LittleRiver

Little River Sanctuary
Team: Jessie, Maria, Steve

Little River miradi

Little River toolkit narrative Little River Project Summary 11/20:

Little River Project Summary 11/13:

Property Brief: [|LittleRiverSummary.pdf]

Here is our rough draft of the tool presentation.


 * Little River Miradi



Here are our Little River Indicators**



Here are our results chains. I put them into a word file because it was easier than trying to decipher my handwriting.



<<Comments from george 6 Nov - the indicator and results chains documents are a good start. It's difficult to see how it all fits together without a diagram, though.

On the indicator chart, I think that you have good indicators but that we're mixing key attributes and threats. A key ecological attribute is something about the ecology or biology of the area that, if changed, would enhance / degrade the target. You have two targets as near as I can tell - (1) water quality and (2) habitat for native wildlife.

So when I look at your water quality indicators, I think that intact stream buffers is a key attribute for water quality. Chemical composition is a direct measure of the target, and macroinverts also measure water quality. Chemical composition is much harder, because of the variability involved; macroinverts are easier to measure and integrate threats over space and time. Sedimentation is a threat, and turbidity a measure of that threat. Water flow is also a key ecological attribute, but I'm not sure how you propose measuring it.

For wildlife habitat, I think the two species compositions are direct measures of targets. I think diversity of species probably is not right, because you want native species. # native species might be better. Connectivity is a key attribute as is amount of bottomland forest, assuming you're focused on species in that forest type; but # bottomland species is an odd indicator, I think - how about area of bottomland forest? Clean water is a key attribute for aquatic species (well, at least the ones you're interested in). Pollutant and macroinverts would measure that. So, I think some cleanup is needed here as well as a bit clearer thinking about the wildlife targets and what constitutes clean water.

Also, need to see a Miradi diagram for this system (hand-drawn is OK.>>

Initial thoughts by Maria

Scope: **Portion of the Little river basin from Vintage Hill Pkwy. to the railroads., including a 150 ft. buffer on each side of the river. 149.9 acres located on the East bank of this portion of the river. **Vision: **A healthy water resource for the habitants of Wake County, an array of healthy habitats for several endangered or protected species and a connector corridor between Littler River Reservoir buffer and the US Army Corps of Engineers (protected wildlife corridors). **Targets: **Water quality Special Habitats Corridor

**

Little River Initial thoughts by Steve Scope ** Targets: Threats Opportunities/strategies Indicators
 * I’m wondering if the scope would include the entire Little River basin? If water quality is being compromised by things upstream, maintaining a pristine 150-acre reserve won’t do much good if everything upstream is polluted.
 * Bottomland forest
 * Floodplain pools
 * Aquatic habitats
 * Habitat for threatened and endangered species
 * Water quality - this target could be a tricky one because of the bigger picture.
 * Wildlife – In particular, wildlife that would use the property as a corridor
 * Decrease in water quality due to increased development upstream.
 * Drought
 * Influence zoning and development plans for the entire watershed including the areas above the Little River Sanctuary that are contributing to the decline in water quality.
 * **Water quality: Nutrients, microalgal growth, water clarity, pH.**
 * **Wildlife corridor: Wildlife census, bird surveys**
 * **Aquatic habitats: Invertebrates, mussels present**

 Little River pre-site visit thoughts
==== Bottomland forest: **Given the amount of the property on the river, I expect to find a good example of bottomland forest.** ====

==== Historic/educational value: **The documentation mentions an old Indian pathway that used to be used as a trail by Native Americans. This could be an important educational draw for the property and offers an aspect not found on any of the other properties we’ve looked at.** ====

==== Seasonal waterbodies: **I’m interested in seeing the seasonal water bodies marked on the map. These are also important features not found on the TFR site and serve important ecological purposes if they are used by amphibians. Monitoring the functionality of the seasonal water bodies could be measured if more egg masses are observed. This would require some sort of species inventory and knowledge of breeding habits to know when to look for the egg masses. One of the seasonal waterbodies appears to be in the powerline easement or other opening. Is this a result of the trees being cut out of that area? If so, what does that mean for the forest management area?** ====

==== Forest management areas: **I’d like to visit these to get a sense of scale for the forest management areas and what impact this could have on the water quality. Some of the areas on the map look close to the water.** ====

==== Treyburn corporate park:** I’m a little surprised to see a corporate park next to a conservation easement. I’d like to get a sense of how built up the park is, the potential for more development in the park and what it could mean for the property. I’d also like to know what types of businesses are there, what are their effects on the environment. ====