Turnipseed Road Unit #1 at Marks Creek
Open Space Management Plan
Effective Period: January 2011-December 2013
Drafted by Wake County Parks, Recreation, & Open Space
July 30, 2010
See http://wakenature.wikispaces.com/ManagementPlanTemplateV1 for guidance on
document formatting.
1
Executive Summary
Name and Location. The Turnipseed Preserve is a 221-acre site located within Wake County in the
Marks Creek watershed, a sub-basin of the larger Neuse River watershed (Figure 1.1). The Mark’s Creek
landscape is a 50,000-acre watershed that straddles the Wake-Johnston county line, 12 miles northeast
of Clayton. The Turnipseed Preserve is owned by Wake County and managed by Wake County’s Division
of Parks, Recreation, and Open Space.
Qualifying Features. A number of features make this site a good candidate for WakeNature Preserve
Status (Table E.1).
Table E.1. Features qualifying Turnipseed Unit #1 for WakeNature Preserve status.
WakeNature Category
Exceptional Natural
Features
- Michaux’s sumac (Federally endangered, US Fish & Wildlife)
- Marks Creek Floodplain (NC Natural Heritage Program SNHA)
- Granitic flatrock and outcrops (recognized as significant on other sites by the NC
Natural Heritage Program)
Outstanding Natural
- Priority wildlife habitat (NC Wildlife Action Plan): small wetland communities
(borrow pits), aquatic riparian habitats, rock outcrops, beaver-impounded wetlands
- Priority wildlife species (NC Wildlife Action Plan): Cooper’s Hawk, Northern Harrier,
Sora, Chuck-Wills-Widow, Whip-Poor-Will, Chimney Swifts, Hairy Woodpecker,
Rose-breasted Grosbeak, Savannah Sparrow, Orchard Oriole, Yellow-billed Cuckoos
Eastern Wood-Peewees, Cerulean Warbler, Prairie Warblers, Magnolia Warbler,
Chestnut-sided Warbler, Golden-winged Warbler, Blue-winged Warbler, Canada
Warbler, Spotted Salamanders, Marbled Salamanders, and the Eastern Box Turtle
Other Natural
- Priority wildlife habitat (NC Wildlife Action Plan): early successional habitat (fallow
and agricultural fields that need restoration)
- Boulders
- Bottomland hardwood forest
- Mixed pine-hardwood forest
Cultural / Historic
- Unmarked graves
General Goals for the Property. Turnipseed Preserve will be a nature preserve characterized by a high
diversity of native species and natural habitats that supports natural heritage values and serves as a
venue for stewardship demonstrations, environmental education, and an outdoor learning laboratory.
Although there is an existing network of unofficial trails on site, there is no parking available and limited
infrastructure for general public access; more limited access and guided tours are more appropriate for
the next three years. The site is part of a larger assemblage of open space property in the Marks Creek
watershed, which the County is working to connect to create larger tracts of protected open space. In
the long term, as part of this larger assemblage, the site will be open to the public for nature-based
recreation.
Specific Objectives. <<summarize section 3 – maybe just copy the table>>
Proposed Management. During the period 2011-2013, we plan to … <<summarize section 4>>
2
Contents
<<Insert at completion. Recommend not going below 2-level headings>>
3
1. Introduction
1.A. Name and Location of Property
The Turnipseed Preserve Unit #1 is a 221-acre site located within Wake County in the Marks
Creek watershed, a sub-basin of the larger Neuse River watershed (Figure 1.1). The Mark’s
Creek landscape is a 50,000-acre watershed that straddles the Wake-Johnston county line, 12
miles northeast of Clayton. The Turnipseed Preserve is owned by Wake County and managed
by Wake County’s Division of Parks, Recreation, and Open Space.
<<We need a simple locator map here – put all maps and photos in text boxes and put the
captions in the box under the image – this allows them to be moved around easily as a unit.>>
Figure 1.1. Location of Turnipseed Preserve.
4
1.B. Qualifying Features
The following features of the Turnipseed Preserve Unit #1 fit into criteria defined by the
WakeNature Preserves Partnership for WakeNature Preserve designation.
Table 1.1. Features qualifying Turnipseed Unit #1 for WakeNature Preserve status.
WakeNature Category
Exceptional Natural
Features
- Michaux’s sumac (Federally endangered, US Fish & Wildlife)
- Marks Creek Floodplain (NC Natural Heritage Program SNHA)
- Granitic flatrock and outcrops (recognized as significant on other sites by the NC
Natural Heritage Program)
Outstanding Natural
- Priority wildlife habitat (NC Wildlife Action Plan): small wetland communities
(borrow pits), aquatic riparian habitats, rock outcrops, beaver-impounded wetlands
- Priority wildlife species (NC Wildlife Action Plan): Cooper’s Hawk, Northern Harrier,
Sora, Chuck-Wills-Widow, Whip-Poor-Will, Chimney Swifts, Hairy Woodpecker,
Rose-breasted Grosbeak, Savannah Sparrow, Orchard Oriole, Yellow-billed Cuckoos
Eastern Wood-Peewees, Cerulean Warbler, Prairie Warblers, Magnolia Warbler,
Chestnut-sided Warbler, Golden-winged Warbler, Blue-winged Warbler, Canada
Warbler, Spotted Salamanders, Marbled Salamanders, and the Eastern Box Turtle
Other Natural
- Priority wildlife habitat (NC Wildlife Action Plan): early successional habitat (fallow
and agricultural fields that need restoration)
- Boulders
- Bottomland hardwood forest
- Mixed pine-hardwood forest
Cultural / Historic
- Unmarked graves
1.C. General Vision and Goals
Turnipseed Preserve will be a nature preserve
characterized by a high diversity of native species and
natural habitats which supports natural heritage values
and serves as a venue for stewardship demonstrations,
environmental education, and an outdoor learning
laboratory.
For its proximity to Raleigh, the landscape contains
relatively few roads and multiple large tracts of land. In
2003 the Marks Creek watershed was named a “Last
Chance Landscape” by Scenic America and is recognized as
being ecologically significant area by the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program.
This area, so close to several growing municipalities,
began to experience a rapid increase in development due to the low cost of land and
5
accessibility. In response to the rapid urban development near the Marks Creek watershed, the
Triangle Land Conservancy, Trust for Public Land, and Wake County government are partnering
to protect the most valuable natural, historic, and agricultural lands in this 50,000-acre
watershed.
Wake County funded the majority of the open space acquisition within the Marks Creek
Watershed with open space bond monies. Therefore, the responsibility to manage and steward
the protected lands falls to Wake County, the fee-simple owner. The Wake County Open Space
Program staff has partnered with The WakeNature Preserves Partnership (WNPP), a voluntary
group of natural resource professionals and concerned citizens, to create a management plan
for Turnipseed Preserve.
Turnipseed Preserve serves as a pilot demonstration site for collaborative work to protect
natural heritage and open space values in Wake County. Due to the significant ecological
integrity and natural resource characteristics of the site, the WNPP has initiated a
comprehensive effort to inventory the habitats and species present on the property and
indentify management needs. Due to the proximity of other County open space in the area, the
management plan for this preserve could be adopted as management plans for other, future
preserves in the area.
1.D. Public Use
The parcels that make up the preserve site are subject to the regulations under the Wake
County Public Open Space Preservation Program Policy (Appendix 6.A). The preserve site is
primarily and currently for the purpose of conservation, stewardship, and education. Although
there is an existing network of unofficial trails on site, there are no plans for general public
access at this time. The existing horse trails existed before the land was purchased as open
space. Wake County does not sanction this use at this point. Future use of the preserve site
including the trails will be partly based on the management plan recommendations and public
needs. It is suggested that these trails be maintained for access, stewardship, field study,
education, and maintenance purposes only.
Ultimately, the secondary use of this property shall be for the purpose of passive recreation
(Appendix 6.B). As mentioned in the Connections section of this plan, the preserve site is part
of a larger assemblage of open space property in the Marks Creek watershed, which the County
is working to connect to create larger tracts of protected open space. Due to the Turnipseed
Preserve’s proximity to several urban development projects, there is an expected increase in
the demand for outdoor recreation in this area. Just to the north of the site (upstream on
Marks Creek) a large area of development is being built or planned. This includes the proposed
Lake Myra County Park, Wendell Falls residential community, and Lake Myra Elementary
School. The school opened in summer 2009, the park is in the planning stages but construction
6
is several years away. When completed, Wendell Falls will be home to thousands of residents
and part of the Town of Wendell.
1.E. Plan Timeframe: 2011-2013
Given the budgetary restraints of the Wake County’s open space division, this management
plan that aims for a three-year timeframe. January 2010-December 2013, and focuses on the
priority issues that can be realistically addressed by staff and volunteers. Failure to implement
the plan could lead to degradation of some existing habitats due to the spread of invasive
species, undesired forest regeneration, or unregulated human access to sensitive sites.
There is a substantial amount of open space in proximity to Turnipseed Road as a result of the
Marks Creek Initiative. It should be noted that due to the proximity of other county owned
open space, the management plan for this preserve could be adopted as management plans for
other, future preserves in the area given the likelihood of shared landscape characteristics,
habitats, and land use history.
7
2. Property Description
2.A. Boundaries and Context
Turnipseed Preserve is a 221 acre site: 46.33 acres of abandoned agricultural fields, 8.63 acres
of mixed pine hardwoods, 9.12 acres of bottomland forest, 33.86 acres of loblolly pine forest,
24.19 acres of wetlands, and a power line easement running through the eastern side of the
property which is 50 feet wide and runs 312 feet. Two tributaries of Marks Creek bisect the
preserve, Gin Branch and Sandy Branch. Total stream footage in the preserve is 12,927 ft (2.45
miles).
USGS 7.5 Quad: Garner
Size: 221 Acres
Basin: Neuse
Type of Protection: Fee Simple
Sub watershed: Marks Creek
Owner: Wake County
Township: Marks Creek
Address: 6325 Turnipseed Rd, Garner
Directions: From downtown Raleigh: take I-440 to Poole Rd. Take Poole Rd East away from downtown.
Right onto Smithfield Rd. Right onto Turnipseed Rd. Property is on the Left just after a small bridge.
2.A.1. Location and Parcels. Turnipseed Preserve is located within Wake County in the Marks
Creek watershed. The Preserve is approximately three miles northeast from the Neuse River
and is less than one mile from the town of Wendell. The Preserve is comprised of a variety of
unique features and a diversity of habitats encompassed within a fairly compact area. To date,
this 221 acre site is comprised of four adjacent parcels. These four properties are designated
by the names of the previous owners before protection and have assigned codes for internal
purposes of the Wake County Open Space Program. Turnipseed Preserve includes the
Pleasants property (OSMC-2), the TESC property (OSMC-3), the Edgerton property (OSMC-4),
and the Medlin property (OSMC -12). The four parcels surround a 32-acre, privately-owned
property, and while the site does provide connectivity, it is not a continuous landscape. Wake
County has made purchasing the in-holding a priority but as of the creation of this management
plan, there are no immediate plans for acquisition.
2.A.2. Boundaries. Turnipseed Preserve is bound to the south by Turnipseed Road and to the
west by Marks Creek. The north side is bound partially by Pleasants Road via Lake Myra Road.
There are currently 20 private adjacent parcels including the 32-acre in-holding. Adjacent
parcel uses range from residential development to agriculture (See Appendix). Additional
surrounding parcels could potentially be added to the current assemblage. Because of future
plans to expand Turnipseed Preserve, this management plan will refer to the preserve as Unit
#1. As the site expands in the future, the management plan will be updated.
8
<<Need a detailed map in a text box around here (on page of it’s own)>>
9
2.A.3. Access. Currently, the preserve site can be accessed via Turnipseed Road and Pleasant’s
Road. The best point of access is along Turnipseed Road as there is a gated, dirt path leading
onto the property and provides minimal parking along the roadside. Turnipseed Road is a fairly
busy road and care should be taken when parking and accessing the site. The dirt path on site
leads to a powerline corridor, which crosses the southwestern portion of the preserve. The
path continues beyond the power line corridor. At Pleasants Road, parking is available near the
end of the road at the old Tobacco barns on the left.
2.A.4. Larger Context. Turnipseed Preserve is part of a larger system of open space properties
owned by Wake County. Within the Marks Creek watershed, there are approximately 1,137
acres of protected open space, although not all properties are adjacent (See Appendix of map
of Mark’s Creek Protected Area – perhaps not an appendix?). There are a number of other
County-owned open space properties in Marks Creek within one mile of Turnipseed Preserve
(Table 2.1).
Table 2.1. Wake County properties near
Turnipseed Unit #1.
Property Name
LCL
Watson
Herdon
Fuller
Williamson
Lake Myra
Poor Boy
Farms
Eagle Rock
Dean
Wake Co. Open
Space Code
OSMC-11
OSMC-10
OSMC-7
OSMC-6
OSMC-1
OSMC-8
Acreage
110.50
2.50
87.23
118.64
173.00
125.80
OSMC-9
OSMC-13
OSMC-14
143.90
12.50
125.00
2.A.5. Greenway Connections. The Neuse River is located 3.3 miles south of the preserve site,
downstream on Marks Creek. The Mountains to Sea Trail, a statewide trail project that spans
North Carolina from Clingman’s Dome in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park to the
Atlantic Ocean, is currently planned to follow the Neuse River in this area. Raleigh and Wake
County are currently in the planning stages for their portions of this trail. There is also longterm potential for a greenway trail from the planned Lake Myra County Park, down Marks
Creek, through the preserve site and to the Neuse River. This would ultimately connect the Lake
Myra Park and Turnipseed Preserve to the Mountains to Sea Trail. Other greenway plans from
Knightdale and Wendell show connections from their jurisdictions to Lake Myra County Park.
10
2.A.6. Horse Trails. Unofficial horse trails have been established on much of the site, primarily
running north/south along Gin Branch. Entrance to the horse trails appears to be from
Pleasants Road, accessed from Lake Myra Road. As the trails travel south, they eventually
connect to the access dirt path off Turnipseed Road.
2.B. Physical Features
2.B.1. Topography and Soils
Turnipseed Unit #1 occurs on terrain transitional between the Coastal Plain and Piedmont
regions of North Carolina. Elevation ranges between the low point of 180 feet to a high point of
260 feet above mean sea level. Most elevation transitions are gradual, with a few notable
exceptions.
<<NEED A TOPO MAP – high res, full page – in document, not appx>>
Bedrock mostly from ancient granite, gneiss, and schist has given rise to subsoils of firm clay to
clay loam composition, yielding deep and generally well drained surface soils. These soils occur
on gently sloping to moderately steep surface terrain. Soils mapped in the unit include Appling,
Colfax, Louisburg, Mantachie, and Wehadkee (Cawthorne 1970).
<<NEED A SOILS MAP – the one included was poor resolution – high res, full page – in
document, not appx >>
Wehadkee, Mantachie and Colfax occur proximal to streams, but only Wehadkee is listed as
hydric. The other three series occur in various phases depending on slope of the terrain. One
special feature of Unit #1 is a number of granite outcrops. Of the soils occurring on Unit #1, only
Appling soils are conducive to widely ranging recreational uses (Table 2.2).
Table 2.2. Use Limits of Soils Found on Unit #1 (Cawthorne 1970).
Soil Type
Characteristic
Campsites
Picnic Areas
Intensive Play
Symbol
Appling
Coarse fragments
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Ap
Colfax
High water table
Severe
Severe
Severe
Cn
11
Louisburg
Depth to rock
Moderate
Slight
Severe
Lo
Mantachie
High water table
Severe
Severe
Severe
Me
Wehadkee
Flooding and High
water table
Severe
Severe
Severe
Wo
2.B.2. Water
Lake Myra serves as the source of Marks Creek which runs into the Neuse River. On May 5,
1988 this stretch was rated as Class C; NSW (nutrient rich sensitive waters). A Division of Water
Quality monitoring site for Marks Creek is located on State Road 1714 in Johnston County and
serves as both a macroinvertebrate (B-13) and fish community (F-7) station. Fish community
status at F7 was recently rated “Good” and macroinvertebrate status was rated as “Good-Fair”
in both 2000 and 2005. Tributaries to Marks Creek include Gin Branch and Sandy Branch, both
of which would be classified C; NSW waters. Total drainage area above Turnipseed has not
been calculated, not has the size of Gin Branch catchments been determined. <<Will there be
some map showing streams, etc, that can be referred to from here?>>
2.C. Biological Features
2.C.1. Vegetation
<<Need a general description of the vegetation – mention especially wildlife action plan veg
communities. A basic veg cover map would be good>>
Loblolly Pine
Broad expanses of the property once were farmed but have since reverted to loblolly pine
forests. These forest stands are a mixed group with some in the 50-year old age class (OSMC-2),
while others are less than 20 years old (OSMC-4, OSMC-12). The latter stands are heavily
overstocked with pine, resulting in many impenetrable shady thickets of stunted trees.
The 2.5 hectare stand (7 acre) in OSMC-2 near the Borrow Pit has trees with a base age of 50
years. These trees are of greater size, with heights ranging from 18-90 feet, and DBH ranging
from 4-28 inches. The area has scattered boulders and pockets of thin soils all of which affects
the size of the trees. The students described an unusually large Sweetgum tree (Liquidambar
styraciflua), which is suggestive of potential archeological interest.
12
The primary pine stand in OSMC-12 is approximately 6 hectares (15 acres) in size with a
naturally regenerated stand of 20-year old Loblolly pine. The stand is very dense and there is
little understory growth other than occasional Black Cherry, Sweetgum, Yellow Poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera) and Holly (Ilex opaca). The students described this stand as having
extremely high density of small stems (3000 trees per acre with stems less than 5 inches DBH),
with an average height of 42 feet. This stocking density results in high competition for light,
water and nutrients which contributes to slow growth of trees, a poorly developed understory
and an increased risk for wild fire.
Shortleaf Pine
Along its eastern edge there is a small grove of Shortleaf Pine (Pinus echinata) which towers
over the pine stand. This grove shelters a small 19th century cemetery with 20 marked graves.
2.C.2. Lichen <<This section seems overly detailed compared to others – if you can figure out a
way to summarize here and move details to an appendix, that would be appropriate>>
Lichens are composite organisms consisting of a fungus and a photosynthesizing symbiont, with
the latter being a green alga and/or a cyanobacterium. Because of the nature of this symbiosis,
lichens function as part of the vegetation as primary producers in the ecosystem. Lichens can
also serve as indicators of environmental health via their sensitivity to air pollution, since they
receive all their nutrients from the atmosphere. Environmental assessment using lichens can
be made from an inventory of their diversity and species composition, in particular the
presence/absence of pollution-sensitive vs. pollution-tolerant species.
In June 2009 an intensive lichen inventory was initiated, sampling in preselected sites that
represent the terrestrial natural communities at Turnipseed. In this survey, forested and rocky
areas (i.e. granitic flatrocks and outcrops) are treated separately. At the time of this report,
habitats in OSMC-3, OSMC-4, and OSMC-12 were surveyed; those in the larger OSMC-2 parcel
will be surveyed in 2010. At each site all species encountered were documented with vouchers
collected and deposited in the UNC Herbarium (NCU), North Carolina Botanical Garden, in
Chapel Hill, NC. Collected specimens are currently being identified using laboratory techniques,
with some set aside for determination by experts at outside institutions.
Many lichen specimens from this survey have not yet been thoroughly examined, so some
identifications are only preliminary and are subject to change. Likewise, the reported numbers
are also preliminary. A full report is expected by the time of the next three-year management
plan in 2012.
13
Preliminary results include a total of about 195 potential species with 84 so far determined.
This diversity is high due to the distinct lichen communities on shaded rocks, trees, downed logs
and exposed flatrocks. In forested areas, lichens were found from the floor up into the canopy,
with the latter represented by litterfall and downed trees. Crustose species such as Common
Script Lichen (Graphis scripta), Surprise Lichen (Bacidia schweinitzii) and Speckled Blister Lichen
(Trypethelium virens) dominated the shaded understory, whereas larger foliose species like
ruffle lichens (Parmotrema spp.) were more characteristic of exposed habitats in the canopy
and forest edges. Lichen diversity, broken down by growth form and habitat, is presented in
Table 2.3; a full checklist is presented as an appendix.
Table 2.3. Lichen diversity of habitats in Turnipseed Road #1 Unit, categorized by growth form.
Lichen species
Habitat
Beaver-impounded
Wetlands
Bottomland
Hardwood Forests
Borrow Pits
Granitic Flatrocks
Granitic Boulders
Site(s)
Parcel(s)
Crustose
Foliose
Fruticose
Not sampled
___
___
___
___
F-2
OSMC-4
32 (62%)
17 (33%)
3 (6%)
Not sampled
___
___
___
___
OSC-4
22 (37%)
15 (26%)
22 (37%)
OSMC-3,
OSMC-4
13 (39%)
17 (52%)
4 (12%)
RO-16, RO17
R-11, R-12,
RO-3, RO-7,
RO-8, RO-9
Powerline Corridor
(forest edge)
P-1
OSMC-3
20 (54%)
14 (38%)
3 (8%)
Mixed PineHardwood Stands
F-1, R-12,
RO-3, RO-7,
F-3
OSMC-3,
OSMC-4
46 (58%)
24 (30%)
9 (11%)
Loblolly Pine
Regeneration
F-4
OSMC-12
15 (63%)
8 (33%)
1 (4%)
Open Fields
Not sampled
___
___
___
___
Most species recorded were either pollution-neutral or of unknown sensitivity. The highest
diversity of pollution-tolerant species, including the highly tolerant Candleflame Lichen
(Candelaria concolor) and Mealy Rosette Lichen (Physcia millegrana) was found in the
Powerline Corridor near Turnipseed Rd, yet overall they were not common (Table 2.4).
Moderately tolerant macrolichens (Flavoparmelia caperata, Punctelia rudecta) were more
14
abundant than the highly tolerant species, and were found more throughout the areas
surveyed. Pollution-sensitive cyanolichens (Collema, Leptogium, Nephroma) were found most
abundantly beyond the ridge, away from the road.
Table 2.4. Site locations and approximated lichen sensitivity ratios.
Site
Latitude
Longitude
Pollution-tolerant : pollution-sensitive lichen species
P-1
35° 44' 21" N
78° 25' 24" W
5:2
F-1
35° 44' 28" N
78° 25' 18" W
3:2
RO-3
35° 44' 19" N
78° 25' 14" W
1:4
F-2
35° 44' 22" N
78° 25' 13" W
3:3
F-3
35° 44' 24" N
78° 25' 04" W
0:3
F-4
35° 44' 29" N
78° 25' 01" W
2:1
Total
7:5
Two other important findings from this survey concern the unique and distinct communities on
granitic flatrocks and the potential of new records and species. Lichens on flatrocks are unlike
those in other habitats due to the relatively extreme exposures and patchiness of flatrock
communities throughout the eastern Piedmont. Flatrocks and other habitats in the Piedmont
have not been thoroughly inventoried of their lichen diversity, leaving the potential for new
discoveries from new county records to new species to science. Several specimens from this
survey are to be determined by outside experts, some of which may yield new discoveries.
2.C.3. Birds
Bird Diversity was high with 126 species recorded during surveys (Appendix 6.XX). Surveys were
undertaken as part of a general faunal survey during the period from February 2008 through
November of 2009. Sampling technique included walking trails across the site and recording all
birds seen or heard during the site visit. Species recorded from mid-May through August were
suspected and recorded as breeding on the tract. One evening visit during summer was
undertaken to survey for nocturnal species. Additional species are likely to be found with more
rigorous sampling regime.
Bird species associated with wetlands were particularly evident, with abundant breeding
populations of Wood Duck, Acadian Flycatcher, White-eyed Vireo, Prothonotary Warbler and
15
Common Yellow-throat observed. Northern Parula Warbler and Louisiana Waterthrush were
also found on the site.
2.C.4. Mammals
Records for Mammals were kept at Turnipseed property but a formal mammal survey using bait
stations, trapping, and other techniques was not conducted for this report. Instead mammals
were simply recorded when seen, or when evidence of their presence was found. This
information was used to generate a simple checklist (Appendix 6.XX). A total of fifteen
mammal species were recorded, but many more are likely to be found with a more rigorous
structured survey.
2.C.5. Reptiles and Amphibians
Reptile and amphibian diversity and abundance appear to be high (See Appendix F-3). Surveys
were undertaken as part of a general faunal survey during the period from February 2008
through November of 2009. Sampling techniques included use of cover boards, incidental
sightings and occasional dip netting. In addition, an evening call count was conducted for frogs
and toads on June 30, 2008 and two turtle traps were set and checked on April 29, 2009.
Twenty-three species of reptiles were identified including six species of turtle, six species of
lizard and eleven species of snake (Appendix 6.XX).
Seventeen species of amphibians were identified including eleven species of frog & toad and six
species of salamander (Appendix 6.YY).
2.C.6. Butterflies
Butterflies: Records of butterflies were also kept, but the sampling was incidental rather than
structured (Appendix 6.ZZ). Still, forty species of butterflies were identified on the tract
including: Spicebush Swallowtail, Juniper Hairstreak, Viceroy, Red Admiral, Question Mark,
Creole and Southern Pearly-eye, Monarch, Silver-spotted Skipper, and Least Skipper.
2.D. Qualifying Features
Table 2.5. Features qualifying Turnipseed Unit #1 for WakeNature Preserve status.
WakeNature Category
Exceptional Natural
Features
- Michaux’s sumac (Federally endangered, US Fish & Wildlife)
- Marks Creek Floodplain (NC Natural Heritage Program SNHA)
- Granitic flatrock and outcrops (recognized as significant on other sites by the NC
Natural Heritage Program)
Outstanding Natural
- Priority wildlife habitat (NC Wildlife Action Plan): small wetland communities
(borrow pits), aquatic riparian habitats, rock outcrops, beaver-impounded wetlands
16
- Priority wildlife species (NC Wildlife Action Plan): Cooper’s Hawk, Northern Harrier,
Sora, Chuck-Wills-Widow, Whip-Poor-Will, Chimney Swifts, Hairy Woodpecker,
Rose-breasted Grosbeak, Savannah Sparrow, Orchard Oriole, Yellow-billed Cuckoos
Eastern Wood-Peewees, Cerulean Warbler, Prairie Warblers, Magnolia Warbler,
Chestnut-sided Warbler, Golden-winged Warbler, Blue-winged Warbler, Canada
Warbler, Spotted Salamanders, Marbled Salamanders, and the Eastern Box Turtle
Other Natural
- Priority wildlife habitat (NC Wildlife Action Plan): early successional habitat (fallow
and agricultural fields that need restoration)
- Boulders
- Bottomland hardwood forest
- Mixed pine-hardwood forest
Cultural / Historic
- Unmarked graves
<<Need map(s) of all the qualifying features in Table 1.1>>
2.D.1 Michaux’s Sumac
A clump of the federally listed endangered species, Michaux’s Sumac (Rhus michauxii) (male
clone), has been found in the sandy meadow under the powerline near Turnipseed Road. Some
have speculated that the specimen is a hybrid, since it has some characteristics (tall stature)
that seem different from normal Michaux’s Sumac. However, this clump will need to be
managed carefully to keep it thriving. Of particular importance is the periodic removal of
competing woody vegetation, as well as the pruning of any overhanging tree branches which
deprive the clump of full sunlight. In addition Sericea Lespedeza is spreading rapidly near the
sumac and should be eradicated. The presence of Michaux’s Sumac may be due to the
frequent mowing of Progress Energy (approximately every 18-24 months); the agency that
currently manages the area. The entire site should be carefully surveyed for additional stands
of Michaux’s Sumac.
A short swatch of sandy meadow has also been maintained by Progress Energy through the
years immediately adjacent to Turnipseed Road within the powerline easement in (OSMC-2).
Meadow habitats like this, with native vegetation growing atop a sandy substrate, are no longer
common in Wake County and a number of rare plants and animals may be found here. Blue
lupine (Lupinus perennis) is a representative species for this community and a healthy, though
small, stand of lupine exists here. This area has been maintained though periodic mowing. It is
important to restrict use of herbicides in this easement to maintain the diverse vegetation.
Progress Energy should not broadcast herbicide to manage vegetation here.
17
The native wildflower mix within this easement is also diverse and includes: milkweed, bearded
tongue, Desmodium sp., goldenrods, ironweed and various asters. It should be considered a
remnant assemblage with potential for use as a seed source for restoration projects in the
abandoned agricultural fields.
2.D.2. Marks Creek Floodplain
<<We don’t seem to say anything about this anywhere. >>
2.D.3. Granitic flatrock and outcrops
Sections of extensive granite domes underlay parts of the Turnipseed Property and in a few
areas the granite is exposed at the surface, forming rock outcrops. At least five of these
outcrops occur on the southside of the property near Turnipseed Road (OSMC-4), ranging in
size from a few square meters in area to almost 30 square meters in area. These sites are part
of a long, dry ridge overlooking the floodplain of Sandy Branch, a tributary to Mark’s Creek.
There is another small outcrop on an inholding of property across the tributary. And there are
at least 2 outcrops running through and adjacent to the abandoned farm field on the Pleasants’
Road (north) side of the property (OSMC-2). All of these outcrops have been mapped (Appendix
6.XX). Each outcrop has unique characteristics and should be evaluated separately for
protection, management or recreation potential.
Areas of granite with little canopy cover experience extreme variations in micro-climate and
play host to a number of endemic species of plants. These sites often resemble natural rock
gardens. This is an extremely fragile community and care should be given to protect these
areas. Once damaged, outcrop communities may take decades to recover. Since each outcrop is
distinct, the communities and abundance of plants which inhabit it will also be unique. Fissures,
depressions, and contours within the rock, and aspect or orientation of the rock with respect to
the sun, all contribute to the unique habitat and species occurrence of each outcrop.
Endemic Plants on the Outcrop. Fameflower (Talium terretifolium) and Sandwort (Arenaria
glabra) are special concern species in North Carolina. Fameflower, in particular, is a perennial
succulent that grows in small pockets of soil on the exposed rock and is especially vulnerable to
disturbance. Sandwort flourishes in pockets or depressions filled with soil within the exposed
rock and will thrive so long as the soil does not erode due to heavy disturbance. Lichens and
mosses are abundant on the outcrops, and many species are vulnerable to trampling. In
addition, Prickly Pear Cactus (Opuntia compressa), Carolina Wild Pink (Silene caroliniana) and
Butterfly Pea (Clitoria mariana) are uncommon-rare plants found in the soils among the granite
outcrops. The cactus is vulnerable if crushed underfoot.
18
A sparse canopy of Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda), Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperous virginiana), Post
Oak (Quercus stellata), Winged Elm (Ulmus alata), and hickories shade some of the outcrops.
Resurrection Fern (Pleopeltis polypoidiodes) perches precariously on the overhanging limbs of a
few Red Cedar. Access through the rock outcrops must be carefully planned to protect the
resource.
There are also at least two dozen large boulders existing on site. Most of these occur below the
ridgeline and on slopes overlooking Gin Branch (OSMC-2) on the east-facing slope. Some of the
boulders have been mapped, but some have not. A few boulders rise above the waters in the
beaver ponds within Gin Branch. Many boulders stand well above the soil line, but others are
more deeply embedded in soils and are covered with leaves or humus. The boulders provide a
unique look to the area and offer interesting potential for geologic interpretation. A few have
interesting flora and those adjacent to the water provide dramatic overlooks to the beaver
ponds and marshes along Gin Branch. (Need to add geologic history notes here)
2.D.4. Beaver-impounded Wetlands
Beaver likely re-colonized the Mark's Creek area during the 1970s and 1980s, creating a series
of dams and ponds, and flooding much of the bottomland within the Mark’s Creek watershed.
These wetlands consist of over 9 hectares (24 acres) of prime habitat along Gin Branch.
Many of the bottomland forest canopy trees have long since drowned and many of the snags
remaining from that inundation have now fallen. Tag Alder (Alnus serrulata), Black Willow (Salix
nigra) and River Birch (Betula nigra) have filled in the pond margins, and cattails (Typha
latifolia), sedges, Hibiscus (Hibiscus mosheutos), Lizard’s Tail (Saururus cernuus), Arrowhead
(Sagittaria latifolia) and other marsh plants are abundant where water levels have receded.
Cardinal Flower (Lobelia cardinalis), Touch-me-Not (Impatiens capensis), Royal Fern (Osmunda
regalis) and Cinnamon Fern (Osmunda cinnamomea) are also common.
Wetland birds include robust populations of Wood Duck, Red-shouldered Hawk, Prothonotary
Warbler, Common Yellowthroat and Louisiana Waterthrush. Other wildlife include an
abundance of reptiles and amphibians, and mammals such as River Otter and Muskrat. There
are recent cuttings that suggest an active beaver presence remains on site. There appears to be
an active lodge in one pool on the upper reaches of Gin Branch. It sits just above an intact
beaver dam and is easily viewed from a Boulder overlook in OSMC-2. There might well be more
lodges in other parts of the extensive wetlands, as beavers have recently added construction
materials on dams up and down the Gin Branch and Mark’s Creek watersheds.
Less beaver activity has occurred within the floodplain of Sandy Branch, a smaller tributary
creek (OSMC-4), and the only evidence of beaver dams in this floodplain is at the very lowest
end near Turnipseed Road. Certainly the bottomland forest in this section of the park could be
19
flooded if beavers were to construct a series of dams across this tributary. Flooding would
completely change the character of this floodplain, and might inundate stands of switchcane,
sphagnum moss beds, and the rocky waterfalls on this creek. Many of the wildlife species using
this floodplain forest might be lost if the forest were to become swamp or marsh, habitats
which are already available along Gin Branch or Mark’s Creek. Yellow-billed Cuckoo, Acadian
Flycatcher, Northern Parula Warbler, and Louisiana Waterthrush, as well as many other wildlife
and plant species, depend on this forested floodplain. It is therefore recommended that this
bottomland forest be monitored annually, and that it be protected from inundation by beavers.
2.D.5. Small Wetland Communities (Borrow Pits)
Two borrow pits are present, a larger one on OSMC-2 and a smaller one on OSMC-4. These
sites have been mapped. Each was created by excavating soil and creating a berm to retain
water. It is likely these Borrow Pits were used to store water for irrigation of the nearby
agricultural fields.
The larger borrow pit (OSMC-2), perhaps .5 hectare (approx. 1 acre) in area, is fed by a wet
weather stream and serves essentially as a storm-water collection basin. George Pleasants has
described establishing this site as a farm pond. It was excavated by a Mule Scoop around 1945.
It was used for irrigation, and also was stocked with fish including sunfish, largemouth bass and
channel catfish. At one time the pond retained perhaps one half hectare of water to a depth of
2-3 meter, but a slow leak has developed in the drain of the dam and only the deeper parts of it
now retain water. It is, perhaps, 1 meter deep during wet weather and less than that during the
summer. The margins gradually slope toward the wet-weather pool at the pit’s center. It now
resembles, and functions as, a borrow pit.
Most of this borrow pit is open and exposed to the sun for much of the day. Water depth in the
borrow pit decreased dramatically during the summer of 2008 but even then, it did not dry
completely despite a persistent drought. At least half of this borrow pit remains dry all the time
and it is being colonized by herbs and seedling trees.
Much of the forest immediately adjacent to this borrow pit is Loblolly Pine regeneration. Downslope, the borrow pit drains through 100 meter (390+ feet) of bottomland forest before
entering the beaver wetlands. In addition there are extensive agricultural fields within 100
meters (390+ feet) in two directions.
The second borrow pit (OSMC-4), is about .25 hectare (.5 acre) in area, and is situated at the
base of a slope as it enters the floodplain and is directly adjacent to a secondary stream. The
berm which separates the borrow pit from the stream is more than a 3 meters (~10 feet) high
and it is unlikely that the stream regularly spills into the borrow pit. The sides of the pit are
steeply sloped. It is possible that when the creek reaches flood stage some water may churn
20
behind the berm and spill into the borrow pit, but there is no clear evidence for this. The
borrow pit is about one quarter hectare in size, with depth estimated at a meter or less. The
source of water has not been determined, though it may simply be from groundwater seepage;
nor is there a drain pipe leading from the pit to the creek. This borrow pit is shaded by large
canopy of forest trees and changes in water level within the pit were minimal, even during the
2008 drought.
Mosquito fish or Gambusia (Gambusia affinis) are present, and extraordinarily abundant, in
each of the borrow pits. Sun fish were found in OSMC-2 but were severely stunted, and they
may exist in OSMC-4, however, their impact through predation on gambusia has been limited.
The presence of gambusia controls mosquitoes but also limits the potential for these borrow
pits to provide breeding habitat for amphibians and other organisms. (It should be noted that
mosquitoes are normally controlled by predators other than gambusia in pools that maintain
water levels over extended periods of time.) Spotted Salamander eggs were seen in the borrow
pit in OSMC-4 but it is doubtful whether any larvae could avoid fish predation.
2.D.6. Priority Wildlife Habitat (Early Successional): Fallow Fields
Sandy Meadow Communities: series of agricultural fields that remain leased for crops or have
recently been taken out of production. One field is a 3-hectare (7.5 acre) ‘fallow’ farm field
above the Pleasant’s Road borrow pit (OSMC-2) that has been abandoned for at least 3 years.
This field should be considered for near-term habitat management. Others open fields on the
Preserve were producing crops in 2008, but left fallow in 2009.
The fallow field (OSMC-2) has potential for immediate habitat restoration as lower-Piedmont
sandy meadow community. It has been out of cultivation for at least 3 years and is progressing
slowly through natural succession. Mostly it is a mix of native and introduced grasses and forbs.
This site provides an opportunity to recreate a natural sandy meadow community of
wildflowers and grasses and to develop a trail system to showcase its unique attributes of
wildflowers, shrubs and granite outcrops. Since much of the native stock of wildflower seed has
been exhausted through years of cultivation, it is likely that the site will have to be enhanced
with the sowing of native seed. Much of the seed can be gathered from existing local sources:
lupine, bearded tongue, variegated milkweed, hypericum, asters, desmodium, Opuntia cactus,
yucca, etc., all exist on site and provide the basis for a restoration project. In addition, the NC
Wildlife Resources Commission can provide technical assistance for planning use of a native mix
of warm season grasses and wildflowers that would be appropriate for this site to enhance
wildlife habitat. This has potential to be a desirable project for a Landscape Horticulture or
Wildlife student, or a long-term project for a volunteer group.
21
Lupine, in particular, is a showcase species and encouraging its spread would provide a
spectacular seasonal display. It blooms profusely in the powerline easement along Turnipseed
Road throughout April and early May. This field also has a granite ridge that bisects the field
from east to west. The granite reaches the surface in at least 3 places, but has been covered
and scraped through the years by farm plows.
2.D.7. Priority Wildlife Habitat (Early Successional): Agricultural Fields
There are a number of agricultural fields that have recently been under cultivation or recently
removed from cultivation in OSMC-2, OSMC-4 and OSMC-12. These clearings total over 18
hectares (46 acres) in area. These fields have little natural vegetation and offer little to the
ecological diversity of the site, but have great potential. They should be considered as preferred
locations for support facilities such as parking, picnic shelters, nature centers, and maintenance
buildings. It is preferable for the protection of natural resources, and particularly for those
species sensitive to habitat fragmentation, to site the infrastructure facilities near the edge of
the property rather than within the preserve’s core. It is helpful (for long-term planning) to
identify which of the fields will serve this infra-structure function so that long-term natural
resource management may proceed on the other fields.
2.D.8. Boulders
At least two dozen large boulders exist across the site. Most of these occur below a ridgeline
and on east-facing slopes overlooking Gin Branch (OSMC-2). Groundhogs (Marmota monax)
have excavated burrows around the base of some boulders. Many boulders have been mapped
(Appendix 6.NN). A few boulders rise above the waters in the beaver ponds of Gin Branch and
form rock islands. Many boulders stand well above the soil line, but others are more deeply
embedded in soils or covered with leaves or humus. The boulders provide a unique look to the
area, and offer interesting potential for geologic interpretation. A few have unique flora and
those adjacent to the water provide dramatic overlooks to the marshes of Gin Branch.
2.D.9. Bottomland (Mixed) Hardwood Forest
Bottomland forest occurs both along Gin Branch (OSMC-2) and Sandy Branch (OSMC-4). Much
of the bottomland along Gin Branch has been inundated through the years by a series of beaver
dams and has been replaced by a series of marshes and ponds. There remains a fringe of
bottomland forest within the floodplain which consists of a mix of hardwoods including: River
Birch, Boxelder (Acer negundo), Red Maple, as well as oaks, elm and ash. Black Willow,
elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), Winterberry and Tag Alder (Alnus serrulata) grow in the
wetland fringe and pond margins. Across the bottomland there are occasional dense stands of
switch cane, but much of the bottomland forest along Gin Branch suffers from an infestation of
Microstegium.
22
A creek bisects the Sandy Branch floodplain (OSMC-4). It has a rocky base in the upper sections
which has formed a series of small waterfalls and pools as the creek descends into the
floodplain. Eventually the floodplain widens and the creek forms a serpentine ribbon through
the headwaters of a swamp before entering a beaver pond. Extensive deposits of sand suggest
heavy sediment loading during flood stages. A lengthy section of the creek below the waterfalls
disappeared during the latter part of the summer in 2008 as drought conditions persisted
through August. Likely this is due to the sediments which have filled much of the lower creek
bed. The creek has not been surveyed for aquatic species.
The bottomland forest along Sandy Branch remains intact and students from North Carolina
State University conducted an inventory of the site in 2009. They identified a mixed forest
dominated by Loblolly Pine, Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), Water Oak (Quercus nigra) and
River Birch. These trees averaged 45-56 years in age. Of note on the northernmost sector of the
stand was a large Black Walnut Tree (Juglans nigra), 80 feet tall with a DBH of 30 inches. The
students refrained from coring the tree but speculated that it was likely a boundary marker
with an age of 150-200 years.
Beavers have not inundated the site and Sandy Branch itself ribbons through the floodplain.
These bottomland forests, approximately 3.5 hectares (9 acres) in area, provide important
habitat for wildlife species, some of which would disappear if the forests were completely
inundated by beaver activity.
Sandy Branch flows from the east and merges directly into the beaver-impounded wetlands at
the confluence of Gin Branch with Mark’s Creek. The floodplain is perhaps 30-50 meters (~100175 feet) wide with a mix of switchcane (Arundinaria tecta), sedges, and Lizard’s Tail alternating
with areas that have become infested with Microstegium. The switchcane stands are thick in
some sections providing a sense of canebreak, reminiscent of a coastal plain environs. In other
areas there is an inexplicable void of switchcane or understory vegetation. Much of this area
has been colonized by Microstegium. Perhaps both sediment deposits and flooding have
drowned stands of native vegetation allowing this invasive to secure a foothold.
Tree species are similar to those found along Gin Branch and include Swamp Chestnut Oak
(Quercus michauxii). There many small sloughs and wet seeps throughout the bottomland with
ferns, canebreaks, wetland plants and pockets of sphagnum moss growing throughout.
Microstegium, however, is spreading across those sections of the floodplain that have been
scoured by floods or have fresh deposits of sediment. A quick sampling of the sloughs filled
with standing water has determined that many are used as breeding sites for Marbled and
Spotted Salamanders, and Eastern Red-spotted Newts, but a detailed determination of their
location and relative importance has not been done. This type of baseline study would be
helpful for long-term management.
23
A few of the pools used by breeding salamanders appear to have trash and/or pollution
concerns. One, described in the Bottomland Forest descriptor, has a history of trash dumping
which includes glass, metal, cans and other debris. The site is used by both Marbled and
Spotted Salamanders but the pool seems stagnant with a sheen developing over the water as
the season progresses. Another series of pools is found at the base of a hill, along the extreme
southeastern edge of the property in OSMC-4. This site is immediately adjacent to a private
tract that was logged in the summer of 2009. These pools were found to have Spotted
Salamander eggs in 2009, but none of the egg masses appeared to be viable. It is not clear what
was affecting them.
Switchcane is an important and increasingly rare component of river floodplain forests,
particularly in the Piedmont, and protection and enhancement of these stands is desirable.
Aging of stems, deposition of sediments during floods and competition with Microstegium are
likely negatively affecting the Switchcane in this bottomland forest.
2.D.10. Mixed Pine-Hardwoods
There are stands of mixed pine-hardwoods across all sectors of the Turnipseed Tract but the
primary stands are in OSMC-2, OSMC-3 and a bottomland (mixed) hardwood forest in OSMC-4.
This forest exists as a strip of ridge-line running between the floodplains of Gin and Sandy
Branches as well as on the slopes along the northside of Gin Branch. The forest is composed of
trees greater than 40 years old and the forest appears to be fully if not under-stocked and
stable. In some areas the understory appears to be lacking and there is some concern that past
farming practices, or perhaps browsing by deer, has limited regeneration of an understory. Soils
are thin with many boulders scattered about so the lower density of trees and understory may
simply be a function of low fertility and/or shallow soils.
Students from North Carolina State University developed detailed inventories of the various
stands of trees, and offered recommendations for managing the stands for their commercial
and ecological values.
2.D.11. Priority Wildlife Species
<<Not sure what we should put here – we have the list in the table. Might want to say
something general about what’s present and the condition of the populations, if known (or say
that it’s not known).>>
2.D.12. Unmarked Graves
<<Need basic information – description, location>>
24
2.E. Management History
<<Can we say anything here?>>
25
3. Specific Management Objectives
<< I made these objectives up based on what I saw in the text – please adjust as needed. Note
that the letters in the first column match the section in section 4. >>
Table 3.1. Summary of management objectives for Turnipseed Unit #1.
A
Feature
Michaux’s sumac
Objectives
Maintain and enhance sumac and lupine in power line
easement.
B
C
Marks Creek floodplain
Granitic flatrock and outcrops
D
Small wetland communities
(borrow pits)
Remove fish and debris so that amphibians – especially
salamanders – can establish populations.
E
Beaver-impounded wetlands
Establish bird boxes. Monitor water levels to maintain
current levels of flooding.
F
Boulders
Remove invasive plant species and encourage native
species. Establish boulders as scenic overlooks in
appropriate places.
G
Fallow fields
Complete survey, remove invasive plants, begin
establishing as permanent meadow.
H
Agricultural fields
Protect small wetlands. Keep invasive plants at bay.
Decide whether to restore to longleaf or create a
piedmont prairie.
I
Bottomland hardwood forest
Prevent inundation from beaver pond, work to reduce
microstygeum, and enhance the swtichcane stands.
J
Mixed pine-hardwood forest
Keep deer populations from destroying vegetation, begin
to address erosion from horse trails.
K
Loblolly regeneration
Thin and burn.
L
Unmarked graves
Keep from disturbance.
Remove invasive plants, refuse, and soil to uncover
flatrocks and outcrops so that native plant life can
reestablish.
26
M Spotted salamander
Attempt to reestablish a population in the borrow pit.
27
4. Management Prescriptions
<<Provide a matching prescription for each management objective in section 3>>
4.A. Michaux’s Sumac
The powerline easement supports an assemblage of plants that may constitute the closest
representation of this seral stage available for these soil types. Progress Energy has maintained
this meadow through periodic mowing, and does not now appear to use herbicides to control
the vegetation. It is preferable that the site manager take responsibility for managing this site
to insure protection goals are met.
 The powerline should be managed to maintain the current assemblage of native vegetation,
and particularly the population of lupine and the clone of Michaux’ Sumac. The open
meadow areas of the site have a tendency to develop thickets of Winged Sumac (Rhus
alata) and Blackberry (Rubus sp.). These will suppress the preferred herbaceous vegetation.
To maintain the herbaceous vegetation the site should be mowed once per year, preferably
in late fall or very early spring to reduce chance of reptile and amphibian mortality during
mowing.
 The lupine stand in the powerline appears to be vigorous. These plants are perennials. A
count of all lupine shoots should be made during the flowering period in April to develop a
baseline for future comparisons. Only the largest clumps produce blooms, but all plants
should be counted. This lupine stand should be considered as a seed source in restoration
efforts across selected fallow (agricultural) fields at Marks Creek.
Lupine seeds mature quickly and the pods erupt violently to disperse seeds. This dispersal
occurs as the pods begin to dry. In 2008 many of the pods began dispersing seed during the
2nd week in May, and seeds were available for collection through the end of that month. An
effective method for seed collection is to cover the plants with thin netting before they
burst. Seeds can be planted immediately following collection, or they can be stored in cool,
moist sand through the winter. Planting of seeds should be undertaken in an organized
systematic way so that success can be tracked. Germination begins in very early spring and
it takes at least 2 years for the plants to begin to flower. This has the potential for a student
or volunteer project that would require several years follow-up.
 Michaux’s sumac is growing along the edge of the powerline opening, but prefers full
sunlight. Management for this species will require periodic removal of any overhanging
branches from nearby trees. In addition, the clone found within the powerline is entirely
male. It would be worthwhile to introduce a female clone within the powerline and monitor
for viable fruit.
28
 Additional woody shrubs that should be encouraged in and near the easement include:
Dwarf Pawpaw (Asimina parviflora), Witch-Hazel (Hamamelis virginiana), Buttonbush
(Cephalanthus occidentalis), Tag Alder (Alnus serrulata), Winterberry (Ilex verticillata),
Swamp Rose (Rosa palustris) and Beargrass (Yucca filamentosa), etc. add diversity to the
site. Saplings of hickories, maple, boxelder, birch, oak, etc. should be cut but the desirable
shrubs should be allowed to grow along the margins of the ponds, along the entrance road,
and under the large standing trees.
 Collecting seeds from native plants in the powerline for sowing in the agricultural fields can
be undertaken as well, but timing and strategies for collection, storage and sowing
schedules will be species-specific. Late May-mid-June and mid-October to early November
will generally provide satisfactory results for most desirable species, but specifics can be
found in Harry Phillips’ book, Growing and Propagating Wildflowers.
 Invasives- Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) is an aggressive invasive perennial that is
spreading across the powerline easement. It has not yet consumed the area occupied by
lupine, but is now competing with natives in 1/3 of the easement. If uncontrolled, it will
likely out-compete the native vegetation within the entire easement. It will take a
concerted effort to eliminate it from the site but control measures should be implemented
as soon as possible. (See USFS Gen Tech Rep SRS-62 for control methods). At a minimum,
before the sericea lespedeza has been eliminated from the site, all stems should be cut in
August before they set seed.
4.B. Marks Creek Floodplain
<<What will we do for this area?>>
4.C. Granitic Flatrock and Outcrops
It is preferable to set aside some sites for permanent protection and study, while opening one
or two for controlled public access. High-quality sites with stable populations of endemics
should be chosen for protection. Photo documentation and mapping of high quality sites and
populations of endemics should be made in order to monitor populations over time. Rock
outcrop endemics thrive with exposure to sunlight and normally natural forces like drought or
fire maintain these sites as openings. Sites which have suffered alternations due to human
29
influences need to be monitored to make sure the habitat remains intact and open. If the tree
canopy begins to close over a rock outcrop it may be necessary to remove offending trees.
Sites with less valuable populations of endemics should be analyzed for ability to route trails
across the outcrop in ways that will minimize impacts while allowing access. Use of natural
constraints or barriers such as tree branches and rock formations to restrict visitors to a trail
across the outcrop is preferred. Rocks can be used to delineate the trail route across the
outcrop. Seed from endemics on protected areas can be used to augment populations
impacted at access outcrops. Photo documentation and measurements of pre-existing
conditions, including extent of endemic colonization, can be used to document impact of
visitors.
 Invasives: Invasive exotic plants have the potential to outcompete native plants on the rock
outcrops. Some outcrops have infestations of invasive plants, especially Chinese privet
(Ligustrum vulgare) in OSMC-2, as well as Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) and stilt
grass (Microstegium virmineum) in both OSMC-2 and OSMC-4, and although it has not been
found at the outcrops, Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) can be particularly aggressive
on these dry sites. These infestations have been mapped and in most instances removal
would take no more than a few hours at each site. Monitoring for infestation should take
place annually, preferably in late spring when growth will be obvious.
It is often possible to pull or grub invasive plants from the outcrops and this is the preferred
way to eliminate them from these environments. It is labor intensive. Herbicides are
generally a poor choice on or near the rock outcrops as the potential for aerial drift, or
pooling and transport of herbicide across the rock face during rain, poses sizable risk. On
occasion, especially with woody stems, it may be necessary to cut stems and apply an
herbicide. The goal should be complete elimination of all invasive plants. (See USFS Gen
Tech Rep SRS-62 for control methods). It is useful to document progress with photos. It is
estimated that removal of invasives from the outcrops would initially require 80 hours of
labor.
 Refuse Removal: Outcrops have in the past been used for refuse disposal. Refuse should be
documented and removed, noting that some refuse may have some archeological
significance or interpretive appeal. In some instances important native plants may have
grown among the refuse, and in those circumstances it may be best to leave the
refuse
in place rather than remove it. Removal of refuse from the outcrop is estimated to require
16 hours of labor and a flat bed truck.
 Restoration Potential: Most of the rock outcrops on this site have been impacted by human
use to some extent but it is not readily apparent which, if any, native endemics have been
30
lost through the years. A thorough study and comparison of this site’s native flora with
other sites in eastern Wake County might reveal deficiencies of native plants which could be
replenished with (seed) sources from local outcrops like Temple Flat Rocks or the Rolesville
Rock Outcrop. Still, the general condition of the outcrops is good and the habitat appears to
be stable. There are relatively few invasive plants on the site other than a pocket or two of
privet or Japanese honeysuckle.
There is an opportunity for restoration within the abandoned agricultural field in OSMC-2
near Pleasants Road. Within this field there is a line of granite outcrop surfacing above the
cultivated soil. This granite ridge may connect with a mapped outcrop situated in the woods
border on the lower edge of the field. (Appendix 6.N) At least 3 clumps of granite are
currently exposed, but a raised ridge suggests the granite runs clear across the field. A small
granite outcrop nearest the Chickasaw Plum stand has a remnant population of Fameflower
on its surface. The granite outcrop below the meadow also has endemic plants.
Soils within this field are sandy and erode quickly, and it is obvious that farm equipment has
dragged soil over the granite through the years in a vain attempt to grow crops atop the
rock. Granite within 1-2 inches of the surface could be mapped and flagged. This granite
could then be cleared of soil with a shovel and brush, thereby exposing the rocky surface
and providing an interesting mosaic of granite outcrop within the open meadow. This would
also allow for restoration of a more natural granite outcrop environment.
Re-establishment of these outcrops would take 8 hours for removing soil; restoration of the
granite outcrop community could be an ongoing process depending on desired level of
intervention chosen--whether to seed the site with endemic plants or simply monitor
natural succession as it progresses.
4.D. Small Wetland Communities (Borrow Pits)
Removal of mosquito fish from these borrow pits has the potential to dramatically improve
aquatic bio-diversity at this site. If gambusia were removed:
OSMC-2 would become a sunny, permanent/semi-permanent pool with emergent vegetation
and could support sizable populations of breeding amphibians and aquatic invertebrates. It has
the site characteristics and potential to support re-introduction of Tiger Salamander to eastern
Wake County. There is no known source for spontaneous re-introduction of gambusia once
they are removed from this borrow pit.
31
It is a recommended that the OSMC-2 borrow pit be drained to allow for increased diversity of
amphibians and aquatic invertebrates on the site. It is also recommended that those sections of
the borrow pit that are no longer under water should be maintained as early successional
habitat rather than allowing it to revert to forest. This will help keep the borrow pit open to
sunlight and decrease the likelihood that water within the borrow pit will be lost through
evapo-tanspiration as the forest canopy develops. Woody vegetation growing within the
borrow pit should be cut to ground level on a three year rotation. It is estimated this would
take 8 hours of labor every third year.
OSMC-4 is a shaded pool and the source of its water remains uncertain. This borrow pit would
respond differently if the gambusia were removed. Vegetation growth within the water is
limited, and the pool is deep with steep-sloping sides. Spotted Salamander might use the site in
numbers, but since it appears to be a permanent pool of water, it is not clear whether it will
serve that function. Certainly other amphibians and invertebrates would colonize it. There is
the possibility that gambusia or other fish would re-enter this pool from the adjacent tributary,
especially during episodes of flooding, but that is not certain. It is well worth consideration to
drain this borrow pit as well, with the intention to determine the source of water and monitor
colonization by various species.
Options for removal of Gambusia include the three methods discussed below, but use of
Rotenone is not recommended at these borrow pits:
 Pumps: Draining the pools using a sump pump and gasoline generator. Fish and other
vertebrates (amphibian larvae) could be seined/transported as the pool dries. Expectations:
12-16 hours to drain each pool by pump when water levels are low. Late summer or early
fall would present the best conditions for draining the pools, assuming absence of a tropical
system dumping heavy rain. Gambusia can survive for extended periods in shallow pools,
and even temporarily in saturated mud. It is essential that all gambusia be removed from
the system during draining since they are extremely prolific breeders. Further, monitoring
for re-infestation should be undertaken annually.
We strongly recommend that this method be used if gambusia are to be removed from
either borrow pit.
 Rotenone: Rotenone is a naturally occurring compound derived from plants. Humans have
been using it for centuries to harvest fish and manipulate fish communities. State
regulations require a permit from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission to use this
chemical for removing fish from ponds, and permits are closely regulated. Rotenone
interferes with the uptake of oxygen in gill-breathing animals such as fish, amphibians and
insects. It can be used in low-moderate doses, which will bring targeted species to the
surface of the water where they can be captured and removed from the water system, or at
32
higher doses to induce mortality. At normal application rates, mammals, birds and reptiles
are not affected. Some mortality of target species can be expected even at low level
concentrations, but most individuals will recover when placed in rotenone-free water.
To determine quantity of rotenone needed, the volume of the pond has to be calculated.
Multiply the number of surface acres by the average depth of the pond. Average depth can
be estimated by multiplying the maximum depth by 0.4. Volume is expressed as acre-feet of
water. One acre-foot of water will cover one surface acre with one foot of water. For
example, a 2-acre pond with an average depth of 4 feet has a volume of 8 acre-feet. Liquid
rotenone application rate is one gallon per acre-foot of water.
Rotenone is often added to a pond using an outboard motor to mix the rotenone in the
water column. Best results are achieved in late summer when water temperature is at its
highest and water level is normally at its lowest.
 Electro-shocking: Many species of fish will become temporarily immobilized and float to
the surface by running a mild electric current through the water. This, however, is not the
case for gambusia which are too small to use electro-shocking as a removal technique.
4.E. Beaver Impounded Wetlands
Beaver ponds are diverse habitats that provide for a rich wildlife experience. The abundance
and diversity of reptiles and amphibians, fish, river otter, muskrat and birds like herons and
egrets can be directly linked to the presence of beaver. For the most part little needs to be
done to manage the beaver ponds themselves; beavers control the water levels according to
their needs.
Wildlife that has benefitted from the beaver ponds is abundant along Mark’s Creek and Gin
Branch. Snags have created opportunities for cavity-nesting birds, and downed snags provide
basking sites for reptiles. Many of the original snags, however, have now rotted and fallen into
the beaver ponds. This has reduced the number of natural nesting cavities, as well as the
potential for future cavities, that are available for birds and other wildlife. The recent
installation of Wood Duck boxes provides suitable nest sites for waterfowl, and also for Screech
Owl, Great Crested Flycatcher and Flying Squirrel.
It is recommended that a minimum of 10 bird boxes be added across these beaver ponds to
provide stable breeding cavities for Prothonotary Warbler, Tree Swallow, as well as other
songbirds. Standard bluebird boxes are suitable for each of these species. These can be wired to
existing trees within the marsh or over water, or be attached to posts. In addition, the
installation of 4 boxes for Northern Flicker is recommended in order to attract that species to
33
nest on site. The addition of a Purple Martin apartment in a meadow in OSMC-4 would provide
nesting habitat that is currently lacking for this species. These nest boxes could be designed,
constructed and installed by a volunteer group such as the Wake Audubon Society, or by a local
scout troop as a service project.
The installation of nesting platform(s) for Osprey and/or Great Blue Heron is a bit more
complicated, but the site might very well support these species as local nesters, particularly if
the nest structures were situated on “island sites” within the flooded marshlands. These
platforms should be installed on metal or treated wood poles, at least 15 feet above the
ground, and protected with a predator guard.
Evidence of foraging by River Otter and Raccoon has been found at numerous locations along
the beaver ponds. Muskrat have been observed swimming in the water and Mink are likely to
be found as well. A variety of bats were also observed foraging above the ponds. These species
can be expected to thrive as long as the beaver ponds remain ecologically intact. Some species
of bat choose snags, abandoned buildings, and bridge structures for their roosts. Once again
these roost sites are limited and declining in number at the site. Bat Houses could be added
within or along the marshes at Gin Branch to supplement natural snags.
Beavers, however beneficial, can also be nettlesome and management of their activities can be
challenging. Beavers alter landscapes, often by flooding timber. They are selective when
choosing woody foods, and can eliminate important species, habitats or recreational facilities
as they build dams and inundate floodplains. It is wise to anticipate problems before they occur
and to develop strategies to cope before they are needed.
The beaver ponds along Gin Branch and Mark’s Creek appear to be stable and currently provide
adequate forage to support beaver for the foreseeable future. In general, there is no need to
undertake beaver pond management on a year-to-year basis. As yet beavers have not extended
their foraging beyond the immediate edge of the floodplain. When beaver forage deeper into
the forest, for example farther than 25 meters (80 feet) from the water’s edge, it may be a sign
that food resources are becoming limited for the beaver population occupying the site. It is
useful to monitor beaver activity annually to gauge population changes and their impacts on
the environment. Beaver cutting of forest trees is most pronounced during fall and winter, so
that is the best time to assess whether control measures need to be undertaken. Beaver prefer
cutting Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Yellow Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), River Birch
(Betula nigra), Black Willow (Salix nigra), oaks and hickories but will also cut many other species
of trees and shrubs. They seldom select Red Maple (Acer rubrum), so floodplain forests with
beaver often become dominated by standing red maple.
34
Proactive steps can be taken to manage tree diversity or to protect certain specimen trees or
shrubs from foraging beaver by using a prophylactic wrap of chicken wire (on large trees or
clump of shrub stems) or a plastic sleeve (on a sapling stem). For example: there is a clump of
Winterberry (Ilex verticillata) that is festooned with bright red berries in winter that sits below
a boulder overlook in OSMC-2. It provides a dramatic display from the overlook during the
winter months, and provides food for wildlife. Determining which specimen trees/shrubs to
protect should be done at different seasons over the course of a year. Decisions might be made
with regard to aesthetic and wildlife values of the trees/shrubs. In addition, part of the
decision-making is determining which valued trees are vulnerable to selection by beaver. This
should be considered an ongoing process.
Water levels in beaver ponds can be managed by manually removing parts of the dams, and/or
by installing drainage pipes through the dams. In some cases beaver populations might need to
be controlled by reducing the number of beavers on the site. Information about beavers and
guidelines for beaver damage management have been published by the NC Cooperative
Extension Service (1991, AG-434; 1994, AG-472) and by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission
(1987, W-57, Study C7-3).
To monitor for beaver colony expansion, and especially to respond if expansion begins to
encroach on the floodplain of Sandy Branch (read section on Bottomland Hardwood Forest), a
staff member needs to walk along the tributary and note where beavers are harvesting trees or
constructing dams in the floodplains. This should be performed annually and can be
accomplished in a matter of hours on a winter’s day. If beavers have constructed a dam and are
inundating the bottomland forest in the watershed, it would be important to breach the dam
immediately, and to implement steps to remove beavers from this watershed, as soon as
possible.
Most vegetation can survive several months of flooding during the winter months, but will
succumb much more quickly when actively growing in spring or summer.
4.F. Boulders
The boulders can be grouped into those with similar attributes related to the vegetation they
support, their location, and their depth in the soil. Management will depend on the type of
boulder and decisions related to recreation and habitat restoration.
 Boulders with Native Plant Communities. Boulders with populations of Resurrection Fern,
Rock Cap Fern (Polypodium virginiana) and Saxifrage (Saxifraga virginiensis) appear to be
limited in number (three were found in OSMC-2 and one in OSMC-4), and are situated along
35
the edge of wetlands and/or under a forest canopy. These should be managed as sensitive
habitats with restricted visitor access since theses species have minimal root anchorage to
the rock surface and can easily be dislodged. Access could be limited to one representative
boulder while leaving others untrammeled and off limits. Trails should be routed away from
fern-covered boulders except those accessed for interpretive purposes. Populations of ferns
should be photo-documented with % coverage monitored for long-term change. Invasive
plants should be removed before they become a problem.
 Boulders with Invasive Plants. These should be cleared of Chinese Privet (Ligustrum
vulgare), Multi-flora Rose (Rosa multiflora) and other invasives by cutting and grubbing, or
by cutting with herbicide application (See USFS Gen Tech Rep SRS-62 for control methods).
The goal should be to expose much of the rock surface by removing the privet or invasive
plants, its root system and much of the organic soil that has accumulated on the boulder.
This may allow regeneration of the pioneer plant community to develop on the rock
surface. Photo documentation should be taken of before and after, and studies could be
implemented to monitor colonization by native plants.
In some cases, native vegetation could be added to use as a comparison with sites where no
additions are made. Some of these boulders could be made available for climbing or use as
scenic overlooks. These would not be expected to support re-colonization of native
vegetation. Climbing boulders and overlooks should be located with easy access from the
trail system. Boulders to be used for climbing and overlooks, particularly along the water,
may also need to be cleared of poison ivy and catbrier.
 Sunken Boulders. Boulders covered by soil, leaves and native vegetation- there are a
number of boulders that are gradually being covered by leaves, soil and vegetation. Some
are difficult to see and are detected as a “hump” of leaves in the woods, but close
inspection reveals the underlying rock. Much of this may be a natural process but past
human use of the landscape may have accelerated or slowed the process that is covering
the boulders. Each should be evaluated and a long-term management strategy developed to
maintain some percentage of exposed boulders. Those covered with native shrubs or
saplings should not be disturbed.
 Boulders forming Overlooks and/or Cliffs. There are at least three boulder areas that form
flat-rock overlooks for Gin Branch in OSMC-2. These are attractive vantage points
overlooking the beaver ponds and marshes. Wildlife including river otter, raccoon, muskrat,
turtles and snakes regularly use these boulders. The boulders can be designed as points of
interest off a trail system and have potential for placing park benches and/or fishing access.
However, until regular park maintenance is available these sites might become targets for
littering and swimming. Each of the sites provides ready access to the water but there are
36
dangers inherent with slippery wet rocks at the water’s edge. One site, in particular, has a
steep drop-off from the boulder top to the water. Diving into the water from this site might
be hazardous.
 There is a cluster of boulders forming a ridge-line cliff overlooking the Sandy Branch
floodplain in OSMC-4. This line of boulders extends for at least 50 meters. One section
provides a dramatic overlook dropping more than 5 meters to the floodplain below. The
cliff-face itself harbors a mix of native rock outcrop plants and ferns including Rock Cap
Fern, but some is thickly covered with Microstegium and Japanese Honeysuckle. These
invasives should be removed before they spread along the entire cliff-face. Microstegium is
an invasive annual grass, so removing the plant will eliminate the seed source. Removal of
Microstegium from this cliff face could be done by hand weeding and would require 2-3
hours labor. It should be done before seed is set in September, and the site should be
checked for 2 years to make sure no residual seed has sprouted. The honeysuckle is a
perennial vine. It can be pulled from the rock face rather easily but will need to be grubbed
where it is rooted in soil. This could be completed in 2 hours. There is some risk associated
from working on this vertical surface, so at least two staff should be assigned to this task.
 Adjacent Woodlands- Much of the woodland leading to this cliff in OSMC-4 has thin soil and
supports an open woods with Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda), Winged Elm (Ulmus alata), Post
Oak (Quercus stellata) and Pignut Hickory (Carya glabra). Understory shrubs are diverse and
consist of Deciduous Holly (Ilex decidua), Beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), hawthorne
and other species. This area has high floral diversity consisting of mints, asters, and other
woodland wildflowers, most of which bloom in mid-late summer. Installation of trails
should be situated to take advantage of, but not negatively impact, this floral diversity.
At the base of the cliff is a thick stand of Beaked Hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), which is a rare
plant. The plants seem to be stunted, probably resulting from being heavily grazed by deer.
Although there were blooms, none were found that produced fruit. There is no obvious
method to protect the Corylus from grazing deer, but an experimental exclosure could be
installed around a few plants and then monitored for results.
The overlook and cliff-face are unique and have potential for outdoor adventure recreation,
and/or as a scenic overlook. On the other hand these are fragile environments, so care
should be taken to protect some of these attributes when situating any recreational
amenities.
In another area (OSMC-2) there is a cluster of boulders that forms an overlook along Gin
Branch. This lies along a ridgeline with thin dry soils and an open canopy. This area supports
a diverse herbaceous community including Green and Gold (Chrysogonum virginianum),
37
Firepink (Silene virginica), and other wildflowers. Trail alignment through this area to the
overlook should take this into account.
4.G. Fallow Fields
This meadow should be surveyed more completely to determine the extent of native
vegetation currently present. A permanent trail alignment through the meadow should be
determined providing access to key attributes. A list of desirable plants for restoration should
be generated and seed sources identified. Consultation with the NC Wildlife Resources Biologist
should be undertaken to consider an appropriate native seed mix for the site to encourage
wildlife. Seeds of native plants to be used in restoration should be gathered and put in cold
storage as described by Phillips, or purchased from reliable vendors.
Once the botanical survey is complete, that part of the meadow that is to be managed as
permanent meadow should be mowed or burned in late winter or early spring of the following
year. A simple mowing or burning should provide sufficient soil disturbance and exposure to
allow hand-sowing of native seeds. Volunteers should hand-plant seeds of native vegetation,
taking care to plant some clumps of native plants in close proximity to the trail for easy viewing.
An alternative would be to germinate plants in a greenhouse and plant seedlings. It is estimated
that 24 hours of volunteer effort will be needed for the initial planting.
Lupine is the key plant element envisioned for this meadow. It should be planted in patches
with efforts to develop dramatic sweeps of blue color in April and May. Butterfly Weed
(Asclepias tuberosa) should also do well here and will provide a brilliant orange contrast to the
lupine. It is recommended that key areas where ‘clumps’ of Lupine and Butterfly Weed seeds or
seedlings are sown should be monitored for 2-3 years to measure success or need for a second
planting. Additional plants could supplement the primary planting and might involve little more
than broadcasting seed to see what takes. The mix might also include bird’s foot violet,
milkweed, hypericum, butterfly pea, passion flower, sundrops, sabatia, penstemon, gerardia,
liatris, goldenrod, coreopsis, bidens and other asters, among others. Choice of species should
be made in consultation with the NC Botanical Garden to insure species chosen are native to
the habitat and thrive in the sandy soils.
Once established, the meadow should be burned or mowed periodically (once every 2 years) to
suppress woody vegetation. Trails through the meadow will need to be mowed more
frequently, likely once per month during the growing season. Mowing is best undertaken in late
morning or early afternoon to reduce chance mortality of basking or foraging reptiles and
38
amphibians. It is preferable to undertake the general mowing after the plants have set seed in
late fall, or before new growth begins in early spring.
In addition, efforts should be made to eliminate/manage invasive weeds, especially Sericea
lespedeza. This may require cutting followed by an application of an herbicide (See USFS Gen
Tech Rep SRS-62 for control methods).
The granite ridge extending across this meadow could be re-conditioned by digging and
sweeping sand and soil to expose the granite. This would be an interesting focal point for
visitors on a trail through this meadow. Opontia cactus and Yucca plants or seed could be
added in soils near the rock. The exposed granite would allow the opportunity for colonization
by pioneer plants. Some granite areas could be sown with seeds from endemic outcrop plants
like Talinum, while others could be left bare to compare colonization rates.
To improve habitat diversity, the northern-most third of this meadow should be allowed to
naturally advance to the shrub-sapling stage, and then be managed to maintain that seral stage.
This would necessitate periodic cutting of trees which grow in the shrub thickets. Adding this
shrub-thicket will encourage species not yet known to breed at the site including: Yellowbreasted Chat and Field Sparrow.
In addition it is recommended that shrub encroachment be encouraged along sections of the
edge of the meadow, and that shrub patches or islands be managed within parts of the
meadow. Some areas along the meadow edge should be kept clear of vegetation to provide
open, sunny locations (habitat) to maintain the robust population of the Six-line Racerunners at
this site.
An island of Chickasaw Plum (Prunus angustifolia) exists within this meadow, immediately
adjacent to the exposed granite with Talium. The plum is a native fruit-producing shrub which
should be encouraged, but it is competing with a robust stand of privet, which extends below
the meadow into a granite outcrop. The privet needs to be removed from this site, which will
be a labor-intensive task. It is estimated to require 40 hours of stem removal to eliminate the
privet. (See USFS Gen Tech Rep SRS-62 for control methods). Additional fruit-producing species
to be encouraged include: serviceberry, cherry, hawthorn, viburnum, plum, sassafras, pawpaw
and sumac.
4.H. Agricultural Fields
Those fields that are not used for facilities can be used to enhance the habitat diversity across
the Turnipseed property. In particular, these openings should be considered as having potential
39
for a mix of open sandy meadows with the lupine restoration as described above, or for
introduction of Piedmont Prairie habitat with the assistance of the NC Wildlife Resources
Commission. A consultant biologist will provide recommendations and sources for planting a
mix of native warm season grasses and wildflowers. The site might qualify for financial
assistance from wildlife restoration grants, particularly for early succession habitat and Longleaf
Pine restoration.
The Longleaf Pine (Pinus palustris) restoration project could include adding a series of small (1-3
hectare, 2-7 acre) planting sites across the park. The trees should be planted as 2-year old
seedlings in a 10-foot x 10-foot spacing. Volunteers and students may be able to provide much
of the labor for this restoration project.
Longleaf Pine will remain in the grass and bottlebrush stages for up to 10 years during which
time it develops a deep tap root. At that point prescribed burning should be introduced to
suppress competing vegetation and promote vigor of the stand. Assistance with procuring
seedlings and conducting prescribed burns can be provided by the NC Division of Forestry.
Roadways along the perimeter of these agricultural fields should be maintained as a good
system of fire breaks for use with prescribed burns.
These sites will provide early-mid succession habitat required by many wildlife species
including: Bobwhite Quail, Prairie Warbler, Yellow-breasted Chat, and Field Sparrow among
others.
The area and location of agricultural fields at Turnipseed is large enough to support a vibrant
mix of these early succession and Longleaf habitats, providing an interesting demonstration of
current restoration techniques. This is a long-term project that will require careful planning.
However, it will be easier to initiate (and install) management prescriptions in the near term
(within 5 years), before the abandoned fields begin to progress through natural succession.
Therefore it is advisable to begin to delineate allocations for each habitat type as soon as
practicable.
Of special note: there is one area, along the road bordering the north-side of a field in OSMC-4
that has a ditch which holds water through much of the summer. This puddle has developed
into an important upland pool for breeding amphibians, especially Gray Tree Frogs. This site,
and any others that provide catchment for storm water above the floodplains, should be
mapped and protected as they are a limited resource at the Turnipseed site.
4.I. Bottomland Hardwood Forest
40
Preventing inundation of the bottomland hardwood forest along Sandy Branch (OSMC-4) is the
most important strategy so annual monitoring of beaver colonization is essential. Sandy Branch
appears to be transporting large amounts of sediment and depositing them in the floodplain.
The source of these sediments has not been determined. Thick sediments can impair the
natural functions of a stream and alter the stream’s fauna. It would be useful to inventory the
current fauna, both vertebrate and invertebrate, to develop a baseline for future comparisons.
The Water Quality office of DENR should be invited to perform this function.
As the stream fills with sediments some of its rocky features, including the small waterfall area,
may be lost. It is recommended that the source of the sediment be identified and that steps be
taken to try to remedy erosion within the watershed.
Wetland pools in the bottomland forest which support breeding amphibians should be
identified. It would be helpful to establish a hierarchy of importance for these pools based on
numbers of amphibian larvae sampled at these sites over a few seasons. In addition water
quality measurements should be taken to establish a baseline for these habitats. Those pools
(described above) which are suspected of having pollution issues should be addressed as soon
as possible (remove trash), and monitored for water quality and breeding success.
Enhancing the productivity and spread of switchcane stands is desirable. Controlled burns have
been shown to rejuvenate switchcane in coastal plain communities and could used here, as well
as removal of competing vegetation, including Microstegium. Switchcane stands are more
robust when they receive greater amounts of sunlight, so selective removal of overstory could
be considered. Planting of switchcane in selected areas where it no longer exists but soils have
stabilized could also be considered. Sphagnum moss is another component species that
appears to be struggling across the floodplain. It succumbs quickly when buried by sediments.
Protecting pockets of sphagnum and encouraging it to spread will be a challenge.
Microstegium has infested those parts of the floodplain that have been scoured by flood waters
or filled with sediments. This invasive plant will continue to spread across the bottomland
without measures to control it. Privet is also found within the floodplain but is not yet
abundant. It should be controlled before it spreads. (See USFS Gen Tech Rep SRS-62 for control
methods).
4.J. Mixed Pine-Hardwoods
 A mixed-Pine-Hardwood forest is a typical climax forest in the lower Piedmont of NC. As
such, little needs to be done to manage this forest type other than monitoring for changes.
Beaver may begin to remove certain tree species and alter forest composition.
41
 Deer population growth can severely impact a forest. Deer browse understory saplings and
tree seedlings and if the population becomes too high, they which will change the structure
of the forest and limit its long-term stability. Often heavy browsing will create a visual cue- a
“browse line”- that can be seen as one looks through the forest. It is helpful to take a few
photos through the forest from defined points to use as a comparative reference in future
years. There is a likelihood that deer hunting pressure will continue into the future in the
rural lands surrounding Turnipseed. This reduces the concern that the forest will suffer from
browsing but it’s not out of the question. It is helpful to have a response plan in place if
deer management becomes necessary. The boulders across this forest-type have been
treated separately.
 A horse trail rambles through much of the forest in OSMC-2 and there has been significant
compaction and erosion of soils with some damage to vegetation along some parts of this
trail. In some areas the trail dips into the floodplain and the soils become muddy; in other
areas tree roots have become exposed where the trails slope. Equestrian trails are not
necessarily incompatible with the Turnipseed site but its location should be carefully
considered with regards to contours and soils, and should be developed as a separate
system from hiking trails.
4.K. Loblolly Regeneration
Most of these loblolly stands have limited aesthetic or wildlife value. (Exception: the abundance
of Six-lined Racerunner and Black Racer along the edge of these stands.) The stocking is dense
and little light reaches the forest floor. As a consequence, little understory or herbaceous
diversity occurs in these stands.
 Thinning: The health of this forest would be improved through thinning the pines- removing
1/3 to 1/2 the existing trees on each of the stands. The stand on OSMC-2 could provide an
opportunity for a commercial thinning (generate income), while thinning on OSMC-12
would likely be a pre-commercial cut. Thinning the stands would improve the health and
growth of existing trees, increase development of understory vegetation and habitat for
wildlife, and reduce the risk from wild fire racing through the stands. Note: It might be
worthwhile to refrain from thinning one acre of the stand on OSMC-12 in order to provide a
comparison of residual tree growth between forests that are thinned and those that aren’t.
42
 Prescribed Burn: These stands would be helped by introducing a prescribed burn regime
following the initial thinning- to be conducted on a 3-5 year burning cycle. This burning cycle
could coincide, or be during alternate years, with prescribed burns for the Long Leaf Pine
restoration sites established on the agricultural lands. It is important to clear fire lanes
around the forest stand border when using prescribed burning in order to reduce chance of
the losing control of the burn.
4.L. Unmarked Graves
<<fill in>>
4.M. Spotted Salamander
<<fill in>>
4.N. Other Management Considerations
Maintain existing trails for stewardship, research, education, and maintenance purposes only.
Periodic work will be needed to maintain trail in good sustainable condition. Access for the
general public will not be offered in the immediate future but should be considered long term.
Monitor condition of old cemetery and take steps to preserves its integrity.
Ultimately, this preserve and other Marks Creek Open Space could be managed by the staff at Lake
Myra County Park. As the Marks Creek Open Space lands become more connected, these areas become
potentially more impacted by visitation. Protection of the natural resources should be considered when
public access is being planned.
43
5. Workplan
5.A. Three-year Workplan
Table 5.1. Three-year workplan for Turnipseed Unit #1. <<Create short statements
summarizing what will be done each year for each feature – Note that this matches the table in
section 3 – if you change that, you’ll need to change this and v-v>>
Feature
Year 1 (2011)
A Michaux’s
sumac
B Marks Creek
floodplain
C Granitic
flatrock and
outcrops
D Small
wetland
communities
(borrow
pits)
E Beaverimpounded
wetlands
F Boulders
G Fallow fields
H Agricultural
fields
I
Bottomland
hardwood
forest
J Mixed pinehardwood
forest
K Loblolly
regeneration
L Unmarked
graves
M Spotted
salamander
Year 2 (2012)
Year 3 (2013)
44
5.B. Annual Workplans
Table 5.2. Workplan for 2011. <<Fill in with items to be done in 2011. Create a new row for
each planned activity. After the activity, put the month it should be carried out in parentheses.
If there are multiple activities for a feature, create a row for each activity and keep them in
chronological (month) order.>>
Feature
Planned Activity (month)
A Michaux’s
sumac
B Marks Creek
floodplain
C Granitic
flatrock and
outcrops
D Small
wetland
communities
(borrow
pits)
E Beaverimpounded
wetlands
F Boulders
G Fallow fields
H Agricultural
fields
I
Bottomland
hardwood
forest
J Mixed pinehardwood
forest
K Loblolly
regeneration
L Unmarked
graves
M Spotted
salamander
Resources / Source / Cost
45
Table 5.3. Workplan for 2012. <<Fill in with items to be done in 2012. Create a new row for
each planned activity. After the activity, put the month it should be carried out in parentheses.
If there are multiple activities for a feature, create a row for each activity and keep them in
chronological (month) order.>>
Feature
Planned Activity (month)
A Michaux’s
sumac
B Marks Creek
floodplain
C Granitic
flatrock and
outcrops
D Small
wetland
communities
(borrow
pits)
E Beaverimpounded
wetlands
F Boulders
G Fallow fields
H Agricultural
fields
I
Bottomland
hardwood
forest
J Mixed pinehardwood
forest
K Loblolly
regeneration
L Unmarked
graves
M Spotted
salamander
Resources / Source / Cost
46
Table 5.4. Workplan for 2013. <<Fill in with items to be done in 2013. Create a new row for
each planned activity. After the activity, put the month it should be carried out in parentheses.
If there are multiple activities for a feature, create a row for each activity and keep them in
chronological (month) order.>>
Feature
Planned Activity (month)
A Michaux’s
sumac
B Marks Creek
floodplain
C Granitic
flatrock and
outcrops
D Small
wetland
communities
(borrow
pits)
E Beaverimpounded
wetlands
F Boulders
G Fallow fields
H Agricultural
fields
I
Bottomland
hardwood
forest
J Mixed pinehardwood
forest
K Loblolly
regeneration
L Unmarked
graves
M Spotted
salamander
Resources / Source / Cost
47
6. Appendixes
<<many appendixes are mentioned in the document. They should be put here in order, 6.A, 6.B, etc and
referenced appropriately from the text. I’d keep the maps in the main text instead of making people go
to the back, using the appedixes more for detailed inventory information and the like.>>
48