Mattanock Town Restoration Plan
Using Mattanock Town's historical land use to understand the property's current conditions to implement a holistic approach to restoration.
Project Partners
Mattanock Town's Restoration Plan is a science-based restoration process that evaluates the site's history, the tribal history, and the best available science to maximize native habitats, enhance coastal resilience, and reconnect the Nansemond people to the local river. Restoration priorities include increasing native plant species, incorporating oyster habitat, and addressing erosion. This StoryMap details how synthesizing past and present physical, biological, and cultural information will guide wetland invasive species eradication, living shoreline project design, and permit application.
History
The story of Mattanock Town is one of productivity, hardship, and revitalization, and that story has unfolded, in one way or another, because of the historical use of the land and its naturally occurring habitat. The sections below detail some pivotal moments in the property's history that have shaped the current conditions, thus impacting the tribe's future restoration efforts.
The Historical Indigenous Communities and Shell Middens on the Nansemond River ArcGIS Map on the left showcases all known tribal villages and shell middens along the Nansemond River (Bass, 2021).
How to use the map:
- Locate the "Open layer list" icon and select it.
- To turn layers on and off, select the "eye" symbol next to the layer title.
Nansemond Indian Nation:
For over a thousand years, the Nansemond people have been stewards of the Nansemond River (Bass, 2021). Evidence of their community and record of their culture are found in shell middens. Shell middens are archeological sites containing oyster shells, fish bones, animal bones, artifacts, and skeletal remains (Bottoms, 1983). Thirty shell middens have been discovered along the banks of the Nansemond River, including Holladay's Point, one of the oldest confirmed Nansemond villages, and Dumpling Island (Bass, 2021). These shell middens accurately explain how oysters, mussels, clams, and scallops were used in the indigenous population's day-to-day village life.
Drone image captured by Nikki Bass in 2021. Dot "1" is Mattanock Town, and dot "2" is Holladay's Point.
History proves that economic prowess is prioritized over what the impact of land disturbance can have on local communities, as in the case of the Grand Coulee Dam in Seattle, WA, where the construction of the dam not only disrupted the salmon migration but also destroyed local tribal burial sites (Lake Roosevelt, n.d.). To date, there is no archaeological record to characterize the Nansemond people's relationship with the Mattanock Town site. Shell middens at Holladay's Point and numerous other Woodland Period sites prove that the tribe lived in the direct vicinity and along both banks of the Nansemond River (Bottoms, 1983). Based on the archaeological record and documented history, it is not unreasonable to assume that the indigenous community used the land for food harvest or even was once an extension of the adjacent settlement located on Holladay’s Point. However, because the mine operation highly modified the site, archeologists may never be able to fully characterize the site’s precolonial history. That said, Chesapecten jeffersonius fossils are found along the shoreline at Mattanock Town. Archeologists have indicated that C. jeffersonius were potentially used as bowls and scraping tools by various tribal communities up and down the Chesapeake Bay (Ferguson, 1998).
When colonists settled in Jamestown in 1607, their food supply was insufficient, and famine threatened to decimate the settlement's population (Neal, 1959). With the threat of starvation, John Smith sent Capt. John Martin and 60 colonists to trade for food from the local indigenous people (Dumpling Island, 2007). After Martin’s advance party failed to return, the colonists responded aggressively (Neal, 1959). This initial confrontation sparked a tumultuous relationship between the two communities and resulted in wars from 1610 to 1646 (Mark, 2021). These wars resulted in unfulfilled peace agreements, significant land loss, and the dissolution of centralized leadership among the coastal Algonquin communities (Bass, 2021).
As displacement continued throughout the 1600s, the enmity of the indigenous community towards the colonists increased. The colonists reasoned that cutting the native people off from the resources within the tidal waterways (particularly oysters) would make them weaker and easier to control (Wharton, 1957). This strategy was so effective that it was later reasoned that a complete cutoff was no longer necessary, and that issuing licensing would provide enough limitation (Wharton, 1957). This law was the first oyster licensing law recorded in Hening's Statutes at Large (Hening, 1823) (See image below). The deliberate and inhuman act of disconnecting the native communities from their culture forever changed the Nansemond people’s lives. It set a course for how our society interacts with the natural environment. However, despite the forced disconnect and the cruelty displayed by colonists and their descendants, the Nansemond people have never stopped seeking reconnection with local waterways and have always advocated for resources in jeopardy.
William Waller Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large; Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia from the First Session of the Legislature in the Year 1619 (New York: R. W. & G. Bartow, 1823), 2:140. https://encyclopediavirginia.org/4613hpr-73b50d1ab8d2224/
Chesapecten jeffersonius
The Suffolk Scarp is a predominant feature in Suffolk, VA, due to its stark contrast in geomorphology compared to the Churchland Flats, just east of the scarp. The Suffolk Scarp is a paleoshoreline formed during the Pliocene period and marked the continental shelf when seas were 12-15 meters above current sea level (Johnson and Hobbs, 1990). Terraces, such as the Churchland Flats, flank paleo shorelines and are often underlain with lagoonal-estuarine sediments (Allen, 2022). Mattanock Town’s current location is within the Churchland Flats (See image below).
This 1968 map created by N. Coch shows the Suffolk Scarp and the red pin point is the current location of Mattanock Town.
Chesapecten jeffersonius, a scallop species, dominated the Churchland Flats during the Miocene into the Pliocene period (23.03 to 2.58 million years ago) (Donohue, 2016). C. jeffersonius fossils are found along the shoreline at Mattanock Town and are so common in the tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay watershed that they are now Virginia’s state fossil (Donohue, 2016). See image below of C. jeffersonius found along the shoreline and the GoPro video of the shell being found along the berm.
Chesapecten jeffersonius found along a mine spoil berm at Mattanock Town.
Chesapecten jeffersonius and other bivalve species that lived during the Miocene and Pliocene period provided the calcium-rich soil needed to create Tertiary shell beds or “marls” (Eckel, 1913). These shell beds are significant in connection with the development of the Portland Cement industry in Virginia (Eckel, 1913). Although their composition is not as desirable as some other marl material found along the east coast, these shell beds were attractive to the Portland Cement industry mainly because they were easily accessible, as in the case of Mattanock Town (Eckel, 1913).
In addition to C. jeffersonius found along Mattanock Towns shoreline, a fossilized oyster roughly 16 cm in size was found along the bank. Although more in-depth research needs to be conducted in order to identify, preliminary analysis indicates the oyster is an Isognomon maxillata common name, Giant Tree Oyster (Kowinsky, 2018).
Fossilized oyster found along the eroding berm at Mattnaock Town.
The Mattanock Town Historical Maps 1919-1949 ArcGIS Map on the left displays contour maps published by USGS and aerial imagery provided in the VIMS Shoreline Studies Program .
How to use map:
- Locate the "Open layer list" icon and select it.
- To turn layers on and off, select the "eye" symbol next to the layer title.
Lone Start Cement Corporation
"In the 1920s, the marl industry became a lucrative business venture for Suffolk locals such as Miss Lucy Upshur, known to “pit mine” marl and sell it as fertilizer high in nitrogen" (Rose, 2011). In 1926, she sold the land and the mine operation to Lone Star Cement Corporation to make Portland Cement (Rose, 2011).
Historical maps show that Lone Star Cement Corporation constructed 11 mine spoil pits that paralleled a single-track rail system that ran from the Nansemond River inland roughly two and a half miles (See Mattanock Town 1949 Map - USGS layer within Mattanock Town Historical Maps 1919 to 1949 on the left). Three of the 11 mine pits and the only two ports were located within Mattanock Town's property limits.
Aerial image of Lone Star Mine Cooperation.
The images below were retrieved from Chuckatuck: A Crossroads In Time. They provide a visual of the day-to-day operations and a frame of reference for how Lone Star Cement Corporation shaped the current landscape. Use the aerial image above to orient the below images.
Dot 1: Post card with marl pit and horse and cart (1910).
Dot 2: Lone Star mud barge on the Nansemond River (1940s).
Dot 3: Lone Star processing plant on the Nansemond River (1940s).
In 1971, the EPA shut down the mine operation due to its unregulated and dangerous practices (Drex, n.d.). Once Lone Star shut down, the City of Suffolk took possession of the property and turned a portion of it into a public park. However, the city did little mitigation to remedy the impacts on the land and the surrounding waterway. Because of this, evidence of the historical land use (both positive and negative) can still be seen upland and along the shoreline.
The images below are the current site conditions for dots one, two, and three referenced in the Aerial image of Lone Star Mine Cooperation above.
Dot 1: The southwest edge of the mine pit.
Dot 2: Shoreline adjacent to the mine spoil pit.
Dot 3: Current condition of the loading and unloading wharf adjacent to the processing plant.
Land Rehabilitation of Mattanock Town by the Nansemond Indian Nation:
It was not until 1985, when the tribe received state recognition, that the Commonwealth of Virginia upheld their rights as original stewards of the land and acknowledged the tribe's sovereignty (Bass, 2021). In 1988, the Nansemond Indian Tribal Association (NITA) hosted its first homecoming at Lone Star Lakes Park, and in 2013 the City of Suffolk deeded 71.153 acres of the property to the tribe (Bass, 2021). This deed included a rescission clause that required the tribe to construct a reenactment village by 2018 that would operate “solely as a tourist attraction primarily for the benefit of the residents of Suffolk, the surrounding communities, and tourists visiting the region” (Development Agreement, 2013). The development agreement associated with the deed stated, "NITA will accept the property in an "AS IS, WHERE IS, WITH ALL FAULTS" condition and will be responsible for conducting the appropriate environmental due diligence" (Development Agreement, 2013). Failure to complete the reenactment of the village within five years would result in repossession of the property (Deed of Gift, 2013). The tribe spent several years planning and fundraising to uphold its commitment to creating a lucrative tourist attraction for the city while continuing to serve its citizens and advocate with other Virginia Indian tribes for federal recognition.
Land Dedication Memorial on Nansemond Indian Tribal Ground Facing the Nansemond River.
After decades of collective advocacy, in 2018, the Nansemond Indian Tribal Association (now the Nansemond Indian Nation) was one of six tribes to receive federal recognition under the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of 2017. Federal recognition was a turning point for the Nansemond people since the federal government acknowledged their autonomy and formalized an intergovernmental relationship (Bass, 2021). In addition, it also gave them access to funding sources that were not available under state recognition (Salazar, 2016).
Virginia Tribes Celebrate Federal Recognition
In the first years of federal recognition, the Tribe prioritized governance and program development for its citizens. In addition to establishing a tribal health program through Indian Health Services and a tribal housing program through Housing and Urban Development, the Tribe established a tribal environmental program through the Environmental Protection Agency's Indian Environmental General Assistance Program (Environmental Protection Agency, 2022) (Bolden, 2020). At the start of this program, the tribe collected data for an environmental baseline of Mattanock Town (analyzing the air, soil, water quality, and land condition) and immediately realized the urgency of restoring the site. After years of externally driven focus on tourism, this information catalyzed an internally driven focus on healing the land and water at a time that coincided with the Nation healing its citizens through the coronavirus pandemic (Gooding, 2013).
Amid the Tribe's emergency response, Nansemond leadership researched opportunities to support its citizens and update facilities at Mattanock Town, which were small, outdated, and inadequate for social distancing. Toward this goal, the Tribe applied for the Indian Community Development Block Grant-American Rescue Plan of 2021 (ICDBG-ARP) to "expand and renovate their community center [at Mattanock Town], which provides services to the Tribal members" (Indian Community Development Block Grant, 2021; U.S. Senator Tim Kaine, 2022). As public health risks forced the cancellation of large gatherings like the Tribe's annual powwow, the Tribe supported cultural resilience through smaller gatherings like outdoor tribal meetings, oyster gardening with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, and volunteering with partners throughout Suffolk who shared their environmental goals.
Since the City of Suffolk's five-year deadline passed, the Tribe has increased its capacity to serve its citizens, continued to expand its tribal environmental program, was awarded $998,250 to renovate its community center at Mattanock Town, and is eligible for numerous new grants to restore and revitalize the 70+ acre site. Despite historic progress for the Nansemond people, unresolved negotiations with the City of Suffolk remain an obstacle to Mattanock Town’s restoration.
This restoration plan underpins the NIN's commitment to invest in and improve the site for its citizens and the community in the spirit of the original agreement while prioritizing its environmental needs. The Tribe has emphasized that restoration does not preclude future public engagement with the site for outdoor recreation, education, and eco-tourism; rather, it is a prerequisite for the site's sustainable growth as a tribal and community resource.
Data Analysis
Lone Star Cement Corporation played a significant role in the degradation of the shoreline and the decline of the natural habitats at Mattanock Town. In addition, the lack of mitigation done to the property after the EPA closed the mine has exasperated the adverse effects. These impacts have had physical, biological, and cultural ramifications beyond Mattanock Town's parcel boundary.
This restoration plan considers Mattanock Town’s entire landscape, from subtidal waters to the riparian upland. It also spans large time scales using historical data to inform the current site conditions and incorporates considerations for future habitat shifts under climate change on the property. Although the sections below are presented separately, it is essential to note that this plan considers them as one interconnected unit since, as the research below shows, impacting one habitat has a ripple effect that extends to the surrounding ecosystems. Furthermore, climate change will blur the lines between vegetation zones, and eventually, those zones will migrate landward and phase into each other (Bilkovic et al., 2016). To help display their interconnectivity, the Mattanock Town Past, Present, and Future map was created. This ArcGIS Online map contains all historical, current, and future data layers analyzed for this restoration plan. Overlaying these data layers and analyzing them together allows for a restoration approach that considers information on the natural land, existing habitats, and the distributions of invasive species to identify restoration priorities. In addition, it allows the NIN to incorporate cultural initiatives that ensure future generations have a place to connect with the local waterways.
Images of the various field data collection days and instruments used to collect the spatial information.
Mattanock Town Past Present and Future ArcGIS Map was created by synthesizing existing data such as historical maps, shoreline changes, existing and historical tidal marsh inventories, erosion rates, elevation, and various current site conditions that could impact future restoration activities (Grigsby, 2023). In addition, field data was completed using an ESRI RTK BadElf Flex Plotter and DJI Phantom 4 RTK drone to gain higher resolution elevation and vegetative information. All the various data layers were first analyzed using ArcGIS Pro for a more in-depth review. It was later transferred to the online platform and published using ArcGIS WebApp to allow public viewing and data sharing. The data summary for the individual layers can be found on the Mattanock Town Past Present and Future map’s contents page or in the appendix associated with this document.
Cross section depicting the various habitat zones referenced in the data analysis.
Riparian Upland
Below are the layers used to analyze the upland bank section of the property. The below text will have the layer name referenced in parentheses and in blue.
- VA DOF Invasive Species
- VA DOF Stands
- Upland Plant Species Landward of Berm
- Contour (m) 2018
- Spring Drone Orthoimagery
- Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Planning Scenarios
- 1949 USGS Map
- 1937 VIMS Aerial Imagery
The riparian upland consists of trees and shrubs growing adjacent to streams, rivers, and wetlands (USDA National Agroforestry Center, 2012). This vegetative zone is often called a riparian forest buffer. It is considered the first line of defense in protecting local water bodies from agricultural and industrialized areas' stormwater runoff (USDA National Agroforestry Center, 2012). Knowing that the mine operation impacted this critical habitat at Mattanock Town, the NIN worked with the Department of Forestry to develop an Urban Forest Management Plan for the site (Topping, 2021). This plan focused on analyzing the forest's health by taking an inventory of the native and invasive plant population, the age of the trees, and the tree size. In addition, it identified any potential fire hazards and future issues that could occur if not adequately addressed. Once an inventory of the site was complete, borders were drawn using ArcGIS around similar vegetative types. These zones are called stands, and the Urban Forest Management Plan uses them to organize the recommended approach for restoration. This data analysis will focus primarily on Stands One, three, and six-c due to their vulnerability to sea level rise, the high invasive plant population and the most opportunity for cultural engagement (VA DOF Stands).
Stand 1 is 15.4 acres and consists of native trees such as Liriodendron tulipifera, Platanus occidentalis, Acer floridadum, and Ulmus americana (Topping, 2021). A. floridadum and U. americana are rare in our region (Topping, 2021). In addition, a Quercus rubra, with a “diameter of 57” at breast height,” is the largest observed tree on the entire property (Topping, 2021). Although the canopy is relatively healthy in Stand 1, the vegetation at the ground level and in the understory consists mainly of invasive plant species such as Ligustrum sinense, Vinca minor, and Microstegium vimineum (Topping, 2021). Although L. Sinense, V. minor, and M. vimineum are found throughout Stand 1, the highest invasive plant densities are in areas where the marl pits were dug out and filled in (VA DOF Invasive Species Map; 1937 VIMS Aerial Imagery)
The topography within Stand 1 showcases one of the most apparent land transformations from the mine operation (Contour (m) 2018; VA DOF Stands). The rough square shape is a relic mine pit with an average bank height of 4.5 meters above Mean Low Water (MLW) and an average elevation within the basin of 1.875 m above MLW. The 1966 hand-drawn map from a Lone Star employee confirms that this area was once a marl pit the mine operation later filled in (See image below). This data is consistent with the soil quality data within the Urban Forest Management Plan (Topping, 2021).
Hand Drawn Map (1966) by Lone Star Employee.
Within the basin and adjacent to the berm that parallels Cedar Creek is a large population of A. floridadum and U. americana. Q. rebra is also located at the crest of the northwestern bank. Comparisons of elevation, upland plant species, and sea level rise scenarios indicate that the basin of the marl pit may start to experience prolonged inundation with a meter of sea level rise (Contour (m) 2018; Upland Plants Species Landward of Berm; Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Planning Scenarios). At the current state, the impacts of sea level rise will affect A. floridadum and U. americana within the next 30 years (Sweet et al., 2022). Sea level rise modeling also shows that Q. rebra is at a high enough elevation that even a meter of sea level rise will not reach the base of the tree. Q. rebra's canopy radius is 15-17 meters (Spring Drone Orthoimagery), and the roots extend approximately two to three times the radius of the canopy (Deep Green Permaculture, 2022). Research shows that Q. rebra is tolerant to saltwater (Gilman & Watson, 1994), putting it at low risk for damage with future sea level rise scenarios (Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Planning Scenarios). Q. rebra's proximity to the channel and the eroding berm edge is more concerning. The current grade from the base of the tree to MLW is one of the steepest sections along the berm, and the nearshore depth does not allow for building out channelward if a living shoreline project were to take place (Contour (m) 2018). A critical restoration goal is figuring out the balance between protecting Q. rebra while enhancing coastal resilience.
Q. rebra located at the crest of the northwestern bank of the mine spoil berm.
Stand 3 is 2.4 acres and has many of the same physical characteristics as Stand 1. However, Stand 3 has a minimal canopy, and L. sinense dominates the plant population (Topping, 2021). Within the Urban Forest Management Plan, the density of L. sinense is described as a “public safety hazard and recommended a professional remove it” (Topping, 2021). DOF proposes to clear-cut this section (and other sections of the property not reviewed in this plan) and replant trees with a broader, shallower root system due to the poor soil conditions remaining from the mine operation (K. Topping, personal communication, March 2023).
Stand 6c is 2.3 acres and consists of native trees labeled in the Urban Forest Management Plan as a "wooded marsh border" (Topping, 2021). The native canopy consists of Juniperus virginiana, Liriodendron tulipifera, Plantanus occidentalis, Liquidambar styraciflua, Ulmus americana, and Celtis occidentalis (Topping, 2021). The understory has native shrubs such as Baccharis halimifolia, Prunus serotina, Rhus, and Cornus florida (Topping, 2021). However, invasive plant species such as L. sinense, Elaeagnus umbellate, Ailanthus altissima, Paulownia tomentosa, and Morus alba dominate (Topping, 2021). As data analyzed for Stand 1 and 3 shows, anthropogenic disturbance and land transformation create a suitable habitat for invasive plant species to take root (Lemke et al., 2012). Without the proper mitigation done after the closing of the mine operation, this is likely what happened at Stand 6c.
An inventory of the various plant species along the upland zone in Stand 6c still needs completion. However, a meter increase in sea level will start to penetrate the upland zone (Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Planning Scenarios). Also, a 1 ½-meter rise will likely impact the upland vegetation to the 1.75-meter grade (Contour (m) 2018).
The current path to the floating dock on Cedar Creek, the main entrance to the new trail system, and the main road in and out of Mattanock Town follow the mine’s old rail cart path (1949 USGS Map; 1937 VIMS Aerial Imagery; Contour (m) 2018). These routes will be maintained, and where they intersect with the adjacent water body are restoration priorities for this proposal.
Cross section depicting the various habitat zones referenced in the data analysis.
High Marsh
Below are the layers used to analyze the high marsh section of the property. The below text will have the layer name referenced in parentheses and in blue.
- Tidal Marsh Inventory 2013
- Mattanock town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022
- 1937 VIMS Aerial Imagery
Tidal flooding and varying salinity tolerances determine salt marshes' vegetation zones (Raposa et al., 2020). The high marsh area is only flooded during extreme high tides and storm events, allowing greater plant diversity than the low marsh (VIMS CCRM, 2023). Unfortunately, these growing conditions are also suitable for non-native species, as demonstrated in the data analysis below. This vegetative zone is a critical habitat for the surrounding ecosystem with the added co-benefit of protecting upland infrastructure from large storms and act as an additional measure for absorbing stormwater runoff (VIMS CCRM, 2023). Some benefits of the high marsh vegetation zone may be lost if non-native plant species dominate marshes.
The invasive strain of Phragmites australis is present within the high marsh zone at Mattanock Town. "The dense monoculture of the non-native P. australis decreases biodiversity resulting in minimal habitat benefits for the surrounding ecosystem" (Allen & Strain, 2013). In addition, the prolific rhizomes outcompete the roots of native wetland grasses and tall stalks shade out any potential regrowth of native plant species (Meyerson et al., 2009). However, research shows that the extensive amount of biomass produced by the non-native P. australis contributes to soil accretion and increases elevation within sections of the marsh where P. australis is present (Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 2020). The increased elevation can make P. australis stands more resilient to sea level rise, and in situations where P. australis is removed without adequate replanting of native wetland vegetation, an increase in shoreline erosion can occur (Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 2020).
Phragmites have been present in North America since the Pliocene period (Meyerson et al., 2009). The rapid expansion over the past century followed the introduction of a strain from Europe that likely was carried over by ballast water in the 1800s (Allen & Strain, 2013). This strain effectively and rapidly displaced the native P. australis to the point of near eradication (Allen & Strain, 2013). Differentiating between the native and non-native strain is difficult. The visual cues are slight and are often interpreted inaccurately. However, The Michigan Department of Natural Resources developed a chart that compares the characteristics of the two strains side by side (See chart below). Further data is needed to determine if the native P. australis is present at Mattanock Town.
Michigan Department of Natural Resources (2020). Figure on page 11. http://lakestatesfiresci.net/docs/deq-ogl-ais-guide-phragbook-212418_7_0.pdf . Accessed by K. Grigsby in November 2022
In 1977, VIMS conducted its first tidal marsh inventory (TMI) for Suffolk, VA. The report concluded that most marshes were healthy and had few invasive plant species (Moore, 1991). The circumstances where invasives were present were due to soil disturbance by human activities (Moore, 1991) and fallen trees during large storm events (Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation, 2007). The area circled in Mattanock Town High Marsh Invasive map below shows a complete removal of the tree canopy (1937 VIMS Aerial Imagery; Mattanock town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022). The 1966 hand-drawn map by a Lone Star employee refers to these sections as “marl ponds refilled with spoil” and “marsh.” Since the map was hand-drawn, it is hard to determine how this information correlates to P. australis. However, the population of P. australis is centralized in the area where the tree canopy was eradicated (1937 VIMS Aerial Imagery; Mattanock town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022).
Map shows two data layers, a 1937 aerial imagery and a tidal marsh inventory of Mattanock Town that was done in 2023. The area shows a P. australis dominant marsh that was once forested. (VIMS, 2017; Grigsby, 2022, Mattanock Town Tidal Marsh Inventory).
Two data sources were used to analyze the rate of the expanse of P. australis within the property boundary (Tidal Marsh Inventory 2013; Mattanock town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022). In 2013 P. australis was the dominant species on 2.06 acres (Tidal Marsh Inventory 2013). 14.16 acres had P. australis present, but the percentage was less than fifty. In 2022 P. australis was the dominant vegetation type on 10.20 acres (Mattanock town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022). From 2013 to 2022, P. australis increased in area by roughly 0.90 acres per year. The rapid expanse is concerning and will make removal cumbersome. In addition, seed banks of P. australis are present in the adjacent marshes along Cedar Creek and throughout the Nansemond River, making the complete removal of P. australis from Mattanock Town unlikely.
Cross section depicting the various habitat zones referenced in the data analysis.
Low Marsh
Below are the layers used to analyze the low marsh section of the property. The below text will have the layer name referenced in parentheses and in blue.
- Mattanock town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022
- Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Planning Scenarios
- 1919 USGS Map
- 1949 USGS Map
- 1937 VIMS Aerial Imagery
- Mean Tide Range
- Upland Plant Species Landward of Berm
- Shoreline Change 1937-2017
- Contour (m) 2018
- Spring Drone Orthoimagery
The mean tide range determines the low marsh zone. The vegetation that dominates this area tolerates twice daily inundation from the adjacent waterbody (VIMS CCRM, 2023). “During low tide, the marsh is exposed, providing food and cover for wetland and terrestrial animals” (VIMS CCRM, 2023). Tidal wetlands are amongst the most valuable ecosystem on earth and are currently under threat due to sea-level rise (Kirwan et al., 2010). Maintaining and growing this habitat is essential to Mattanock Town’s shoreline stability.
Mattanock Town has over a mile of shoreline and 21.81 acres of tidal wetlands (Mattanock town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022). The physical removal of soil and the infrastructure installed by Lone Star's mining operation impacted most of the stability of Mattanock Town's marshes. However, two sections of the shoreline display the most evidence of anthropogenic disturbance and land transformation within the low marsh zone (Mattanock town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022; Shoreline Change 1937-2017). Various historical maps show that one site was once a marl pit, and both were once the only ports on the property used to load marl onto barges (1937 VIMS Aerial Imagery; 1949 USGS Map). Evidence of the infrastructure needed for these ports and marl pits, such as bulkheads, docks, mooring pilings, harbors, and berms, are still present and still play a role in the instability and stability of the shoreline.
For the remainder of the section, "Site 1" will reference the site adjacent to Cedar Creek and "Site 2" the area adjacent to the Nansemond River.
Locate the "Bookmarks" tab to navigate to the various sections of the property.
Due to C. jeffersonius layered within the berm's sediment and secondary successional growth on top of the berm's ridge, Lone Star Mining Company likely dug out the pit and left the edge to create a natural barrier. Historical maps show that tidal wetlands present at Site 1 were relatively narrow even before Lone Star (1919 USGS Map). The increased activity and potential dredging of Cedar Creek by the mine operation likely eradicated the wetland vegetation along this stretch of shoreline. The lack of fringe marsh made the berm more susceptible to erosion and compromised the stability of the tree roots, which increased their likelihood of falling during storm events. As the trees fall, the root ball dislodges a large chunk of the bank, causing erosion along the berm (See image below).
Image showing the main contributing factor to erosion along the mine spoil berm on the channelward side at Site 1.
In addition to the increased erosion rate, the fallen trees also shade out this section of shoreline and cause a steep grade to form along the berm (Contour (m) 2018). Most native and non-native plants within tidal wetlands require full sun exposure and a gradual slope to prosper. Spartina alterniflora, the most common salt marsh plant species in the low marsh zone, has a growing range determined by tidal inundation and by the slope of the shoreline. The growing range is typically from above MLW to Mean High Water (MHW) (Smith et al., 2015), and the target grade is 3:1 or flatter (Hardaway et al., 2017). Site 1's suitable growing range for S. alterniflora is 0.5 m to 2.99 m (VIMS, 2021) (Contour (m) 2018). However, the area is completely shaded (Spring Drone Orthoimagery) (See image below).
Trees shade out most of the section of shoreline along mine spoil berm.
At Site 2, a dilapidated bulkhead still exists, and although it is currently stabilizing the bank, it has gone without routine maintenance since the closing of Lone Star in 1971. Without regular maintenance, bulkheads develop pits on the landward side of the structure. These pits result from the bulkhead deflecting the wave energy, causing undercutting at the base, which leads to holes at the bottom of the structure. As these holes become more prominent, water erodes the land behind the bulkhead, causing pits to form (See image below). These pits will become more prominent with an increase in sea-level rise, and Site 2 will start to see impacts to the shoreline with just a meter increase (Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Planning Scenarios).
Image of the pits that formed landward of the old bulkhead at Site 2.
However, a Spartina cynosuroides dominated marsh has formed channelward, stabilizing the shoreline and is likely slowing down the bulkhead's degradation (Mattanock Town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022; Shoreline Change 1937-2017). Although S. cynosuroides is growing within the high marsh vegetation zone, this plan evaluates it in conjunction with an adjacent offshore S. alterniflora marsh island since the sediment accretion along Site 2 relies on the presence of these marsh islands (Shoreline Change 1937-2017). These marsh islands likely act as a natural offshore breakwater and stabilize the shoreline directly adjacent to Site 2, thus giving it the appropriate elevation for S. cynosuroides to grow. The movement and formation of the islands correlate with the channelward side of the harbor constructed by the mine operation (Shoreline Change 1937-2017). Site 2 was also the primary location for loading and unloading the marl material (1937 VIMS Aerial Imagery). Although the marsh islands act as a natural (Shoreline Change 1937-2017). Stabilizing the marsh islands must be prioritized to maintain a stable shoreline at Site 2.
Cross section depicting the various habitat zones referenced in the data analysis.
Intertidal
Below are the layers used to analyze the intertidal section of the property. The below text will have the layer name referenced in parentheses and in blue.
- Mattanock town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022
- Salinity
- Benthic Bottom
- Fall Drone Orthoimagery
- Mean Tide Range
- Contour (m) 2018
The intertidal habitat zone encompasses the area within the high, middle, and low tides (National Geographic Society, 2022). This data analysis section will focus on the middle and low tide region, “which provides more favorable conditions for organisms that cannot tolerate long periods of air exposure” (National Geographic Society, 2022). Two such species are the Eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica, and the Ribbed Mussel, Geukensia demissa. This restoration proposal significantly focuses on C. virginica and will discuss opportunities and limitations with G. demissa in restoration design. Physically incorporating C. virginica into the restoration design and incorporating restoration practices that are proven to promote G. demissa natural recruitment will strengthen the interconnectivity between habitats, enhance shoreline stability, and strengthen the cultural connection for the Tribe.
Oysters are the architects of the marine environment. In addition to ecosystem services associated with water quality, oyster reefs can be used as a tool to stabilize shorelines and provide essential habitats for juvenile finfish and other bivalve species (Morris, Bilkovic, Boswell, et al., 2019). The name "Chesapeake" is an Algonquin term that roughly translates to "Great Shellfish Bay" (MPNCC, 2016). Colonists used this term for the robust oyster population within the Chesapeake Bay. Ironically, they had no idea that the oysters described as "lay[ing] on the ground as thick as stones" and depicted in later journals as navigational hazards were a potential food source (MPNCC, 2016). Today, the oyster population is roughly one percent of the historical population due to disease, over-harvesting, and lack of suitable substrate (NOAA Fisheries, 2023).
Suitable site conditions for an oyster sill structure (constructed of bagged oyster shell or concrete reef structures) include salinity above eight PPT, a firm bottom, adequate inundation, and low to moderate energy settings (Chesapeake Bay Foundation, 2020). However, the presence of an existing oyster population is the best determinant of oyster viability (Chesapeake Bay Foundation, 2020). A small wild oyster population is present within Cedar Creek adjacent to the floating dock, where large stones are present along the shoreline (See video below). However, there is little evidence of an oyster population directly along the shoreline at Site 1. The lack of substrate for oysters to settle on could be a factor in the low population at Site 1 since they are present directly downstream.
Benthic biomass present along Cedar Creek at Mattanock Town.
At Site 2, oysters are all along the shoreline and can be seen in aerial imagery (Fall Drone Orthoimagery).
Salinity measures within the Nansemond River show downstream salinity ranges of 16-24 PPT(station 06J03) and upstream salinity ranges of 9-15 PPT(station 06J03) (Salinity). Although no station is directly offshore from Mattanock Town, Site 2's salinity range will likely be similar to the neighboring stations. However, Site 1 will need further testing to ensure that median salinity is above eight PPT.
Oysters cannot survive when completely buried in "muddy” conditions, and the sediment type factors into the oyster sill structure used to stabilize the shoreline (Chesapeake Bay Foundation, 2020). Although the sediment at Site 2 is "mud," a quick determinant for the oyster viability and the appropriate substrate is the ability to walk along the shoreline (Benthic Bottom) (State of Maryland, 2015). It is relatively easy to maneuver along the shoreline directly adjacent to Site 2. However, additional data is needed to understand the sediment type bordering the marsh islands. At Site 1, sections of shoreline are relatively easy to walk along, but some areas are not.
A critical threshold for intertidal oyster reef establishment is 50% inundation duration (Morris et al., 2021) (See image below). Studies show that as freeboard decreases, wave attenuation decreases (Morris et al., 2021). In this case, compensating crest height with crest width may provide the requisite wave attenuation goals (Morris et al., 2019). Additional research is needed to determine the ratio between the wave crest height and the width of the sill structure. The marsh islands adjacent to Site 2 may be suitable for gathering this information. However, the nearshore depth and sediment composition are still needed to determine if this is an appropriate test site.
Showing the threshold of oysters growing range between MLW and MHW. This image was taken on the Lynnhaven River.
In low-energy environments, such as Site 1, achieving the target inundation is attainable since the goal of the sill structure is to mimic the natural environment rather than attenuate the wave energy. Spartina alterniflora’s lowest elevation in the adjacent marsh or along the existing shoreline determines the crest height of sill structures in low-energy environments. The mean tide range is slightly over a meter above MLW (Mean Tide Range). To achieve target inundation, the sill height at Site 1 should not exceed 0.5 meters, and S. alterniflora’s lowest average growing elevation is 0.5 meters above MLW (Contour (m) 2018; Mean Tide Range). Based on these calculations, the shoreline at Site 1 can reach target inundation while simultaneously stabilizing the shoreline.
Geukensia demissa mutualistic relationship with S. alterniflora (Bilkovic et al., 2021) and its cultural significance to the Tribe (Bass, 2021) makes this organism an important species to explore in this restoration plan. However, research shows that the recruitment of G. demissa in constructed wetlands is not as robust as in naturally fringing marshes (Bilkovic et al., 2021). The traditional approach to constructing wetlands uses coarse sand and plants in grid patterns. The sand often lacks organic matter, and the grid pattern leaves large gaps between plugs (Bilkovic et al., 2021; Hardaway et al., 2017). The result is a delay in ecosystem development, affecting the survivability of G. demissa in restoration projects (Bilkovic et al., 2021). Although further research is needed to understand the issues with sediment quality, studies have shown that planting S. alterniflora in clusters (or clumps) has resulted in a higher yield in marsh establishment and productivity (Silliman et al., 2015). Using Sites 1 and 2 to compare the recruitment of G. demissa in various planting configurations is an opportunity worth exploring in the final design.
Conceptual Design
This photo shows the hands of multiple generations of Nansemond people holding spat on oyster shells.
Lone Star Cement Corporation’s activities fractured the connection between the upland forest, the high marsh, the low marsh, and the intertidal zones. The Tribe can re-establish these relationships by implementing restoration activities that focus on maximizing native habitats and enhancing coastal resilience. In addition, incorporating various plant and animal species that are important to the Tribe’s culture will strengthen their connection to traditions lost due to greed and cruelty. A direct correlation exists between healing the land and strengthening the Tribe's connection to their heritage. Enhancing this symbiotic relationship will be how Mattanock Town gets restored.
In July 2020, Virginia passed Senate Bill 776 instructing the Virginia Marine Resources Commission "to approve only living shoreline approaches to shoreline stabilization unless the best available science shows that such approaches are not suitable" (S.B. 776, 202). Living shorelines are a proven approach for protecting low-energy, tidal shorelines from erosion by planting native wetland plants (Mitchell & Bilkovic, 2019). Often these natural shoreline designs need some additional protection along the marsh toe. Bioengineered structures such as oyster reefs and coconut fiber logs add that additional wave/tidal engineering damping (Chesapeake Bay Foundation, 2020).
The data analysis in the previous section identified two sites prioritized for restoration at Mattanock Town. The conceptual design section will focus on a proposed living shoreline and riparian buffer restoration project for Site 1. Although Site 2 is equally a priority, additional information, such as sediment type and depth offshore of the marsh islands, is needed before a proposed design can be developed.
JPA Group 2 Permit Maps and Cross Sections for Site 1:
Layouts below were created using the data layers analyzed in the Mattanock Town Past, Present, and Future map. The below maps and cross-sections are designed for a living shoreline Group 2 Joint Permit Application (JPA) and are based on the criteria needed for the permit submission (Virginia Marine Resources Commission, 2022). The current site conditions provide information that permit writers can use to determine the proposed project's impact on existing habitats and be a baseline for monitoring project success. Practitioners can also use the current site conditions data to read the land and determine the best approach for implementing project goals. Success metrics and goals vary with each project and are up to the property owner to determine. In the case of the Site 1 living shoreline and riparian buffer project, the NIN has determined that a successful project will protect and enhance existing native vegetation, remove invasive vegetation, and incorporate oyster habitat.
Maps and cross-sections created for a living shoreline and riparian buffer project at Site 1. All layouts were made in accordance to JPA Group 2 permit regulations. K. Grigsby 2023
The text below will reference the layouts above as well as some of the map layers within the data analysis section. The layouts will be in blue and the map layers will be in green.
Remove Invasives
Phragmites australis that flank one side of Site 1.
A Phragmites australis dominate marsh flanks either side of the proposed project area (Existing Conditions). Although the fallen trees are shading out the native wetland grasses, they also keep P. australis from migrating into this section of the property. For this project to succeed, removing these trees and grading must occur. However, suitable growing conditions for native grasses also mean appropriate growing conditions for P. australis. Completely eradicating P. australis from Cedar Creek will be near impossible. Keeping them from dominating this section of the shoreline will be a constant battle after the project is complete due to the adjacent seed banks. A robust removal, maintenance, and monitoring plan should be discussed and agreed upon with the contractor installing the shoreline or an outside resource specializing in P. australis management. When applying for funding, the Tribe should include maintenance for several years post-construction within the budget for P. australis (Maryland Department of Natural Resources, 2020). This time frame allows native shrubs and small trees, such as Iva frutescens, Baccharis halimifolia, Myrica cerifera, and Myrica pensylvanica, to establish and outcompete P. australis for resources (Maryland Department of Natural Resources, 2020; Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 2014).
Michigan Department of Natural Resources (2020). Figure on page 20. http://lakestatesfiresci.net/docs/deq-ogl-ais-guide-phragbook-212418_7_0.pdf . Accessed by K. Grigsby in November 2022
The Michigan Department of Natural Resources' management strategy for large, dense stands of P. australis is pairing Herbicide treatment with prescribed fire (Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 2014). “In situations where prescribed fire can be implemented safely and effectively, it is a cost-effective and ecologically sound tool to help control P. australis” (Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 2014). Historically, fire has been used by tribal communities to manage and revitalize land (Long et al., 2017; Long et al., 2020). The Karuk Tribe Department of Natural Resources developed a Climate Adaptation Plan highlighting fire's importance in shaping ecosystem function and diversity (Long et al., 2017; Karuk Tribe, 2019). Many tribes in California have “fire-dependent” cultures that rely on cultural burning to increase the quality and quantity of plants (Long et al., 2020). In 2021, the Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge implemented a control burn on the dead stalks of P. australis and paired the burn with herbicide treatment (Shore Daily News, 2021). Additional research is needed to determine if conducting a controlled burn within sections of shoreline where P. australis is present should be considered at Mattanock Town. However, due to the lack of infrastructure adjacent to the project and the cultural symbolism of fire to tribal communities, the P. australis dominant marshes directly adjacent to the proposed project area may be a place to study and test the practice in the local watershed.
Protecting Existing Native Vegetation
The lack of high and low marsh vegetation indicates that the current conditions at Site 1 must be modified to create a living shoreline project (Mattanock Town Tidal Marsh Inventory 2022). The data analysis section identified this area as a mine spoil berm and concluded that the primary source of erosion was fallen trees due to the lack of fringe marsh protecting the bank. The Potential Impact to Riparian Upland data layer showcases the proposed grade based on data layers within the Mattanock Town Past Present and Future map (Contour (m) 2018). Th cross-section drawings showcase the potential volume of material that would need removing or adding to achieve the recommended 3:1 grade (Hardaway et al., 2017).
However, achieving a 3:1 grade along the northwestern section of the shoreline is impossible due to Q. rubra’s proximity to the eroding bank edge and the inability to build the shoreline out channelward due to the depth in the nearshore (Upland Plants Species Along Berm; Contour (m) 2018). Terracing this section of shoreline would balance the need for shoreline protection and saving the existing vegetation. “Terraces are created by installing short walls of wood, stone, or other materials which hold a soil platform and planted” (Florida Living Shorelines, 2023). A1-A2 and B1-B2 cross sections above demonstrate the proposed terrace design. At both demonstrate that the first terrace starts at a little over a meter (or 3’ 9 1/2” as indicated in the drawing) above MLW. A terrace should be installed for every foot of elevation gain after that until the current grade does not require additional stabilization. These cross-sections are conceptual drawings and could change once the Tribe consults with a contractor.
Currently, the cross-sections indicated the terrace material as “to be determined.” Tree trunks have been used for the terrace edge (Stross, 2023). Repurposing the trees removed during the shoreline project would cut down on the cost and would embody the tribal culture of reuse and repurpose. However, the feasibility of reusing the tree trunks must be discussed with the contractor hired to install the project.
The data analysis showed that no trees growing directly on the berm are healthy, and the surviving ones are mostly seedlings that can be transplanted (Upland Plants Species Along Berm) (Topping, 2021). However, rare native trees are landward of the berm and within the project footprint (Upland Plants Species Along Berm) (Topping, 2021). The proximity to the proposed project area and grading could negatively impact the health of these tree species (Potential Impact to Riparian Upland). Permitting agencies will require contractors to implement practices to ensure minor damage. That said, most species marked “Impacted” will be damaged or removed during grading (Potential Impact to Riparian Upland). In that case, mitigation measures will be required by the Suffolk Wetlands Board. Since this is a likely scenario if a living project occurs, a replanting area is proposed in the final conceptual design (Proposed Design).
Incorporate Oyster Habitat
The Nansemond Tribe and other tribal communities were the original oyster farmers and had mastered the fragile balance of meeting community needs while maintaining a healthy oyster population (Bass, 2021). Research shows tribal members would "seed" intertidal oyster reefs with oysters from subtidal parent reefs (Bass, 2021). The mutualistic relationship between the tribe and the surrounding ecosystem stems from their spiritual connection with these habitats (Bass, 2021; Long et al., 2020). Rather than consider these ecosystems as a resource to use, they were part of their community, even family, in some circumstances (Bass, 2021; Long et al., 2020). This perspective and bond instilled a need to implement harvesting practices that promoted the health and productivity of these habitats.
The oysters the NIN grew as part of the Oyster Gardening program with CBF
Current oyster restoration efforts, in some ways, embody the same reverence and care that tribes once bestowed on all habitats. Various levels of restoration have been implemented, from the construction of extensive reefs by the State to community members growing oysters for restoration in their backyards with oyster gardening programs (Chesapeake Bay Foundation, 2023). In 2020, the NIN started oyster gardening with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) and has contributed roughly 1,300 adult oysters to the local reef population since beginning the program (Chesapeake Bay Foundation, personal communication, 2020). Each year, the NIN returns their fostered oysters, and CBF then plants them on sanctuary reefs in other sections of the Nansemond River. Once constructed, the NIN could place the oysters they grow through the oyster gardening program on the oyster sill at Site 1, establishing their sanctuary reef at Mattanock Town.
Shell recycling is another form of oyster restoration that involves volunteers retrieving used oyster shells from restaurants and festivals. Shell recycling is the backbone for many restoration activities, including living shoreline projects. These shells are bagged and cured for six months to a year. Once cured, they are placed in setting tanks for Spat-On-Shell production or along shorelines for stabilization and habitat restoration. There are also community bins all over Hampton Roads to allow residents to recycle their shells. One of these bins is located at Mattanock Town. The shells collected in this bin will be used for the oyster sill at Site 1. The final proposed design has a total length of 103.6 meters (Proposed Design), a maximum height of 0.5 meters, and a width of 0.85 meters (A1-A2; B1-B2; C1-C2; D1-D2; E1-E2). The cross sections also indicate that the channelward row is only two shell bags tall, and both rows are stacked in an alternating pattern to allow for a more uniform configuration (A1-A2; B1-B2; C1-C2; D1-D2; E1-E2). There are ten shell bags every 0.46 meters, which will require 2,266 shell bags to complete the project. CBF staff also estimate that roughly 275 shells are within each bag (Luecke, personal communication, 2023). If this project were to proceed, the NIN would return over six hundred thousand oyster shells to the local ecosystem.
Shell bags also have the potential to adapt to climate change (Milligan et al., 2018). Further research is needed to understand the best practices to consider during project planning to enable adaptation. The alternating stacking would easily allow for additional bags in the future to be placed on top, but other configurations could be more effective. The living shoreline project at Site 1 would be suitable for gathering this information (Sea Level Rise Scenarios).
Nansemond Indian Nation tribal members with their first oyster gardening cage in 2020.
Summary
The restoration of Mattanock Town is a challenge for the ages because it embodies the nearly universal historical, social, and environmental challenges of a troubled past and a precarious future. This plan set out to identify restoration priority areas on the property and develop actionable restoration projects that embodied the Nansemond Indian Nation’s thoughtful and caring culture. This plan also sought to understand the best methods and protocols for implementing a restoration approach that incorporates tribal heritage. In fact, this plan demonstrates that as long as the overall goal is to restore native habitats, a scientific approach and a tribal approach are more alike than different. This plan identified many opportunities that are transferable to other tribal lands and can serve as a blueprint for developing a holistic approach to restoration that embodies both tribal heritage and the need for habitat restoration.
Adaptive management is a term that has become popular and is often associated with restoration projects. However, this idea of learning from the land has always been apart of indigenous cultures. This restoration plan highlights several opportunities to strengthen our knowledge on best practices for climate adaptation and habitat restoration. Currently, one third of land cover is occupied by native or indigenous communities and “91% of that land is in good or fair ecological condition” (Einhorn et al., 2023). Although Mattanock Town is far from a blank slate, it is an opportunity to learn from our mistakes and, as research shows, indigenous stewardship is effective in managing complex natural environments (Einhorn et al., 2023).
This plan also demonstrated that the NIN faces hurdles, past and present, that prevent them from implementing any future projects. Recently, the City of Suffolk denied writing a letter of support to enable the Tribe to get community input on some of the proposed suggestions in this plan. Although this development is discouraging and disheartening, it teaches perseverance lessons. However, in the long history of Mattanock Town, this is one small obstacle. There will be others. It is important to learn from the setbacks and remember to stay focused on the future. And that future is bright as long Mattanock Town is under the Nansemond Indian Nations' care.
K. Grigsby presenting Mattanock Town's Restoration Plan at the Nansemond Indian Nation council meeting.
References
References and supplementary information for Mattanock Town's Restoration Plan can be found on William & Mary's ScholarWorks website. Please see the link below.
