr SR 1002 Mitchell 09/30/98 Figure 2. Heavy infestation of yellow grub Big Crabtree Cr SR 1002 Mitchell 05/04/99 Big Rock Cr NC 226 Mitchell 09/30/98 disease in bigeye chub. Pigeonroost Cr SR 1349/ Mitchell 10/20/97 NC 197 Although some researchers incorporate the incidence of black spot incidence into indices of Criteria and ratings applicable only to wadeable biotic integrity (e.g., Steedman 1991), others, streams in the French Broad River basin are the because of a lack of a consistent, inverse same as those for the Hiwassee, Little Tennessee, relationship to environmental quality, do not (e.g., New, and Watauga River Basins. Metrics and Sanders et al. 1999). The disease is not ratings should not be applied to non-wadeable considered in the NCIBI because it is widespread, streams and trout streams in each of these basins. affecting fish in all types of streams ranging from Fair to Excellent. In 2002, the incidence of yellow Blackspot and Yellow Grub Diseases grub was very high in Turkey Creek and to a much These two diseases are naturally occurring, lesser extent in Newfound Creek. In Turkey common infections of fish by an immature stage of Creek, the disease was prevalent in bigeye chub, flukes. The life cycle involves fish, snails, and fantail darter, and Swannanoa darter. Blackspot piscivorous birds. Although heavy, acute disease was observed in Boylston, Cane, Hominy, infections can be fatal, especially to small fish, fish South Hominy, Newfound, Turkey, Flat, Big Ivy, can carry amazingly high worm burdens without Bull, Sandymush, and Price Creeks and in the any apparent ill effects (Noga 1996). The Swannanoa River. Species affected were central infections may often be disfiguring and render the stoneroller, blacknose dace, whitetail shiner, creek fish aesthetically unpleasing (Figures 1 and 2). chub, fatlips minnow, blotched chub, river chub, bigeye chub, Tennessee shiner, saffron shiner, mirror shiner, warpaint shiner, striped shiner, fantail darter, and Swannanoa darter.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 148 Table 4. Scoring criteria for the NCIBI for wadeable streams in the Western and Northern Mountains of the French Broad (including the Pigeon River), Hiwassee, Little Tennessee, New, and Watauga River basins with watersheds ranging between 3.1 and 161 mi2.

No. Metric Score 1 No. of species ≥ 16 species 5 12-15 species 3 < 12 species 1 2 No. of fish 320-1,000 fish 5 205-319 fish 3 < 205 fish 1 > 1,000 fish 3 3 No. of species of darters French Broad & New River, Pigeon River, Watauga1, Little Tennessee River Basins & Hiwassee River Basins ≥ 4 species ≥ 3 species 5 2 or 3 species 1 or 2 species 3 0 or 1 species 0 species 1 4 No. of species of rock bass, smallmouth bass, and trout ≥ 2 species 5 1 species 3 0 species 1 5 No. of species of cyprinids All basins, except Pigeon River Basin Pigeon River Basin ≥ 8 species ≥ 6 species 5 6 or 7 species 4 or 5 species 3 ≤ 5 species ≤ 3 1 6 No. of intolerant species All basins, except New River Basin New River Basin ≥ 3 species ≥ 5 species 5 2 species 3 or 4 species 3 0 or 1 species 0, 1, or 2 species 1 7 Percentage of tolerant individuals ≤ 2% 5 2-10% 3 > 10% 1 8 Percentage of omnivorous + herbivorous individuals 10-36% 5 37-50% 3 > 50% 1 < 10% 1 9 Percentage of insectivorous individuals 55-85% 5 40-54% 3 < 40% 1 > 85% 1 12 Percentage of species with multiple age groups ≥ 65% of all species have multiple age groups 5 45-64% all species have multiple age groups 3 < 45% all species have multiple age groups 1 1Tentative for the Watauga River basin; also includes Cottus bairdi (mottled sculpin) and Noturus insignis (margined madtom). The Watauga River basin is the only basin in North Carolina where these three benthic, insectivorous groups (darters, mottled sculpin, and margined madtom) are sympatric. Recently (in 2001), N. insignis was found in the Toxaway River (Savannah River basin) watershed in North Carolina.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 149 Table 5. Tolerance ratings and adult trophic guild assignments for fish in the French Broad River basin.

Family/ Common Tolerance Trophic Guild Species1 Name Rating of Adults Petromyzontidae Lampreys Ichthyomyzon bdellium Ohio lamprey Intermediate Parasitic I. castaneus Chestnut lamprey Intermediate Parasitic I. greeleyi Mountain brook lamprey Intermediate Non-feeding Lampetra appendix American brook lamprey Intermediate Non-feeding

Polyodontidae Paddlefishes Polyodon spathula Paddlefish Intermediate Planktivore

Lepisosteidae Gars Lepisosteus osseus Longnose gar Tolerant Piscivore

Clupeidae Herrings and shads Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Intermediate Omnivore D. petenense1 Threadfin shad Intermediate Omnivore

Hiodontidae Mooneyes Hiodon tergisus Mooneye Intermediate Insectivore

Salmonidae Trouts and Chars Oncorhynchus mykiss1 Rainbow trout Intolerant Insectivore Salmo trutta1 Brown trout Intermediate Piscivore Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout Intolerant Insectivore

Esocidae Pikes Esox masquinongy Muskellunge Intermediate Piscivore E. niger1 Chain pickerel Intermediate Piscivore

Cyprinidae Minnows Campostoma anomalum Central stoneroller Intermediate Herbivore Carassius auratus1 Goldfish Tolerant Omnivore Clinostomus funduloides Rosyside dace Intermediate Insectivore Ctenopharyngodon idella1 Grass carp Tolerant Herbivore Cyprinella galactura Whitetail shiner Intermediate Insectivore C. spiloptera Spotfin shiner Intermediate Insectivore Cyprinus carpio1 Common carp Tolerant Omnivore Erimystax insignis Mountain blotched chub Intermediate Omnivore Hybopsis amblops Bigeye chub Intermediate Insectivore Luxilus chrysocephalus Striped shiner Intermediate Omnivore L. coccogenis Warpaint shiner Intermediate Insectivore Nocomis leptocephalus1 Bluehead chub Intermediate Omnivore N. micropogon River chub Intermediate Omnivore Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden shiner Tolerant Omnivore Notropis leuciodes Tennessee shiner Intermediate Insectivore N. photogenis Silver shiner Intolerant Insectivore N. rubellus micropteryx Redface shiner Intolerant Insectivore N. rubricroceus Saffron shiner Intermediate Insectivore N. spectrunculus Mirror shiner Intermediate Insectivore N. telescopus Telescope shiner Intolerant Insectivore N. volucellus Mimic shiner Intolerant Insectivore Phenacobius crassilabrum Fatlips minnow Intermediate Insectivore Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow Tolerant Omnivore P. promelas1 Fathead minnow Tolerant Omnivore Rhinichthys atratulus Blacknose dace Intermediate Insectivore R. cataractae Longnose dace Intermediate Insectivore Semotilus atromaculatus Creek chub Tolerant Insectivore

Catostomidae Suckers Carpiodes carpio River carpsucker Intermediate Omnivore C. cyprinus Quillback Intermediate Omnivore Catostomus commersoni White sucker Tolerant Omnivore Hypentelium nigricans Northern hogsucker Intermediate Insectivore Ictiobus bubalus Smallmouth buffalo Intermediate Omnivore I. niger Black buffalo Intermediate Omnivore

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 150 Table 5 (continued).

Family/ Common Tolerance Trophic Guild Species1 Name Rating of Adults Moxostoma anisurum Silver redhorse Intermediate Insectivore M .carinatum River redhorse Intermediate Insectivore M. duquesnei Black redhorse Intermediate Insectivore M. erythrurum Golden redhorse Intermediate Insectivore M. macrolepidotum Shorthead redhorse Intermediate Insectivore

Ictaluridae Catfishes Ameiurus catus1 White catfish Tolerant Omnivore A. nebulosus Brown bullhead Tolerant Omnivore A. platycephalus1 Flat bullhead Tolerant Insectivore Ictalurus punctatus Channel catfish Intermediate Omnivore Noturus eleutherus Mountain madtom Intermediate Insectivore N. flavus Stonecat Intermediate Insectivore Pylodictis olivaris Flathead catfish Intermediate Piscivore

Poeciliidae Livebearers Gambusia affinis Western mosquitofish Tolerant Insectivore G. holbrooki1 Eastern mosquitofish Tolerant Insectivore

Moronidae Temperate basses Morone chrysops1 White bass Intermediate Piscivore

Centrarchidae Sunfishes and Black Basses Ambloplites rupestris Rock bass Intolerant Piscivore Lepomis auritus1 Redbreast sunfish Tolerant Insectivore L. cyanellus1 Green sunfish Tolerant Insectivore L. gibbosus1 Pumpkinseed Intermediate Insectivore L. gulosus Warmouth Intermediate Insectivore L. macochirus Bluegill Intermediate Insectivore L. microlophus1 Redear sunfish Intermediate Insectivore Lepomis sp. Hybrid sunfish Tolerant Insectivore Micropterus dolomieu Smallmouth bass Intolerant Piscivore M. punctulatus Spotted bass Intermediate Piscivore M. salmoides Largemouth bass Intermediate Piscivore Pomoxis annularis White crappie Intermediate Piscivore P. nigromaculatus Black crappie Intermediate Piscivore

Percidae Darters and Perches Etheostoma acuticeps Sharphead darter Intolerant Insectivore E. blennioides Greenside darter Intermediate Insectivore E. chlorobranchium Greenfin darter Intolerant Insectivore E. flabellare Fantail darter Intermediate Insectivore E. fusiforme1 Swamp darter Intermediate Insectivore E. jessiae Blueside darter Intolerant Insectivore E. rufilineatum Redline darter Intermediate Insectivore E. swannanoa Swannanoa darter Intermediate Insectivore E. zonale Banded darter Intermediate Insectivore Perca flavescens1 Yellow perch Intermediate Piscivore Percina aurantiaca Tangerine darter Intolerant Insectivore P. burtoni Blotchside logperch Intolerant Insectivore P. caprodes Logperch Intermediate Insectivore P. evides Gilt darter Intolerant Insectivore P. sciera Dusky darter Intermediate Insectivore P. squamata Olive darter Intolerant Insectivore Stizostedion canadense Sauger Intermediate Piscivore S. vitreum Walleye Intermediate Piscivore

Cottidae Sculpins Cottus bairdi Mottled sculpin Intermediate Insectivore C. carolinae Banded sculpin Intermediate Insectivore

Sciaenidae Drums Aplodinotus grunniens Freshwater drum Intermediate Insectivore 1Introduced species.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 151 Appendix 11. Fish community structure data collected in the French Broad River basin, 1993 - 2002. Current basinwide sites are in bold font.

Subbasin/Waterbody Location County Index No. Date NCIBI Score NCIBI Rating 04-03-01 West Fk French Broad R SR 1309 Transylvania 6-2-(7.5) 10/23/97 --- Not Rated Little R SR 1533 Transylvania 6-38-(20) 06/03/02 40 Good-Fair 10/23/97 46 Good-Fair Crab Cr SR 1532 Transylvania 6-38-23 06/03/02 50 Good 04-03-02 Mud Cr SR 1647 Henderson 6-55 06/04/02 22 Poor 09/16/97 20 Poor Bat Fork SR 1779 Henderson 6-55-8-1 06/04/02 14 Poor 09/16/97 24 Poor Clear Cr SR 1587 Henderson 6-55-11-(1) 10/02/01 44 Good-Fair Clear Cr SR 1586 Henderson 6-55-11-(1) 10/02/01 36 Fair Clear Cr SR 1513 Henderson 6-55-11-(5) 10/02/01 44 Good-Fair Cane Cr US 25 Henderson 6-57-5 06/04/02 50 Good 09/16/97 46 Good-Fair Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 6-76 09/24/02 40 Good-Fair 09/17/97 50 Good South Hominy Cr NC 151/SR 3449 Buncombe 6-76-5 09/23/02 50 Good 04/09/97 48 Good Swannanoa R SR 2435 Buncombe 6-78 06/18/02 48 Good 09/19/97 40 Good-Fair Swannanoa R US 25 Buncombe 6-78 06/28/93 32 Poor Beetree Cr SR 2427 Buncombe 6-78-15-(6) 06/25/97 32 Poor Newfound Cr SR 1641 Buncombe 6-84 06/17/02 48 Good 04/09/97 28 Poor Reems Cr NC 251 Buncombe 6-87-(10) 06/18/02 50 Good 09/17/97 52 Good 11/17/93 44 Good-Fair Flat Cr SR 1742 Buncombe 6-88 06/18/02 50 Good 04/10/97 56 Good Sandymush Cr SR 1107 Madison 6-92-(9) 06/19/02 48 Good 09/17/97 50 Good 11/16/93 50 Good Turkey Cr SR 1629 Buncombe 6-92-13 06/17/02 48 Good 04-03-03 Boylston Cr SR 1314 Henderson 6-52-(6.5) 06/04/02 52 Good 09/15/97 56 Good Mills R SR 1337 Henderson 6-54-(1) 09/15/97 58 Excellent 10/19/94 --- Not Rated 06/29/93 --- Not Rated 04-03-04 (Big) Ivy Cr SR 2150 Buncombe 6-96-(0.5) 06/18/02 60 Excellent 09/18/97 58 Excellent 11/17/93 60 Excellent Ivy R US 25/70 Madison 6-96-(11.7) 11/16/93 52 Good Bull Cr SR 1574 Madison 6-96-16 06/19/02 40 Good-Fair Big Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 6-112 09/18/97 46 Good-Fair Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208/212 Madison 6-112-26 06/20/02 58 Excellent 06/03/97 58 Excellent Little Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 6-112-26-13 05/04/99 58 Excellent 09/29/98 60 Excellent 04-03-05 Richland Cr SR 1160/1168 Haywood 5-16-(1) 07/17/01 --- Not Rated Richland Cr Bus US 23 Haywood 5-16-(1) 07/17/01 --- Not Rated Richland Cr Boyd Ave Haywood 5-16-(1) 07/17/01 28 Poor Richland Cr SR 1184 Haywood 5-16-(1) 07/17/01 28 Poor Richland Cr Walnut Trail Rd Haywood 5-16-(16) 09/24/02 32 Poor 10/22/97 38 Fair Winchester Cr off SR 1157 Haywood 5-16-3 07/18/01 --- Not Rated Hyatt Cr SR 1165 Haywood 5-16-6 07/18/01 --- Not Rated Cherry Cove Cr above reservoir Haywood 5-16-7-2 07/19/01 --- Not Rated Shiny Cr above reservoir Haywood 5-16-7-3 07/19/01 --- Not Rated Old Bald Cr above reservoir Haywood 5-16-7-6 07/19/01 --- Not Rated Rocky Br SR 1147 & 1219 Haywood 5-16-7-9-(2) 07/18/01 --- Not Rated Medford Br off SR 1140 Haywood 5-16-8-1 07/18/01 --- Not Rated

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 152 Appendix 11 (continued).

Subbasin/Waterbody Location County Index No. Date NCIBI Score NCIBI Rating Farmer Br Brown & Georgia Ave Haywood 5-16-11 07/18/01 --- Not Rated Shelton Br Marshall St Haywood 5-16-13 07/16/01 --- Not Rated Raccoon Cr Bus US 23 Haywood 5-16-14 07/16/01 34 Fair Factory Br US 19 Haywood 5-16-15 07/16/01 --- Not Rated Crabtree Cr NC 209 Haywood 5-22 09/24/02 40 Good-Fair 06/03/97 28 Poor Jonathan Cr US 276 Haywood 5-26-(7) 10/22/97 46 Good-Fair 11/16/93 48 Good Fines Cr SR 1355 Haywood 5-32 09/24/02 38 Fair 10/22/97 34 Fair 04-03-06 North Toe R SR 1121 Avery 7-2-(0.5) 06/23/97 46 Good-Fair Big Crabtree Cr SR 1002 Mitchell 7-2-48 05/04/99 58 Excellent 09/30/98 58 Excellent 06/24/97 58 Excellent Cane Cr SR 1211 Mitchell 7-2-59 06/24/97 34 Fair Jacks Cr SR 1337 Yancey 7-2-63 06/21/02 38 Fair 10/20/97 34 Fair Big Rock Cr NC 226 Mitchell 7-2-64 09/30/98 50 Good Pigeonroost Cr SR 1349/NC 197 Mitchell 7-2-69 06/21/02 58 Excellent 10/20/97 60 Excellent 04-03-07 Price Cr SR 1126/1136 Yancey 7-3-21 06/20/02 52 Good 10/21/97 46 Good-Fair Bald Mountain Cr SR 1408 Yancey 7-3-32 10/21/97 --- Not Rated

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 153 Appendix 12. Fish community metric values from 23 wadeable streams in the French Broad River basinwide monitoring program, 2002.1

Subbasin d. a. No. No. No. Sp. No. Sp. No. Sp. No. % % Omni. % % Waterbody Location County (mi2) Date Species Fish Darters RST Cyprinids Intol. Sp. Tolerant +Herb. Insect. MA 04-03-01 Little R SR 1533 Transylvania 60.1 06/03/02 17 75 4 1 6 2 20 11 85 53 Crab Cr SR 1532 Transylvania 7.0 06/03/02 20 402 4 2 7 2 11 30 64 80 04-03-02 Bat Fork SR 1779 Henderson 6.0 06/04/02 9 131 1 0 3 0 32 60 37 56 Mud Cr SR 1647 Henderson 23.6 06/04/02 14 180 1 1 5 2 16 65 33 57 Cane Cr US 25 Henderson 82.1 06/04/02 24 296 5 1 9 3 11 17 79 67 Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 30.2 09/24/02 16 266 2 2 7 1 13 26 71 56 South Hominy Cr NC 151/SR 3449 Buncombe 38.3 09/23/02 19 386 2 2 8 1 6 28 63 68 Swannanoa R SR 2435 Buncombe 62.7 06/18/02 22 960 3 1 10 2 7 39 60 77 Newfound Cr SR 1641 Buncombe 34.2 06/17/02 14 444 2 2 7 2 2 29 71 50 Reems Cr NC 251 Buncombe 36.3 06/18/02 20 544 5 2 10 4 2 8 87 85 Flat Cr SR 1742 Buncombe 24.5 06/18/02 16 254 3 2 6 3 5 14 79 69 Sandymush Cr SR 1107 Madison 34.8 06/19/02 15 696 2 2 7 2 4 20 76 93 Turkey Cr SR 1629 Buncombe 27.4 06/17/02 14 535 2 2 6 2 9 17 78 93 04-03-03 Boylston Cr SR 1314 Henderson 15.3 06/04/02 24 602 6 1 9 2 7 19 79 71 04-03-04 Big Ivy Cr SR 2150 Buncombe 60.0 06/18/02 18 744 4 2 9 5 0 22 77 89 Bull Cr SR 1574 Madison 21.2 06/19/02 14 1372 2 2 6 2 1 59 40 79 Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208/212 Madison 40.0 06/20/02 18 675 5 2 8 4 0 39 57 78 04-03-05 Richland Cr Walnut Trail Rd Haywood 64.7 09/24/02 11 116 0 2 3 2 44 22 68 64 Crabtree Cr NC 209 Haywood 19.1 09/24/02 11 568 0 3 4 2 4 32 63 64 Fines Cr SR 1355 Haywood 27.2 09/24/02 13 166 1 2 5 1 18 35 63 69 04-03-06 Jacks Cr SR 1337 Yancey 20.2 06/21/02 11 798 0 2 7 3 1 77 20 73 Pigeonroost Cr SR 1349/NC 197 Mitchell 14.1 06/21/02 23 746 5 5 11 7 0 33 65 57 04-03-07 Price Cr SR 1126/1136 Yancey 22.1 06/20/02 22 799 3 3 10 5 0 44 55 50 1Abbreviations are d. a. = drainage area, No. = number, Sp. = species, RST = rockbass, smallmouth bass, and trout, Intol. = intolerants, Omni. + Herb. = omnivores+herbivores, Insect. = insectivores, and MA = species with multiple age groups.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 154 Appendix 13. Fish distributional records for the French Broad River basin.

In 2002, the most widely distributed species In 2002, as part of the NC DWQ's fish community (collected at 22 or 23 of the 29 sites) were the monitoring program, the striped shiner was northern hogsucker, central stoneroller, and collected from Price Creek; it was also collected warpaint shiner. The central stoneroller and from this stream in 1997. TVA biologists collected warpaint shiner were not collected from the Little this species from Flat Creek (at SR 1742, River and Bat Fork, respectively. The central Buncombe County) in 1997. Other new stoneroller was also the most abundant species; distributional county records obtained in 2002 representing 25 percent of all the fish collected. included: This species dominance at several sites reflected Bluehead chub – Henderson and Yancey, an elevated percentage of omnivores+herbivores Green sunfish – Henderson and Buncombe, and was indicative of an abundance of nutrients and and periphyton. Swamp darter – Henderson county.

Based upon Menhinick (1991), NC DWQ’s data, and data from other researchers, 95 species of fish (including at least 19 species that have been introduced (Appendix 10)) are known from the French Broad River basin in North Carolina. Twelve of these species have been given special protection status by the U. S. Department of the Interior, the NC Wildlife Resources Commission, or the NC Natural Heritage Program under the NC State Endangered Species Act (G.S. 113-331 to 113-337) (LeGrand et al. 2001; Menhinick and Braswell 1997) (Table 1).

Table 1. Species of fish listed as state threatened (T), state endangered (E), or of special concern (SC) in the French Broad River basin.

State Species Common Name Rank Lampetra appendix American brook lamprey T, S1 Polyodon spathula Paddlefish E, SH Hiodon tergisus Mooneye SC, S1 Luxilus chrysocephalus Striped shiner T, S1 Carpiodes carpio River carpsucker SC, SH Noturus eleutherus Mountain madtom SC, SH Etheostoma jessiae Blueside darter SC, SH Percina burtoni Blotchside logperch E, S1 Percina sciera Dusky darter E, SH Percina squamata Olive darter SC, S2 Cottus carolinae Banded sculpin T, S1 Aplodinotus grunniens Freshwater drum T, S1 1S1 = critically imperiled in North Carolina because of extreme rarity or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from North Carolina; S2 = imperiled in North Carolina because of rarity or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extirpation from North Carolina; and SH = of historical occurrence in North Carolina, perhaps not having been verified in the past 20 years and suspected to be still extant (LeGrand et al. 2001).

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 155 Appendix 14. Water quality at fish community sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002.

As mentioned throughout this report, many stream Fair, Fair, and Poor sites were 34, 62, 58, 71, and flows during 2002 were very low and have been 66 µmhos/cm, respectively. for several years due to the prolonged drought (Appendix 1). Although the 2002 conductivity 110 measurements were ± 30 µmhos/cm different from 100 the 1997measurements (Table 1 and Figure 1), 90 the differences represented increases as great as 80 117 percent at Shelton Laurel Creek and 70 decreases as great as 33 percent at Flat and Big 60 Ivy Creeks. The significant change at Shelton 50 Laurel Creek was attributed to land disturbances Sp Cond from flash floods that the watershed experienced 40 in 2000 and 2001. 30 20 Sixty-six rateable fish community samples with 10 Poor Fair Good-FairGood Excellent associated conductivity measurements have been 0 collected throughout the basin, primarily since 1 2 3 4 5 1997. [One data point - Beetree Creek (1997) was not included in this data set.] This data set Figure 2. Relationships between specific showed that communities rated Excellent had the conductance (µmhos/cm) and NCIBI ratings in the French Broad River basin, lowest conductivity measurements (Figure 2). 1993 - 2002. Median measurements for Excellent, Good, Good-

Table 1. Water quality at 23 basinwide fish community sites in the French Broad River basin, 2002.

Specific Dissolved Subbasin/ Temperature conductance oxygen Saturation pH Waterbody Location County Date (ûC) (µmhos/cm) (mg/L) (%) (s.u.) 04-03-01 Little R SR 1533 Transylvania 06/03/02 20.0 22 9.0 99 7.0 Crab Cr SR 1532 Transylvania 06/03/02 22.0 25 8.1 93 6.8 04-03-02 Bat Fork SR 1779 Henderson 06/04/02 20.0 80 9.2 101 7.0 Mud Cr SR 1647 Henderson 06/04/02 21.0 49 8.5 95 7.3 Cane Cr US 25 Henderson 06/04/02 23.0 62 8.4 98 6.7 Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 09/24/02 19.3 98 7.9 86 7.3 South Hominy Cr NC 151/SR 3449 Buncombe 09/23/02 19.6 35 8.4 92 7.4 Swannanoa R SR 2435 Buncombe 06/18/02 18.0 54 8.5 90 6.9 Newfound Cr SR 1641 Buncombe 06/17/02 22.9 113 7.6 88 7.3 Reems Cr NC 251 Buncombe 06/18/02 18.7 73 9.0 96 7.2 Flat Cr SR 1742 Buncombe 06/18/02 21.5 52 7.4 84 7.6 Sandymush Cr SR 1107 Madison 06/19/02 23.0 73 9.2 107 8.9 Turkey Cr SR 1629 Buncombe 06/17/02 21.0 89 9.0 101 7.2 04-03-03 Bolyston Cr SR 1314 Henderson 06/04/02 19.4 35 9.0 98 7.2 04-03-04 Big Ivy Cr SR 2150 Buncombe 06/18/02 18.1 43 8.1 86 6.9 Bull Cr SR 1574 Madison 06/19/02 20.0 95 8.2 90 8.2 Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208/212 Madison 06/20/02 18.6 52 8.1 87 6.9 04-03-05 Richland Cr Walnut Trail Rd Haywood 09/24/02 21.2 81 7.0 79 7.1 Crabtree Cr NC 209 Haywood 09/24/02 18.1 75 7.2 76 6.8 Fines Cr SR 1355 Haywood 09/24/02 20.8 74 7.4 83 7.6 04-03-06 Jacks Cr SR 1337 Yancey 06/21/02 15.4 107 8.0 80 7.0 Pigeonroost Cr SR 1349/NC 197 Mitchell 06/21/02 15.1 34 8.0 80 6.9 04-03-07 Price Cr SR 1126/1136 Yancey 06/20/02 20.0 51 7.8 86 7.1

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 156 30

20

10 Fines Cr Jacks Cr Bat Fork Cr Flat Cr 0 Bolyston Cr Pigeonroost Cr

-10 Cane Cr Mud Cr Hominy Cr Little R Richland Cr Crabtree Cr Crabtree Price Cr Newfound Cr 2002 minus 1997 (umhos/cm) -20 Swannanoa R Difference in specific conductance, Sandymush Cr South Hominy Cr Shelton Laurel Cr

-30 Cr Reems Big Ivy Cr Waterbody

Figure 1. A comparison of the specific conductance at 23 fish community sites in the French Broad River basin, 1997 vs. 2002. A positive difference meant that conductivity was greater in 2002 than in 1997; a negative difference meant that conductivity was greater in 1997 than in 2002.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 157 Appendix 15. Fish community assessments conducted by the Tennessee Valley Authority in the French Broad River basin.

The Tennessee Valley Authority has conducted a of further monitoring by DWQ (Table 1). fish community monitoring program in the French Waterbodies (where water quality problems are Broad River basin for many years. The index of already not known) in need of additional biotic integrity which was developed by their staff monitoring by DWQ include Reems Creek is different than the one used by the DWQ. (Buncombe County), Walnut and Big Pine Creeks Scores and ratings are not equivalent but the TVA (Madison County), and Cane Creek (Mitchell data can be used to “screen” waterbodies in need County).

Table 1. Fish community assessments conducted by the Tennessee Valley Authority in the French Broad River Basin, 1997 – 2002.

Subbasin Waterbody Location County Date TVA IBI Score TVA IBI Rating 04-03-01 French Broad R US 178 Transylvania 07/15/97 50 Good 07/03/02 50 Good Little R SR 1536 Transylvania 08/13/97 54 Good-Excellent 06/09/02 52 Good 04-03-02 Clear Cr SR 1513 Henderson 06/24/97 42 Fair 06/19/02 46 Fair-Good Mud Cr SR 1508 Henderson 06/24/97 36 Poor-Fair Mud Cr US 25 Henderson 04/16/97 36 Poor-Fair 07/02/02 42 Fair Cane Cr US 25 Henderson 04/17/97 46 Fair-Good 07/03/02 46 Fair-Good French Broad R SR 3495 Buncombe 07/16/97 42 Fair 05/22/02 50 Good Hominy Cr NC 191 Buncombe 04/16/97 44 Fair 06/20/02 40 Fair South Hominy Cr NC 151 Buncombe 04/09/97 44 Fair 06/12/02 50 Good Swannanoa R US 25 Buncombe 04/15/97 42 Fair 04/30/02 50 Good Flat Cr SR 1742 Buncombe 04/10/97 42 Fair 08/09/02 42 Fair Reems Cr SR 1740 Buncombe 04/09/97 26 Very Poor-Poor 06/03/02 34 Poor French Broad R SR 1348 Buncombe 07/28/97 42 Fair Newfound Cr SR 1641 Buncombe 04/07/97 40 Fair 07/02/01 32 Poor Sandymush Cr SR 1629 Madison 04/08/97 44 Fair 08/02/01 48 Good 04-03-03 Mills R SR 1353 Henderson 04/17/97 48 Good 03/20/02 44 Fair Davidson R US 276 Transylvania 06/11/97 46 Fair-Good 03/21/02 50 Good 04-03-04 French Broad R SR 1001 Madison 07/29/97 46 Fair-Good French Broad R SR 1151 Madison 08/08/02 48 Good Ivy Cr SR 2150 Buncombe 06/26/97 52 Good 07/03/01 52 Good Ivy Cr Bus US 25/70 Madison 06/12/97 46 Fair-Good 08/16/01 54 Good-Excellent Little Ivy Cr SR 1610 Madison 06/25/97 46 Fair-Good 08/03/01 46 Fair-Good French Broad R US 25/70 Madison 07/30/97 44 Fair 08/21/01 48 Good Spring Cr NC 209 Madison 04/21/97 36 Poor-Fair 07/12/01 48 Good Big Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 04/22/97 44 Fair 07/13/01 44 Fair

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 158 Appendix 15 (continued).

Subbasin Waterbody Location County Date TVA IBI Score TVA IBI Rating 04-03-04 Shelton Laurel Cr NC 208 Madison 07/07/97 48 Good 05/31/01 52 Good Walnut Cr off SR 1139 Madison 08/29/01 24 Very Poor-Poor Shut-in Cr SR 1303 Madison 03/16/99 48 Good Big Pine Cr SR 1555 Madison 07/12/01 30 Poor 04-03-05 E Fk Pigeon R US 276 Haywood 07/09/97 32 Poor W Fk Pigeon R NC 215 Haywood 07/17/97 44 Fair Pigeon R NC 215 Haywood 07/23/97 48 Good Pigeon R SR 1533 Haywood 07/22/97 38 Poor-Fair 07/31/02 30 Poor Pigeon R SR 1338 Haywood 07/21/97 34 Poor 06/21/00 28 Poor Big Cr SR 1332 Haywood 08/04/97 28 Poor Jonathan Cr SR 1338 Haywood 07/08/97 36 Poor-Fair Richland Cr SR 1184 Haywood 04/15/97 30 Poor 04-03-06 North Toe R US 19 Avery 08/17/99 50 Good North Toe R NC 80 Yancey 08/05/97 40 Fair 06/16/99 50 Good North Toe R SR 1314 Mitchell 08/14/97 40 Fair 06/16/99 56 Good-Excellent North Toe R SR 1336 Yancey 08/15/97 48 Good South Toe R NC 80 Yancey 08/04/97 48 Good Little Crabtree Cr US 19E Yancey 08/06/97 44 Fair 04/27/99 40 Fair Cane Cr NC 80 Mitchell 06/05/97 32 Poor 04/27/99 34 Poor Big Rock Cr NC 197 Mitchell 08/05/97 50 Good 06/28/00 50 Good Jacks Cr SR 1336 Yancey 06/26/00 40 Fair 04-03-07 Cane R US 19E Yancey 06/04/97 44 Fair 06/27/00 50 Good Cane R US 19W Yancey 08/07/97 40 Fair 07/06/00 48 Good Cane R US 19W Yancey 06/24/97 46 Fair-Good Nolichucky R SR 1321 Mitchell 08/13/97 50 Good 05/20/02 52 Good

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 159 Appendix 16. Fish tissue criteria.

In evaluating fish tissue analysis results, several Presently, the FDA has only developed metals different types of criteria are used. Human health criteria for mercury. concerns related to fish consumption are screened by comparing results with federal Food and Drug The US EPA has recommended screening values Administration (FDA) action levels (USFDA 1980), for target analytes formulated from a risk Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) assessment procedure (USEPA 1995). These are recommended screening values, and criteria the concentrations of analytes in edible fish tissue adopted by the North Carolina State Health that are of potential public health concern. The Director (Table 1). Individual parameter results DWQ compares fish tissue results with US EPA which seem to be of potential human health screening values to evaluate the need for further concern are evaluated by the N.C. Division of intensive site specific monitoring. Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology by request from the Water Quality Section. The North Carolina State Health Director has adopted a selenium limit of 5 µg/g and a mercury The FDA levels were developed to protect humans limit of 0.4 µg/g for issuing an advisory. Although from the chronic effects of toxic substances the US EPA has suggested a screening value of consumed in foodstuffs and thus employ a "safe 0.7 ppt (pg/g) for dioxins, the State of North level" approach to fish tissue consumption. Carolina currently uses a value of 4.0 ppt in issuing an advisory.

Table 1. Fish tissue criteria. All wet weight concentrations are reported in parts per million (ppm, µg/g), except for dioxin which is in parts per trillion (ppt, pg/g).

Contaminant FDA Action Levels US EPA Screening Values NC Health Director Metals Cadmium 10.0 Mercury 1.0 0.6 0.4 Selenium 50.0 5.0 Organics Aldrin 0.3 Chlorpyrifos 30 Total chlordane 0.08 Cis-chlordane 0.3 Trans-chlordane 0.3 Total DDT1 0.3 o, p DDD 5.0 p, p DDD 5.0 o, p DDE 5.0 p, p DDE 5.0 o, p DDT 5.0 p, p DDT 5.0 Dieldrin 0.007 Dioxins (total) 0.7 4.0 Endosulfan (I and II) 60.0 Endrin 0.3 3.0 Heptachlorepoxide 0.01 Hexachlorobenzene 0.07 Lindane 0.08 Mirex 2.0 Total PCBs 0.01 PCB-1254 2.0 Toxaphene 0.1 1 Total DDT includes the sum of all its isomers and metabolites (i.e. p, p DDT, o, p DDT, DDE, and DDD). 2Total chlordane includes the sum of cis-and trans- isomers as well as nonachlor and oxychlordane.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 160 Appendix 17. Lake assessment program.

Lakes Monitored accordance with specified protocols (NCDEHNR Six lakes in the basin were monitored as part of 1996 and subsequent updates). the Lakes Assessment program in 2002 (Table 1). Five of these lakes are routinely monitored as part Data Interpretation of the basinwide monitoring program. Lake The North Carolina water quality standards per Kenilworth was monitored in 2002 as part of a 15A NCAC 2B .0200 are used in determining if a special study. Surface physical and photic zone lake is meeting its designated uses. Table 5 (in chemistry data collected from 1997 through 2002 the Intropudction ot Program Methods Section) are presented in Appendix 18. lists the standards applicable to the various use classifications (designated uses) associated with Lake Sampling Methods lakes and streams. In addition to data collected Physical field measurements (dissolved oxygen, through field sampling efforts, lake water quality pH, water temperature and conductivity) are made assessments are also based on information with a calibrated HydrolabTM. Readings are taken obtained from other lake monitoring programs Lake monitoring stations are sited to provide such as those implemented by municipalities and representative samples of lake water quality based major hydroelectric companies. Observations and on morphology, size, and site-specific features comments from citizens, local government such as coves and tributaries. Physical field personnel, water treatment facility staff, etc. are measurements (dissolved oxygen, pH, water also considered in the assessment process. temperature and conductivity) are made with a calibrated HydrolabTM. Readings are taken at the In addition to determining use support, data surface of the lake (0.15 meters) and at one-meter collected during ambient lakes monitoring are increments to the bottom of the lake. Secchi used to evaluate the trophic state of lakes. An depths are measured at each sampling station index was developed specifically for North with a weighted Secchi disk attached to a rope Carolina lakes as part of the state's original Clean marked off in centimeters. Surface water samples Lakes Classification Survey (NCDNRCD 1982). are collected for chloride, hardness, fecal coliform The North Carolina Trophic State Index (NCTSI) is bacteria and metals. based on total phosphorus (TP in mg/L), total organic nitrogen (TON in mg/L), Secchi depth (SD A LablineTM sampler is used to composite water in inches), and chlorophyll a (CHL in µg/L). samples within the photic zone (a depth equal to Lakewide means for these parameters are used to twice the Secchi depth). Nutrients, chlorophyll a, produce a NCTSI score for each lake, using the solids, turbidity and phytoplankton are collected at equations: this depth. Nutrients and chlorophyll a from the photic zone are used to calculate the North TONScore = ((Log (TON) + 0.45)/0.24)*0.90 Carolina Trophic State Index score. The LablineTM TPScore = ((Log (TP) + 1.55)/0.35)*0.92 sampler is also used to collect a grab water SD = ((Log (SD) – 1.73)/0.35)*-0.82 samples near the bottom of the lake for nutrients. Score Water samples are collected and preserved in CHLScore = ((Log (CHL) – 1.00)/0.48)*0.83 NCTSI = TONScore + TPScore + SDScore + CHLScore

Table 1. Lakes monitored in the French Broad River basin during the 2002 sampling effort.

Subbasin/ Surface Mean Volume Watershed Retention Lake County Classification Area (Ac) Depth (ft.) (X106m3) (mi2) Time (days) 04-03-02 Burnett Res Buncombe WS-I, HQW 330 39 22.0 2 Lake Julian Buncombe C 320 66 2.6 5 120 Lake Kenilworth Buncombe B 18 3 04-03-05 Allen Creek Res Haywood WS-I, HQW 120 46 3.3 13 Lake Junaluska Haywood B 200 20 4.5 63 13 Waterville Lake Haywood C 341 76 31.6 455

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 161 In general, NCTSI scores relate to trophic Table 2. Lakes classification criteria. classifications (Table 2). When scores border between classes, best professional judgment is NCTSI Score Trophic classification used to assign an appropriate classification. < -2.0 Oligotrophic -2.0 – 0.0 Mesotrophic Scores may be skewed by highly colored water 0.0 – 5.0 Eutrophic typical of dystrophic lakes. Some variation in the > 5.0 Hypereutrophic trophic state between years is not unusual because of the variability of data collections, which Oligotrophic lakes are characteristically found in usually involve sampling a limited number of times the mountains or in undisturbed watersheds. during the growing season. Many mesotrophic and eutrophic lakes are found in the central piedmont. There are a few hypereutrophic lakes where point or nonpoint sources of pollution contribute to high levels of nutrients.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 162 Appendix 18. Surface physical water data and photic zone chemistry data collected from lakes in the French Broad River basin, 1992 – 2002.

Subbasin/ Dissolved Water Secchi Total Susp. Waterbody/ Oxygen temperature pH Conductivity depth TP TKN NH3 NOx TN TON TIN CHL a Solids Solids Turbidity Date Station (mg/L) (°C) (s.u.) (µmhos/cm) (m) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (µg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (NTU) 04-03-02 Lake Julian 08/12/2002 FRBLJ2 6.3 35.7 7.6 94 3.8 <0.02 0.25 0.02 0.10 0.35 0.23 0.12 4 66 <2 1.3 08/12/2002 FRBLJ4 5.9 36.2 7.7 96 3.7 <0.02 0.26 0.02 0.11 0.37 0.24 0.13 4 66 3 1.2 08/12/2002 FRBLJ6 6.2 35.7 8.0 95 4.4 <0.02 1.30 1.00 <0.02 1.31 0.30 1.01 4 62 2 1.1 07/17/2002 FRBLJ2 7.2 35.1 8.3 88 3.2 <0.02 <0.20 <0.02 0.13 0.23 0.09 0.14 7 77 <2.5 2.3 07/17/2002 FRBLJ4 6.1 35.5 7.7 87 2.9 <0.02 <0.20 <0.02 0.13 0.23 0.09 0.14 7 77 <2.5 1.8 07/17/2002 FRBLJ6 6.2 35.2 8.0 88 2.8 <0.02 <0.20 0.03 0.14 0.24 0.07 0.17 6 86 <5 2.5 06/11/2002 FRBLJ2 6.3 32.8 7.2 87 5.5 <0.02 <0.20 0.01 0.19 0.29 0.09 0.20 2 180 59 24.0 06/11/2002 FRBLJ4 6.2 33.7 7.2 87 5.5 <0.02 <0.20 <0.01 0.20 0.30 0.10 0.21 1 71 <3.3 1.2 06/11/2002 FRBLJ6 6.3 32.6 7.5 87 6.0 <0.02 <0.20 <0.01 0.20 0.30 0.10 0.21 1 77 5 2.6 07/28/1992 FRBLJ2 5.9 35.5 7.7 78 2.2 0.02 0.20 0.02 0.20 0.40 0.18 0.22 3 65 3 1.1 07/28/1992 FRBLJ4 5.1 36.2 7.4 76 2.4 0.01 0.30 0.03 0.22 0.52 0.27 0.25 2 69 2 1.0 07/28/1992 FRBLJ6 5.9 35.6 7.7 82 2.4 0.02 0.40 0.03 0.22 0.62 0.37 0.25 2 68 4 1.3 Burnett Reservoir 08/13/2002 FRBBUR2 7.8 26.0 7.1 13 5.3 <0.02 <0.20 0.02 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 3 10 3 3.0 08/13/2002 FRBBUR4 7.9 26.1 8.1 14 6.2 <0.02 <0.20 <0.02 0.08 0.18 0.09 0.09 3 18 <2 1.2 07/16/2002 FRBBUR2 6.9 26.1 7.1 13 5.6 <0.02 <0.20 0.03 0.14 0.24 0.07 0.17 5 44 3 2.0 07/16/2002 FRBBUR4 6.8 25.4 8.0 13 6.6 <0.02 <0.20 <0.02 0.13 0.23 0.09 0.14 2 33 <2.5 1.9 06/11/2002 FRBBUR2 8.2 23.0 6.8 13 10.5 <0.02 <0.20 <0.01 0.17 0.27 0.10 0.18 <1 <3.3 <1 06/11/2002 FRBBUR4 8.1 22.9 7.5 13 12.0 <0.02 <0.20 0.02 0.18 0.28 0.08 0.20 <1 20 <2.5 <1 08/12/1997 FRBBUR2 8.1 24.2 6.7 13 5.0 <0.01 <0.10 <0.01 0.18 0.23 0.05 0.19 53 1 <1.0 08/12/1997 FRBBUR4 7.8 24.0 6.3 13 8.0 <0.01 0.20 0.10 0.19 0.39 0.10 0.29 14 3 <1.0 07/21/1997 FRBBUR2 7.6 26.0 7.0 13 7.0 <0.01 0.20 0.08 0.12 0.32 0.12 0.20 35 2 <1.0 07/21/1997 FRBBUR4 7.2 26.0 7.4 13 10.0 <0.01 0.20 0.08 0.14 0.34 0.12 0.22 28 <1 <1.0 06/30/1997 FRBBUR2 8.7 22.3 6.0 13 5.0 0.01 0.10 <0.01 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.11 21 9 <1.0 06/30/1997 FRBBUR4 8.9 22.6 6.5 14 8.5 0.01 0.20 <0.01 0.12 0.32 0.20 0.13 27 2 <1.0 Lake Kenilworth 08/13/2002 LK1 8.5 25.5 8.1 130 1.0 0.02 0.61 <0.02 <0.02 0.62 0.60 0.02 24 100 9.8 08/13/2002 LK2 8.4 25.4 8.1 131 0.9 0.03 0.60 <0.02 <0.02 0.61 0.59 0.02 22 98 7 11.0 08/13/2002 RC1 19.9 7.6 146 0.06 <0.20 0.04 0.36 0.46 0.06 0.40 <1.0 180 10 9.7 08/13/2002 RC2 8.2 18.0 7.7 240 0.04 <0.20 <0.02 0.31 0.41 0.09 0.32 25 180 19 1.4 07/23/2002 LK1 8.2 29.1 8.3 118 1.9 0.05 0.71 <0.02 <0.02 0.72 0.70 0.02 31 85 5 8.2 07/23/2002 LK2 9.6 26.8 8.8 119 0.9 0.04 0.40 <0.02 <0.02 0.41 0.39 0.02 6 92 4 3.6 07/23/2002 RC1 5.8 23.1 7.6 124 0.04 <0.20 0.02 0.31 0.41 0.08 0.30 <1 110 <5 1.0 07/23/2002 RC2 8.5 20.8 7.5 175 0.07 <0.20 <0.02 0.29 0.39 0.09 0.33 1 170 <2 1.3 06/20/2002 LK1 8.9 25.3 6.2 116 2.2 0.02 0.40 0.16 0.05 0.45 0.24 0.21 24 100 8 4.6 06/20/2002 LK2 8.8 25.3 7.6 117 1.9 <0.02 0.32 0.07 0.07 0.39 0.25 0.14 10 100 4 6.6 06/20/2002 RC1 6.4 20.5 7.0 122 0.02 <0.20 0.03 0.34 0.44 0.07 0.37 1 100 7 2.4 06/20/2002 RC2 8.4 17.9 7.1 179 <0.02 <0.20 <0.02 0.42 0.52 0.09 0.43 1 150 <2.5 1.9

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 163 Appendix 18 (continued).

Subbasin/ Dissolved Water Secchi Total Susp. Waterbody/ Oxygen temperature pH Conductivity depth TP TKN NH3 NOx TN TON TIN CHL a Solids Solids Turbidity Date Station (mg/L) (°C) (s.u.) (µmhos/cm) (m) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (µg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (NTU) 04-03-05 Allen Creek Reservoir 08/12/2002 FRBACR2 8.6 25.2 8.1 16 4.3 <0.02 <0.20 <0.02 0.03 0.13 0.09 0.04 7 130 73 33.0 08/12/2002 FRBACR4 8.6 24.2 8.4 17 4.5 <0.02 <0.20 <0.02 0.03 0.13 0.09 0.04 8 51 3 2.1 07/17/2002 FRBACR2 8.6 22.1 7.0 14 2.8 <0.02 <0.20 <0.02 0.07 0.17 0.09 0.08 6 43 <5 2.6 07/17/2002 FRBACR4 8.3 22.4 7.4 14 2.8 <0.02 <0.20 <0.02 0.07 0.17 0.09 0.08 6 30 <2.5 2.3 06/10/2002 FRBACR2 8.5 23.3 7.0 14 3.0 <0.02 <0.20 <0.01 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.11 2 31 <2.5 1.8 06/10/2002 FRBACR4 8.3 22.4 7.5 14 3.6 <0.02 <0.20 <0.01 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.11 2 27 <2.5 1.5 08/24/1993 FRBACR2 8.2 24.5 6.4 20 3.7 0.03 0.20 0.02 <0.01 0.21 0.18 0.03 6 29 12 1.9 08/24/1993 FRBACR4 8.1 24.3 6.5 21 4.0 0.01 0.10 0.04 0.01 0.11 0.06 0.05 1 11 1 <1.0 07/27/1993 FRBACR2 7.4 25.5 6.1 22 2.3 0.02 <0.10 0.03 0.10 0.15 0.02 0.13 2 29 2 2.6 07/27/1993 FRBACR4 7.3 25.7 5.7 23 2.3 0.02 <0.10 0.03 0.10 0.15 0.02 0.13 2 33 2 2.4 06/21/1993 FRBACR2 7.9 21.6 6.4 14 3.8 0.01 <0.10 0.01 0.13 0.18 0.04 0.14 <1 17 1 1.2 06/21/1993 FRBACR4 7.8 21.5 6.2 14 3.8 <0.01 0.20 0.03 0.12 0.32 0.17 0.15 1 19 <1 1.1 Lake Junaluska 08/12/2002 FRB047A 9.6 27.9 8.8 94 1.5 0.03 0.25 <0.02 <0.02 0.26 0.24 0.02 10 66 6 4.5 08/12/2002 FRB047B 9.8 27.1 9.1 97 2.2 <0.02 0.24 <0.02 <0.02 0.25 0.23 0.02 6 62 3 2.7 08/12/2002 FRB047C 9.9 27.0 9.2 97 2.4 <0.02 0.25 <0.02 <0.02 0.26 0.24 0.02 5 65 2.3 07/17/2002 FRB047A 10.1 25.8 9.0 90 1.2 <0.02 0.10 0.03 0.14 0.24 0.07 0.17 16 78 6 5.5 07/17/2002 FRB047B 10.4 25.8 9.2 94 1.3 <0.02 0.10 0.01 0.09 0.19 0.09 0.10 15 91 6 8.1 07/17/2002 FRB047C 10.2 25.9 9.3 94 1.3 <0.02 0.21 0.01 0.11 0.32 0.20 0.12 20 86 5 6.4 06/10/2002 FRB047A 9.1 26.3 8.0 77 1.8 <0.02 <0.20 <0.01 0.40 0.50 0.10 0.41 7 89 15 8.4 06/10/2002 FRB047B 9.3 25.7 8.1 77 1.9 <0.02 0.20 <0.01 0.40 0.60 0.20 0.41 4 62 3 4.2 06/10/2002 FRB047C 9.8 24.1 8.4 76 1.8 <0.02 <0.20 <0.01 0.40 0.50 0.10 0.41 4 82 4 4.1 08/12/1997 FRB047A 9.5 25.1 7.3 53 0.8 0.02 0.20 <0.01 0.30 0.50 0.20 0.31 50 6 4.2 08/12/1997 FRB047B 9.1 25.9 7.9 53 1.6 0.02 0.20 0.01 0.33 0.53 0.19 0.34 54 6 4.8 08/12/1997 FRB047C 9.2 26.6 7.9 52 2.0 0.02 0.20 0.04 0.31 0.51 0.16 0.35 55 6 3.7 07/21/1997 FRB047A 7.7 27.7 6.9 54 0.6 0.02 0.20 0.12 0.32 0.52 0.08 0.44 56 5 4.0 07/21/1997 FRB047B 8.0 27.5 7.4 52 1.8 0.01 0.20 0.09 0.32 0.52 0.11 0.41 55 3 1.8 07/21/1997 FRB047C 8.3 27.4 7.6 52 2.1 <0.01 0.20 0.01 0.31 0.51 0.19 0.32 46 4 2.1 06/30/1997 FRB047A 8.2 23.3 6.8 0.5 0.03 0.20 0.12 0.38 0.58 0.08 0.50 66 23 15.0 06/30/1997 FRB047B 9.0 22.7 7.4 0.9 0.01 0.10 0.04 0.38 0.48 0.06 0.42 52 7 5.9 06/30/1997 FRB047C 9.0 23.2 7.6 1.6 0.01 0.10 0.05 0.39 0.49 0.05 0.44 34 4 4.4 Waterville Lake 08/12/2002 FRBWL2 6.2 25.4 7.8 786 0.3 3 550 45 39.0 08/12/2002 FRBWL4 6.3 27.4 7.6 516 0.8 0.09 0.68 0.02 0.06 0.74 0.66 0.08 72 320 13 11.0 08/12/2002 FRBWL8 4.8 26.5 7.5 456 1.0 0.08 0.49 <0.02 0.02 0.51 0.48 0.03 31 290 7 5.0 07/24/2002 FRBWL2 11.2 27.1 9.1 432 0.9 0.17 0.71 <0.02 0.08 0.79 0.70 0.09 23 290 6 5.6 07/24/2002 FRBWL4 14.0 27.3 9.6 340 0.9 0.06 0.90 <0.02 <0.02 0.91 0.89 0.02 48 230 8 8.0 07/24/2002 FRBWL8 13.0 27.1 9.6 339 1.0 0.05 0.32 <0.02 <0.02 0.33 0.31 0.02 34 220 6 4.9 06/10/2002 FRBWL2 10.7 28.0 8.8 262 1.3 0.07 <0.20 <0.01 0.22 0.32 0.10 0.23 14 180 6 4.5 06/10/2002 FRBWL4 11.5 27.1 9.1 271 1.3 0.04 <0.20 0.02 0.05 0.15 0.08 0.07 16 180 8 5.3 06/10/2002 FRBWL8 10.6 26.6 8.8 268 1.5 0.03 <0.20 <0.01 0.02 0.12 0.10 0.03 12 180 8 4.7 07/28/1992 FRBWL2 11.1 26.9 9.2 414 1.1 0.10 0.40 0.05 0.53 0.93 0.35 0.58 21 280 11 3.6 07/28/1992 FRBWL4 10.3 26.6 9.2 405 1.1 0.08 0.20 0.04 0.52 0.72 0.16 0.56 16 290 5 3.0 07/28/1992 FRBWL6 10.8 25.6 9.1 131 1.2 0.08 0.40 0.04 0.50 0.90 0.36 0.54 14 270 7 3.2 07/28/1992 FRBWL8 10.0 25.8 8.9 397 1.3 0.06 0.20 0.04 0.52 0.72 0.16 0.56 15 290 7 2.2 1 Abbreviations are TP = total phosphorus, TKN = total Kjeldahl nitrogen, NH3 = ammonia nitrogen, NOx = nitrate + nitrite nitrogen, TON = total organic nitrogen, TIN = total inorganic nitrogen, and Chl a = chlorophyll a.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 164 Appendix 19. Ambient water quality summaries for the French Broad River basin, August 1997 - September 2002.

Subbasin/ Station Map Code1 Number Waterbody/Location County Class 04-03-01 E0150000 French Broad R at NC 178 at Rosman Transylvania B Tr E1130000 Little R near Cedar Transylvania C Tr E1270000 French Broad R at SR 1503 at Blantyre Transylvania WS-IV&B 04-03-02 E2120000 Mud Cr at SR 1508 near Balfour Henderson C E2730000 French Broad R at SR 3495 near Skyland Buncombe B E3520000 Hominy Cr at SR 3413 near Asheville Buncombe C E4030000 Beetree Cr near Swannanoa Buncombe WS-I HQW E4170000 Swannanoa R at NC 25 at Asheville Buncombe C E4280000 French Broad R at SR 1348 at Asheville Buncombe B E4770000 French Broad R at SR 1634 at Alexander Buncombe B 04-03-03 E0850000 Davidson R at US 64 near Brevard Transylvania WS-V &B Tr E1490000 Mills R at End of SR 1337 near Mills River Henderson WS-II Tr HQW 04-03-04 E5120000 French Broad R at Blennerhassett Island at Marshall Madison B 04-03-05 E5410000 W Fk Pigeon R upstream Lake Logan near Hazelwood Haywood WS-III Tr E5495000 Pigeon R at NC 215 near Canton Haywood WS-III Tr CA E5600000 Pigeon R at SR 1642 at Clyde Haywood C E6110000 Richland Cr at SR 1184 near Waynesville Haywood B E6300000 Jonathans Cr at US 276 near Cove Creek Haywood C Tr E6450000 Cataloochee Cr at SR 1395 near Cataloochee Haywood C Tr ORW E6480000 Pigeon R at SR 1338 near Hepco Haywood C E6500000 Pigeon R at Waterville Haywood C 04-03-06 E7000000 N Toe R at US 19E near Ingalls Avery WS-IV Tr E8100000 N Toe R at SR 1162 at Penland Mitchell C Tr E8200000 S Toe R at SR 1168 near Celo Yancey B Tr ORW E9990000 Nolichucky R beside SR 1321 at Poplar Mitchell B 04-03-07 E9800000 Cane R at SR 1417 near Sioux Yancey C Tr

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 165

Location: French Broad R at NC 178 at Rosman Station: E0150000 Classification: B Tr Subbasin: FRB01

Period: 9/9/1997 to 8/29/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 57 0 <4 0 0.0 8.8 9.3 10.1 11.2 12.5 13.5 15.2 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 57 na . . . 11 15 17 19 21 24 28 Temperature (°C) 57 na . . . 3 5 8 12 19 20 21

pH (s.u.) 56 na <6 2 3.6 5.6 6.5 6.8 7.0 7.1 7.3 7.6 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 31 0 . 8 10 17 26 33 39 50 TSS 39 10 >10 1 2.6 1 1 2 2 3 5 22 >20 1 2.6

Chloride 32 0 >230 0 0.0 1 1 1 2 2 5 35

Turbidity (NTU) 57 1 >50 0 0.0 1 1 2 3 5 8 40 >25 2 3.5 ...... >10 3 5.3 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 43 11 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.18 0.93 TKN as N 42 1 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 1.00

NO2+NO3 as N 44 1 >10 0 0.0 0.07 0.11 0.16 0.24 0.36 0.42 0.50 Total Phosphorus 44 7 >0.05 17 38.6 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.09 0.50

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 39 0 . . . 67 80 110 150 245 406 1700 Arsenic (As) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 39 39 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 39 26 >7 5 12.8 2 2 2 2 3 7 12 Iron (Fe) 39 0 >1000 1 2.6 68 96 110 140 215 340 1200 Lead (Pb) 39 34 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 11 23 Manganese (Mn) 33 26 . . . 10 10 10 10 10 12 28 Mercury (Hg) 39 39 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 39 39 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 39 15 >50 1 2.6 10 10 10 12 18 28 64

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 57 N>200= 2 N>400= 2 %>400= 3.5 Geometric mean= 4.3

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 166

Little R upstream High Falls at Dupont Plant near Location: Cedar Station: E1130000 Classification: C Tr Subbasin: FRB01

Period: 9/9/1997 to 8/29/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 52 0 <4 0 0.0 5.5 7.6 8.5 9.9 10.9 12.1 13.0 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 52 na . . . 11 20 25 29 44 51 84 Temperature (°C) 52 na . . . 4 7 10 14 21 23 25

pH (s.u.) 50 na <6 0 0.0 6.2 6.5 6.7 6.8 6.9 7.1 7.5 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 36 5 >10 0 0.0 1 1 1 2 2 47 >20 0 0.0

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 52 0 >50 0 0.0 1 1 2 2 3 4 10 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 0 0.0 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 37 2 . . . 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.11 0.17 0.20 0.32 TKN as N 36 2 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.70

NO2+NO3 as N 37 1 >10 0 0.0 0.03 0.05 0.10 0.16 0.28 0.59 1.10 Total Phosphorus 37 16 >0.05 1 2.7 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.10

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 36 0 . . . 58 80 100 120 170 310 490 Arsenic (As) 36 36 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 36 36 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 36 36 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 36 22 >7 4 11.1 2 2 2 2 3 6 12 Iron (Fe) 36 0 >1000 0 0.0 160 225 260 375 455 505 580 Lead (Pb) 36 33 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 17 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 36 36 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 36 36 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 36 22 >50 2 5.6 10 10 10 10 15 27 67

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 52 N>200= 1 N>400= 1 %>400= 1.9 Geometric mean= 4.1

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 167

Location: French Broad R at SR 1503 at Blantyre Station: E1270000 Classification: WS-IV&B Subbasin: FRB01

Period: 9/9/1997 to 8/29/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 56 0 <4 0 0.0 6.6 7.4 8.4 9.8 11.2 12.2 13.3 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 56 na . . . 20 31 36 46 66 83 99 Temperature (°C) 56 na . . . 3 6 9 14 21 24 25

pH (s.u.) 55 na <6 0 0.0 6.5 6.7 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.3 8.0 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 >500 0 ...... TSS 38 2 >10 10 26.3 1 3 5 7 12 1869 >20 3 7.9

Chloride 0 0 >250 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 56 0 >50 1 1.8 1 3 4 6 9 19 58 >25 4 7.1 ...... >10 12 21.4 ......

Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N 44 8 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.14 0.21 0.50 TKN as N 42 2 . . . 0.10 0.11 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.48 1.10 NO2+NO3 as N 44 1 >10 0 0.0 0.12 0.16 0.17 0.21 0.24 0.30 0.50 Total Phosphorus 44 6 >0.05 23 52.3 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.10 0.50

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 39 0 . . . 110 190 255 400 545 1140 3600 Arsenic (As) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 39 39 >2 1 2.6 2 2 2 2 2 2 10 Chromium (Cr) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 39 23 >7 4 10.3 2 2 2 2 3 6 12 Iron (Fe) 39 0 >1000 3 7.7 240 278 320 430 575 968 2700 Lead (Pb) 39 35 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 25 Manganese (Mn) 2 0 >200 0 0.0 18 24 33 49 64 73 79 Mercury (Hg) 39 39 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 39 39 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 39 18 >50 2 5.1 10 10 10 11 15 35 91

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 56 N>200= 7 N>400= 5 %>400= 8.9 Geometric mean= 28.8

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 168

Mud Cr at SR 1508 near Location: Balfour Station:

E2120000 Classification: C Subbasin: FRB02

Period: 9/18/1997 to 8/21/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 54 0 <4 0 0.0 6.7 7.5 7.9 9.1 10.5 11.8 13.9 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 55 na . . . 40 55 68 77 90 105 134 Temperature (°C) 55 na . . . 3 5 9 14 21 22 23

pH (s.u.) 54 na <6 0 0.0 6.1 6.5 6.7 6.8 6.9 7.0 7.3 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 39 1 >10 11 28.2 2 3 5 8 11 2241 >20 5 12.8

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 55 0 >50 2 3.6 2 4 6 7 12 29 83 >25 6 10.9 ...... >10 15 27.3 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 43 5 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.10 0.19 0.41 TKN as N 42 1 . . . 0.10 0.11 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.70

NO2+NO3 as N 43 0 >10 0 0.0 0.43 0.59 0.65 0.86 0.99 1.18 2.30 Total Phosphorus 43 1 >0.05 43 100.0 0.09 0.12 0.16 0.24 0.39 0.48 0.72

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 41 0 . . . 140 190 290 410 570 1400 2800 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 23 >7 2 4.9 2 2 2 2 3 5 10 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 5 12.2 370 430 480 640 770 1400 2100 Lead (Pb) 41 39 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 18 Manganese (Mn) 1 0 . . . 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 41 10 >50 0 0.0 10 10 11 13 19 34 44

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 54 N>200= 18 N>400= 8 %>400= 14.8 Geometric mean= 117.3

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 169

Location: French Broad R at SR 3495 Glenn Bridge Rd near Sky Station: E2730000 Classification: B Subbasin: FRB02

Period: 9/18/1997 to 8/21/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 54 0 <4 0 0.0 6.0 7.2 7.9 9.2 10.7 12.1 15.8 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 55 na . . . 24 39 44 50 59 73 98 Temperature (°C) 55 na . . . 3 5 9 15 21 23 25

pH (s.u.) 54 na <6 0 0.0 6.5 6.7 6.8 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.6 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 39 1 >10 12 30.8 1 3 4 7 12 2328 >20 5 12.8

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 55 0 >50 0 0.0 2 4 5 7 10 20 31 >25 3 5.5 ...... >10 13 23.6 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 43 8 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.11 0.20 TKN as N 42 0 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.60

NO2+NO3 as N 43 0 >10 0 0.0 0.22 0.26 0.31 0.37 0.42 0.47 0.67 Total Phosphorus 43 1 >0.05 28 65.1 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.14

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 41 0 . . . 150 180 260 380 670 1200 2600 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 25 >7 6 14.6 2 2 2 2 4 8 10 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 5 12.2 260 330 370 450 600 1100 1700 Lead (Pb) 41 38 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 19 Manganese (Mn) 1 0 . . . 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 41 20 >50 2 4.9 10 10 10 10 14 29 250

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 54 N>200= 7 N>400= 5 %>400= 9.3 Geometric mean= 19.8

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 170

Location: Hominy Cr at SR 3413 near Asheville Station: E3520000 Classification: C Subbasin: FRB02

Period: 9/18/1997 to 8/21/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 54 0 <4 0 0.0 6.5 7.7 8.7 9.8 11.4 12.6 16.0 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 54 na . . . 40 65 77 89 106 117 166 Temperature (°C) 54 na . . . 1 5 9 16 21 23 26

pH (s.u.) 53 na <6 0 0.0 6.8 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.7 8.2 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 37 2 >10 12 32.4 1 2 5 7 13 20 32 >20 4 10.8

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 54 0 >50 4 7.4 2 3 6 8 12 29 290 >25 7 13.0 ...... >10 15 27.8 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 42 7 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.08 0.27 0.58 1.20 TKN as N 41 1 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.30 0.50 1.00 1.70

NO2+NO3 as N 42 0 >10 0 0.0 0.61 0.69 0.78 0.95 1.08 1.29 3.50 Total Phosphorus 42 1 >0.05 26 61.9 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.13 0.24 0.52

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 40 0 . . . 81 100 160 325 460 813 1400 Arsenic (As) 40 40 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 40 40 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 40 40 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 40 20 >7 1 2.5 2 2 2 2 4 5 8 Iron (Fe) 40 0 >1000 9 22.5 320 409 540 730 878 1400 2400 Lead (Pb) 40 37 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 17 Manganese (Mn) 1 0 . . . 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Mercury (Hg) 40 39 >0.012 1 2.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 40 40 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 40 13 >50 2 5.0 10 10 10 13 18 29 90

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 53 N>200= 13 N>400= 8 %>400= 15.1 Geometric mean= 56.6

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 171

Location: Beetree Cr near Swannanoa Ps 10 Station: E4030000 Classification: WS-I HQW Subbasin: FRB02

Period: 9/11/1997 to 8/12/1999 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 20 0 <4 0 0.0 8.3 8.9 9.1 10.6 12.1 12.8 13.5 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 20 na . . . 6 16 17 19 20 25 26 Temperature (°C) 20 na . . . 4 5 10 13 15 15 18

pH (s.u.) 20 na <6 0 0.0 6.2 6.3 6.5 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 20 0 >500 0 . 4 10 20 27 30 34 48 TSS 20 2 >10 0 0.0 1 1 2 2 2 22 >20 0 0.0

Chloride 20 2 >250 0 0.0 1 1 1 2 2 2 4

Turbidity (NTU) 20 1 >50 0 0.0 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 0 0.0 ......

Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N 22 13 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.08 TKN as N 22 6 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.18 0.20 0.30 NO2+NO3 as N 22 1 >10 0 0.0 0.01 0.13 0.18 0.22 0.31 0.34 0.43 Total Phosphorus 22 13 >0.05 0 0.0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 22 10 . . . 50 50 50 51 64 91 93 Arsenic (As) 22 22 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 22 22 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 22 22 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 22 13 >7 1 4.5 2 2 2 2 3 4 8 Iron (Fe) 22 16 >1000 0 0.0 50 50 50 50 71 99 400 Lead (Pb) 22 21 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 14 Manganese (Mn) 21 19 >200 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 30 Mercury (Hg) 22 22 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 22 22 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 22 13 >50 2 9.1 10 10 10 10 18 43 120

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 20 N>200= 0 N>400= 0 %>400= 0.0 Geometric mean= 1.8

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 172

Location: Swannanoa R at NC 25 at Asheville Station: E4170000 Classification: C Subbasin: FRB02

Period: 9/18/1997 to 8/21/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 54 0 <4 0 0.0 6.1 8.1 8.7 10.2 11.7 13.1 16.4 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 54 na . . . 22 45 59 68 76 84 109 Temperature (°C) 54 na . . . 2 5 9 16 21 23 24

pH (s.u.) 53 na <6 0 0.0 6.7 6.8 7.0 7.3 7.4 7.5 8.0 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 38 3 >10 8 21.1 1 2 3 4 8 1889 >20 4 10.5

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 54 0 >50 4 7.4 1 3 4 6 10 32 140 >25 6 11.1 ...... >10 11 20.4 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 44 13 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.12 0.43 TKN as N 43 2 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 1.00

NO2+NO3 as N 44 0 >10 0 0.0 0.04 0.18 0.21 0.27 0.32 0.37 0.64 Total Phosphorus 44 4 >0.05 7 15.9 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.23

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 41 2 . . . 50 87 110 180 440 1100 4400 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 21 >7 3 7.3 2 2 2 2 3 5 16 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 5 12.2 320 370 410 510 900 1700 6000 Lead (Pb) 41 39 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 24 Manganese (Mn) 1 0 . . . 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 41 11 >50 4 9.8 10 10 10 15 26 49 190

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 53 N>200= 13 N>400= 9 %>400= 17.0 Geometric mean= 76.7

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 173

Location: French Broad R at SR 1348 at Asheville Station: E4280000 Classification: B Subbasin: FRB02

Period: 9/19/1997 to 8/21/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 54 0 <4 0 0.0 7.2 8.2 9.2 10.3 11.8 13.1 16.5 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 54 na . . . 27 42 47 55 67 77 107 Temperature (°C) 54 na . . . 2 5 9 17 22 25 27

pH (s.u.) 53 na <6 0 0.0 6.8 7.0 7.1 7.4 8.2 8.6 9.2 >9 1 1.9 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 39 1 >10 14 35.9 1 2 4 8 12 3246 >20 5 12.8

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 55 0 >50 2 3.6 1 4 5 8 12 24 56 >25 6 10.9 ...... >10 15 27.3 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 44 11 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.55 TKN as N 43 1 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.31 0.40 0.80

NO2+NO3 as N 44 0 >10 0 0.0 0.11 0.28 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.47 0.53 Total Phosphorus 44 1 >0.05 19 43.2 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.11 0.31

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 41 0 . . . 75 120 240 390 660 1700 2900 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 23 >7 3 7.3 2 2 2 2 3 6 12 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 7 17.1 250 280 370 490 740 1700 2900 Lead (Pb) 41 40 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 41 20 >50 1 2.4 10 10 10 10 17 32 51

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 54 N>200= 5 N>400= 3 %>400= 5.6 Geometric mean= 13.5

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 174

Location: French Broad R at SR 1634 at Alexander Station: E4770000 Classification: B Subbasin: FRB02

Period: 9/19/1997 to 8/21/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 54 0 <4 0 0.0 6.6 8.0 8.6 9.8 11.4 12.5 16.2 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 54 na . . . 37 56 65 77 100 123 164 Temperature (°C) 54 na . . . 4 6 10 18 23 26 28

pH (s.u.) 53 na <6 0 0.0 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.7 8.0 8.4 9.0 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 39 1 >10 17 43.6 2 2 6 9 16 4056 >20 6 15.4

Chloride 1 0 >230 0 0.0 777 7 7 77

Turbidity (NTU) 53 0 >50 2 3.8 2 4 6 8 13 25 64 >25 6 11.3 ...... >10 18 34.0 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 43 3 . . . 0.01 0.05 0.09 0.12 0.15 0.21 4.30 TKN as N 42 0 . . . 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.69 5.90

NO2+NO3 as N 43 0 >10 0 0.0 0.27 0.42 0.51 0.62 0.72 0.88 1.10 Total Phosphorus 43 1 >0.05 42 97.7 0.05 0.07 0.12 0.18 0.23 0.27 0.35

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 41 0 . . . 100 170 280 400 700 1600 2500 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 15 >7 1 2.4 2 2 2 3 4 6 7 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 9 22.0 240 320 440 600 800 1600 2400 Lead (Pb) 41 38 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 25 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 41 11 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 13 19 28 49

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 53 N>200= 3 N>400= 2 %>400= 3.8 Geometric mean= 10.1

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 175

Location: Davidson R at US 64 near Brevard Station: E0850000 Classification: WS-V & B Tr Subbasin: FRB03

Period: 9/9/1997 to 8/29/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 56 0 <4 0 0.0 8.7 9.2 10.0 11.1 12.4 13.8 14.7 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 56 na . . . 10 12 14 16 18 20 37 Temperature (°C) 56 na . . . 1 5 7 12 18 19 20

pH (s.u.) 55 na <6 5 9.1 5.1 6.0 6.4 6.5 6.7 6.7 7.3 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 32 0 >500 0 . 8 14 16 23 30 35 57 TSS 38 13 >10 2 5.3 1 1 1 2 2 420 >20 0 0.0

Chloride 32 5 >250 0 0.0 111 2 2 743

Turbidity (NTU) 57 12 >50 0 0.0 1 1 1 2 2 3 19 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 1 1.8 ......

Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N 43 17 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.18 0.50 TKN as N 42 7 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.30 1.00 NO2+NO3 as N 43 3 >10 0 0.0 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.10 0.22 0.31 0.50 Total Phosphorus 43 11 >0.05 11 25.6 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.10 0.50

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 38 17 . . . 50 50 50 58 86 133 1100 Arsenic (As) 38 38 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 38 38 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 38 38 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 38 26 >7 2 5.3 2 2 2 2 3 5 15 Iron (Fe) 38 17 >1000 0 0.0 50 50 50 61 88 97 790 Lead (Pb) 38 38 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Manganese (Mn) 3 2 >200 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 18 23 26 Mercury (Hg) 38 38 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 38 38 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 38 24 >50 1 2.6 10 10 10 10 13 23 54

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 57 N>200= 2 N>400= 1 %>400= 1.8 Geometric mean= 4.4

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 176

Location: Mills R at end of SR 1337 near Mills River Station: E1490000 Classification: WS-II Tr HWQ Subbasin: FRB03

Period: 9/18/1997 to 8/21/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 54 0 <4 0 0.0 8.7 9.2 9.6 10.6 12.1 13.1 16.9 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 54 na . . . 10 13 15 16 18 20 30 Temperature (°C) 54 na . . . 1 4 8 13 18 20 23

pH (s.u.) 53 na <6 1 1.9 5.9 6.6 6.8 6.9 7.1 7.3 7.5 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 31 0 >500 0 . 11 16 20 27 34 38 73 TSS 39 10 >10 0 0.0 1 1 1 2 3 5 10 >20 0 0.0

Chloride 31 4 >250 0 0.0 1 1 1 2 2 2 4

Turbidity (NTU) 55 4 >50 0 0.0 1 1 2 2 3 5 30 >25 1 1.8 ...... >10 2 3.6 ......

Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N 42 24 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.20 TKN as N 41 8 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 NO2+NO3 as N 41 0 >10 0 0.0 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.11 0.13 Total Phosphorus 42 12 >0.05 0 0.0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 40 4 . . . 50 50 59 81 145 221 460 Arsenic (As) 40 40 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 40 40 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 40 40 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 40 26 >7 2 5.0 2 2 2 2 2 4 22 Iron (Fe) 40 0 >1000 0 0.0 56 67 86 120 183 228 430 Lead (Pb) 40 38 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 16 Manganese (Mn) 2 0 >200 0 0.0 11 11 12 13 13 14 14 Mercury (Hg) 40 40 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 40 40 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 40 29 >50 1 2.5 10 10 10 10 11 27 71

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 54 N>200= 3 N>400= 2 %>400= 3.7 Geometric mean= 5.3

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 177

Location: French Broad R at Blennerhassett Island at Marshall Station: E5120000 Classification: B Subbasin: FRB04

Period: 9/19/1997 to 8/21/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 53 0 <4 0 0.0 6.8 8.1 8.9 10.1 12.2 12.9 16.6 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 53 na . . . 38 54 67 81 106 122 159 Temperature (°C) 53 na . . . 3 6 10 17 23 26 27

pH (s.u.) 52 na <6 0 0.0 7.0 7.2 7.3 7.6 8.0 8.3 8.9 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 38 2 >10 19 50.0 1 2 4 11 19 37 53 >20 8 21.1

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 53 0 >50 3 5.7 2 4 6 9 15 28 240 >25 6 11.3 ...... >10 18 34.0 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 42 4 . . . 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.13 0.19 0.50 TKN as N 41 0 . . . 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.70

NO2+NO3 as N 42 0 >10 0 0.0 0.29 0.48 0.61 0.70 0.80 0.91 1.20 Total Phosphorus 42 1 >0.05 41 97.6 0.04 0.07 0.11 0.16 0.22 0.24 0.31

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 40 0 . . . 86 169 285 485 825 1750 2800 Arsenic (As) 40 40 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 40 40 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 40 40 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 40 17 >7 4 10.0 2 2 2 3 4 6 17 Iron (Fe) 40 0 >1000 8 20.0 260 298 445 650 905 2010 3100 Lead (Pb) 40 38 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 15 Manganese (Mn) 1 0 . . . 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 Mercury (Hg) 40 40 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 40 40 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 40 14 >50 1 2.5 10 10 10 12 22 28 59

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 52 N>200= 5 N>400= 3 %>400= 5.8 Geometric mean= 13.1

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 178

W Fk Pigeon R upstream Lake Logan near Location: Hazelwood Station: E5410000 Classification: WS-III Tr Subbasin: FRB05

Period: 9/16/1997 to 5/22/2000 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 31 0 <4 0 0.0 8.5 8.8 9.5 10.9 12.5 13.0 15.6 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 31 na . . . 8 10 12 13 14 16 18 Temperature (°C) 31 na . . . 3 5 8 13 19 21 22

pH (s.u.) 29 na <6 0 0.0 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.9 7.0 7.2 7.5 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 30 0 >500 0 . 10 14 17 20 27 33 36 TSS 30 6 >10 0 0.0 1 1 1 2 2 26 >20 0 0.0

Chloride 31 5 >250 0 0.0 111 1 2 24

Turbidity (NTU) 31 6 >50 0 0.0 1 1 1 2 2 2 4 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 0 0.0 ......

Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N 32 17 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.08 TKN as N 32 6 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 3.50 NO2+NO3 as N 32 2 >10 0 0.0 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.12 0.15 0.16 0.19 Total Phosphorus 32 20 >0.05 0 0.0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 32 9 . . . 50 50 50 66 89 139 360 Arsenic (As) 32 32 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 32 32 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 32 32 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 32 18 >7 2 6.3 2 2 2 2 4 6 8 Iron (Fe) 32 20 >1000 0 0.0 50 50 50 50 58 80 370 Lead (Pb) 32 28 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 13 24 Manganese (Mn) 32 31 >200 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 14 Mercury (Hg) 32 32 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 32 32 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 32 18 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 16 33 43

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 31 N>200= 0 N>400= 0 %>400= 0.0 Geometric mean= 1.9

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 179

Location: Pigeon R at NC 215 near Canton Station: E5495000 Classification: WS-III Tr CA Subbasin: FRB05

Period: 9/16/1997 to 8/26/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 58 0 <4 0 0.0 5.9 8.7 9.8 11.2 12.7 13.5 16.7 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 58 na . . . 12 18 20 23 27 30 33 Temperature (°C) 58 na . . . 1 4 8 14 21 23 24

pH (s.u.) 56 na <6 0 0.0 6.3 6.7 7.0 7.3 7.4 7.8 8.0 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 33 0 >500 0 . 6 12 20 28 36 46 93 TSS 40 6 >10 2 5.0 1 1 2 2 3 551 >20 1 2.5

Chloride 36 3 >250 0 0.0 111 2 2 918

Turbidity (NTU) 57 7 >50 1 1.8 1 1 1 2 3 5 51 >25 2 3.5 ...... >10 4 7.0 ......

Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N 46 17 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.15 0.50 TKN as N 44 5 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.33 0.47 1.00 NO2+NO3 as N 46 3 >10 0 0.0 0.01 0.10 0.17 0.21 0.26 0.31 0.50 Total Phosphorus 46 11 >0.05 6 13.0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.50

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 41 7 . . . 50 50 71 110 170 230 2700 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 29 >7 1 2.4 2 2 2 2 2 4 16 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 1 2.4 62 75 130 200 260 340 3500 Lead (Pb) 41 36 >25 1 2.4 10 10 10 10 10 13 26 Manganese (Mn) 36 14 >200 0 0.0 10 10 10 11 17 22 74 Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 41 25 >50 1 2.4 10 10 10 10 15 33 59

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 57 N>200= 1 N>400= 0 %>400= 0.0 Geometric mean= 8.0

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 180

Location: Pigeon R at SR 1642 at Clyde Station: E5600000

Classification: C Subbasin: FRB05

Period: 9/16/1997 to 8/26/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 58 0 <4 0 0.0 5.8 7.1 7.8 9.8 11.5 12.2 16.2 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 58 na . . . 88 195 327 564 957 1579 2045 Temperature (°C) 58 na . . . 5 8 10 18 25 26 28

pH (s.u.) 56 na <6 1 1.8 5.8 7.2 7.6 7.8 8.0 8.2 9.0 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 1 0 . 888 8 8 88 TSS 39 4 >10 6 15.4 1 2 2 4 7 1179 >20 3 7.7

Chloride 31 1 >230 0 0.0 1 14 18 27 65 98 260

Turbidity (NTU) 57 1 >50 1 1.8 1 2 3 4 6 9 74 >25 3 5.3 ...... >10 4 7.0 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 46 7 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.09 0.13 0.39 1.30 TKN as N 44 2 . . . 0.10 0.13 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.77 1.70

NO2+NO3 as N 46 2 >10 0 0.0 0.13 0.19 0.24 0.34 0.43 0.56 1.00 Total Phosphorus 46 3 >0.05 42 91.3 0.04 0.07 0.12 0.21 0.29 0.50 0.89

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 40 0 . . . 130 168 220 365 545 1230 3800 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >2 1 2.4 2 2 2 2 2 2 10 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 14 >7 7 17.1 2 2 2 3 4 8 17 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 5 12.2 91 150 220 340 510 1200 5600 Lead (Pb) 41 39 >25 1 2.4 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 Manganese (Mn) 2 0 . . . 230 257 298 365 433 473 500 Mercury (Hg) 41 40 >0.012 1 2.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 40 13 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 12 20 32 48

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 57 N>200= 3 N>400= 1 %>400= 1.8 Geometric mean= 49.1

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 181

Location: Richland Cr at SR 1184 near Waynesville Station: E6110000 Classification: B Subbasin: FRB05

Period: 9/23/1997 to 8/13/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 56 0 <4 0 0.0 8.8 9.1 9.9 11.2 12.2 13.3 15.0 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 56 na . . . 24 37 43 60 68 91 169 Temperature (°C) 56 na . . . 1 5 7 13 18 20 21

pH (s.u.) 55 na <6 0 0.0 6.1 6.6 6.7 7.0 7.3 7.5 7.8 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 40 2 >10 11 27.5 1 2 2 6 11 14 22 >20 1 2.5

Chloride 1 0 >230 0 0.0 666 6 6 66

Turbidity (NTU) 54 0 >50 0 0.0 1 2 3 5 6 8 19 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 4 7.4 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 45 16 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.07 0.11 0.37 TKN as N 44 2 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.37 0.60

NO2+NO3 as N 45 0 >10 0 0.0 0.21 0.36 0.37 0.42 0.51 0.61 1.30 Total Phosphorus 45 6 >0.05 2 4.4 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.13

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 39 0 . . . 61 87 165 290 465 728 1200 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >2 1 2.4 2 2 2 2 2 2 10 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 24 >7 2 4.9 2 2 2 2 3 4 9 Iron (Fe) 39 0 >1000 2 5.1 130 150 225 430 565 942 1400 Lead (Pb) 41 39 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 12 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 41 19 >50 1 2.4 10 10 10 10 19 25 84

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 56 N>200= 9 N>400= 6 %>400= 10.7 Geometric mean= 50.8

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 182

Location: Jonathans Cr at US 276 near Cove Creek Station: E6300000 Classification: C Tr Subbasin: FRB05

Period: 9/23/1997 to 8/13/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 56 0 <4 0 0.0 9.0 9.3 10.0 11.2 12.2 13.4 15.2 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 56 na . . . 21 32 33 37 40 43 50 Temperature (°C) 56 na . . . 1 4 7 13 17 19 21

pH (s.u.) 55 na <6 0 0.0 6.4 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.5 7.8 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 40 3 >10 7 17.5 1 2 3 5 9 1118 >20 0 0.0

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 56 0 >50 0 0.0 1 2 3 4 6 8 14 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 2 3.6 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 45 13 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.10 0.20 TKN as N 44 6 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.30 1.50

NO2+NO3 as N 45 0 >10 0 0.0 0.17 0.32 0.34 0.38 0.50 0.66 0.78 Total Phosphorus 45 5 >0.05 2 4.4 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.13

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 41 1 . . . 50 74 120 220 390 480 890 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 30 >7 3 7.3 2 2 2 2 2 5 23 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 0 0.0 110 130 200 280 480 590 930 Lead (Pb) 41 39 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 41 24 >50 1 2.4 10 10 10 10 15 19 77

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 57 N>200= 6 N>400= 3 %>400= 5.3 Geometric mean= 29.6

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 183

Location: Cataloochee Cr at SR 1395 near Cataloochee Station: E6450000 Classification: C Tr ORW Subbasin: FRB05

Period: 9/23/1997 to 8/13/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 50 0 <4 0 0.0 9.1 9.4 9.8 11.3 12.1 13.0 15.5 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 50 na . . . 10 13 15 16 17 18 23 Temperature (°C) 50 na . . . 2 5 8 12 17 18 19

pH (s.u.) 49 na <6 0 0.0 6.5 6.8 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.7 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 37 9 >10 1 2.7 1 1 1 2 2 513 >20 0 0.0

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 51 12 >50 0 0.0 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 0 0.0 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 41 16 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.07 0.20 TKN as N 40 4 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.31 0.60

NO2+NO3 as N 40 1 >10 0 0.0 0.02 0.05 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.17 0.21 Total Phosphorus 41 15 >0.05 2 4.9 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.13

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 38 15 . . . 50 50 50 65 89 123 390 Arsenic (As) 38 38 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 38 38 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 38 38 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 38 26 >7 3 7.9 2 2 2 2 2 4 25 Iron (Fe) 38 15 >1000 0 0.0 50 50 50 53 74 95 390 Lead (Pb) 38 36 >25 1 2.6 10 10 10 10 10 10 36 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 38 38 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 38 38 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 38 27 >50 1 2.6 10 10 10 10 12 26 62

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 51 N>200= 1 N>400= 1 %>400= 2.0 Geometric mean= 2.4

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 184

Location: Pigeon R at SR 1338 near Hepco Station: E6480000 Classification: C Subbasin: FRB05

Period: 9/23/1997 to 8/13/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 56 0 <4 0 0.0 5.9 8.8 9.4 10.8 11.9 12.8 15.0 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 56 na . . . 42 144 222 284 452 612 851 Temperature (°C) 56 na . . . 2 5 7 15 21 23 24

pH (s.u.) 55 na <6 0 0.0 7.0 7.5 7.8 7.9 8.2 8.3 8.6 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 40 4 >10 12 30.0 1 2 3 5 12 18 38 >20 4 10.0

Chloride 1 0 >230 0 0.0 16 16 16 16 16 16 16

Turbidity (NTU) 57 0 >50 0 0.0 1 2 3 5 7 10 20 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 6 10.5 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 45 8 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.15 0.36 TKN as N 44 1 . . . 0.10 0.13 0.20 0.30 0.31 0.40 0.60

NO2+NO3 as N 45 0 >10 0 0.0 0.33 0.37 0.42 0.51 0.60 0.72 1.60 Total Phosphorus 45 1 >0.05 37 82.2 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.11 0.14 0.21 0.82

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 41 0 . . . 97 130 180 300 490 940 1500 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 40 18 >7 1 2.5 2 2 2 2 3 4 18 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 6 14.6 110 180 270 370 710 1100 1900 Lead (Pb) 41 35 >25 1 2.4 10 10 10 10 10 13 26 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 40 14 >50 1 2.5 10 10 10 12 18 28 71

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 57 N>200= 2 N>400= 1 %>400= 1.8 Geometric mean= 30.5

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 185

Location: Pigeon R at Waterville Station: E6500000

Classification: C Subbasin: FRB05

Period: 9/23/1997 to 8/13/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 54 0 <4 0 0.0 6.3 7.6 8.9 10.6 11.5 12.3 15.4 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 54 na . . . 47 90 125 198 294 423 608 Temperature (°C) 54 na . . . 2 7 10 15 21 23 24

pH (s.u.) 53 na <6 0 0.0 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.6 7.8 8.2 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 40 4 >10 1 2.5 1 1 2 3 4 520 >20 0 0.0

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 57 0 >50 0 0.0 1 2 3 4 5 7 23 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 3 5.3 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 45 9 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.12 0.16 0.26 TKN as N 44 1 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.60

NO2+NO3 as N 45 0 >10 0 0.0 0.24 0.28 0.32 0.37 0.43 0.53 0.62 Total Phosphorus 45 1 >0.05 27 60.0 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.13 0.22

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 41 0 . . . 54 69 94 140 200 300 1600 Arsenic (As) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 41 41 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 41 41 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 41 24 >7 3 7.3 2 2 2 2 3 5 21 Iron (Fe) 41 0 >1000 1 2.4 87 140 200 240 380 430 1500 Lead (Pb) 41 38 >25 1 2.4 10 10 10 10 10 10 30 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 41 41 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 41 41 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 41 24 >50 1 2.4 10 10 10 10 15 25 67

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 56 N>200= 2 N>400= 1 %>400= 1.8 Geometric mean= 6.7

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 186

Location: N Toe R at US 19E near Ingalls Station: E7000000

Classification: WS-IV Tr Subbasin: FRB06

Period: 9/10/1997 to 8/27/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 54 0 <4 0 0.0 8.2 8.8 9.6 11.2 12.4 12.9 13.9 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 54 na . . . 25 38 42 47 50 51 56 Temperature (°C) 54 na . . . 1 5 7 12 18 21 23

pH (s.u.) 53 na <6 0 0.0 6.8 7.0 7.3 7.5 7.7 7.9 8.3 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 29 0 >500 0 . 26 32 34 45 53 73 290 TSS 39 6 >10 5 12.8 1 1 2 3 7 11250 >20 1 2.6

Chloride 30 0 >250 0 0.0 1 2 2 3 3 4 5

Turbidity (NTU) 54 3 >50 1 1.9 1 1 2 3 5 8 110 >25 1 1.9 ...... >10 4 7.4 ......

Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N 41 19 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.09 0.20 TKN as N 39 3 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 1.00 NO2+NO3 as N 41 0 >10 0 0.0 0.20 0.37 0.42 0.48 0.62 0.69 1.20 Total Phosphorus 42 14 >0.05 3 7.1 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.50

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 38 2 . . . 50 58 74 165 310 466 13000 Arsenic (As) 38 38 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 38 38 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 38 38 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 38 19 >7 3 7.9 2 2 2 2 3 5 20 Iron (Fe) 38 0 >1000 1 2.6 100 120 133 240 425 563 13000 Lead (Pb) 38 30 >25 1 2.6 10 10 10 10 10 13 28 Manganese (Mn) 33 7 >200 1 3.0 10 10 11 13 17 24 320 Mercury (Hg) 38 38 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 38 38 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 38 28 >50 1 2.6 10 10 10 10 10 23 120

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 54 N>200= 4 N>400= 2 %>400= 3.7 Geometric mean= 6.0

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 187

Location: N Toe R at SR 1162 at Penland Station: E8100000 Classification: C Tr Subbasin: FRB06

Period: 9/10/1997 to 8/27/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 48 0 <4 0 0.0 8.2 8.8 9.5 10.8 11.9 13.4 14.1 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 49 na . . . 45 65 80 106 120 137 156 Temperature (°C) 49 na . . . 1 5 8 15 20 24 25

pH (s.u.) 48 na <6 0 0.0 6.4 7.0 7.3 7.4 7.7 7.9 8.7 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 34 4 >10 5 14.7 1 2 2 3 5 23100 >20 4 11.8

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 49 0 >50 1 2.0 1 2 2 3 6 13 75 >25 3 6.1 ...... >10 7 14.3 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 42 17 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.09 0.28 TKN as N 40 2 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.50

NO2+NO3 as N 42 0 >10 0 0.0 0.16 0.27 0.32 0.41 0.52 0.61 0.85 Total Phosphorus 43 6 >0.05 5 11.6 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.06 0.50

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 39 0 . . . 100 130 165 250 425 1056 4800 Arsenic (As) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 39 39 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 39 20 >7 3 7.7 2 2 2 2 4 6 8 Iron (Fe) 39 0 >1000 4 10.3 200 226 260 330 465 1076 5200 Lead (Pb) 39 37 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 17 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 39 39 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 39 39 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 39 22 >50 1 2.6 10 10 10 10 18 33 58

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 49 N>200= 3 N>400= 3 %>400= 6.1 Geometric mean= 14.8

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 188

Location: S Toe R at SR 1168 near Celo Station: E8200000

Classification: B Tr ORW Subbasin: FRB06

Period: 9/10/1997 to 8/27/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 53 0 <4 0 0.0 8.1 8.8 9.6 11.1 12.0 13.0 13.9 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 54 na . . . 9 13 14 16 17 20 31 Temperature (°C) 54 na . . . 1 5 8 12 17 20 23

pH (s.u.) 53 na <6 0 0.0 6.2 6.5 6.7 6.9 7.0 7.2 7.3 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 39 13 >10 0 0.0 1 1 2 2 2 38 >20 0 0.0

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 54 13 >50 0 0.0 1 1 1 1 2 2 10 >25 0 0.0 ...... >10 0 0.0 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 42 24 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.09 0.20 TKN as N 40 5 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40

NO2+NO3 as N 42 2 >10 0 0.0 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.14 1.10 Total Phosphorus 43 25 >0.05 2 4.7 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.50

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 39 17 . . . 50 50 50 66 90 168 330 Arsenic (As) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 39 39 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 39 33 >7 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 Iron (Fe) 39 15 >1000 0 0.0 50 50 50 60 92 142 430 Lead (Pb) 39 37 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 16 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 39 39 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 39 39 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 39 29 >50 1 2.6 10 10 10 10 12 26 61

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 54 N>200= 2 N>400= 2 %>400= 3.7 Geometric mean= 2.9

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 189

Location: Nolichucky R beside SR 1321 at Poplar Station: E9990000 Classification: B Subbasin: FRB06

Period: 9/10/1997 to 8/27/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 38 0 <4 0 0.0 7.9 8.4 9.1 10.9 12.2 13.3 13.9 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 39 na . . . 30 52 55 62 72 79 94 Temperature (°C) 39 na . . . 1 6 9 17 22 24 27

pH (s.u.) 38 na <6 0 0.0 6.5 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.7 8.3 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 28 6 >10 9 32.1 1 1 3 8 14 26150 >20 4 14.3

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 38 0 >50 1 2.6 1 2 3 6 10 13 170 >25 3 7.9 ...... >10 6 15.8 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 31 12 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.08 0.20 TKN as N 29 1 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.21 0.40 0.60

NO2+NO3 as N 31 0 >10 0 0.0 0.07 0.16 0.21 0.31 0.45 0.56 0.82 Total Phosphorus 31 3 >0.05 4 12.9 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.28

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 28 1 . . . 50 93 145 345 718 1150 8800 Arsenic (As) 28 28 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 28 28 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 28 28 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 28 12 >7 1 3.6 2 2 2 2 3 5 15 Iron (Fe) 28 0 >1000 4 14.3 99 184 278 480 820 1550 9500 Lead (Pb) 28 27 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 16 Manganese (Mn) 0 0 ...... Mercury (Hg) 28 28 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 28 28 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Zinc (Zn) 28 16 >50 2 7.1 10 10 10 10 22 33 54

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 39 N>200= 1 N>400= 0 %>400= 0.0 Geometric mean= 9.0

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 190

Location: Cane R at SR 1417 near Sioux Station: E9800000

Classification: C Tr Subbasin: FRB07

Period: 9/10/1997 to 8/27/2002 < or > Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles Parameter N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90Max.

Field Dissolved Oxygen 52 0 <4 0 0.0 8.3 9.1 9.7 11.6 12.6 13.8 14.8 (DO; mg/L) <5 0 0.0 ......

Conductivity 54 na . . . 25 40 43 49 56 61 71 Temperature (°C) 54 na . . . 1 4 7 13 21 23 25

pH (s.u.) 53 na <6 0 0.0 6.1 6.6 6.9 7.3 7.8 8.2 8.8 >9 0 0.0 ......

Other (mg/L) Total Residue 0 0 ...... TSS 39 5 >10 12 30.8 1 1 2 5 13 33250 >20 6 15.4

Chloride 0 0 >230 0 ......

Turbidity (NTU) 54 1 >50 4 7.4 1 2 2 4 8 29 230 >25 6 11.1 ...... >10 11 20.4 ......

Nutrients (mg/L)

NH3 as N 42 17 . . . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.09 0.24 TKN as N 40 3 . . . 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.23 0.40 0.46

NO2+NO3 as N 42 0 >10 0 0.0 0.06 0.22 0.26 0.37 0.52 0.64 0.83 Total Phosphorus 43 4 >0.05 7 16.3 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.10 0.50

Metals (µg/L) Aluminum (Al) 39 2 . . . 50 59 96 190 515 214010000 Arsenic (As) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Cadmium (Cd) 39 39 >0.4 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Chromium (Cr) 39 39 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Copper (Cu) 39 19 >7 5 12.8 2 2 2 2 4 9 23 Iron (Fe) 39 0 >1000 7 17.9 82 128 155 290 735 2460 13000 Lead (Pb) 39 37 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 24 Manganese (Mn) 2 1 . . . 10 14 20 30 39 45 49 Mercury (Hg) 39 39 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nickel (Ni) 39 37 >88 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 84 Zinc (Zn) 39 25 >50 1 2.6 10 10 10 10 17 32 130

Bacteria (#/100 ml) Fecal coliform 54 N>200= 2 N>400= 2 %>400= 3.7 Geometric mean= 11.6

Abbreviations: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than"; TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as µmhos/cm; na = not applicable. Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be used for ecological or Action Level review.

NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report - French Broad River Basin - June 2003 191