Turnipseed Road #1 Unit at Marks Creek
Open Space Management Plan
Effective Period: January 2010-December 2012
Drafted by WakeNature Preserves Partnership
March 5, 2010
1
Executive Summary
The Mark’s Creek watershed is a 50,000-acre watershed straddling the Wake-Johnston county line.
Named a “Last Chance Landscape” in 2003 by Scenic America due to its rural character, the Mark’s Creek
landscape is rich with rare plant communities, historic homesteads, and patches of mature hardwood
forests noted as ecologically significant by the NC Natural Heritage Program. Located just a few miles
from the town Wendell and three miles north of the Neuse River, Marks Creek is located in a quickly
transitioning area. In response to explosive development around Clayton and Mark’s Creek—a tributary
to the Neuse River—the Triangle Land Conservancy, the Trust for Public Land, and Wake County have
partnered to permanently protect over 1,100 acres within the watershed. Through this partnership,
Wake County has committed to contributing funds from open space bond monies for land acquisition in
the Marks Creek Watershed and to provide long-term stewardship.
Wake County is responsible for the management and
stewardship of all of its open space properties and
easements in a manner consistent with its Consolidated
Open Space Plan. This requires having management plans in
place for these properties. In an effort to meet the goal of
creating management plans for all its open space properties,
the Wake County Open Space Program has partnered with
the WakeNature Preserves Partnership, a group comprised
of natural resource professionals from North Carolina
Museum of Natural History, North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program, North Carolina State University, North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission, Triangle Land Conservancy,
UNC Herbarium/NC Botanical Garden, Wake County’s
Division of Parks, Recreation and Open Space, local
municipalities, and other interested individuals.
The
WakeNature Preserves Partnership has an interest in
indentifying ecologically valuable, publicly owned open space
with Wake County and building capacity for appropriate
management and long-term stewardship of those areas.
The WakeNature Preserves Partnership has identified four adjacent properties within the Marks Creek
Watershed to serve as a pilot demonstration site for collaborative work to protect natural heritage and
open space values in Wake County. This site is known as Turnipseed Preserve, a 221 acre site
characterized by unique geology, a diversity of habitats and species of high quality. The WakeNature
Preserves Partnership has provided support and expertise to help the Wake County Open Space
Program inventory the natural resources and habitats extant on Turnipseed Preserve and to create a
management plan to ensure long-term stewardship of the site.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 4
VISION 1.1 ................................................................................................................ 4
II. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ............................................................................... 6
2.1 SCOPE ................................................................................................................. 6
2.2 CONNECTIONS .................................................................................................... 7
2.2.1 Greenway Trail Connections .......................................................................................... 7
2.3 PUBLIC USE ........................................................................................................................... 8
III. NATURAL FEATURES & BIODIVERSITY ................................................... 9
3.1 SOILS .................................................................................................................. 9
3.2 WATER ............................................................................................................. 10
3.3 WILDLIFE DIVERSITY OVERVIEW....................................................................... 10
3.3.1 Bird Diversity .............................................................................................. 10
3.3.2 Mammal Diversity ....................................................................................... 11
3.3.3 Reptile and Amphibian Diversity .................................................................. 11
3.3.4 Butterfly Diversity ....................................................................................... 12
3.4 LICHEN DIVERSITY ............................................................................................ 12
IV. MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES & PRESCRIPTIONS ................................ 14
4.1 ROCK OUTCROPPINGS & BOULDERS ...............................................................................14
4.1.1 Management Recommendations for Exposed Granite Outcrops ....................... 15
4.1.2 Management Recommendations for Boulders ................................................ 17
4.2 MICHAUX’S SUMAC .............................................................................................................20
4.2.1 Management Recommendations for Michaux’s Sumac ................................... 20
4.3 EARLY SUCCESSIONAL HABITATS ....................................................................................23
4.3.1 Fallow Fields ............................................................................................... 23
4.3.2 Agricultural Fields ....................................................................................... 23
4.3.2 Management Recommendation for Fallow Field ............................................ 24
4.3.3 Management Recommendation for Agricultural Fields ................................... 25
4.4 LATE SUCCESSIONAL HABITATS ......................................................................................27
4.4.1 Mixed Pine Hardwoods ................................................................................ 27
4.4.2 Loblolly Regeneration .................................................................................. 27
4.4.3 Management Recommendation for Mixed Pine Hardwoods ............................ 27
4.4.4 Management Recommendation for Loblolly Regeneration .............................. 28
4.5 AQUATIC RIPARIAN HABITATS .......................................................................................29
4.5.1 Beaver Impounded Wetlands ........................................................................ 29
4.5.2 Borrow Pits.................................................................................................. 30
4.5.3 Bottomland Hardwood Forest ....................................................................... 31
4.5.4 Management Recommendation for Beaver Impounded Wetlands .................... 32
4.5.5 Management Recommendation for Borrow Pits.............................................. 34
4.5.6 Management Recommendation for Bottomland Hardwood Forest ................... 36
3
I. Introduction
1.1 Vision:
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.
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. The Mark’s Creek landscape is a
50,000-acre watershed that straddles the Wake-Johnston county line, 12 miles northeast of
Clayton. For its proximity to the Triangle urban area, 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 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.
The following management plan is based on information
collected from the ecological inventory that began in the
February of 2008 and the professional opinions of experts
that have participated in the WNPP. This management plan serves as a template for future
nature preserves and is a testimonial to the efforts and intent of the WNPP to provide
resources to help steward protected natural areas within Wake County.
4
Given the budgetary restraints of the Wake County’s open space division, the WNPP suggest
creating an initial management plan that aims for a three-year timeframe 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.
5
II. Property Description
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
2.1 Scope
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).
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.
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.
6
2.2 Connections
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.
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.
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). Other open space properties in Marks Creek within 1 mile of Turnipseed
Preserve include the following:
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
It should be noted that 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.
2.2.1 Greenway Trail 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
7
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 long-term 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.
2.3 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 (See appendix X). 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
(defined in appendix X). 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 is several years away. When completed, Wendell Falls will be home to thousands
of residents and part of the Town of Wendell.
8
III. Natural Features & Biodiversity
As a result of natural terrain features and past land uses, a variety of habitats occur within Unit
#1. Inventories of species and observations of resource conditions provide information upon
which management prescriptions can be based. What follows in section three are descriptions
of soils, hydrology and the varied faunal assemblages and community types of interest,
including the results of an on-going lichen inventory.
3.1 Soils
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. 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).
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. A
9
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 1. Use Limits of Soils Found on Unit #1 (Cawthorne 1970).
Soil Type
Characteristic
Campsites
Picnic Areas
Intensive Play
Symbol
Appling
Course
fragments
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Ap
Colfax
High water table
Severe
Severe
Severe
Cn
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
3.2 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.
3.3 Wildlife Diversity Overview
3.3.1 Bird Diversity
Bird Diversity was high with 126 species recorded during surveys (See Appendix F-1). 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
10
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
Common Yellow-throat observed. Northern Parula Warbler and Louisiana Waterthrush were
also found on the site. Key (Wildlife Action Plan Priority, WAP) breeding and/or possibly
breeding species include Chuck-Wills-Widow, Whip-poor-Will, Yellow-billed Cuckoo, Redheaded Woodpecker, Hairy Woodpecker, Eastern Wood Pewee, Eastern Kingbird, Wood
Thrush, Prairie Warbler and Orchard Oriole. Northern Flicker was seen but not during the
breeding season, and Rusty Blackbird were found during fall period.
3.3.2 Mammal Diversity
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 (See Appendix F-2). A total of fifteen
mammal species were recorded, but many more are likely to be found with a more rigorous
structured survey.
3.3.3 Reptile and Amphibian Diversity
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. Key (WAP) species include: Eastern Box Turtle, Eastern Hognosed Snake, and Eastern Ribbon Snake. In addition, Rough Green Snake, and Six-lined
Racerunner were found. Seventeen species of amphibians were identified including eleven
species of frog & toad and six species of salamander. Key (WAP) species include: Spotted
Salamander, Marbled Salamander, and White-lipped Slimy Salamander. In addition, Redspotted Newt and Greater Siren were recorded. Additional species are likely to be recorded
with a more rigorous sampling regime.
11
3.3.4 Butterfly Diversity
Butterflies: Records of butterflies were also kept, but the sampling was incidental rather than
structured (See Appendix F-4). 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.
3.4 Lichen Diversity Overview
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. A full report is
expected by the time of the next three-year management plan in 2012.
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; a full checklist is presented as an appendix.
12
Table 2. Lichen diversity of habitats in Turnipseed Road #1 Unit, categorized by growth form.
Lichen spp.
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. Moderately
tolerant macrolichens (Flavoparmelia caperata, Punctelia rudecta) were more abundant than
the highly tolerant species, and were found more throughout the areas surveyed. Pollutionsensitive cyanolichens (Collema, Leptogium, Nephroma) were found most abundantly beyond
the ridge, away from the road. Pollution-tolerant : pollution-sensitive macrolichen species
ratios are listed in Table 3.
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.
13
Table 3. Site locations and approximated lichen sensitivity ratios.
Site
Latitude
Longitude
Pollution-tolerant : pollution-sensitive
lichen species ratio
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
Note: 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.
14
IV. Management Objectives & Prescriptions
Based on the ecological inventory, the staff of the Wake County Open Space program identified
certain habitats as priorities for management. These areas and elements are known as
conservation targets, or the species, ecosystems, and processes that are the focus of
management. The following conservation targets have been identified: rock outcrops,
Michaux’s Sumac, early successional habitats, late successional habitats, and aquatic/riparian
habitats.
4.1 Rock Outcroppings and Boulders
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 (See
Appendix __). 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.
15
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)
4.1.2 Management Recommendations for Granite Flatrocks/ 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
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)
16
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 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 OSMC2 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. (See Appendix __) 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.
17
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.
4.1.3 Management Recommendations for 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 ___). 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.
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 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.
18

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 recolonization 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 which 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 which
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 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
19
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), Firepink (Silene virginica), and other wildflowers. Trail alignment through
this area to the overlook should take this into account.
20
4.2 Michaux’s sumac and Powerline Easement
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 (PE) 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.
(Note: It is important to restrict use of herbicides in this easement (PE should not broadcast
herbicide to manage vegetation) in order to maintain the diverse vegetation.)
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.
4.2.1 Management Recommendations
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
21
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.

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
22
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.
23
4.3 Early Successional Habitats
4.3.1 Open 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.
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 which 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.
4.3.2 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
24
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.
4.3.3 Management Recommendations for Fallow Field
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
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.
25
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.
4.3.4 Management Recommendations for 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
for a mix of open sandy meadows with the lupine restoration as described above, and/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
26
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.
27
4.4 Late Succession Habitats
4.4.1 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.
4.4.2 Loblolly Regeneration
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.
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.
28
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.
4.4.3 Management Recommendations for 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.

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.
4.4.4 Management Recommendations for 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 pinesremoving 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
29
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.

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.
30
4.5 Aquatic Riparian Habitats
There are many different types of aquatic systems in the Marks Creek area including
floodplains, ponds, free flowing streams, borrowed pits, and beaver impounded wetlands.
Healthy aquatic habitat provides important refuge, breeding and feeding areas for plants and
animals. There are no ‘quick fix’ options for improving aquatic habitats. Focus efforts on exotic
invasive plant removal (Microstegium), stream bank restoration, extending stream buffers
where necessary, and trash removal from all waterways. Site could serve as Tiger Salamander
restoration project.
4.5.1 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
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
31
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.
(See Bottomland Hardwood Forests in Sect. 4.5.3).
4.5.2 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
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
32
canopy of forest trees and changes in water level within the pit were minimal, even during the
2008 drought.
4.5.3 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.
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
33
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.
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.
4.5.4 Management Recommendations for 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.
34
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
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
35
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.
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.
36
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.
4.5.5 Management Recommendations for Bottomland Hardwood Forest
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).
37
4.5.6 Management Recommendations for Borrow Pits
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.
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.
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.
38
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 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
39
the case for gambusia which are too small to use electro-shocking as a removal
technique.
40
4.6 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.
41
V. Appendix
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 pollutionsensitive 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. A full report is expected by the time of the next three-year management plan in 2012.
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; a full checklist is presented as an appendix.
Table 2. Lichen diversity of habitats in Turnipseed Road #1 Unit, categorized by growth form.
Lichen spp.
Site(s)
Parcel(s)
Crustose
Foliose
Fruticose
Not sampled
___
___
___
___
F-2
OSMC-4
32 (62%)
17 (33%)
3 (6%)
Borrow Pits
Not sampled
___
___
___
___
Granitic Flatrocks
RO-16, RO-17
OSC-4
22 (37%)
15 (26%)
22 (37%)
Habitat
Beaverimpounded
Wetlands
Bottomland
Hardwood Forests
42
Granitic Boulders
Powerline
Corridor (forest
edge)
Mixed PineHardwood Stands
Loblolly Pine
Regeneration
Open Fields
R-11, R-12, RO-3,
RO-7, RO-8, RO-9
OSMC-3, OSMC4
13 (39%)
17 (52%)
4 (12%)
P-1
OSMC-3
20 (54%)
14 (38%)
3 (8%)
F-1, R-12, RO-3,
RO-7, F-3
OSMC-3, OSMC4
46 (58%)
24 (30%)
9 (11%)
F-4
OSMC-12
15 (63%)
8 (33%)
1 (4%)
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. Moderately tolerant macrolichens (Flavoparmelia caperata, Punctelia
rudecta) were more 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. Pollution-tolerant : pollution-sensitive macrolichen
species ratios are listed in Table 3.
Table 3. Site locations and approximated lichen sensitivity ratios.
Site
Latitude
Longitude
Pollution-tolerant :
pollution-sensitive lichen
species ratio
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
43
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.
Note: 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.
44