DOCSLIB.ORG

North Fork New River Watershed NC DWQ NEW RIVER BASIN PLAN: North Fork New River Watershed HUC 0505000101 2011 HUC 0505000101

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
North Fork New River Watershed NC DWQ NEW RIVER BASIN PLAN: North Fork New River Watershed HUC 0505000101 2011 HUC 0505000101 CHAPTER 1 North Fork New river watershed NC DWQ NEW RIVER BASIN PLAN: North Fork New River Watershed HUC 0505000101 2011 New River Watershed NC DWQ NEW RIVER BASIN PLAN: North Fork HUC 0505000101 Includes: Three Top Creek, Big Laurel Creek, Buffalo & Little Buffalo Creeks, Little & Big Horse Creeks & Helton Creek GeNeral watershed descriptioN watershed at a GlaNce This ten-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) watershed, with an area of about 250 square miles, is the equivalent to DWQ’s old subbasin 05-07- couNties: 02 and contains the North Fork New River and its tributaries (See DWQ’s Ashe & Watagua Old Subbasins to New HUC Conversion map in the Maps Chapter). The majority of the watershed lies within Ashe County, with the headwaters MuNicipalities: of the North Fork New River beginning in Watauga County and the Lansing & West Jefferson headwaters of Big Horse Creek and Helton Creek beginning in Virginia. The North Fork New River flows in an east-northeast direction before it ecoreGioNs: converges with the South Fork New River to form the New River. Amphibolite Mountains, New River Plateau, Southern Crystaline The land cover within this watershed is mostly forested (80%) with Ridges and Mountains, & areas of agriculture (14%) and the least amount of developed land in Southern Sedimentary Ridges the New River basin (3.7%). Rural residential properties and pasture lands are scattered throughout this watershed. Agricultural activities perMitted Facilities: have historically consisted of pasture and cultivated croplands, but within NPDES WWTP: ........................6 the past 20 years has expanded to include Christmas tree farming. Major ...........................................0 The majority of agricultural lands in this watershed are found along Minor ...........................................6 streambanks. Non-Discharge Facilities: ..........3 Stormwater: ..............................2 Roughly 16,000 acres of conservation land are found in this watershed General .......................................2 Individual .....................................0 and include easements held by local watershed groups (Elk Knob State Animal Operations: ...................0 Park, Cherokee National Forest and Blue Ridge Rural Land Trust). populatioN: This watershed’s population is centered mostly around the towns of 2010: ................. Coming Soon Lansing and West Jefferson. Lansing’s population declined by 12% between 1990 and 2000, and was estimated to decline by another 2006 laNd cover: one percent by 2010 according to the 2000 census. West Jefferson’s Developed .........................3.81% population increased by 8% in 2000 and was estimated to increase by Forest ...............................81.1% another 12% by 2010. Agriculture .......................14.98% Wetlands ...........................0.11% 2001 Impervious Surface ..0.24% 1.1 FIgure 1-1: NoRth FoRk New River WAtershed (0505000101) hin Branch Bi Rips g Ho rs e D P C i B KB137 i x r n P o i e e g )"à «¬16 y o n e t L k C a C t a KB136 r o r u KB122 . e r "à C e ) e L )"à . r l i k ttl . C e H UV194 on R r o Helt C «¬93 e r )"à le F r e KB25 w e idd or KB63 s e k e k e k M HC )"à C )"à[ KB127 r ¡ KF5 N )"à ee k k KB121 r k O o P l r i d KB28 F o n F . F e ie d y l C )"à N g r n . i C r r a e o e R ¢¡ ALLEGHANY L )"à R k KB135 Lansing o i S *# c n t K7500000 h a g H g KF1 M g KB27 S i [ l KB33 ¡ h l i C )"à)"à )"à o C l r a l . l C s B r *# KB123 Cr ig e r . e L . l L e Litt au a KB125 )"à re u r k ¤£221 l el . C C r unda r re r KB118 Legend Ro b e e e C ou e k v )"à KB117 t k KB86 i C R )"à )"à x r. w L i Watershed Boundary Ne . n KB120 P oe*# *# ["à ork h )"à KB30 ¡) KF 22 Nort h F County Boundaries R KB31 oc Municipalities k «¬88 )"à KF 21 C )"¡[à )"à KB23 L )"à i ree KB29 KB134 tt Conservation Lands k le Jefferson rk ¡[ KF23 B o )"à u Primary Roads F f Bru sh KB119 *# f KB32 a *# "à )"à KB138 l )¡[ Bu o 88 NPDES Permits KF10 ffalo eek XY «¬*# T Cr C h r XY Major WW Discharge r . k e *# 18 KB26 e e *# e T Minor WW Discharge )"à KB141 r o C )"à p e Monitoring Sites C West p rk o r ¡¢ n Fo e Jefferson Ambient ki H s r e e o g k v ¡[ n H i Fish Community o R L ")à Benthos w e ASHE «¬16 N ¤£221 163 *# Hydrology - Use Support k UV r o Supporting F . N Impaired 0 1 2 4 6 8 *# No Data Miles WATAUGA 1.2 194 2 UV 2 NC DWQ NEW RIVER BASIN PLAN: NoRth FoRk N1 ew River WAtershed hUC 0505000101 2011 watershed water Quality overview The North Fork New River watershed has some of the best water quality in the basin and water quality has changed little in the five years since the last planning cycle. The large areas of forest and minimal agriculture and urban areas create only a minimal human impact to water quality. In DWQ’s efforts to protect the pristine nature of this watershed, a watershed-wide study was conducted to determine if these waters could be reclassified as High Quality Waters (HQW) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW). As a result, almost the entire watershed was reclassified as ORW. For a map of the affected area and a more detailed discussion see the Additional Studies section below. Little Buffalo Creek, near West Jefferson, is the only Impaired water body in the watershed and was not included in the reclassification. water Quality data summary For this watershed Monitoring stream flow, aquatic biology and chemical/physical parameters are a large part of the basinwide planning process. More detailed information about DWQ monitoring and the effects each parameter has on water quality is discussed in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Supplemental Guide to North Carolina’s Basinwide Planning document. UC 0505000101 2011 h ed h uNderstaNding the data ers t Biological & Ambient Rating Converted to Use Support Category A Biological (benthic and fish community) samples are given a W bioclassification/rating based on the data collected at the site FIgure 1-2: Use SuppoRt iver by DWQs Environmental Sciences Section (ESS). These CAtEgories FoR BIoLogical RAtingS R bioclassifications include Excellent, Good, Good-Fair, Not Biological Aquatic Life ew Ratings Use Support Impaired, Not Rated, Fair and Poor. For specific methodology N k defining how these rating are given see Benthic Standard Excellent R o Operating Procedures (SOP) or the Fish Community SOP. Good Supporting F Once a rating is given, it is then translated into a Use Support (Categories 1-2) Good-Fair th R Category (see Figure 1-2). Not Impaired o Not Rated Ambient monitoring data are analyzed based on the percent of Not Rated (Category 3) samples exceeding the state standard for individual parameters for each site within a two-year period. If a standard is exceeded Fair Impaired (Categories 4-5) in greater than 10.0% of samples taken for a particular parameter, Poor that stream segment is Impaired for that parameter. The fecal coliform bacteria parameter is the exception to the rule. See the Fecal Coliform Bacteria section in the Ambient Data portion below. For the purposes of this plan, any site with greater than 7.0% to 10.0% of samples not meeting a parameter’s standard will be considered Impacted. FIgure 1-3: ExAmple oF A Use Each biological parameter (benthic and fish community) and each SuppoRt and monitoring Box ambient parameter is assigned a Use Support Category based on its Use SuppoRt: iMpaired (14 mI) rating or percent exceedance. Definitions for each category can be 2008 IR Cat. 5 found in Use Support Methodology Chapter. Each monitored stream 2010 IR Cat. 5 segment is then given an overall category which reflects the highest individual parameter category. For example, using the data from Benthos (CB1) Fair (2008) Figure 1-3, the individual parameter categories would be as follows: NC DWQ NEW RIVER BASIN PLAN: N Benthos - 5, Fish Community - 1, Turbidity - 5. Therefore, the overall Fish Com (CF1) Good-Fair (2008) category, which is reported on the Integrated Report, would be 5 AMS Turbidity - 12% (Impaired). An Integrated Report is developed by the state every two (C1234500) FCB - 48% years and reported to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1.3 streaM Flow The basin experienced prolonged FIgure 1-4: Yearly AveragE FLoW RAtes (cfs) oF thE USgS gAgE droughts in 1998-2002 and 2007-2008 StAtIoN in thE New River Basin BEtween 1997 & 2008 and exceptionally high flows resulting USGS Flow Guage 03161000 - SF New River from the remnants of several hurricanes (Figure 1-4). During a three-week 700 period in September 2004, the tropical NC DWQ NEW RIVER BASIN PLAN: N 600 storm remnants of Hurricanes Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne lead to wide-spread 500 flooding throughout the central and 400 northern mountains in the Catawba, cfs French Broad, New, and Watauga 300 River basins. Rainfall estimates for 200 the combined three storms totaled more than 20-30 inches in certain 100 watersheds. Runoff from the storms produced flash floods throughout the 0 region, with peak flows in excess of 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 10,000 cfs (approximately 500 times Indicates periods of drought in the New River Basin median flows) in upper tributary streams; peaks flows in some tributary rivers exceeded 50,000 cfs.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Surface Water Supply of the United States
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OEOJUGE OTIS SMITH. DiBKCTOK WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 243 SURFACE WATER SUPPLY OF THE UNITED STATES 1907-8 PART III. OHIO RIYER BASIN PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF M. 0. LEIGHTON BY A. H. HORTON, M. R. HALL, AND R. H. BOLSTER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1910 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 243 SURFACE WATER SUPPLY OF THE UNITED STATES 1907-8 PART III. OHIO RIVER BASIN PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF M. 0. LEIGHTON BY A. H. HORTON, M. R. HALL, AND R. H. BOLSTER Water Resources Branch, Geological Survey, WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1910 CONTENTS. Page. Introduction.............................................................. 7 Authority for investigations........................................... 7 Scope of investigations................................................ 8 Purposes of the work. ............................^.................... 9 Publications.......................................................... 10 Definition of terms................................................... 13 Convenient equivalents................................................ 14 Explanation of tables................................................. 15 Field methods of measuring stream flow................................. 16 Office methods of computing and studying discharge and run-off.......... 21 Accuracy and reliability of field data and comparative results........... 26 Use of the data.......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Information on the NCWRC's Scientific Council of Fishes Rare
    A Summary of the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina Submitted by Bryn H. Tracy North Carolina Division of Water Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC On behalf of the NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes November 01, 2014 Bigeye Jumprock, Scartomyzon (Moxostoma) ariommum, State Threatened Photograph by Noel Burkhead and Robert Jenkins, courtesy of the Virginia Division of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Southeastern Fishes Council (http://www.sefishescouncil.org/). Table of Contents Page Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes In North Carolina ........... 4 Summaries from the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina .......................................................................................................................... 12 Recent Activities of NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes .................................................. 13 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part I, Ohio Lamprey .............................................. 14 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part II, “Atlantic” Highfin Carpsucker ...................... 17 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part III, Tennessee Darter ...................................... 20 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part
    [Show full text]
  • An Inventory of the Significant Natural Areas of Ashe County, North Carolina
    Executive Summary An Inventory of the Significant Natural Areas of Ashe County, North Carolina North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Funding provided by: North Carolina Natural Heritage Trust Fund July 1999 SIGNIFICANT NATURAL HERITAGE SITES OF ASHE COUNTY Ashe County is located at the northwestern corner of North Carolina, entirely within the Blue Ridge Province of the Southern Appalachian Mountains. In Ashe County the Blue Ridge is divided into two regions based on landforms and geology: the Unaka Range and the Blue Ridge Range. The northern and northwestern parts of the county, north of the North Fork New River, are contained within the Unaka Range region. The remaining two-thirds of Ashe County falls within the Blue Ridge Range, including all areas south of the North Fork New River. The rolling mountains and valleys of the New River plateau in southeastern Ashe County and the large cluster of high mountains in central and southwestern Ashe County are included within this region. The southeastern border of the county roughly follows the top of the Blue Ridge Escarpment, the steep boundary between the Blue Ridge and the Piedmont. As is typical in the Blue Ridge, the landscape of the county is a complex of mountains and valleys that are oriented in a variety of directions. The elevational range of the mountain peaks is from 2480 feet to 5160 feet, with an average of about 3000 feet. Ashe County contains a greater amount of rare mafic rock types than any other mountain county in the state. Mafic rock types are those that are high in minerals such as magnesium, iron, and calcium and which weather to unusually nutrient-rich high pH (basic) soils.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Southern Blue Ridge Ecoregional Conservation Plan
    SOUTHERN BLUE RIDGE ECOREGIONAL CONSERVATION PLAN Summary and Implementation Document March 2000 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY and the SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN FOREST COALITION Southern Blue Ridge Ecoregional Conservation Plan Summary and Implementation Document Citation: The Nature Conservancy and Southern Appalachian Forest Coalition. 2000. Southern Blue Ridge Ecoregional Conservation Plan: Summary and Implementation Document. The Nature Conservancy: Durham, North Carolina. This document was produced in partnership by the following three conservation organizations: The Nature Conservancy is a nonprofit conservation organization with the mission to preserve plants, animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive. The Southern Appalachian Forest Coalition is a nonprofit organization that works to preserve, protect, and pass on the irreplaceable heritage of the region’s National Forests and mountain landscapes. The Association for Biodiversity Information is an organization dedicated to providing information for protecting the diversity of life on Earth. ABI is an independent nonprofit organization created in collaboration with the Network of Natural Heritage Programs and Conservation Data Centers and The Nature Conservancy, and is a leading source of reliable information on species and ecosystems for use in conservation and land use planning. Photocredits: Robert D. Sutter, The Nature Conservancy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This first iteration of an ecoregional plan for the Southern Blue Ridge is a compendium of hypotheses on how to conserve species nearest extinction, rare and common natural communities and the rich and diverse biodiversity in the ecoregion. The plan identifies a portfolio of sites that is a vision for conservation action, enabling practitioners to set priorities among sites and develop site-specific and multi-site conservation strategies.
    [Show full text]
  • Hazard Ranking System (Hrs) Documentation Record Cover Sheet
    HAZARD RANKING SYSTEM (HRS) DOCUMENTATION RECORD COVER SHEET Name of Site: Ore Knob Mine EPA ID No.: NCN000409895 Contact Persons Documentation Record: Jennifer Wendel, National Priorities List Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., 11th Floor Atlanta, Georgia 30303 (404) 562-8799 Pathways, Components, or Threats Not Scored The ground water migration, soil exposure, and air migration pathways were not scored in this Hazard Ranking System (HRS) documentation record because they are not expected to significantly contribute to the overall score. Ground Water Migration Pathway: Actual contamination at Level I concentrations is present in two private drinking water wells that serve about 5 people and actual contamination at Level II concentrations is present in three private drinking water wells that serve about 9 people (Refs. 2, p. BII-8; 5, Appendix A, Table A.5-2; 54). Additional private wells may be located within the 4-mile radius of Ore Knob Mine. Some residents within a 4-mile radius of Ore Knob Mine obtain drinking water from a surface water intake maintained by the City of Jefferson (Ref. 21). Soil Exposure Pathway: About 128 people reside within 1 mile of Ore Knob Mine (Ref. 53, p. 1). The surrounding area is very rural, largely undeveloped, and sparsely populated. About 6 residences are located in the vicinity of areas formerly mined for copper (Ref. 5, Figure 3-5). Soil samples were collected on three residential properties (Ref. 5, Table 3-5, Appendix A, Table A.5-1). Metals (cadmium, chromium, zinc, etc.) were detected at levels both above and below the levels detected in background samples for the site.
    [Show full text]
  • New River Basin Than the State As out Stand Ing Resource Any Other River Basin in the State
    RIVER NEW BASIN he New River is thought to be one of the oldest rivers in the world. Some geologists T estimate its age at 300 million years old. This clean, clear river begins as two streams on the western side of the Blue Ridge Mountains in Watauga County. The North Fork and South Fork converge along the Ashe-Alleghany County line as the profile: New River, which flows northward into Virginia and loops back south - Total miles of ward into North Carolina twice before continuing north into Virginia. streams and rivers: 918 miles Va The river winds and cuts its way through meta- Municipalities morphic rock more than a billion years old. But within basin: 6 its age is not all that distinguishes the river. A Counties sense of proud ownership also surrounds the New, within basin: 3 which has been embraced by residents in the basin Size: 754 and admirers from around the country. square miles Population: In 1998, President Clinton visited and named the New River an American Heritage River, an 70,436 honor he bestowed on only 14 other rivers in the nation. The designa tion brings with it fed - (2010 U.S. Census) erally funded, community-driven initiatives for protect ing the river and for guiding sus tain able KEN TAYLOR, NCWRC growth in the basin. The lower South Fork New River and the North Carolina portion of the New River—26 miles—are desig - Tiny Turtle nated as National Scenic Rivers. More bog turtles live in That stretch is also classified by the New River Basin than the state as Out stand ing Resource any other river basin in the state.
    [Show full text]
  • New River State Park General Management Plan
    New River State Park General Management Plan North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Division of Parks and Recreation Mountain Region February 2017 I. MISSION AND PURPOSE MISSION STATEMENT Conservation: To protect North Carolina’s natural diversity through careful selection and stewardship of state parks system lands; Recreation: To provide and promote outdoor recreation opportunities in the state parks system and throughout the state; and Education: To encourage appreciation of North Carolina’s natural and cultural heritage through diverse educational opportunities; for all citizens of and visitors to the State of North Carolina. Our purpose: The State of North Carolina offers unique archaeologic, geologic, biologic, scenic and recreational resources. These resources are part of the heritage of the people of this State. The heritage of a people should be preserved and managed by those people for their use and for the use of their visitors and descendants. PARK PURPOSE: New River State Park was established as a result of a lengthy preservation effort that lasted for approximately 14 years. In 1975, the N.C. General Assembly designated the 26.50-mile segment of the New River as a State Scenic River. The purpose of this designation is to protect both the scenic and natural resources of the river as well as to preserve the local communities, culture, and lifestyle of rural Ashe and Alleghany county residents. The segment was added to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System in 1976. The State of North Carolina works to preserve the significant values of the river corridor by encouraging the continuation of local agricultural uses of the land, acquiring key parcels, and advocating local land-use planning.
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Fork – South Fork of the New River Watershed Plan
    Middle Fork – South Fork of the New River Watershed Plan Watauga County, North Carolina 2 Table of Contents Partners ........................................................................................... 4 Context .......................................................................................... 5 Watershed Characteristics .............................................................. 7 Types of Pollutants ....................................................................... 13 Baseline Watershed Information and Monitoring Needs............15 Field Assessments ........................................................................ 17 Best Management Practices ......................................................... 27 Plan Implementation .................................................................... 30 References ................................................................................... 32 Appendix ....................................................................................... 33 3 Partners 4 Context A tributary of the New River, the South Fork New River flows for 89.2 miles through Watauga and Ashe County. Eventually the New River proper begins at the confluence of the North Fork and South Fork in northern Ashe County. The Middle Fork of the South Fork is one of the impaired tributaries within the South Fork Watershed. The Middle Fork -- South Fork New River flows for over 9 miles, originating east of the Town of Blowing Rock. The first half mile of the Middle Fork flows through wooded and developed
    [Show full text]
  • Outdoor Recreation Plan the Boone Area
    The Boone Area Spring 2011 Outdoor Recreation Plan Produced by: Watauga County Tourism Development Authority intentionally left blank The Boone Area Outdoor Recreation Plan Boone, North Carolina Prepared For: Watauga County Tourism Development Authority (WCTDA) Watauga County Board of Commissioners Watauga County Parks and Recreation Commission WCTDA Partner Organizations Prepared By: Watauga County Eric Woolridge, AICP Watauga County TDA 814 West King Street 815 West King Street Boone, NC 28607 Director of Tourism Planning Boone, NC 28607 Phone: 828-265-8000 Watauga County Tourism Development Authority Phone: 828-266-1345 intentionally left blank Exhibit 7: Submitted by Beech Mountain ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Exhibit 8: Produced by Noah Nowinski, WCTDA Intern Watauga County Tourism Development Authority Map Production Board of Directors Ben Sachs, WCTDA Intern, assisted in compilation of geographic data for maps. Maps 1-7 produced by Eric Woolridge Rob Holton, Chairman Dave Robertson, Vice-Chairman Facility Design (chapter three) Lisa Martin Kimberly Marland, AIA, LEED AP Tony Gray Mike Hall Missy Harrill Photography Front cover: Eric Heistand Watauga County Board of Commissioners Major contributors throughout plan: Eric Heistand, Kristian Jackson, and Lynn Willis Nathan Miller, Chairman David Blust, Vice-Chairman Partner Organizations Jim Deal Friends of Mountains-to-Sea Trail Tim Futrelle Boone Area Cyclists, Inc. Vince Gable Cove Creek Preservation and Development, Inc. Watauga River Conservation Partners Watauga County Tourism Development
    [Show full text]
  • JM Greenhill, Manager Planninz and Research Branch Division Of
    March 16, 1989 MEMORANDUM TO; J. M. Greenhill, Manager Planninz and Research Branch Division of Highways Department of Transportation FROM: David Brook, Deputy State historic Preservation Officer SUBJECT: US 421 from NC 194 in Boone to west of South Fork New River, No. 6.751008, CH 89-E-4220-0696 Watauga County We have received notification from the State Clearinghouse concerning the above project. One archaeological site, 31Wt13, is located within the project area. However, the site has not been evaluated for significance nor has a systematic survey been conducted within the project area to identify additional significant archaeological resources. We recommend that a comprehensive archaeological survey be conducted if Alternate B is selected. If Alternate A is selected, a survey is recommended for the eastern end only. We understand that hensleySchmidt, Inc., the project consultant, will conduct a cultural resources survey to identify and evaluate significant historic and prehistoric resources. Since a historic structures survey of Watauga County is currently under way, we suggest that the project consultant contact Deborah Thompson, Center for Appalachian Studies, Appalachian State University, at 704/262-4089 (Tuesday or Thursday only) for information on any structures surveyed within the area of potential environmental effect. Our office looks forward to reviewing the survey results in the near future. The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800, and to Executive Order 11593, "Protection and Enhance- ment of the Cultural Environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Convergence 2019 MATRC Summit What Does Convergence Look Like to You?
    Convergence 2019 MATRC Summit What does Convergence look like to you? Agenda What does Choke Convergence look like to you? Blowing Rock, NC Boone, NC South Fork New River Aho Branch/Middle Fork South Fork New River Helton Creek Big Horse New River Creek Little Horse Creek Big Laurel Creek Long Hope Creek Little River Big Indian Reed Creek Creek South Fork Dodd Creek Reed Creek Cripple West Fork Creek Little River Little Reed Island Creek Elk Creek Middle Fox Creek Crooked Creek Fox Creek Chestnut Wilson Creek Creek Brush Creek As New River moves north into SW VA West of New River – Walker Creek East River Sugar Run Nobusiness Creek Kimberling Clear Fork Creek Hunting New River Blue Spring Camp Creek Creek Walker Creek New River flowing north Bluestone River Camp Creek ? Island Creek New River flowing north into WV Back Creek New River Tract Fork Peak Creek Muddy Creek Dry Creek Bluestone River New River flowing North Twentymile Creek New River flowing north, meets Gauley River New River Anglins Creek Meadow River Big Clear Creek Loop Creek Point Pleasant, WV Kanawha River Hurricane Creek River Kanawha Coal River Kanawha River flowing northwest CabinPaint Creek Creek Point Pleasant Aho Branch Ohio River Creek Kinniconick Creek Little Sandy River Sixteenmile Big Sandy River Twelvepole Creek Soldier Fork East Fork Little Sandy River Guyandotte River Ohio River flows west, collecting What happens at Point Pleasant, WV? nearly all KY natural water Ohio River *BayouMassac Creek Creek Tennessee River Wickliffe, KY Ohio River Mississippi River What does this have to do with Convergence? Facilitating Convergence 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Site Function and Occupational Patterns at Colvard Ii (31Ah266)
    SITE FUNCTION AND OCCUPATIONAL PATTERNS AT COLVARD II (31AH266) by Amber L. Cross Honors Thesis Appalachian State University Submitted to the Department of Anthropology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science May 11, 2020 Approved by: 1 Table of Contents Abstract 2 Introduction 3 Site Background 3 Analysis 13 Results 35 Interpretations 37 Conclusions and Areas of Future Research 39 Acknowledgments 41 Appendix A 42 Appendix B 48 Appendix C 51 References Cited 56 2 Abstract This paper examines the occupational patterns and site formation processes at Colvard II (31AH266). Colvard II is a low-density site located in Ashe County in nothwestern North Carolina, on the T-2 of the south bank of the South Fork New River. The site has been repeatedly occupied throughout the Paleoamerican, Archaic, and Woodland periods. Artifact analyses, focused on lithic debitage raw material sourcing, lithic tool types and use, and ceramic types, reveal more information about occupation patterns at Colvard II. The results of these analyses suggest that the site was occupied repeatedly by mobile people, but Colvard II occupations lasted longer than overnight hunting camps or other short-term occupations. 3 The Colvard II (31AH266) site is located in Ashe County in northwestern North Carolina, along the South Fork of the New River. Previous investigations have revealed evidence of multiple episodes of human occupation throughout the Paleoamerican, Archaic, and Woodland periods. This research is meant expand on the current interpretations of the site and to address the following questions: (1) What were the occupation patterns at Colvard II, and what were its formation processes? (2) What were the site functions? (3) What can low-density sites such as Colvard II tell us about Paleoamerican occupations of the Appalachian Summit? Site Background Natural Setting The Colvard II site is located in the Appalachian Summit.
    [Show full text]