Bull Neck Swamp Preserves
FER Home : The Department : Bull Neck Swamp
Bull Neck Swamp Atlantic White-Cedar Preserve
Much of Bull Neck Swamp was once dominated by Atlantic white cedar (AWC). Continuous logging in the early 1900’s, lack of regeneration efforts, continuous deer browsing and fire suppression are all thought to have caused much of the Atlantic white cedar to be out-competed by various understory shrubs and hardwoods. Ashe (1894) estimated 200,000 acres of AWC in Dare, Hyde, Tyrell and Washington counties in eastern N.C. in the late 19th century. Davis et al. (1997) estimated less than 10,000 acres remaining in all of N.C. by the late 20th century. The below map shows the native range of AWC derived by Little (1971).
The existing AWC preserve on BNS has remained untouched for at least 40 years and some of the remaining trees are thought to be over 80 years old. Although it is believed that a well established seed bed exists on the preserve, the current canopy consists of sparse AWC, loblolly pine, red bay, and red maple. The understory and shrub layer consist of fetterbush, sweetpepperbush, wax-myrtle, gallberry, titi, inkberry, and swamp azalea. Herbs and vines growing in the preserve include blaspheme vine, poison ivy, netted chain fern, royal fern, sedges, whorled pennywort, and lizards tail. Regeneration of AWC is evident along the roadsides where herbicide was applied in 2004 and 2005.
There are a number of management options possible for regenerating AWC, however we need to be cautious of the long and short term effects of each prescription. The existing peat soils eliminate the preserve from being a candidate for any type of thinning or cutting of the existing hardwood species on the tract. Even the least invasive machinery is known to compact peat soils and damage the sensitive root mass of AWC. Also, Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge (PLNWR) found that the windrows left after thinning served as ‘tunnels’ for fire to travel when a prescribed burn was later administered (Stanton 2006, personal communication). Stanton (2006) also found that Arsenal was the only herbicide strong enough to rid the existing competition long enough for AWC to be able to regenerate. The broad-scale application of Arsenal is not compatible with the management objectives of BNS. A number of reptile studies are currently underway at BNS and the long-term effects of Arsenal to reptiles are not yet fully understood. We feel that a prescribed burn would most mimic the natural ecology of the AWC ecosystem. Existing canals and roads around the preserve could serve as firebreaks, reducing our cost of burning. Prescribed burning may have to be supplemented with hand planting of one-year-old seedlings or older transplants depending on regeneration after the prescribed burn. Also, white-tailed deer and rabbit are known to browse on the young seedlings of AWC and measures would have to be taken to prevent such activities. These measures range from installing fencing around the AWC preserve to protecting individual seedlings with constructed tubing (such as tomato caging) until they are old enough to sustain the browsing.