National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Natural Resource Program Center 

Assessment of Water Resources and Watershed 

Conditions in Congaree National Park, South 

Carolina 

Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2010/267 
ON THE COVER 

Researchers at Wise Lake, an oxbow within Congaree National Park 

Photograph by: Michael Mallin 
Assessment of Water Resources and Watershed 

Conditions in Congaree National Park, South 

Carolina 

Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—2010/267 

Michael A. Mallin and Matthew R. McIver 

Center for Marine Science 

University of North Carolina Wilmington 

Wilmington, NC 28409 

December 2010 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

National Park Service 

Natural Resource Program Center

Fort Collins, Colorado 
ii 

The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that 

address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National 

Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and 

environmental constituencies, and the public. 

The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource 

management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse 

audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management 

applicability. 

All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the 

information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended 

audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer 

review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting 

of the data, and whose background and expertise put them on par technically and scientifically with the 

authors of the information. 

Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not 

necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the 

Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or 

recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. 

This report is available in the Reports and Publications section of the Southeast Coast Inventory 

and Monitoring Network webpage (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/secn/) and the Natural 

Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/NRPM). 

Please cite this publication as: 

Mallin, M. A., and M. R. McIver. 2010. Assessment of water resources and watershed conditions 

in Congaree National Park, South Carolina. Natural Resource Report NPS/SECN/NRR—

2010/267. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

NPS 178/106142, November 2010 
iii 

Contents 

Page 

Figures........................................................................................................................................... vii

Tables ............................................................................................................................................. ix

Plates .............................................................................................................................................. xi

Appendices ................................................................................................................................... xiii

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... xv

Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................... xvii

Commonly Used Abbreviations ................................................................................................... xix

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

Park Description.............................................................................................................................. 3

Background .............................................................................................................................. 3

Location, Size, and Boundaries .......................................................................................... 3

History of the Park .............................................................................................................. 4

Creation of the Park ............................................................................................................ 5

Hydrologic Information ........................................................................................................... 6

Rivers .................................................................................................................................. 6

Creeks ................................................................................................................................. 8

Lakes ................................................................................................................................. 12

Wetlands ........................................................................................................................... 15

Hydrology Affecting Congaree National Park. ................................................................ 16

Groundwater Resources .................................................................................................... 19

Biological Resources ............................................................................................................. 20

Algae ................................................................................................................................. 20

Aquatic Macrophytes ........................................................................................................ 20
iv 

Terrestrial Vegetation ....................................................................................................... 21

Rare and Threatened Plant Species ................................................................................... 22

Invasive Plants .................................................................................................................. 23

Zooplankton ...................................................................................................................... 24

Benthic Macroinvertebrates .............................................................................................. 24

Crayfish ............................................................................................................................. 26

Fish .................................................................................................................................... 28

Reptiles and Amphibians .................................................................................................. 31

Mammals........................................................................................................................... 34

Feral hogs .......................................................................................................................... 34

Birds .................................................................................................................................. 37

Rare and Threatened Animal Species ............................................................................... 37

Invasive Animal Species ................................................................................................... 38

Assessment of Park Water Resources ........................................................................................... 39

Sources of Pollutants ............................................................................................................. 39

Congaree National Park and USGS/SCDHEC Watersheds Designation ......................... 39

Point Source Pollution ...................................................................................................... 39

Non-point Source Pollution .............................................................................................. 43

Assessment of Biological Resources with Respect to Water Quality (Both Surface and 

Groundwater) ......................................................................................................................... 48

Water Quality Standards ................................................................................................... 48

Surface Water Quality ....................................................................................................... 48

Groundwater Quality ........................................................................................................ 58

Ecosystem Effects ............................................................................................................. 59

Human Health Issues ........................................................................................................ 62

List of impairments (State and Federal listings) .................................................................... 63
v 

List of Water Bodies with Undocumented Conditions/ Status .............................................. 64

Other Areas of Concern ................................................................................................................ 67

Development Trends .............................................................................................................. 67

Land Use ........................................................................................................................... 67

Surface and Groundwater Withdrawals ............................................................................ 68

Nuisance and Invasive Species ......................................................................................... 69

Physical Impacts ............................................................................................................... 69

Continuous Land Impacts ................................................................................................. 69

Acute Land Impacts in the Park ........................................................................................ 69

Stressors to Congaree National Park Water Bodies .............................................................. 69

Explanation of Stressors ........................................................................................................ 70

Cedar Creek ...................................................................................................................... 70

Toms Creek ....................................................................................................................... 71

Drinking Water Wells ....................................................................................................... 71

Oxbow Lakes .................................................................................................................... 71

Congaree River ................................................................................................................. 71

Wateree River ................................................................................................................... 71

Recommendations for Addressing Impairments, Potential Impacts and Undocumented Water 

Bodies ........................................................................................................................................... 73

Human Health Issues ............................................................................................................. 73

Monitoring Needs .................................................................................................................. 73

Research Needs ...................................................................................................................... 73

Ecosystem Health Needs ....................................................................................................... 75

Community Relations/Cooperation Needs ............................................................................ 75

Annotated Bibliography ................................................................................................................ 77

vii 

Figures 

Page 

Figure 1. 2007 boundary of Congaree National Park, located east of Columbia, South 

Carolina. .......................................................................................................................................... 4

Figure 2. The Santee River Watershed and location of Congaree National Park. ........................ 7

Figure 3. Streams, oxbow lakes, and other water features in and influencing Congaree 

National Park .................................................................................................................................. 9

Figure 4. Bates Fork Tract (also called Fork Swamp) of Congaree National Park, with Bates 

Old River along the eastern border. .............................................................................................. 12

Figure 5. Oxbow lakes, ponds, and other named water features in a portion of Congaree 

National Park. ............................................................................................................................... 14

Figure 6. Land use within the Congaree and Wateree River Watersheds .................................... 41

Figure 7. Location of NPDES dischargers and SCDHEC water sampling sites within or near 

Congaree National Park, SC. ........................................................................................................ 42

Figure 8. Location of permitted livestock production facilities (CAFOs) in watersheds 

impinging upon Congaree National Park (see Appendix C for map details). .............................. 44

Figure 9. Location of SCDHEC active sampling sites near CONG that have data detailed on 

various Tables in this report, and Superfund sites that are on the EPA National Priorities List .. 47

Figure 10. Regression equation predicting Cedar Creek turbidity at CONGccbr site using 

USGS-generated stream gage height in Cedar Creek Station 02169672, July 18 – August 14, 

2008............................................................................................................................................... 52

 

ix 

Tables 

Page 

Table 1. Current and potential stressors that are affecting or may affect Congaree National 

Park habitats. ................................................................................................................................. xv

Table 2. Geomorphologic and hydrologic characteristics of streams impacting Congaree 

National Park ................................................................................................................................ 10

Table 3. Impact of Congaree River discharge (as computed at Columbia, data 1973-1982) 

on flooding within the main body of Congaree National Park ..................................................... 16

Table 4. Plant Species of Concern within Congaree National Park listed by the State of 

South Carolina; main section of the park only.............................................................................. 23

Table 5. Partial exotic and/or invasive plant species found in Congaree National Park. ............. 23

Table 6. Taxonomic richness by family, genus and species for five insect orders found in 

Congaree National Park, 2002-2003 ............................................................................................. 25

Table 7. Benthic macroinvertebrate species richness by location as sampled ............................. 25

Table 8. Crayfish species collected with Congaree National Park, January – December 2005 ... 27

Table 9. Mussels collected within Congaree National Park ......................................................... 27

Table 10. Fish species collected in Congaree National Park between 1999 and 2002 and 

collection location. ........................................................................................................................ 30

Table 11. Amphibian taxa verified from Congaree National Park .............................................. 32

Table 12. Reptile taxa verified from Congaree National Park. .................................................... 33

Table 13. Mammals certified or considered to be probably present at Congaree National 

Park ............................................................................................................................................... 36

Table 14. Land use by percent coverage in the watersheds impacting Congaree National 

Park ............................................................................................................................................... 44

Table 15. Congaree River water quality, collected at the west edge of Congaree National 

Park; SCDHEC Station C-074.. .................................................................................................... 50

Table 16. Congaree River water quality, 3/74 – 6/97, collected at Highway 601; SCDHEC 

Station C-007. ............................................................................................................................... 51
x 

Table 17. Cedar Creek water quality as recorded by NPS-operated in-situ instrumentation 

CONGccbr, August 9, 2006 – August 15, 2008, 30 minute intervals (missing data from 

February 19 – May 14, 2008). .................................................................................................... 51

Table 18. Cedar Creek water quality collected at USGS gauging platform near S-40-734; 

SCDHEC Station C-075. .............................................................................................................. 54

Table 19. Cedar Creek water quality, 1/96 – 3/97, collected 500 ft. downstream from 

junction of Reeves and Myers Creeks with Cedar Creek ............................................................. 54

Table 20. Toms Creek water quality, 1/96 – 3/97. Data presented as mean + standard 

deviation / range / median. ............................................................................................................ 55

Table 21. Lower Toms Creek water quality, 2/96 – 11/97, collected in creek just before it 

enters the Congaree River within Congaree National Park. ......................................................... 56

Table 22. Weston Lake water quality, 1/96 – 3/97, collected within Congaree National Park. .. 57

Table 23. Wise Lake water quality, 1/96 – 3/97, collected within Congaree National Park. ...... 57

Table 24. Bates Old River water quality, 1/96 – 3/97, collected within Congaree National 

Park. .............................................................................................................................................. 57

Table 25. Wateree River water quality collected 2.5 km upstream of confluence with the 

Congaree River; SCDHEC Station CW-222/SC-002. .................................................................. 58

Table 26. Freshwater guideline values for sediment metals and organic pollutant 

concentrations (ppm, or g/g, dry wt.) potentially harmful to aquatic life, based on 

consensus (MacDonald et al. 2000). ............................................................................................. 61

Table 27. Locations near or in Congaree Park where sediment metals have been found in 

potentially toxic concentrations according to estuarine guidelines .............................................. 61

Table 28. Water bodies located upstream and near Congaree National Park that are 

considered impaired and are on the South Carolina 303(d) list, including the reason and 

target date for completed TMDL. ................................................................................................. 65

Table 29. Current and potential stressors that are affecting or may affect Congaree National 

Park habitats. ................................................................................................................................. 70

Table B-1. Channel types found within Congaree National Park. ............................................... 91

Table C-1. Species list of aquatic benthic macroinvertebrates from five insect orders in 

Congaree National Park ................................................................................................................ 93

Table D-1. List of permitted animal production facilities in the five 11-digit hydrologic 

units surrounding Congaree National Park, with facility name underneath descriptors ............. 103 
xi 

Plates 

Page 

Plate 1. Boardwalk within Congaree Park showing flooding high water mark. ............................ 3

Plate 2. Dike formerly used to protect cattle and agricultural areas from flooding. Such 

dikes and cattle mounts are found in several locations in Congaree National Park. ...................... 5

Plate 3. The Congaree River at southwest corner of Congaree National Park. .............................. 8

Plate 4. Cedar Creek (left) contains a canoe launch and trail and is designated an 

Outstanding National Resource Water by the State of South Carolina. Tom’s Creek (right) 

is one of several creeks draining into the park from the northern border. It is listed as 

impaired waters by the SCDHEC for fecal coliform bacteria pollution and an impaired 

biological community. .................................................................................................................. 10

Plate 5. Bates Old River borders the Bates Fork Tract in Congaree National Park ..................... 11

Plate 6. Weston Lake (left), accessible by the boardwalk, and Wise Lake (right) are two 

significant oxbow lakes within Congaree Park. .......................................................................... 13

Plate 7. Typical wetland area within Congaree National Park. .................................................... 15

Plate 8. Gut in Congaree National Park. ...................................................................................... 17

Plate 9. Mid-channel view of the Congaree River. ...................................................................... 18

Plate 10. Congaree National Park is known for unusually tall trees of many species. ................ 22

Plate 11. A – hog wallow, B – feral hog rooting area, C – feral hog rooting causes stream 

turbidity increases, D – USDA feral hog research program utilizes traps in Bates Fork Tract. ... 35

xiii 

Appendices 

Page 

Appendix A. Individuals Providing Information Through Interviews During the Preparation 

of this Report................................................................................................................................. 89

Appendix B. Channel Types within Congaree National Park ...................................................... 91

Appendix C. Aquatic Benthic Macroinvertebrate Species at Congaree National Park ................ 93

Appendix D. Permitted Animal Production Facilities ................................................................ 103

xv 

Executive Summary 

The purpose of this report was to locate and examine existing information pertaining to the water 

quality in and around Congaree National Park (CONG), assess the present and likely future 

water conditions of the park, and make recommendations to fill in existing information gaps. 

Water quality and quantity, habitat issues, potential for invasive species, and trends in park 

resource usage are addressed. 

The body of this report details water quality issues impacting the rich aquatic resources within 

CONG. The most pressing issues are termed stressors, and are displayed below (Table 1) for 

each of the major water systems within or impacting humans, wildlife or the ecosystems within 

CONG. More detail explaining the table’s conclusions is provided subsequently. 

Water quality within CONG is generally good, but there are several current and potential 

problems that should be either noted or addressed and in some cases investigated further (Table 

1). Upper Cedar Creek where it enters the park is generally considered to have excellent water 

quality. However, other research has shown lower Cedar Creek near Wise Lake to have elevated 

fecal bacteria counts; this is a human health concern. SCDHEC lists several areas adjoining the 

park as impaired for use. These include Toms Creek (impaired for high fecal coliform counts 

and, as previously noted, impaired biological community); the Congaree River at the west 

boundary of the park (impaired for high fecal coliform counts), and the Congaree River near the 

Bates Fork Tract at Highway 601 (impaired for high fecal coliform counts and elevated copper). 

Clearly, source tracking of fecal bacteria inputs are a major research need for CONG. In 

addition there is a fish consumption advisory for various species in the area due to mercury 

contamination. Various studies collectively indicate that there may be a problem with elevated 

metals in water and sediments of the park. 

Table 1. Current and potential stressors that are affecting or may affect Congaree National Park habitats 

(reprinted from Table 29 within the text) [EP – existing problem, OK – low or no problem, PP – potential 

problem, ND – no data to make judgment]. 

Stressor Cedar Creek Toms Creek Wellwater Oxbows Congaree 

River Wateree River

Algal Blooms OK OK OK EP OK OK 

Toxic Algae OK OK OK PP OK OK 

Nutrient Loading OK OK OK PP PP PP 

Excessive Nitrate OK OK OK OK OK OK 

Hypoxia OK OK OK EP OK OK 

Sedimentation OK OK OK OK PP PP 

Turbidity PP OK OK OK PP PP 

Erosion PP PP OK OK OK OK 

Fecal Bacteria PP EP OK OK EP OK 

Excessive Metals PP PP OK EP EP EP 

Toxic Compounds OK PP OK ND OK ND 

Invasive Species EP EP OK EP OK OK 

Habitat Disruption EP EP OK EP OK OK 
xvi 

The Congaree and Wateree Rivers are subject to increases in turbidity after rainy periods. 

Recent NPS-generated data has shown that increases in turbidity also occur in Cedar Creek. 

Some of these appear to be linked to elevated stream discharge in Cedar Creek, the Congaree 

River, or both. As Cedar Creek has been designated as Outstanding National Resource Waters 

this turbidity issue bears further investigation. 

The creeks contain low nutrient loads and do not suffer from low dissolved oxygen problems. 

However, data collected by USGS found periods of near-anoxia in some of the park’s oxbow 

lakes. Additionally, these oxbows are subject to algal blooms, including blue-green algal 

(Cyanobacterial) blooms. Algal blooms can be a cause of low dissolved oxygen problems 

through creation of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). Since flooding brings river-borne 

nutrients into the oxbows, these contributions to oxbow lake ecosystem function are of great 

importance, and limnological investigations of the oxbows are needed. 

Operation of the Saluda River Dam upstream of the park impacts Congaree River gage heights 

and the periodicity and duration of floodplain flooding within CONG. The impacts on park 

ecosystems are incompletely understood; thus research on dam operational impacts on CONG 

are needed. This would be best accomplished within a stakeholder framework as discussed 

within. 

Editors Note: This assessment is based on the state of Congaree National Park in 2007. 

However, research on the natural resources of Congaree National Park is ongoing and the park 

has acquired additional lands since this report was initially prepared. Background information 

on the resources present (or thought to be present) within the park has been updated to reflect 

the most current data available, but in many cases (particulary with regard to park boundaries), 

we have presented information on the state of the park at the time the assessment was conducted. 
xvii 

Acknowledgments 

This study was funded by the National Park Service, Southeast Coast Network. Dr. Theresa 

Thom of NPS was particularly helpful in providing on-site information to the authors, as was Bill 

Hulsander and Dr. David Shelley. Dr. W.D. Webster graciously provided park mammal 

information to the authors. Dr. Jeannie Eidelson of SCDHEC was most helpful in proving 

information on permitted animal production facilities, and Dr. Vernon Beaty of SCDHEC for 

facilitating our access to SCHEC and STORET data files. We thank Eva DiDonato, Joe DeVivo 

and Dr. Christina Wright of the National Park Service and Dr. JoAnn Burkholder of North 

Carolina State University for facilitation and many helpful review comments. Brent Blakely, 

intern with NPS, provided a number of excellent GIS-based maps. Tara Anderson of UNC 

Wilmington provided help with data gathering. This project was submitted to the Southeast 

Coast I&M Network (SECN) through the Piedmont-South Atlantic Coast and South Florida & 

Caribbean Cooperative Ecosystem studies Group, Task Agreement No: J2114 05 0033, 

Cooperative Agreement No. H5000 02 0433. 

xix 

Commonly Used Abbreviations 

BOD – biological oxygen demand 

BOD5 –five-day biological oxygen demand 

CAFO – concentrated animal feeding operation 

CFS – cubic feet per second 

CFU – colony-forming units 

CONG – Congaree National Park 

DO – dissolved oxygen 

EPA – United States Environmental Protection Agency 

EPT Index – Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera Index 

GPD – gallons per day 

ha – hectares 

Kjeldahl nitrogen – the sum of organic nitrogen, ammonia (NH3), and ammonium (NH4+) 

m – meter 

MGD – million gallons per day 

mg/L – milligrams per liter (= parts per million) 

μg/L – micrograms per liter (= parts per billion) 

N – nitrogen 

North Carolina Biotic Index (BI) 

NPS – National Park Service 

NPDES – National Pollution Discharge Elimination System 

NTU – Nephelometric turbidity units 

ORW – Outstanding Resource Waters as designated by the state of South Carolina General 

Assembly 

ONRW – Outstanding National Resource Waters as designated by the state of South Carolina 

General Assembly 

P – Phosphorus 

SAV – submersed aquatic vegetation 

SC – South Carolina 

SCDHEC – South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 

SCDNR – South Carolina Department of Natural Resources 

STORET – short for STOrage and RETrieval Data Warehouse for water quality data 

WWTP – Waste Water Treatment Plant 

1 

Introduction 

Congaree National Park (CONG) preserves one of the largest intact stands of old-growth 

bottomland forest in the United States. CONG is known both nationally and internationally for 

its ecological uniqueness. As such, it has received a number of special designations attesting to 

its importance as a natural feature. The park contains approximately 24,230 acres (9,806 ha) of 

land, and is located in Richland County, on the South Carolina coastal plain, about 20 miles (32 

km) southeast of the City of Columbia. There are two sections to the park currently owned by 

NPS, though both are included within a larger contiguous area authorized for acquisition. The 

main area where the Old-Growth Bottomland Forest Research and Education Center is located 

stretches along the Congaree River for approximately 10 miles and receives drainage from two 

major creek systems, Cedar Creek (designated as an Outstanding National Resource Water by 

the state of South Carolina) and Toms Creek. At the juncture of the Congaree and Wateree 

Rivers lies the Bates Fork Tract, added to the park in 2005. Much of the park is forested wetland 

that is flooded by the rivers to some degree several times a year, and the majority of the park is 

flooded on average about once per year. Besides the creek systems mentioned above, other 

water features in the park include oxbow lakes, ponds, guts and sloughs. The surface water 

bodies within CONG other than Cedar Creek have been designated Outstanding Resource 

Waters by the State of South Carolina. There is an upper aquifer with seeps forming wetlands in 

the northeast corner of the park, and a deeper aquifer from which drinking water is pumped 118 

ft. (36 m) and chlorinated. 

A diverse and unique flora characterizes CONG. The park is known for hosting champion trees, 

which are the largest individuals known for a species (25 species so noted at the time of 

preparation of this report). There are no Federally-listed Threatened or Endangered plant species 

currently within CONG. There are ten plant species that are listed as Species of Concern by the 

State of South Carolina. Based on park-certified data of vascular plant species at CONG, 

researchers have found 74 plant species that were either exotic (i.e. alien species not native to the 

U.S.) or invasive (alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or 

environmental harm or harm to human health). They noted two species in particular that should 

be monitored for spreading: kudzu (Pueraria lobata) and Japanese climbing fern (Lygodium 

japonicum). There is no comprehensive information available on aquatic macrophyte or 

phytoplankton communities. 

Some faunal groups within CONG have been well-characterized by researchers. Various 

research and monitoring efforts have found that the benthic macroinvertebrate community of 

upper Cedar Creek as it enters the park reflects excellent water quality, but lower Cedar Creek 

near Wise Lake is periodically degraded. The South Carolina Department of Health and 

Environmental Control (SCDHEC) has listed Toms Creek as impaired for the state of its 

biological community. The mussel community of the streams within CONG and the adjoining 

Congaree River contains several species that are listed as Federal or State species of concern, and 

one invasive species, the Asiatic clam (Corbicula sp.), is exotic. At least 56 fish species 

belonging to 17 families have been collected in CONG. A study by the United States Geological 

Survey (USGS) concluded that the fish community of most stations they sampled (with the 

exception of upper Cedar Creek) should be rated as poor. There is a high taxonomic richness of 

reptiles and amphibians within this park. Numerous birds (at least 191 species) have been 

observed at CONG, and it is listed as a Globally Important Bird Area by the American Bird 
2 

Conservatory. There is an extensive mammal list for the park; however, the feral hog Sus scrofa

is abundant and causes considerable habitat damage in many areas of the park through its rooting 

activities. These animals may also be a source of fecal microbial contamination and suspended 

sediment to park waters. 

The purpose of this report was to locate and examine existing information pertaining to the water 

quality in and around CONG, assess the present and likely future water conditions of the park, 

and make recommendations to fill in existing information gaps. Water quality and quantity, 

habitat issues, potential for invasive species, and trends in park resource usage are addressed. 
3 

Park Description 

Background 

Location, Size, and Boundaries 

Congaree National Park preserves the largest intact stand of old growth bottomland forest in the 

southeastern United States (Plate 1). The park, which contains approximately 24,230 acres (9,806 

ha) of land, including approximately 11,000 acres of old-growth, is located in Richland County, on 

the South Carolina coastal plain, about 20 miles (32 km) southeast of the City of Columbia (Figure 

1). It is most easily accessed from Columbia via S.C. 48 or from the east by exiting U.S. 601 to S.C. 

48, from which Old Bluff Road can be accessed either from the east or west. The National Park 

Service road is entered from Old Bluff Road. The main portion of the park is located along and just 

above the floodplain of the Congaree River, and a smaller, more recently added section is the Bates 

Fork Tract (2,395 acres, or 969 ha), on the Wateree River to the east. The main portion of the park 

runs along the north bank of the Congaree River for about 10 miles (16 km), and varies in width 

from the river bank inland between, 1.8 to 3.5 miles, or 2.5 to 5 km (Knowles et al. 1996), while the 

Bates Fork Tract runs along the Wateree River for about four miles (6.4 km), and borders the 

Congaree River where it joins the Wateree River. This National Park is under the jurisdiction of the 

U.S. National Park Service (NPS), and there is a Park Office on-site (http://www.nps.gov/cong). 

The coordinates of the Harry Hampton Visitor's Center parking lot are N33.83031, W80.82343

(WSG 84 datum). Presently the NPS maintains the Harry Hampton Visitor's Center and museum, 

the Old-Growth Bottomland Forest Research and Education Center (the Learning Center), a 

Maintenance Facility and Fire Building and a lower and upper boardwalk trail totaling 2.4 miles, or 

3.9 km (Plate 1), and five other trails in the wooded areas (NPS 2004; NPS undated); with 

approximately 20 miles (32 km) of trails in CONG. 

Plate 1. Boardwalk within Congaree Park showing flooding high water mark. Photo by M. Mallin. 
4 

Figure 1. 2007 boundary of Congaree National Park, located east of Columbia, South Carolina. 

History of the Park 

In pre-European times the Congaree River and its floodplain were fished and hunted by the 

Congaree Indians, who were decimated by a smallpox epidemic apparently brought to the region 

along with European settlers in the 1700s (NPS undated). Subsequently some farming was 

attempted on the floodplain with poor success; livestock raising did better (Lockhart 2006). 

Since flooding by the river is relatively frequent, in the early to mid 1800s dikes (Plate 2) and 

raised areas called cattle mounts were built by slave labor on the floodplain to protect livestock 

during floods (Lockhart 2006). Six cattle mounts have been listed in the National Register of 

Historic Places (Lockhart 2006). Besides remnant cattle mounts and dikes, there is some 

evidence of past agricultural activities such as drainage ditches, fence rows and old road beds 

found within current old-growth forest areas (Jones 1997). During the period 1895 to 1905 the 

Congaree area was purchased by Francis Beidler, whose company, the Santee River Cypress 

Lumber company, began limited logging operations (NPS 2006). During this period bald 

cypress (Taxodium distichum) was extensively harvested (Jones 1997). Difficulties in logging 

the wetlands and a sense of conservationism led to Beidler’s discontinuing logging operations in 

the Congaree floodplain around 1910-1915, and the area was mainly leased to hunting clubs for 

the next several decades (Lockhart 2006). A conservationist named Harry Hampton began a 

campaign to protect the Congaree floodplain’s ecosystems in the 1950s. However, in 1969 

logging, re-established by Francis Beidler II, again threatened the area due to increases in timber 

prices (NPS 2006; NPS undated). 
5 

Plate 2. Dike formerly used to protect cattle and agricultural areas from flooding. Such dikes and cattle 

mounts are found in several locations in Congaree National Park. Photo by M. Mallin.

Creation of the Park 

Because of the logging threat to the area’s giant trees in the early 1970s, a public campaign to 

save the trees led Congress to establish Congaree Swamp National Monument in 1976 through 

Public Law 94-545. With Public Law 108-108 Congress changed the park’s name in 2003 to 

Congaree National Park and expanded the park’s authorized boundary to 21,666 acres (8,768 

ha). In 2005, 2,564 acres (1,038 ha) were purchased and added to the park (the Bates Fork 

Tract); this acreage being located along the Wateree River where it joins the Congaree River to 

the east of the main portion of the park (Figure 1). The present Harry Hampton Visitor’s Center 

was completed in 2001, and the Old-Growth Bottomland Forest Research and Education Center 

was completed in 2004. 

Special Designations of the Park 

CONG is known both nationally and internationally for its ecological uniqueness. As such, it 

has received a number of special designations attesting to its importance as a natural feature. 

 August 25, 1974: The area was designated a Natural National Landmark by the U.S. 

Secretary of the Interior. 

 June 30, 1983: The monument was declared an International Biosphere Reserve by the 

United National Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 
6 

 October 24, 1988: The monument was designated a Wilderness by the U.S. Congress. 

 July 26, 2001: The monument was designated a Globally Important Bird Area by the 

American Bird Conservatory. 

 May 31, 2006: The waters within Congaree were reclassified as “Outstanding Resource 

Waters” and portions of Cedar Creek were reclassified as “Outstanding National 

Resource Waters” by the South Carolina General Assembly (State Register Document 

No. 3025, Amendment of R.61-69). The Cedar Creek designation was the first such 

designation of its kind for South Carolina waters. 

The Outstanding Resource Waters classification specifically includes the portions of water 

bodies beginning at the borders of CONG including Cedar Creek to Wise Lake, Dry Branch to 

Weston lake, McKenzie Creek to Toms Creek, Myers Creek to Cedar Creek, Running Lake 

Creek to Toms Creek, Toms Creek to Cedar Creek, entire Weston Lake, entire Wise Lake, entire 

Bates Old River (described in the regulation as Old Dead River) and unnamed creeks, ponds or 

lakes entirely within the park. The legislation denotes as ONRW the portion of Cedar Creek 

beginning at Wise Lake to its confluence with the Congaree River. 

Hydrologic Information 

Mean annual rainfall in Columbia is approximately 47 inches (127 cm), ranging between 34 and 

53 inches, or 86 and 134 cm (Patterson et al. 1985). While rainfall is often highest in summer, 

evapotranspiration is also highest then and limits runoff into streams and the rivers. 

Rivers 

CONG lies within the Santee River Watershed, which at 7,020 miles2 (18,182 km2 – Knowles et 

al. 1996) is the largest watershed in South Carolina (Figure 2). It begins in North Carolina as the 

Catawba River, which becomes the Wateree River as it leaves Lake Wateree in South Carolina 

(Figure 2). Including the Lake Wateree system there are four hydroelectric facilities and one 

thermoelectric facility along the Catawba River (SCDHEC 2007). The 6th order Congaree River 

itself (Plate 3) begins in Columbia, where it is formed by the Saluda and Broad Rivers at the fall 

line (the Piedmont-Coastal Plain boundary). The Broad River upstream of Columbia is regulated 

to a degree by the presence of at least 10 hydroelectric facilities and two thermoelectric power 

plants (SCDHEC 2007). The Congaree joins the Wateree River about 80 km (50 miles) 

downstream to form the Santee River, which flows into Lakes Marion and Moultrie. Those 

reservoirs, respectively, are drained into the Atlantic Ocean by the Santee and Cooper Rivers. 

Mean annual discharge rates for the Congaree and Wateree Rivers are 9,147 and 6,215 ft3/s (259 

and 176 m3

/s), respectively, while discharge for the Santee is approximately 11,618 ft3/s or 329 

m3/s (Sexton 1999). Based on a common sinuosity index (channel length/downvalley length), 

the Congaree and Wateree Rivers, with index values of 1.75 and 1.73, respectively, are 

considered good examples of meandering rivers, while an index value of 1.37 makes the upper 

Santee more of a straight river (Sexton 1999). Meanders are common in lowland southeastern 

U.S. rivers, and important in that through erosion they remove and transport accreted sediment 

from floodplains downstream (Hupp 2000). Depths of the Congaree River range from 3-5 m 

(10-16 ft) whereas in the Wateree depth ranges from 2-3 m (6.5-10 ft) except for some deep 
7 

areas that reach 6 m (20 ft); the Santee River is deeper than both, with the channel ranging from 

5-7 m, or 16-23 ft (Sexton 1999). 

Figure 2. The Santee River Watershed and location of Congaree National Park. 
8 

Plate 3. The Congaree River at southwest corner of Congaree National Park. Photo by M. Mallin. 

Creeks 

The main section of CONG receives the inflow from several streams, including Cedar Creek, 

Dry Branch, Toms Creek and McKenzie Creek (Figure 3, Plate 4). Cedar Creek is the most 

prominent inflowing stream to the park, entering in the northwestern corner of the park. It is a 

5th order stream that averages about 23 ft (7 m) in width as it enters the park and for much of its 

length; however, near where it enters Wise Lake it broadens to about 125 ft (38 m) in width 

(Maluk and Abrahamsen 1999). As mentioned above, this creek has been reclassified as 

“Outstanding National Resource Waters” by the South Carolina General Assembly. Woody 

snags are an important habitat in this stream (Smock et al. 1985), with about 22-27% of the 

bottom containing such material (Maluk and Abrahamsen 1999). Before entering the park it 

drains a catchment of approximately 35 miles2 (90 km2

); by the time it reaches Wise Lake in the 

middle of the park this drainage area increases to 71 miles2

 (184 km2), or (Maluk and 

Abrahamsen 1999). Upstream of the park Cedar Creek is fed by several tributaries, 2nd order 

Myers Creek, 3rd order Cabin Branch (which joins Myers Creek), and 3rd order Horsepen Branch 

(Table 2, Figure 3). 
9 

Figure 3. Streams, oxbow lakes, and other water features in and influencing Congaree National Park 

(note that the area referred to as Fork Swamp is now called the Bates Fork Tract). 

Dry Branch, a 3rd order stream, enters the midsection of the park from the north (Figure 3). To 

the east of this creek, 4th order Toms Creek (Plate 4) enters the park, with its 3rd order tributary 

McKenzie Creek also entering the park to the east of Toms Creek. Another tributary to Toms 

Creek, 2nd order Ray Branch, joins Toms Creek before it enters the park (Figure 3). Near its 

entrance to the park Toms Creek is 20-23 ft wide (6-7 m) wide and about 2.6 ft (0.8 m) deep 

(Table 2). Toms Creek drains a catchment of approximately 39 mi2 (100 km2) (Maluk and 

Abrahamsen 1999). The floodplain area for both Cedar and Toms Creeks within the park 

extends beyond 50 m (164 ft) from the stream bank in either direction (Maluk and Abrahamsen 

1999). Collectively, the creeks within the park meander considerably, joining and separating 

before entering the Congaree River (Figure 3). These are all blackwater creeks, which are 

characterized by darkly stained water from floodplain vegetation leachate, somewhat acidic 

waters, and elevated dissolved organic carbon content (Myer 1990). Just to the east of the main 

park is Running Creek/Running Lake (which enters present park lands and joins Toms Creek) 

and Griffins Creek and Singleton Creek lying in an area that may be a future park acquisition. 
10 

Plate 4. Cedar Creek (left) contains a canoe launch and trail and is designated an Outstanding National 

Resource Water by the State of South Carolina. Tom’s Creek (right) is one of several creeks draining into 

the park from the northern border. It is listed as impaired waters by the SCDHEC for fecal coliform 

bacteria pollution and an impaired biological community.

Table 2. Geomorphologic and hydrologic characteristics of streams impacting Congaree National Park 

(modified from Knowles et al. (1996), and Maluk and Abrahamsen (1999).* 

Stream or tributary (stream order) 

 (Strahler system) 

Total Length 

(miles) 

Length in Park

(miles) 

Mean Depth 

(feet) 

Mean Width 

(feet) 

Cedar Creek (5) 25.8 14.0 5.0 22.3 

 Myers Creek (2) 6.3 0.0 3.0 30.5 

 Cabin Branch (3) 5.8 0.0 

 Horsepen Branch (3) 0.9 0.0 

 Goose Branch (2) 4.5 0.0 

 Reeves Branch (1) 3.6 0.0 

 Dry Branch (3) 10.8 0.4 

Toms Creek (4) 13.5 1.8 2.6 22.0 

 McKenzie Creek (3) 5.4 0.6 

 Ray Branch (2) 2.7 0.0 

*Order and length from Knowles et al. (1996); mean depths and widths from stations sampled by Maluk and 

Abrahamsen (1999). 

Major creeks do not impact the Bates Fork Tract. However, the northwest border of the tract is 

formed by Bates Old River (also referred to as Old Dead River in some maps), which is an 

abandoned Congaree River channel cutoff in 1852 (Dr. David Shelley, NPS, personal 

communication; Figure 4, Plate 5). 
11 

Plate 5. Bates Old River borders the Bates Fork Tract in Congaree National Park. Photo by M. Mallin.
12 

Figure 4. Bates Fork Tract (also called Fork Swamp) of Congaree National Park, with Bates Old River 

along the eastern border. 

Lakes 

Oxbow lakes are seen primarily in southeastern lowland areas of the U.S. They are formed when 

a meandering river channel loop is cut off. This straightens the channel and leaves behind an 

oxbow lake (Hupp 2000). There are two well known such lakes in the park, Wise and Weston 

Lakes, and other that are less accessible (Figures 3-5). Weston Lake is accessible to pedestrians 

via the raised boardwalk that extends from the Visitor’s Center to the lake and returns to the 

Visitors Center (Figure 1). Wise Lake is accessible by a roadway (Sim’s Trail) that becomes 

submerged during the periodic flooding that CONG experiences. Weston Lake is about 2.02 

acres (0.82 ha) in size, whereas Wise Lake is about 5.54 acres (2.24 ha) in size (Ryan 2007). As 

are the creeks, these lakes are blackwater systems (Plate 6). 
13 

Plate 6. Weston Lake (left), accessible by the boardwalk, and Wise Lake (right) are two significant oxbow 

lakes within Congaree Park. Wise Lake is accessible via a road and trail.

There are numerous water bodies scattered throughout the park (Cely, 2004). Besides Wise and 

Weston Lakes there are seven other named lakes and 25 named ponds (Figure 5). There are also 

14 named sloughs, which are swampy areas that hold water for a period after flooding subsides, 

and are additional wildlife habitat (Maliszewski 2005). Because of the poor accessibility to most 

of the water features, the majority of lentic biotic (fish and invertebrate) surveys have been 

limited to Wise and Weston Lakes. There are at least two oxbow lakes in the Bates Fork tract, 

neither of which is presently accessible by vehicle, as well as Bates Old River (Plate 5). 
14 

Figure 5. Oxbow lakes, ponds, and other named water features in a portion of Congaree National Park. 
15 

Wetlands 

CONG consists largely of forested bottomland wetlands (Plates 1 and 7; Figures 3 and 4). Two 

estimates of total wetland coverage within the main portion of CONG include 20,269 acres 

(91.3% of the area) from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory, and 

21,245 acres (95.7% of the area) from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource 

Conservation Service (SCDNR 1995). The river surface and stream channels within the park are 

within the 90 and 100 ft (27.4 and 30.5 m) elevation contours. The park offices and visitor’s 

center are located along a bluff at approximately the 120 ft (36.6 m) contour. Regular seasonal 

flooding typically reaches the 110 ft (33.5 m) contour (Plate 1). Approximately 90% of the main 

area of the park is flooded primarily from the Congaree River on average once per year, with 

lesser portions of the park flooded several times per year (Patterson et al. 1985). Besides the 

creeks, oxbow lakes and ponds mentioned above, other wet areas include guts, which are low 

areas usually containing standing water that become conduits for river water during flood periods 

(Plate 8). Sloughs, as mentioned, are swampy areas that hold water periodically. A complex 

web of various types of channels called scroll complex channels, batture channels, backswamp 

channels and crevasse channels distributes water and sediment throughout CONG; these have 

been classified by Shelly and Meitzen (2005) as cited in Shelly et al. (2008) with detailed 

information presented in Appendix A. In upland areas of the park there are seeps from the upper 

aquifer that create bog areas that support wetland vegetation, primarily an overstory of swamp 

tupelo Nyssa biflora and an understory of sedges dominated by Carex spp. (high species 

richness; 47 species within CONG), in non-flood periods (Gaddy et al. 2000). 

Plate 7. Typical wetland area within Congaree National Park. Photo by M. Mallin.
16 

Hydrology Affecting Congaree National Park. 

The main portion of the CONG ecosystem is extensively influenced hydrologically, both from 

creeks entering CONG and water from the Congaree River (Figures 3 and 4). The degree of 

flooding within the main portion of CONG is controlled by Congaree River discharge (Table 3). 

Gage height for the Congaree River near CONG (Station 02169625) is accessible for the USGS 

at this website: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/uv?02169625. Along the north bank of the 

Congaree River is a natural levee, normally 8 to 10 ft (2.4 – 3 m) high, which is pierced at 

intervals by breaches known as guts (Plate 8). As the river discharge increases, river water 

begins to overflow into the floodplain through the guts and into the low areas of the floodplain 

(Table 3). Lower elevations fill first, and if discharge is great enough as much as 90% of the 

main portion of the park will become covered in water – on average this occurs approximately 

once per year (Patterson et al. 1985). The general movement of the water in the floodplain is, 

like the river itself, eastward toward the Wateree River. Flooding is most common in late winter 

and early spring, following the period of lowest evapotranspiration (Patterson et al. 1985; 

Knowles et al. 1996). The Bates Fork Tract is impacted by flooding from both the Congaree and 

Wateree Rivers. Impacts of flooding by the rivers on the Bates Fork Tract have not been studied 

and this should be an area of further research. Gage height data for the Wateree River is 

available for USGS Station 02148315. 

Table 3. Impact of Congaree River discharge (as computed at Columbia, data 1973-1982) on flooding 

within the main body of Congaree National Park (revised from Patterson et al. 1985). 

Discharge 

(cfs) 

Percent of time 

equaled or 

exceeded 

Average times 

per year 

equaled or 

exceeded 

11,800 23.7 11 

River water enters floodplain channels 

19,900 9.3 6 

Guts overflow into low areas of floodplain; road 

to Wise Lake impassable 

25,500 5.8 5 

Bakfull flow at USGS station 02169625 on 

Congaree River west of Wise Lake near 

Gadsen 

34,300 3.0 4 

Water covers the ground at Wise Lake; most of 

swamp is flooded 

76,600 0.3 1 

Entire Swamp Flooded 

Depending upon upstream rainfall, the Congaree River may contain large quantities of 

suspended sediments and be turbid at times (Plate 9). As will be discussed later in this report, at 

times this river-borne turbidity may impact the water quality of streams within CONG. During 
17 

flooding events the larger sediment particles settle on the floodplain nearest the river, while the 

lighter particles are carried into the interior of the swamp (Patterson et al. 1985). This deposition 

provides fertile soil to the floodplain to enhance vegetation growth (as noted, this park contains 

many champion trees). Thus, the flooding is a natural and important part of the ecosystem 

function. However, if the sediments (and floodwaters) are bearing pollutants, the fauna of the 

parks streams and lakes could be impaired by the pollutants brought in from upstream in the 

Congaree Watershed and the Wateree Watershed. There is presently little information on 

vertical accretion rates of sediment within the different areas of the park, and on the contents of 

such suspended sediments (i.e. nutrients and toxicants). Historical increases in sediment load 

due to land use in the watershed, however, have likely significantly increased sedimentation rates 

and related process. Obtaining such information on a transect through the floodplain from the 

river to the uplands would provide important information related to the importance of river 

discharge to ecosystem fertility, and how upstream land use and stormwater runoff from such 

land use impacts park biotic communities, either positively through fertilization or negatively 

through import of potentially toxic materials in the floodwaters and suspended sediments. 

Plate 8. Gut in Congaree National Park. Photo by M. Mallin. 
18 

Plate 9. Mid-channel view of the Congaree River. Photo by M. Mallin.

One of the two major tributaries of the Congaree River is the Saluda River, on which the Lake 

Murray Dam (Figure 2) was created in 1929 for hydroelectric power production and operated by 

the South Carolina Electric and Gas Company (SCDNR 1995). The other major tributary to the 

Congaree River is the Broad River, which as mentioned is regulated to some degree by the 

presence of at least 10 hydroelectric facilities (SCDHEC 2007), and joins the Saluda about 11 

miles (18 km) below the Saluda Dam. The dam on the Saluda, located about 38 miles (60 km) 

upstream of Congaree Park controls about one third of the total flow to the Congaree River 

upstream of Columbia (Knowles et al. 1996). The damming of the Saluda River has not 

decreased the frequency of the one-year flooding, depicted in Table 3 (Patterson et al. 1985). 

However, it was thought to have reduced the frequency of the largest floods (for example, floods 

with a five-year recurrence interval were increased to a 25 year recurrence interval after 1929 – 

Patterson et al. 1985). 

Authors of a later study (Conrads et al. 2007) took issue with the belief that the Saluda Dam led 

to fewer major floods in the park. By utilizing a combination of data mining, backcasting and 

statistical approaches these authors determined that the lack of large floods after 1930 was due to 

natural causes (more natural floods pre-construction), and the main impact of the dam was to 

cause lower river gage heights in the first half of the year (December to May) and higher gage 

heights in the second half of the year (June to November)). Another effect these authors 
19 

determined was that the dam increased the 1, 3, 7, 30 and 90 day minimum gage heights by up to 

23.9% and lowered the 1, 3, 7, 30 and 90 day maximum gage heights by up to 7.2% (Conrads et 

al. 2007). These authors speculated that dam operations may affect the levels of the surficial 

aquifer and may impact vegetative community structure, but provided no further detail on 

suspected ecological effects. 

Regarding potential vegetation impacts, one report (Minchin and Sharitz 2007) suggested that a 

long-term change in forest composition was occurring toward a community less tolerant of 

flooded conditions, particularly in higher elevation sites >3 km from the river. The champion 

trees (and their tree rings) are a source of historical information, and an analysis of such “living 

records” could be a key endeavor in assessing long-term dam operation impacts on the 

ecosystem of CONG. 

A stakeholder’s group (NPS 2008) recently engaged in a multi-step process modeled after the 

Ecologically Sustainable Water Management Approach (ESWM) devised by the Nature 

Conservancy. This was designed to provide a process by which flows from the Saluda River 

Dam could be better managed to provide for multiple needs including power production, 

adequate recreation in Lake Murray, and appropriate timing, discharge and water levels for 

protection of a healthy native biological community in the Congaree and Saluda Rivers and 

floodplain of CONG. The process included a literature review, expert opinion on individual 

species, workshops and a production of a model. Several plant and animal species were noted as 

being or potentially being affected by flow management (addressed later in this report). The 

results of the process are detailed in NPS (2008) but are referred to by the authors as the 

naturalized flow scenario and in part recommend allowance of continuous downstream flows for 

a set period each spring that approximate natural inflows, and provide for intra-and-inter annual 

variability to meet the ecological needs of the Congaree River system. The report recommends 

establishment and funding of an adaptive management council consisting of experts and 

interested stakeholders that would meet twice annually to implement the plan and monitor key 

species using various metrics and make decisions to adjust the water management plan as 

needed. We recommend NPS follow through on this approach with the stakeholders as it 

provides for strong science-based management of water flows impacting CONG.

Groundwater Resources 

There is a shallow aquifer underlying CONG that is variable, ranging from the surface in some 

areas to 55 ft (21 m) in other locations, underlain by a confining bed of approximately 70 ft (17 

m) in thickness (Patterson et al. 1985). The shallow aquifer breaches the surface in areas where 

there is primarily sand at the surface, and is confined where the surface materials are more silty 

and clayey, such as in most of the floodplain (Patterson et al. 1985). Where it impinges on the 

surface there are ponds and lakes; additionally the groundwater sustains streamflow (base flow) 

during drought periods. Where the groundwater exits from hillsides rim swamps occur, which 

support diverse vegetation (Shelley et al. 2008). Below the confining layer supporting the upper 

aquifer there lies a deep aquifer made primarily of sand that lies at depths varying from 125 to 

360 ft, or 38 to 110 m (Patterson et al. 1985). Recharge to the shallow aquifer occurs by local 

rainfall where surface sediments are highly permeable, and by leakage from the deep aquifer 

(Patterson et al. 1985). Some small streams in and near CONG receive flow only from the 

shallow aquifer and have poorly sustained low flows, including Griffin’s Creek, Dry Branch and 

Tom’s Creek (Patterson et al. 1985). More deeply incised streams such as Mill Creek and Cedar 
20 

Creek are recharged by the deep aquifer and are thus critical to the water needs of the floodplain 

when other sources are reduced, such as during drought (Patterson et al. 1985). Well water is 

used for drinking water in the park, but the well water is drawn from 118 ft. (36 m) depth and 

tested by SC DEHEC (two wells are on-site). The water is treated on-site by chlorination 

regardless. Crystalline bedrock is found 600-800 ft below the floodplain surface (Dr. David 

Shelley, NPS, personal communication). 

Biological Resources 

Because of the beauty and uniqueness of the habitats within CONG much of the flora and fauna 

have been well-studied by government, academic, and citizen researchers. In particular these 

include trees and other terrestrial species, invertebrates, reptiles and amphibians, mammals and 

stream fish communities, yet some major gaps remain in terms of phytoplankton and other algae, 

zooplankton, aquatic macrophytes and flood-period fish communities. 

Algae 

There have been no published studies of the phytoplankton or benthic microalgal communities 

within the park. In July 2007 Wise Lake experienced an algal bloom that SCDHEC personnel 

identified as Oscillatoria sp., a genus of blue-green algae, or cyanobacteria (Dr. Theresa Thom, 

NPS, personal communication). Since there is no nearby source of nutrients to stimulate such a 

bloom, it was either formed from a naturally occurring population within the lake or was perhaps 

seeded by flooding from the river that occurred in March of that year. A 1996-1997 USGS study 

found periodic high chlorophyll a concentrations in the water column in three oxbow lakes (see 

NPS 1998 and tables 22-24, this report), demonstrating their capability of algal bloom formation. 

Thus, a limnological sampling program involving algal sampling would be prudent for selected 

lakes, since they would be most susceptible to bloom formation. 

Chlorophyll a data are available for the rivers impacting the park for the period 1989-1991. 

These data, collected by SCDHEC a few miles upstream of CONG, yielded mean chlorophyll a

concentrations of 4.0 and 4.5 μg/L for the Congaree and Wateree Rivers, respectively (Lacy 

1992). These values are comparable to that of the Cape Fear River in North Carolina, a 

moderately productive ecosystem that likewise receives turbidity pulses after extensive 

watershed rainfall (Mallin et al. 1999). There was very little seasonal difference in chlorophyll 

concentration for either the Congaree or Wateree River (Lacy 1992). 

Aquatic Macrophytes 

There has been no comprehensive survey of aquatic macrophytes in the creeks or lakes within 

the park. This is a major concern because many non-native and exotic aquatic macrophyte 

species can cause major ecological damage through physical habitat alteration, crowding out of 

native species, alteration of vertebrate or invertebrate feeding strategies, physical blockage of 

waterways and degradation of water quality through decreases in dissolved oxygen by biomass 

decay. In areas hard hit by aquatic “weed” invasions, monetary costs can be very high to protect 

ecosystem integrity. For instance, the U.S. spends $100 million per year to control non-native 

aquatic nuisance species (Pimentel et al. 2000). These invasive species can be easily transported 

by boats, fishing tackle, birds, and flowing water; thus a comprehensive survey of aquatic 

macrophytes throughout CONG would be prudent, and should be repeated at three year intervals 

(at least in key locations) to find out what is present, and to ensure future community integrity. 
21 

Terrestrial Vegetation 

CONG contains the largest intact tract of old-growth bottomland forest in the southeastern 

United States, with the woody species dominated by bald cypress, tupelo, several oaks and 

loblolly pine. CONG contains one of the tallest broad-leaved forests in North America (Jones 

1997), including trees that are 700 years old (NPS staff, personal communication). CONG 

contains many state champion trees, which are the largest known individual for their species in 

South Carolina (Plate 10). In a 1993-1995 survey Jones (1997) found 29 individuals 

representing 25 species that are state champions. In addition to the State champions, three 

individuals representing three species, including possumhaw (Ilex deciduas), persimmon 

(Diospyros virginiana), and water hickory (Carya aquatic) were large enough to quality as 

National champions (Jones 1997). 

Gaddy et al. (2000) compiled the most comprehensive information available on the flora of 

CONG. These researchers listed over 500 vascular plant species from the park, including 80 

native species of trees. Gaddy et al. (2000) described the park as having a very complex 

vegetation community, with one of the most diverse assemblages of forest communities in North 

America. Reviews of ecosystem effects of biodiversity indicate that in general greater plant 

diversity leads to greater productivity, greater nutrient retention in ecosystems, and greater 

ecosystem stability (McCann 2000; Tilman 2000). Gaddy et al. (2000) noted ten different 

vegetation cover types within CONG: 

1. Upland pine (most of which have been planted except for a stand of loblolly and longleaf 

pine) 

2. Upland pine-mixed hardwoods (relatively rare and along the northeast boundary, mainly 

oaks and sweet gum) 

3. Upland mixed hardwood depressions (found in a two acre depression along the northeast 

boundary) 

4. Bluff mixed hardwoods (on the bluffs in the northeast boundary) 

5. Mixed bottomland hardwoods (the most extensive cover type; covering 50% of the 

floodplain) 

6. Pine-mixed bottomland hardwoods (tall, old-growth loblolly pines mixed with an 

understory of mixed old-growth hardwoods) 

7. Swamp tupelo (in swamps near the northeast boundary) 

8. Bald cypress-water tupelo (covering over 15% of the floodplain in old oxbows, sloughs, 

guts and other low areas) 

9. Open water-flowing water (free-floating aquatic macrophytes on the open water surface) 

10. Open fields/disturbed areas (various habitats dominated by variable early successional 

weedy plants) 
22 

Plate 10. Congaree National Park is known for unusually tall trees of many species. Photo by M. Mallin.

It is notable that a stakeholder’s group (NPS 2008) considered bald cypress Taxodium distichum

to be a potentially at-risk species on the floodplain because of operations of the Saluda River 

dam. The report notes that when water heights are increased during naturally low water periods, 

the seedlings of this species experience prolonged inundation during a life stage that is highly 

intolerant to submersion. 

Rare and Threatened Plant Species 

There are no known Federally-listed Threatened or Endangered plant species currently 

documented as occurring within CONG. However, there are nine vascular plant species 

documented in the park that are listed as Species of Concern by the State of South Carolina 

(Table 4). Previous lists (Gaddy et al. 2000) have included the Winter grapefern (Botrychium 

lunaroides), however in 2005, additional surveys and carful examination of the vocher 

specimens showed that this species was originally misidentified and does not occur within 

CONG (Hauk 2005). 
23 

Invasive Plants 

Gaddy et al. (2000) documented 18 species in CONG (Table 5) that were either exotic (i.e. not 

native to the U.S.) or invasive (not native to the local plant communities, but could be native to 

other U.S. areas). Additional plant surveys and research have documented 74 vascular plant 

species considered to be exotic and/or invasive in CONG (NPSpecies 2009). To date, no known 

surveys of aquatic invasive species have been conducted in CONG. 

Table 4. Plant Species of Concern within Congaree National Park listed by the State of South Carolina 

(revised from Gaddy et al. 2000); main section of the park only. 

Species Habitat(s)

Cherokee sedge Carex cherokeensis Mixed bottomland hardwoods 

Crow’s-foot sedge Carex crus-corvi Mixed bottomland hardwoods 

Social sedge Carex socialis Mixed bottomland hardwoods 

Swamp cucumber Cayaponia boykinii Bald cypress-water tupelo 

Walter’s horsebalm Collinsonia serotina Bluff mixed hardwoods 

Toothed woodfern Dryopteris carthusiana Mixed bottomland hardwoods 

Sevice holly Ilex amelanchier Upland mixed hardwood depressions/swamp tupelo 

Bog mint Macbridea caroliniana Swamp tupelo 

Weak nettle Urtica chamaedryoides Mixed bottomland hardwoods 

Table 5. Partial exotic and/or invasive plant species found in Congaree National Park (revised from 

Gaddy et al. 2000). 

Species Exotic 

Native to U.S. 

Invasive at 

Congaree 

Mimosa Albizzia julibrissin X

Asiatic dayflower Analeima keisak X

Catalpa tree Catalpa bignoniodes X

Lambsquarter Chenopodium album) X

Silverberry Eleagnus umbellata X

Japanese privet Ligustrum japonicum X

Chinese privet Ligustrum sinensis X

Monkey grass Liriope sp. X

Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica X

Japanese climbing fern Lygodium japonicum X

Creeping charlie Lysimachia nummumlaria X

Japanese Hedge hyssop Mazus japonicus X

Chinaberry Melia azedarach X

Japanese shade grass Microstegium vimneum X

White mulberry Morus alba X

Kudzu Pueraria lobata X

Meadow buttercup Ranunculus acris X

Christmas cherry Solanum psuedocapsicum X
24 

Zooplankton 

Weekly zooplankton collections were carried out at a single station in each of the Congaree and 

Wateree Rivers during 1989-1991 at locations a few miles upstream of CONG (Lacy 1992). The 

zooplankton community was dominated by, in descending order, rotifers, copepods (particularly 

nauplii), and cladocerans, with some meroplankton present mainly as clam veligers (a planktonic 

larval stage). Average concentrations of the major groups for the Congaree River were (as 

no/m3) were total zooplankton 6,530, rotifers 2,946, copepods 1,924 and cladocerans 362. 

Average concentrations for the Wateree River (as no/m3) were total zooplankton 9,465, rotifers 

6,591, copepods 1,853 and cladocerans 164. The major groups showed spring and fall peaks and 

summer minima (a negative response to elevated temperatures, which is normal in the 

southeasetern United States). The zooplankton abundances responded positively to increases in 

river discharge and corresponding increases in turbidity and suspended solids, particularly 

rotifers. Lacy (1992) found some evidence that rainfall had a positive effect on rotifer 

abundance and a negative effect on copepod abundance, although we found that evidence to be 

rather equivocal. We note that zooplankton in turbid reservoirs are capable of consuming and 

subsisting on turbidity particles, provided that nutritious organic matter is associated with such 

particles, such as through adsorption of dissolved organic matter (Marzolf 1990). In blackwater 

rivers chemical and physical reactions cause colloidal-sized particles to coalesce into 

“amorphous particulate matter”, that has been evaluated and described as nutritious food for 

invertebrate consumers (Carlough 1994). 

Benthic Macroinvertebrates 

The benthic invertebrate community of CONG has been well studied. The species composition, 

species richness and species diversity were noted as reflecting excellent water quality for Cedar 

Creek (Smock and Gilinsky 1982). A later study of stations at nine sites in the park concluded 

that CONG contains relatively high aquatic insect diversity, particularly for aquatic beetles, 

caddisflies, and damselflies and dragonflies (Pescador et al. 2004). Pescador et al. (2004) 

focused on five insect orders, and in terms of species diversity ranked them is descending order 

as follows: Coleoptera (beetles), Trichoptera (caddisflies), Odonata (dragonflies and 

damselflies), Ephemeroptera (mayflies) and Plecoptera (stoneflies). Table 6 breaks down the 

various orders into number of families, genera, and species. While the lowest species richness is 

among mayflies and stoneflies, that is not surprising given the generally warm, slow moving 

waters and periodic low dissolved oxygen found in blackwater streams of the southeast United 

States – thus that does not reflect poor water quality. The richest collection locations for these 

taxonomic groups were Cedar Creek and Weston Lake, while the location with fewest species 

was Wise Lake (Table 7). The species list compiled by Pescador et al. (2004) is provided in 

Appendix B. 
25 

Table 6. Taxonomic richness by family, genus and species for five insect orders found in Congaree 

National Park, 2002-2003 (modified from Pescador et al. 2004). 

Order Common names Families Genera Species

Coleoptera beetles 47 152 302

Trichoptera caddisflies 13 30 67

Odonata dragon & damselflies 6 34 55

Ephemeroptera mayflies 8 15 19

Plecoptera stoneflies 4 7 8

Table 7. Benthic macroinvertebrate species richness by location as sampled by Pescador et al. (2004). 

Habitat Total Species

Cedar Creek at Bluff Rd. below bridge 141

Weston Lake 129

Cedar Creek at Dawson Lodge 123

Toms Creek 98

Cedar Creek at Service Rd. 83

Cedar Creek at Bluff Rd. above bridge 75

McKenzie Creek 73

Cedar Creek at jeep trail 67

Wise Lake 49

Various benthic habitats occur within the park, including woody material, plant material such as 

Sparganium), muddy banks, sandy sediments (Smock and Gilinsky 1982), presenting a variety of 

food resources for the invertebrate community. For three sites within Cedar Creek, Smock and 

Gilinsky (1982) determined that the dominant taxa were the mayfly Stenonema modestum, the 

caddisflies Macronema carolina, Cheumatopsyche spp. and Oecetis spp., the elmid beetle 

Ancyronyx variegata, the chironomids Polypedilum illinoense, Tanytarsus spp., Rheotanytarsus

spp. and Ablabesmyia parajanta, as well as various tubificid oligochaetes. Smock et al. (1985) 

assessed benthic productivity and use of the various habitats. They found that the snags (woody 

tree parts within the stream) yielded the highest densities of individuals (21,000 individuals/m2

of habitat) with highest annual mean biomass (2.14 g/m2

) on snags as well. Productivity on 

snags was twice that of any other habitat, and productivity on leaves of bur-reed (Sparganium 

americanum) was also high, while productivity in leaf packs was the lowest of any habitat. 

Smock et al. (1985) found that the hydropsychid caddisfly (Macronema carolina) yielded the 

highest production among individual taxa (4.90 g/m2

) while the chironomids Rheotanytarsus and 

Tanytarsus also had relatively high annual production. Productivity was highest in the creek 

upstream of the park, and decreased as the stream passed through the park. Overall this study 

found that the stream bottom yielded the highest invertebrate production (39-44% of the total 

production) due to the sediments being the largest habitat, while snags, with their far lower 

habitat area but much higher productivity yielded 28-35% of total invertebrate production. 

Smock and Roeding (1986) assessed what were the food sources supporting the invertebrate 

production in Cedar Creek. They found that fine particulate organic matter (FPOM) was the 
26 

major food source, supporting 47-64% of total production, while algae (mainly filamentous algae 

and diatoms) supported 15-34% of production. This was surprising as previously held dogma 

assumed that algae were rather unimportant in blackwater stream systems. Animal material 

supported 16-26% of macroinvertebrate production while coarse particulate organic matter 

(CPOM) only supported 1-3% of total production. Smock and Roeding (1986) hypothesized that 

unlike upland streams, streams within the lowlands receive much previously-processed material 

from the floodplain, where shredders such as amphipods, isopods, amphibians and other 

terrestrial organisms convert the CPOM into FPOM, which then enters the streams in runoff or 

flooding events. These authors suggested that the floodplain provides a similar function for 

lowland blackwater stream systems that low order streams provide for streams in upland areas in 

terms of CPOM processing. 

In 1995-1998 the U.S. Geological Survey performed an assessment of the benthic 

macroinvertebrates at six locations within Cedar Creek, Toms Creek, Myers Creek and the 

Congaree River (Maluk and Abrahamsen 1999), and applied various biotic indexes to the data. 

Compared with a reference stream outside of the park (the Coosawhatchie River), these 

researchers concluded that most of the sites were unimpaired with the exception of Cedar Creek 

near Wise Lake, which they described as slightly impaired. The elevated abundance of 

chironomids relative to their number of taxa at that location was the cause of the comparatively 

lower biotic score. 

In 2002, March-October 2008, and March-August 2009 additional odonate surveys were 

conducted in various surface water features in the park (Worthen 2009). This effort documented 

63 species, including 17 new county records and a new state record. When combined with the 

2002 survey results, the total Odonate species found within CONG is 70 species, representing 

45% of the 157 species now listed for the state of South Carolina. The new state record is 

Gomphus (Hylogomphus) apomyius (Banner Clubtail), captured on 30 March 2009 in a 

successional field adjacent to Wise Lake. The other new county records are: Hetaerina titia

(Smoky Rubyspot), Lestes australis (Southern Spreadwing), Lestes inaequalis (Elegant 

Spreadwing), Lestes vigilax (Swamp Spreadwing), Enallagma doubledayi (Atlantic Bluet), 

Enallagma dubium (Burgundy Bluet), Enallagma geminatum (Skimming Bluet), Enallagma 

traviatum (Slender Bluet), Enallagma vesperum (Vesper Bluet), Nehalennia integricollis

(Southern Sprite), Helocordulia selysii (Selys’ Sundragon), Somatochlora filosa (Fine-lined 

Emerald), Macromia alleghaniensis (Allegheny River Cruiser), Libellula axilena (Bar-winged 

Skimmer), Libellula luctuosa (Widow Skimmer), and Sympetrum ambiguum (Blue-faced 

Meadowhawk). Voucher specimens for all but L. luctuosa (photo record) are maintained in the 

archives at Congaree National Park. Photos of all species can be seen at: 

http://eweb.furman.edu/~wworthen/dflies/cong/conlist2.htm. 

Crayfish 

In 2005 a crayfish survey was conducted utilizing multiple sampling techniques at 38 sites across 

six habitat types in CONG (Price 2005). Habitats sampled included oxbow lakes, gum ponds, 

sloughs, streams, guts and floodplains. Six species of crayfish were collected (Table 8), which 

the report author considered relatively high diversity compared with other protected areas in the 

region. Of the six species, Procambarus chacei is listed as a South Carolina Species of Concern 

due to the dearth of distribution information on it and because it appears to be endemic to South 

Carolina and eastern Georgia (Price 2005). This species was found only in streams habitats 
27 

within the park. In general, research conducted in the park on crayfish suggest they are a key 

component of the detrital-based foodweb of the floodplain forest ecosystem. 

Table 8. Crayfish species collected with Congaree National Park, January – December 2005 (collected 

by Price 2005). 

Species common name (if available) status 

Cambarus diogenes the devil crayfish common 

 C. reduncus common 

Procambarus acutus the white river crayfish common 

 P. troglodytes common 

 P. chacei SC Species of Concern 

Fallicambarus fodiens common 

Mussels 

There has been catastrophic loss of mussels in North American, especially so in the southeast, 

due to various anthropogenic activities in the past several decades (Neves et al. 1997). Due to 

lack of mobility they cannot escape when changes in their environment occur, such as flow 

changes by human alterations, sediment and other pollutant loading, or non-native bivalve 

introductions (competitors) occur. Thus, mussel presence (especially that of imperiled species) 

provides a useful bellwether of negative changes in stream or river water quality. It is of interest 

to note that South Carolina in the early 20th century had the lowest species richness (33) of the 

southeastern States; Alabama had the most with 175 species (Neves et al. 1997). A mussel 

survey of CONG was conducted in 2002 and 2004, with sampling conducted in the Congaree 

River along the southern boundary of the park, Cedar Creek, Toms Creek, McKenzie Creek, 

Myers Creek, Weston Lake and Wise Lake (Williams and Benson 2004). Several Federal or 

State Species of Concern were found (Table 9). 

Table 9. Mussels collected within Congaree National Park by Williams and Benson (2004). 

Common name Scientific Name Status 

Carolina lance Elliptio angustata Federal Special Concern 

Eastern elliptio E. complanata Stable 

Variable spike E. icterina Stable 

Atlantic spike E. producta Special Concern in SC 

Yellow lampmussel Lampsilis cariosa Endangered in SC, Fed Sp. Con. 

Eastern lampmussel L. radiata Threatened in SC 

Eastern pondmussel Ligumia nasuta Endangered in SC 

Eastern floater Pyganodon cataracta Stable 

Florida pondhorn Uniomerus carolinianus Stable 

Paper pondshell Utterbackia imbecillis Stable 

Asian clam Corbicula fluminea Invasive 

A survey of mussels outside of the park included collections at six locations in the Congaree 

River along the Lexington/Richland County line (Alderman 2006). Of the nine species collected 
28 

in the Congaree River, five are considered species of concern. Carolina slabshell (Elliptio 

congaraea), Roanoke slabshell (E. roanokensis), Carolina lance (E. angustata), Yellow 

lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa) and Rayed pink fatmucket (L. splendid) are all listed as Federal 

Species of Concern, with Roanoke slabshell considered at high risk of extinction and Yellow 

lampmussel and Rayed pink fatmucket considered at moderate risk of extinction (Alderman 

2006). Additional mussel surveys were completed in 2008 using tactile surveys and SCUBA 

(Krueger 2009). At least 15 species of freshwater mussels were collected and identified across 

18 survey points located in the Congaree and Wateree mainstem rivers, a large oxbow known as 

Bates’ Lake (Griffin Creek), and an unnamed oxbow lake off the Wateree mainstem. Elliptio 

complanata and E. icterina were likely both present but no attempt was made to separate these 

two species (E. complanata and E. icterina), as they are common in many Atlantic drainages and 

are considered locally and globally secure. Considering both species as occurring would bring 

the total to 16 species. Species detected included all species represented in Williams and Benson 

(2004), as well as four additional species not previously detected: Toxolasma pullus, Leptodea 

ochracea, Villosa delumbis, and Elliptio congaraea. Also, Elliptio roanokensis was reported in 

this survey, but Williams and Benson (2004) declined to report this species due to morphological 

intergrading. The Savannah liliput (Toxolasma pullus) is considered to be highly imperiled, and 

is currently being considered as a candidate for federal listing status and proposed state listing as 

endangered (Krueger 2009, Bogan and Alderman 2008). 

Because there are a number of imperiled species present, mussel surveys in CONG on a regular 

basis would be a prudent way to assess ecosystem changes. Also both inside and outside of the 

park in the Congaree and Wateree Rivers, as well as in some streams within the park, the Asiatic 

clam (Corbicula fluminea) has been collected in several locations (Williams and Benson 2004; 

Alderman 2006, Krueger 2009). This is an exotic invasive species introduced in the 1930s and 

well established in U.S. waters. 

Fish 

In 1995-1998 the U.S. Geological Survey collected and analyzed the CONG and nearby area fish 

communities from six locations within Myers Creek, Cedar Creek, Toms Creek and the 

Congaree River (Maluk and Abrahamsen 1999). They applied an Index of Biotic Integrity to the 

fish data, compared the index values with a reference stream outside of the park, and rated the 

fish community of upper Cedar Creek as Fair, but rated lower Cedar Creek near Wise Lake as 

Poor, and Myers Creek, Toms Creek, and the Congaree River as Poor. However, they noted that 

the low conductivity and deep water lowered catch efficiency of their electroshocker and likely 

compromised the results at the lower Cedar Creek site (Maluk and Abrahamsen 1999). 

The Freshwater Fisheries Section of the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources 

(SCDNR), in cooperation with NPS, completed a total of 50 fishery surveys from 33 sites within 

Congaree Park from 1999-2002 (Rose 2002; Rose and Bulak 2004). The majority of the 

sampling sites were streams; however, in 2002 a number of collections were made from guts, 

sloughs, ponds and the two larger lakes, Weston and Wise. Stream sampling was completed by 

block-netting either end of a 100 m stretch of stream, and then using a backpack electroshocker 

to stun the fish. In Wise and Weston Lakes a boat electroshocker was used to collect around the 

entire circumference of the lake. All collections were performed in the main section of CONG 

(the Bates Fork Tract near the Wateree River has not been sampled for fish as of yet). 
29 

A total of 56 species belonging to 17 different families were collected within the (main section) 

park boundaries (Table 10). Cluster analyses (Rose and Bulak 2004) identified four community 

groups associated with differing habitat characteristics: 

 Community group 1 indicator species were Flier (Centrarchus macropterus), Eastern 

mudminnow (Umbra pygmaea), Golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas) and banded 

pygmy sunfish (Elassoma zonatum); this group’s sites were characterized by relatively 

low flows and dissolved oxygen. 

 Community group 2 indicator species were the Tesselated darter (Etheostoma olmstedi), 

Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and the Redear sunfish (Lepomis

microlophus); this group’s habitat was comprised of faster flowing, deeper streams such 

as Cedar Creek. 

 Community group 3 were the Sailfin shiner (Pteronotropis hypselopterus), Dusky shiner 

(Notropis cummingsae), Spotted sunfish (Lepomis punctatus) and the Dollar sunfish 

(Lepomis marginatus); this group’s sites were characterized by high flow and firm, sandy 

bottoms, and were located in the transition area between bluff and swamp. 

 Community group 4 was a single outlier site that yielded only four species (compared to 

the average number of 16); Yellow bullhead (Ameiurus natalis), Largemouth bass 

(Micropterus salmoides), Pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayanus) and Mosquitofish 

(Gambusia holbrooki). It was located in McKenzie Creek, which had low dissolved 

oxygen and comparatively high conductivity and farming, grazing, and a poultry facility 

in its watershed. Rose and Bulak (2004) considered this creek a degraded stream and 

suggested further study of the creek. 

Flooding of the park by the Congaree River alters taxonomic composition of the fish fauna. The 

composition of 11 pre-flood samples, collected in 2001-2002, were compared with eight postflood samples taken in 2003 by Rose and Bulak (2007). These researchers found similar species 

richness between periods (38 species pre-flood and 37 species post-flood). However, seven taxa 

(blackbanded sunfish, channel catfish, flat bullhead, green sunfish, piedmont darter, snail 

bullhead and spotted sucker) were only collected in the pre-flood sampling while seven other 

taxa (bowfin, black crappie, carp, longnose gar, mud sunfish, pumpkinseed and redear sunfish) 

were only collected in the post-flood sampling (Rose and Bulak 2007). 

Regarding the Congaree River fish community, it is notable that the shortnose sturgeon 

Acipenser brevirostrum is Federally listed as an Endangered species. There are no records of it 

in CONG, but a spawning site for this species is located in the Congaree River near Columbia 

(Collins et al. 2003). However, historical accounts preserved in local folktales indicate locals 

found large sturgeon in Weston Lake, an oxbow lake of the Congaree River (Cain et al. 2000). 

Outside of CONG, a study of the fish community of the lower Saluda River downstream of the 

Lake Murray Dam and upstream of the Congaree River was performed by State of South 

Carolina biologists (Crane 1987). Sampling was conducted in three areas using a boat 

electroshocker and seining. The results consisted of 889 fish representing 29 species and 11 
30 

families collected, with the community described as typical of a lower piedmont/upper coastal 

plain community, with no exclusively cold water species collected (Crane 1987). 

A recent report by a stakeholder’s group (NPS 2008) made recommendations to continue a 

process that was begun in order to provide species-specific science in managing water flows 

from the Saluda River Dam that impact CONG and the Congaree River. Regarding area fish, 

improved water flow management was recommended to enhance spawning of shortnose sturgeon 

and American shad in early March and robust redhorse, sunfish and other spawners in late May 

(see NPS 2008 for more detail). 

Table 10. Fish species collected in Congaree National Park between 1999 and 2002 and collection 

location, revised from Rose and Bulak (2004). 

Family Species Stream Lake 

Lepisosteidae Longnose gar (Lepisosteus occeus) X X 

Amiidae Bowfin (Amia calva) X X 

Anguillidae American eel (Anguilla rostrata) X 

Clupeidae Threadfin shad (Dorosoma petenense) X 

Gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) X 

Umbridae Eastern mudminnow (Umbra pygmaea) X X 

Esocidae Redfin pickerel (Esox americanus) X X 

Chain pickerel (Esox niger) X X 

Cyprinidae Greenfin shiner (Cyprinella chloristius) X X 

Whitefin shiner (Cyprinella nivea) X 

Common carp (Cyprinus carpio) X 

Eastern silvery minnow (Hybognathus regius) X 

Bluehead chub (Nocomis leptocephalus) X 

Golden shiner (Notemigonis crysoleucas) X 

Dusky shiner (Notropis cummingsae) X 

Spottail shiner (Notropis hudsonius) X 

Taillight shiner (Notropis maculates) X X 

Coastal shiner (Notropus petersoni) X 

Sailfin shiner (Pteronotropis hypselopterus) X 

Catostomidae Creek chubsucker (Erimyzon oblongus) X X 

Spotted sucker (Minytrema melanops) X X 

Shorthead redhorse (Moxostoma macrolepidotum) X 

Ictaluridae Snail bullhead (Ameiurus brunneus) X 

Yellow bullhead (Ameiurus natalis) X 

Brown bullhead (Ameiurus nebulosus) X 

Flat bullhead (Ameiurus platycephalus) X 

Channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) X 

Tadpole madtom (Noturus gyrinus) X 

Margined madtom (Noturus insignis) X 
31 

Table 10. (Continued). 

Family Species Stream Lake 

Flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris) X 

Amblyopsidae Swampfish (Chologaster cornuta) X 

Aphredoderidae Pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayanus) X X 

Cyprinodontidae Lined topminnow (Fundulus lineolatus) X 

Poeciliidae Eastern mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki) X X 

Atherinidae Brook silverside (Labidesthes sicculus) X X 

Percichthyidae White perch (Morone americana) X 

Centrarchidae Mud sunfish (Acantharcus pomotis) X 

Flier (Centrarchus macropterus) X X 

Banded pygmy sunfish (Elassoma zonatum) X X 

Blackbanded sunfish (Enneacanthus chaetodon) X 

Bluespotted sunfish (Enneacanthus gloriosis) X X 

Redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus) X X 

Green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus) X 

Pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus) X X 

Warmouth (Lepomis gulosus) X X 

Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) X X 

Dollar sunfish (Lepomis marginatus) X X 

Redear sunfish (Lepomis microlophus) X X 

Spotted sunfish (Lepomis punctatus) X X 

Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) X X 

Black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus) X X 

Percidae Swamp darter (Etheostomafusiforme) X 

Tesselated darter (Etheostoma olmstedi) X 

Sawcheek darter (Etheostoma serrifer) X X 

Yellow perch (Perca flavescens) X X 

Piedmont darter (Percina crassa) X 

Reptiles and Amphibians 

A total of 61 native reptiles and amphibian species have been documented at CONG (Tables 11 

and 12), of which none are introduced species (Tuberville et al. 2005). This park ranks third 

among the 16 Southeast Coast Network parks in terms of native species documented. There 

have been 32 species of reptiles noted, including one crocodilian (the American alligator 

Alligator mississippiensis), 19 snakes (three poisonous, the cottonmouth Agkistrodon piscivorus, 

the copperhead A. contortrix, and the timber rattlesnake Crotalus horridus), five lizards and 

seven turtles (Tuberville et al. 2005). Of the 28 total amphibian species found 20 were frogs and 

toads and eight were salamanders (Tuberville et al. 2005). Tuberville et al. (2005) noted that 

CONG contained a high taxa richness of amphibians and reptiles due to the size of the park and 

high diversity of habitat types. A broad variety of studies has indicated that increased diversity 

(plant and animal) is positively related to ecosystem stability (McCann 2000). It is important to 
32 

note that these species in the Tuberville et al. (2005) study were catalogued from the main 

portion of the park only, and a survey of the Bates Fork Tract would be appropriate to form a 

baseline by which to compare with other parks and future surveys of CONG. The Marbled 

salamander Ambystoma opacum was noted by a stakeholder’s group (NPS 2008) as a species that 

is potentially impacted by artificial river flows and flooding in CONG due to operations of the 

Saluda River Dam. 

Table 11. Amphibian taxa verified from Congaree National Park (from Tuberville et al. 2005). 

Species 

Northern cricket frog (Acris crepitans) 

Southern cricket frog (Acris gryllus) 

Southern toad (Bufo terrestris) 

Eastern narrowmouth toad (Gastrophyne carolinensis) 

Gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis) 

Green treefrog (Hyla cinerea) 

Pine woods treefrog (Hyla femoralis) 

Barking treefrog (Hyla gratiosa) 

Squirrel treefrog (Hyla squirella) 

Brimley’s chorus frog (Pseudacris brimleyi) 

Spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer) 

Southern chorus frog (Pseudacris nigrita) 

Ornate chorus frog (Psuedacris ornate) 

American bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) 

Green frog (Rana clamitans) 

Pickerel frog (Rana palustris) 

River frog (Rana heckcheri) 

Southern leopard frog (Rana sphenocephala) 

Carpenter frog (Rana virgatipes) 

Eastern spadefoot (Scaphiopus holbrookii) 

Marbled salamander (Ambystoma opacum) 

Mole salamander (Ambystoma talpoideum) 

Southern dusky salamander (Desmognathus auriculatus) 

Threelined salamander (Eurycea guttolineata) 

Dwarf waterdog (Necturus punctatus) 

Slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus) 

Mud salamander (Pseudotriton montanus) 

Greater siren (Siren lacertian) 
33 

Table 12. Reptile taxa verified from Congaree National Park (from Tuberville et al. 2005). 

Species 

American alligator (Alligator mississippensis) 

Snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentine) 

Spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) 

Eastern mud turtle (Kinosternon subrubrum) 

River cooter (Pseudemys concinna) 

Stinkpot (Sternotherus odoratus) 

Eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina) 

Pond slider (Trachymys scripta) 

Green anole (Anolis carolinensis) 

Common fivelined skink (Eumeces fasciatus) 

Southeastern fivelined skink (Eumeces inexpectatus) 

Broadheaded skink (Eumeces laticeps) 

Little brown skink (Scincella lateralis) 

Copperhead (Agkistrodon contortix) 

Cottonmouth (Agkistrodon piscivorus) 

Eastern wormsnake (Carphophis amoenus) 

Eastern racer (Coluber constrictor) 

Timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus) 

Ringnecked snake (Diadophus punctatus) 

Eastern ratsnake (Elaphe obsolete) 

Redbellied mudsnake (Farancia abacura) 

Eastern hognosed snake (Heterodon platirhinos) 

Common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getula) 

Choachwhip (Masticophis flagellum) 

Plainbellied watersnake (Nerodia erythrogaster) 

Southern watersnake (Nerodia fasciata) 

Brown watersnake (Nerodia taxipilota) 

Rough greensnake (Ophreodrys aestivus) 

Brownsnake (Storeria dekayi) 

Redbellied snake (Storeria occipitomaculata) 

Eastern ribbonsnake (Thamnophis sauritus) 

Common gartersnake (Thamnophis sirtalis) 
34 

Mammals 

Based on sampling conducted by Dr. David Webster of the University of North Carolina as a 

part of the Inventory and Monitoring Program and other records, 35 mammal species are known 

to be present at the park (Table 13). An additional three species are probably present or 

unconfirmed, and two species (black bear and red wolf) are thought to have been extirpated. 

Of the non-native species, Webster (personnel communication) notes that feral cats are active 

predators on birdlife, reptiles and small mammals. Nationwide, it has been estimated that feral 

cats, together with outdoor cats, kill over 560 million birds per year in the United States 

(Pimentel et al. 2000). Webster also noted that feral hogs are an invasive species with clear 

destructive impacts to the park. Throughout the U.S., the 4,000,000 feral hogs are belived to 

cause approximately $800 million worth of crop damage per year, with considerably more costs 

due to environmental damage and disease spreading (Pimentel et al. 2000). The impacts of these 

large mammals to CONG alone merit a section and discussion (below). 

Feral hogs 

Feral hogs Sus scrofa were introduced as captive animals into America in 1539, and occur in 

approximately half of the states in the U.S. (Freibel 2007). There is a large and very active 

population of these animals within Congaree Park that has caused extensive damage through 

rooting and wallowing (Plate 11). The authors of this report saw evidence of rooting and 

wallowing in several areas of the park, including along the boardwalk trail to Weston Lake, in 

areas near Wise Lake, near water bodies along the eastern border road of the park, and especially 

within the Bates Fork Tract (Plate 11). In areas of heavy use the soil and vegetation is 

extensively turned over to depths of 4 to12 in (10 to 30 cm), with the patches as large as 6.5 by 

33 ft (2 m by 10 m) easily visible near trails (Plate 11A and B). While conducting mussel 

surveys Williams and Benson (2004) noted that feral hogs had uprooted hundreds of meters of 

streambank to depths of 6 to 12 in (15 to 30 cm) in search of food, killing vegetation and 

enhancing the potential for streambank erosion. Williams and Benson (2004) also found 

evidence that feral hogs fed on mussels along streams. We saw evidence that feral hog activity 

along water bodies (where clay was present) contributed to significantly elevated turbidity in the 

water (Plate 11C). A study by Freibel (2007) indicated that individuals maintained 

comparatively compact home ranges and spatial fidelity, suggesting an abundant resource base in 

CONG. While recording feral hogs within all types of habitats studies within the park, Freibel 

(2007) found evidence that the hogs particularly selected habitats for availability of oak mast, 

and suggested its prevalence within the park may be critical to hogs. A study of hog disturbance 

of plots within various habitats (performed primarily during drought conditions) found that 

average total disturbance in individual plots was 19% in cypress-tupelo forest, 9% in mixed 

bottomland hardwoods, 9% in seepage forest and <1% in uplands, showing a preference for 

wetter areas (USGS 2005). However, the study found that once widespread flooding recurred, 

differences in disturbance between uplands and wetlands were no longer statistically significant. 

Regarding long-term impacts, that report noted that severe rooting in the seepage forest plots 

remained visible for months to even years (USGS 2005). Presently, USDA is conducting disease 

research through a permit from NPS in CONG (Plate 11D). Feral hogs are trapped, euthanized, 

and tested for zoonotic diseases. 

As mentioned, the feral hog community within CONG is responsible for considerable habitat 

alteration and destruction, with potential implications to plant and invertebrate species of 
35 

concern. The USGS (2005) study demonstrated that during drought periods these animals will 

concentrate their activities in wetland areas. The Williams and Benson (2004) study, along with 

our own observations, show that feral hog activities can degrade stream bank habitat and water 

quality. Additionally, we note that these large mammals produce feces that can contain bacteria, 

viruses, and protozoans that are pathogenic to humans (Hinton and Bale 1991) and their presence 

may be contributing to microbial water pollution within the park (see subsequent section titled 

Human Health Issues). Thus, NPS needs to continue and enhance programs designed to reduce 

the population of feral hogs within CONG. As noted by Freibel (2007), because these animals 

move freely across park borders management programs will need to involve neighboring 

property owners. 

A B

C D

Plate 11. A – hog wallow, B – feral hog rooting area, C – feral hog rooting causes stream turbidity 

increases, D – USDA feral hog research program utilizes traps in Bates Fork Tract. 
36 

Table 13. Mammals certified or considered to be probably present at Congaree National Park 

(NPSpecies, 2010). 

Common Name Scientific Name Status in Park 

A. Mammals present in park 

Virginia opossum Didelphis virginiana Common 

Southeastern shrew Sorex longirostris Uncommon 

Star-nosed mole Condylura cristata Status Unknown 

Northern short-tailed shrew Blarina brevicauda Status Unknown 

Southern short-tailed shrew Blarina carolinensis Common 

Least shrew Cryptotis parva Common 

Eastern mole Scalopus aquaticus Common 

Southeastern myotis Myotis austroriparius Status Unknown 

Big brown bat Eptesicus fuscus Status Unknown 

Eastern red bat Lasiurus borealis Status Unknown 

Evening bat Nycticeius humeralis Status Unknown 

Eastern pipistrelle bat Pipistrellus subflavus Status Unknown 

Eastern cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus Uncommon 

Southern flying squirrel Glaucomys volans Status Unknown 

Fox squirrel Sciurus niger Uncommon 

Eastern gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis Common 

Beaver Castor canadensis Uncommon 

White-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopus Status Unknown 

Cotton mouse Peromyscus gossypinus Common 

Marsh rice rat Oryzomys palustris Status Unknown 

Eastern harvest mouse Reithrodontomys humulis Common 

Hispid cotton rat Sigmodon hispidus Common 

Eastern woodrat Neotoma floridana Uncommon 

River otter Lontra canadensis Uncommon 

American mink Mustela vison Common 

Striped skunk Mephitis mephitis Rare 

Raccoon Procyon lotor Common 

Bobcat Lynx rufus Uncommon 

Coyote Canis latrans Uncommon 

Gray fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus Common 

White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus Common 

Feral hog Sus scrofa Abundant 

Cat Felis catus Uncommon 

Dog Canis familiaris Uncommon 

Rafinesque's Big-eared Bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii Status Unknown 
37 

Table 13. (Continued). 

Common Name Scientific Name Status in Park 

B. Mammals probably present but not verified 

Marsh Rabbit Sylvilagus palustris palustris Status Unknown 

Red Fox Vulpes vulpes Status Unknown 

Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus Status Unknown 

C. Mammals extirpated from area 

Black Bear Ursus americanus americanus Absent / Historic 

Birds 

At least 191 species of birds have been observed at CONG (Carter 2005). Several groups are 

represented that are often or occasionally associated with aquatic habitats including Grebes, 

Pelicans, Herons and Egrets, Ibises and Storks, and Geese and Ducks, and Shorebirds. However, 

these birds are all listed by Carter (2000) as uncommon (50% chance of encounter), occasional 

(20% chance of encounter), or rare (<5% chance of encounter). Those listed as uncommon 

include the Anhinga Anhinga anhinga, Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias, Night Heron 

Nycticorax nycticorax and Wood Duck Aix sponsa; occasionals include the Great Egret 

Casmerodius albus, Green Heron Butoides virescens, Wood Stork Mycteria amaericana and 

American Woodcock Scolopax minor. The Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus is rare and 

nests in the park; other rarely-seen raptors that utilize the park’s aquatic resources are Swallowtail Kite Elanoides forficatus and Osprey Pandion haliaetus. The Rusty Blackbird Euphagus 

carolinus breeds in forested wetlands and is seen in fall and winter in CONG. As mentioned, 

this park is considered a Globally Important Bird Area by the American Bird Conservatory. It is 

important to note that Prothonotary Warblers Protonotaria citrea and other migratory birds 

utilize the floodplain forest habitats in Congaree National Park. The breeding success of 

Prothonotary Warblers Protonotaria citrea is considered by a stakeholder’s group (NPS 2008) to 

be dependent at least in part by proper flow management of the Congaree River and flooding of 

CONG through Saluda River Dam operations. 

Rare and Threatened Animal Species 

There are no known terrestrial mammals found to occur in CONG that are listed as Species of 

Concern by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The State of South Carolina lists both the starnosed mole and the eastern fox squirrel as Special Concern. The American alligator Alligator 

mississippiensis (Federally listed as Threatened) has been documented from CONG (Tuberville 

et al. 2005). It is not State listed and there is a controlled hunt in South Carolina for alligator 

since 2008 (not within CONG however). The shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum, which 

is a Federally-listed Endangered Species has been tracked via radio transmitter in the Congaree 

River and a spawning site was verified in the river near Columbia (Collins et al. 2003). 

As to invertebrates, the crayfish Procambarus chacei is listed as a South Carolina Species of 

Concern, and is found in streams within CONG (Price 2005). A number of mussel species 

within CONG are species of concern (see Table 9) Carolina lance (Elliptio angustata) and 

Yellow lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa) are Federally listed Species of Concern, while Atlantic 

spike (Elliptio product) is a South Carolina Species of Concern, Eastern lampmussel (Lampsilis 

radiate) is threatened in South Carolina, and Eastern pondmussel (Lignumia nasuta) is 
38 

endangered in South Carolina (Williams and Benson 2004). Outside of but near the park in the 

Congaree River several mussels, Carolina slabshell (Elliptio congaraea), Roanoke slabshell (E. 

roanokensis), Carolina lance (E. angustata), Yellow lampmussel and Rayed pink fatmucket (L. 

splendid) are all listed as Federal Species of Concern, with Roanoke slabshell considered at high 

risk of extinction and Yellow lampmussel and Rayed pink fatmucket considered at moderate risk 

of extinction (Alderman 2006). Additionally, Bogan and Alderman (2008) provide proposed 

status updates of several species above (to list as either state endangered, state threatened, or 

state listed species of special concern) based on fieldwork, including the Savannah liliput 

Toxolasma pullus, which is considered to be highly imperiled, and is currently being considered 

as a candidate for federal listing status (Krueger 2009). 

Invasive Animal Species 

According to CONG personnel, with the exception of feral hogs and the Asian clam, other exotic 

invasive animal species (terrestrial or aquatic), have not been documented in the park. Black 

rats, Norway rats, and house mice are not native to the area and their impact of local vegetation 

has not been adequately assessed (W.D. Webster, personal communication). As mentioned 

earlier, former domesticated and now feral pigs and cats may have significant impacts on the 

wildlife and flora. Feral dogs are relatively uncommon in the park. 

In the Congaree River in and near the park the Asian clam (Corbicula fluminea) has been 

collected in several locations (Alderman 2006). This is an exotic invasive long established in 

U.S. waters that causes fouling problems in water intake pipes for power plants and water 

treatment facilities. Its impact in terms of competitive exclusion with native bivalves is 

equivocal (Neves et al. 1997). 
39 

Assessment of Park Water Resources 

Sources of Pollutants 

Congaree National Park and USGS/SCDHEC Watersheds Designation 

CONG is divided within several watersheds as designated by the United States Geological 

Survey (USGS) and utilized as such by the South Carolina Department of Health and 

Environmental Control (SCDHEC). The hydrologic units used by SCDHEC are from the 1999 

USGS Hydrologic Unit code for South Carolina. The Congaree River Watershed is an 8-digit 

hydrologic unit designated 03050110. It drains 668 mi2 (1730 km2), and it’s land use consists 

primarily of forested lands, agricultural lands, forested wetlands and urban land (Figure 6; see 

also SCDHEC 2004a). The subwatersheds within the Congaree Watershed are 11-digit 

hydrologic units. These include the Congaree River Watershed (03050110-010) which extends 

from the confluence of the Saluda River and the Broad River in Columbia along the river 

southeast until the Congaree River joins the Wateree River; thus the portions of the park 

adjoining the Congaree River lie within this subwatershed. The largest portion of the park lies 

within the Cedar Creek Watershed, represented by the 11 digit hydrologic unit 03050110-050. 

This watershed drains Cedar Creek and its main tributaries Myers Creek and Dry Branch 

(SCDHEC 2004a). The easternmost edge of the main portion of the park is in the Toms Creek 

Watershed, designated as 11-digit hydrologic unit 03050110-060. The Bates Fork Tract is 

officially within the lower Congaree River Watershed 03050110-070, but is also strongly 

influenced by flooding from the Wateree River Watershed, 03050104-030 (SCDHEC 2005). 

Point Source Pollution 

Point source discharges are waste waters containing various degrees and types of pollutants, and 

discharged by a pipe of some sort from municipal, industrial or commercial facilities into surface 

waters. Such discharges are regulated by the U.S. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (NPDES) administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA 

generally cedes this regulation of this program to a regulatory agency within the individual 

states, in the case of South Carolina it is SCDHEC. Floodwaters entering CONG from the two 

rivers, as well as stream water entering the park from the creeks can be impacted by many 

NPDES dischargers (Figure 7). Five major NPDES dischargers are located along the Congaree 

River upstream of the park, including some within the City of Columbia. These facilities 

discharge a combined permitted flow of > 212 MGD, in addition to an additional 12 facilities 

that discharge a combined permitted flow of < 0.9 MGD into tributaries. The five major 

dischargers are (SCDHEC 2004a): 

 Voridian plant at 100.82 MGD, major industrial (NPDES# SC0001333) 

 City of Columbia Metro WWTP at 60 MGD, major domestic (NPDES# SC0020940) 

 Westinghouse Electric Plant at 0.13 MGD, major industrial (NPDES# SC0001848) 

 City of Cayce WWTP at 12 MGD, major domestic (NPDES# SC0024147) – note an 

additional 40 MGD are proposed for this discharger. 
40 

 East Richland Co. PSD/Gills Creek Plant at 39.5 MGD, major domestic (NPDES# 

SC0038865) 

The Cedar Creek watershed contains seven minor NPDES dischargers totaling about 0.15 MGD, 

while the Toms Creek Watershed and the lower Congaree Watershed (03050110-070) contain no 

NPDES dischargers (SCDHEC 2004a). The Wateree River Watershed contains seven major 

NPDES dischargers that discharge into the Wateree River proper totaling about 490 MGD and 

14 minor NPDES facilities discharging either into the river or tributary streams with permits 

totaling less than 4.1 MGD. Major NPDES dischargers licensed to discharge into the Wateree 

River are as follows (from SCDHEC 2005); 

 South Carolina Electric and Gas (SCE&G) Wateree Station, at 490 MGD, major 

industrial (NPDES# SC0002038) 

 Invista Sarl/Camden at 4.2 MGD, major industrial (NPDES# SC0002585) 

 Clariant LSM (America) at 0.8 MGD, major industrial (NPDES# SC0002682) 

 City of Camden WWTP at 2.4 MGD, major domestic (NPDES# SC0021032) – note this 

plant has an additional 3.0 MGD proposed. 

 International Paper/Eastover, major industrial (NPDES# SC0038121) 

 Kawashima Textile USA, major industrial (NPDES# SC0023264) 

 City of Sumter at 9.0 MGD (proposed), major domestic (NPDES# SC0027707) 

Other information on point source dischargers can be found in Knowles et al. (1996) and 

Maliszewski (2005), as well as SCDHEC (2004a and 2005). 
41 

Figure 6. Land use within the Congaree and Wateree River Watersheds (SCDHEC 2004a; 2005). 

Congaree Watershed Land Use

Forest

Forested Wetland

Agriculture

Urban

Barren

water

Marsh

Scrub/Shrub

Wateree Watershed Land Use

Forest

Forested Wetland

Agriculture

Urban

Barren

water

Marsh

Scrub/Shrub
42 

Figure 7. Location of NPDES dischargers and SCDHEC water sampling sites within or near Congaree 

National Park, SC. 
43 

Non-point Source Pollution 

Non-point source pollution consists of pollutants that are not piped off-site, but are diffused upon 

the landscape and subject to movement off site by stormwater runoff. Concentrated animal 

feeding operations (CAFOs) are large-scale livestock production facilities where dozens to 

hundreds (horse or cattle) or hundreds to thousands (swine) to hundreds of thousands and even 

millions (chicken and turkey) of animals are raised in close quarters and produce large amounts 

of manure. In these systems animal manure is spread out diffusely over the landscape either as 

liquid spray (swine waste) or dry litter (poultry waste), or semi-solid waste (cattle and hoses), 

this becoming non-point source pollution threats and subject to stormwater runoff carrying it into 

the nearest body of water. Thus, livestock waste runoff in some areas is a major water quality 

issue (Mallin 2000; Burkholder et al. 2007). There are several active permitted livestock 

facilities (located in the Congaree River, Wateree River, and Toms Creek watersheds (Figure 8). 

In Congaree hydrological subunit 03050110-010 none of these facilities are near the river or park 

and are likely not an issue, and no such facilities are located in the Cedar Creek watershed 

03050110-050 (Figure 8). In Toms Creek hydrologic subunit 03050110-060 there is a stable 

facility (ND0086428) maintaining up to 100 horses. Runoff from such an area where horses 

defecate can pollute a stream with potentially pathogenic microbes. In Congaree River 

hydrological subunit 03050110-070 there are two poultry CAFOs (ND0080543 and ND0068268) 

holding between 80,000 and 100,000 birds each (Figure 8), and runoff from such facilities may 

be able to impact the easternmost portions of the park with fecal microbial or nutrient pollution. 

The Wateree River hydrological subunit 03050104-030 contains a number of permitted animal 

facilities, but only one is near the river itself (ND0080519) a poultry facility permitted for 80,000 

birds. See Appendix C for information on all permitted CAFOs in the watersheds impinging on 

CONG. 

Cultivated cropland produces non-point source pollution primarily in the form of nutrients from 

fertilizers that are then subject to rural stormwater runoff entering streams and rivers. However, 

the amounts of cultivated land in the Congaree River watersheds and the Wateree River 

watershed are not large in the area compared with forested land and forested wetland (Table 14). 

In contrast, the Toms Creek watershed has significant agricultural land use that may contribute to 

downstream pollution (Table 14). There is a large aquaculture facility (Southland Fisheries, Inc.) 

located near Cedar Creek near Old Bluff Road; Knowles et al. (1996) noted that the impacts of 

potential discharges or flooding from this facility on the creek is unknown. However, an 

examination of the existing water quality data from sampling sites on Cedar Creek downstream 

of this facility show no unusual or negative impacts in regards to nutrient inputs or dissolved 

oxygen (see section Water Quality in Cedar Creek). It is hoped that SCDHEC will continue 

sampling at the creek where it enters CONG to continue monitoring any potential inputs of 

pollutants. If discharges do occur from this facility the in-situ instrumentation in Cedar Creek, 

along with regular SCDHEC sampling, should reflect this. Regardless, NPS should seek an 

agreement with Southland Fisheries to alert the park staff if a pond drainage or other water 

release is planned. 
44 

Figure 8. Location of permitted livestock production facilities (CAFOs) in watersheds impinging upon 

Congaree National Park (see Appendix C for map details). 

Table 14. Land use by percent coverage in the watersheds impacting Congaree National Park (from 

SCDHEC 2004a and SCDHEC 2005). 

Watershed Hydrologic Unit Urban Agricultural Forested

Forested  

Wetland Barren

Congaree River 03050110-010 7.4% 11.9% 54.2% 21.8% 2.0% 

Congaree River 03050110-070 0.6% 21.9% 48.0% 24.9% 2.2% 

Cedar Creek 03050110-050 3.8% 23.5% 44.0% 23.3% 4.1% 

Toms Creek 03050110-060 1.4% 32.2% 51.4% 13.4% 0.2% 

Wateree River 03050104-030 3.6% 13.0% 56.5% 19.4% 0.1% 

Impervious surface coverage (roads, sidewalks, parking lots, rooftops), which concentrates 

pollutants and increases stormwater runoff pollution, is presently very low in CONG. There are 

the parking areas near the Visitors Center and the entrance road; and the roofs of the park 

buildings are impervious surfaces. All of these surfaces are well away from Cedar Creek or any 
45 

of the other surface water bodies and thus immediate runoff within the park is not a potential 

problem to park water quality. 

Impervious surface coverage in general in watersheds is largely a product of urban land. Of the 

area watersheds only Congaree River 03050110-010 has notable urban coverage (Table 14), 

draining much of the Columbia metropolitan area, and undoubtedly the river receives non-point 

source loads of fecal bacteria, nutrients, suspended sediments, metals and toxic chemicals. 

Toxic waste sites with the potential to contaminate groundwater and/or nearby surface water are 

called Superfund sites; i.e. falling under the U.S. EPA’s Superfund Program. While coming 

from a known industrial site, pollutants in groundwater move as a plume and cannot be 

controlled as a point source, but require removal of large amounts of contaminated soils – thus 

are functional underground non-point source discharges. The great majority of Superfund sites 

in South Carolina are local urban sites with little potential for contaminating downstream areas. 

However, the EPA maintains a National Priorities List (NPL), which are sites that the EPA has 

determined present a “significant risk to human health or the environment”. South Carolina has 

26 such sites that are active, and three that have been remediated sufficiently to be deleted from 

the listing. 

In the Congaree Watershed or nearby watersheds there are five such NPL sites (Figure 9): 

1) The most relevant one to CONG is SCRDI Bluff Road, an abandoned petroleum and 

chemical disposal and recycling plant located across Bluff Road (Highway 48 – see 

Figure 9) from the Westinghouse facility four miles away from the park (EPA ID: 

SCD000622787, Site ID 0403212; Lat/Long 33.885410, -080.908750). The facility had a 

polluted underground plume, but has been remediated to “no contaminated groundwater 

migration” and is considered by EPA as “construction complete”. This means that this is 

a site “where all immediate threats are eliminated and all long-term threats are under 

control” 

2) The Townsend Saw Chain Company is an NPL site located well away from CONG, north 

of Ft. Jackson and near I20 (EPA ID: SCD980558050; Site ID: 0403363; Lat/Long 

34.106250, -080.834160). This site is also listed as “construction complete”, but 

contaminated groundwater migration is not considered under control yet. 

3) In the Congaree Watershed near Columbia (Figure 9) is SCRDI Dixiana, an NPL site 

(EPA ID: SCD980711394; Site ID: 0403402; Lat/Long 33.904450, -081.063880). This 

site is also considered “construction complete’, with no contaminated groundwater 

migration. 

4) Located close to SCRDI Dixiana is the Lexington County Landfill Area (Figure 9), an 

NPL site (EPA ID: SCD980558043, Site ID: 0403362, Lat/Long 33.919580, -

081.074160). This is also considered “construction complete”: with no contaminated 

groundwater migration. 

5) The final NPL site in the area is Palmetto Recycling company, located in the Congaree 

Watershed in suburbs of Columbia (EPA ID: SCD037398120, Site ID: 0403274; 

Lat/Long 34.122800, -081.011700). This site is listed as deleted from the Superfund 

lists, which is the final step beyond “construction complete”. This information was 

obtained from two useful websites that also contain further information on these and 
46 

other Superfund sites, one is called Wasting Away – The Center for Public Integrity 

http://projects.publicintegrity.org/Superfund. The other website is the EPA Superfund 

site http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/index.htm. 

 
47 

Figure 9. Location of SCDHEC active sampling sites near CONG (green border) that have data detailed 

on various Tables in this report, and Superfund sites that are on the EPA National Priorities List (black 

boxes). BR = SCRDI Bluff Road, DX = SCRDI Dixiana, LX = Lexington Landfill area, PW = Palmetto 

Recycling. As in Figure 7, yellow circles are SCDHEC sample sites and red triangles are NPDES 

locations. 
48 

Assessment of Biological Resources with Respect to Water Quality (Both Surface 

and Groundwater) 

Water Quality Standards 

The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control is required to develop a 

priority list of water bodies pursuant to Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act and 

Federal regulation 40 CFR 130.7. The listing identifies S.C. water bodies that do not currently 

meet State water quality standards for its designated use. The ratings for a water body are based 

on chemical water quality standards and biological assessments, if available, based on benthic 

macroinvertebrate community structure (see Lenat (1993) and NCDENR (2006)). For water 

bodies not meeting State standards, a TMDL (total maximum daily load) may be required. A 

TMDL is a calculation of the maximum amount of a specific pollutant that a water body can 

receive and still meet water quality standards. For impaired water bodies the TMDL document 

specifies the level of pollutant reductions needed and how much from what sources. 

The State of South Carolina has freshwater quality standards (SCDHEC 2004b) for common 

water quality parameters including: 

 Dissolved oxygen (5 mg/L, with a low of 4 mg/L) 

 Turbidity (50 NTU for most freshwater, 25 NTU for lakes) 

 Chlorophyll a of 40 g/L (for lakes >40 acres). 

Microbiological water quality and S.C. standards are discussed in a subsequent section (Human 

Health Issues). South Carolina also has standards for metals and various toxic compounds, and 

standards for total phosphorus and total nitrogen for lakes, depending on ecoregion (SCDHEC 

2004b); there are also narrative standards. Standards can be accessed at this website: 

http://www.scdhec.net/environment/water/regs/r61-68.pdf. Additionally, there is an 

Environmental Protection Agency standard of 10 mg/L for nitrate-N for drinking water, to 

protect infants from potentially fatal methemoglobinemia (blue-baby syndrome) 

Surface Water Quality 

No active SCDHEC ambient water quality monitoring stations are located within the park 

boundaries; however, there are a number of such sites near the borders of the park (Figure 7 and 

Figure 9). Upstream in West Columbia where the Saluda and Broad Rivers join to form the 

Congaree, SCDHEC maintains two sampling stations, CSB-001L and CSB-001R; a third station 

(C-074) is located in the Congaree River at the west boundary of the park (Figure 9), and a 

fourth station (C-007: see Figure 9) in the lower river at Highway 601 (SCDHEC 2004a). Cedar 

Creek has three SCDHEC stations: C-069 upstream in the creek at S-40-66, C-071 farther 

downstream at S-40-734 and C-075 (Figure 9) south of S-40-734 at the old USGS gauging 

platform (SCDHEC 2004a). Myers Creek hosts one station, C-578 at SR 734, and Toms Creek 

is host to two stations, C-072 at SC 48 (Figure 9) and C-579 at the power line and railroad track 

(SCDHEC 2004a). There is also a station on the Wateree River 2.5 km upstream of its 

confluence with the Congaree River (CW-222/SC-002: see Figure 9). Besides SCDHEC, a 

number of special water quality studies have carried out in and near the park by USGS and NPS 

personnel. Thus, there is an abundance of water quality data from a few river and stream stations 
49 

near the park. There is some historical data from sites within the park, but it is limited. 

Historical and recent data at the stations located either within the park or closest to the park are 

provided in the tables below. NPS is currently collecting sonde-based continuous water quality 

data from Cedar Creek, which will be discussed subsequently in this report. 

Water Quality in the Congaree River. SCDHEC (2004a) sampling has indicated mixed water 

quality in the upper Congaree River in Columbia. CSB-001L is rated as fully supportive of 

aquatic life, but recreational uses are only partially supportive due to elevated fecal coliform 

bacteria and copper, while downstream near CONG the Congaree River is impaired by fecal 

coliform bacteria, copper and mercury (Impairment information is listed in a subsequent section 

in Table 28). 

In the Congaree River at the western boundary of the park (Station C-074: Figure 9), a brief 

historical data set was provided in NPS (1998). These results showed unremarkable conditions 

in terms of turbidity and generally high dissolved oxygen concentrations (Table 15). Excessive 

levels of nutrients and fecal coliform bacteria were not found, and five-day biochemical oxygen 

demand (BOD5) concentrations were at levels normal for coastal plain rivers (Mallin et al. 

2006). 

SCDHEC (2004a) provided summary information for Station C-074 in the Congaree River at the 

western boundary of CONG (Figure 9) from 1987-2001. Only 2% of the dissolved oxygen 

samples violated the standard, although there was a significant decreasing trend during that 

period. Turbidity showed 6% violations and no trend, as did 6% of the copper measurements 

(SCDHEC 2004a). During 1987-2001 9% of the fecal coliform bacteria samples exceeded the 

human contact standard, and there was a significant downward trend (SCDHEC 2004a). 

SCDHEC data for this site representing 2005-2006 were obtained from the EPA STORET 

system. Eleven of 30, or 37% of the samples had fecal coliform counts exceeding 200 CFU/100 

mL, the state standard for human contact, indicating that fecal bacteria problems may be 

increasing for the Congaree River near CONG. Recent SCDHEC data showed that dissolved 

oxygen and turbidity were no problem, and nutrient concentrations were unremarkable. 

Farther downstream where the Congaree River is crossed by Highway 601 near the Bates Fork 

Tract (Station C-007: Figure 9) a robust historical data set was presented in NPS (1998). 

Turbidity data show that there are periodic excursions above the state standard, although mean 

and median levels were well below it (Table 16). For the period 1987-2001 SCDHEC (2004a) 

noted only 3% of samples exceeded the standard and there was a decreasing trend in turbidity. 

Dissolved oxygen concentrations were not problematic, and chlorophyll a measurements were all 

below the South Carolina algal bloom standard for lakes. Nutrient concentrations were not 

excessive compared with other southeastern Coastal Plain rivers (Meyer 1992; Mallin et al. 

1999; Burkholder et al. 2006), and SCDHEC (2004a) noted a significant decreasing trend in total 

phosphorus concentrations. Fecal coliform bacteria counts (Table 16) indicated that excursions 

above the human contact standard can be a continuing problem, although SCDHEC (2004a) 

found a decreasing trend in fecal coliforms between 1987 and 2001. 
50 

Table 15. Congaree River water quality, collected at the west edge of Congaree National Park; SCDHEC 

Station C-074. Data presented as mean + standard deviation / range / median. Sample size (n) = 30 for 

all data unless otherwise noted. 

11/1996 - 06/1997 

SCDHEC data in NPS (1998) 

1/2005 - 12/2006 

Most Recent STORET data 

Parameter Mean Range Median Mean Range Median

Turbidity (NTU) 11.6+5.7a

 4.7-22.0 a 10 a 18.9+19.0 3.0-90.0 12 

Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 9.6+1.6 a 2.9-13.2 a 9.9 a 7.9+1.6 5.8-10.9 7.7 

BOD5 (mg/L) 1.0+0.7 b 0.5-2.8 b

 0.8 b -- -- -- 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 0.428+0.030 b 0.390-0.470 b

 0.425 b 0.520+0.160 0.310-0.900 0.59 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 0.067+0.041 b 0.025-0.120 b 0.06 b 0.270+0.120 0.110-0.560 0.26 

Total Kjeldahl nitrogen 

(mg-N/L) 

0.345+0.138 b 0.200-0.620 b

 0.33 b 0.440+0.150 0.050-0.710 0.46 

Total phosphorus 

(mg-P/L) 

0.060+0.011 b 0.040-0.070 b

 0.06 b 0.060+0.020 0.010-0.100 0.06 

Fecal coliform bacteria 

(CFU/100 mL) 

74+44 a 31-150 a

 74 a, c 177+369 5-1800 65 

a n=7 samples, b n=8 samples, c geometric mean 

Summary information provided in SCDHEC (2004a) for Station C-007 at Highway 601 showed 

no major problems with dissolved oxygen, turbidity, nutrients, or fecal coliform bacteria during 

the period 1987-2001, and significant downward trends during that period for turbidity, 

phosphorus and fecal coliform bacteria. STORET data for 2005-2006 (Table 14) showed 13% of 

the fecal coliform bacteria samples exceeding 200 CFU/100 mL during that period, while 2007 

data from DHEC showed 8% exceeding that standard. The 2005-2006 data showed no problems 

for dissolved oxygen, but excessive turbidity on occasion (maximum of 90 NTU). Nutrients 

were low to moderate compared with other regional systems (Meyer 1992; Mallin et al. 1999; 

Burkholder et al. 2006). Thus, water in the Congaree River at Station C-007 at Highway 601 

showed that excessive fecal coliform bacteria counts are a continuing problem, and turbidity is 

on occasion. 

Water Quality in Cedar Creek. The National Park Service began collecting regular automated 

water quality data in Cedar Creek beginning in August 2006. The data sonde deployed at this 

location is a YSI 6600 EDS Multi-Parameter Water Quality Logger with "wiped" Rapid Pulse 

D.O. probe. The water quality station is designated “CONGccbr”, a fixed site water monitoring 

station located in CONG on the downstream side of the metal Cedar Creek bridge (ccbr) located 

at the junction of Sims Trail, Weston Lake Loop and the start of the Oakridge Trail. The metal 

bridge is labeled as “B” on trail maps. Walking from the Old-Growth Bottomland Forest 

Research and Education Center down Sims Trail to the data sonde takes between 30 minutes to 

an hour. This site was chosen as a long-term fixed water quality monitoring site for several 

reasons. Cedar Creek is one of the main blackwater tributary streams that traverse the forested 

floodplain within CONG. Cedar Creek supports diverse aquatic communities, and provides 

recreational opportunities (mainly canoeing and fishing) for park visitors. In addition, this 

section of Cedar Creek is designated as Outstanding National Resource Waters for South 

Carolina. CONG staff also manage two additional YSI data sondes for use in various projects 

and for future water quality work. 
51 

Table 16. Congaree River water quality, 3/74 – 6/97, collected at Highway 601; SCDHEC Station C-007. 

Data presented as mean + standard deviation / range / median. Sample size (n) = 23 for all data unless 

otherwise noted. 

03/1974 – 06/1997 

SC Pollution Control Authority 

(NPS 1998) 

1/2005 - 12/2006 

Most Recent STORET data 

Parameter Mean Range Median Mean Range Median

Turbidity (NTU) 22.5+24.1 a 0.6-210 a

 15 a 18.0+19.0 Mar-90 12 

Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 8.2+1.7 b 2.9-13.2 b 7.8 b 7.9+1.6 5.8-10.9 7.7 

Chlorophyl a (μg/L) 4.0+2.3 c

 1.3-13.6 c 3.4 c -- -- -- 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 0.373+0.122 d 0.030-1.140 d 0.37 d 0.520+0.160 0.310-0.900 0.47 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 0.139+0.312 e 0.010-2.700 e 0.06 e 0.160+0.070 0.030-0.360 0.11 

Total Kjeldahl nitrogen 

(mg-N/L) 

0.748 f 0.050-32.000 f

 0.41 f 0.320+0.150 0.050-0.640 0.33 

Total phosphorus 

(mg-P/L) 

0.120+0.285 g 0.010-4.400 g

 0.08 g 0.060+0.020 0.030-0.120 0.05 

Fecal coliform bacteria 

(CFU/100 mL) 

830+2551 h 8-24,000 h

 179 h, i 177+369 5-1,800 65 

a n=271 samples, b n=346 samples, c n=102 samples, d n=289 samples, e n=256 samples, f n=252 samples, g n=253 

samples, h n=224 samples, i geometric mean 

The operation of CONGccbr has proved to be a useful endeavor. The data (Table 17) indicate 

this stretch of Cedar Creek as being a low conductivity stream with good dissolved oxygen 

concentrations and pH values normal for blackwater streams. However, the sonde has also 

recorded periods where turbidity values well exceed South Carolina freshwater standards (Table 

17). 

Table 17. Cedar Creek water quality as recorded by NPS-operated in-situ instrumentation CONGccbr, 

August 9, 2006 – August 15, 2008, 30 minute intervals (missing data from February 19 – May 14, 2008). 

Data presented as mean + standard deviation / range / median. 

Parameter Mean Range Median 

Temperature (oC) 18.83+7.14 3.74-31.37 20.37 

Specific Conductance (mmho) 0.03+0.01 0.02-0.07 0.03 

pH 5.84+0.25 5.20-6.91 5.86 

Turbidity (NTU) 51.8+182.1 1.0-1,935.8 9.2 

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 7.5+1.8 4.5-12.1 6.8 

DO % Saturation 77.6+7.9 55.2-95.8 76.7 

There are numerous occasions when turbidity jumps to levels exceeding 1,000 NTU for brief 

periods of 30 minutes to a couple of hours; these excursions are likely a result of particulate 

matter becoming briefly lodged in the sensor, or possibly a stream disturbance in the immediate 

area such as hogs, researchers, or canoers. What is particularly striking are the extended periods 

(several days) when turbidity remains elevated to concentrations well exceeding SC standards. 

The USGS maintains water level meters in Cedar Creek (USGS Station 02169672) and the 

Congaree River near CONG (USGS Station 02169625). On some occasions elevated water 

levels driven by upstream rainfall coincided with the turbidity excursions. For example, in late 
52 

July and early August 2008 turbidity in Cedar Creek as measured by CONGccbr coincided 

strongly with elevated stream height in Cedar Creek as recorded by USGS, but much less so with 

Congaree River height. We obtained data from the NPS sonde CONGccbr as well as SC USGS 

for the period July 18 – August 14, 2008, and produced a scatter plot showing the positive 

relationship (Figure 10), and produced a highly significant (p < 0.001) and strong (r2

 = 0.80) 

predictive linear regression equation: 

Cedar Creek turbidity = 307.5 (gage height in ft. Cedar Creek) – 597.8 

Substituting Congaree River gage height produced a significant (p = 0.01) but weak regression 

equation (r2

 = 0.22), thus in this instance runoff-related discharge in Cedar Creek likely led to the 

elevated turbidity values. 

Cedar Creek turbidity = 222.6 (gage height in ft. Congaree River) + 26.9 

However, elevated turbidity in Cedar Creek in May and early June 2007 was not significantly 

related to gage height in either stream (p > 0.05). Thus, at times elevated discharge in either 

Cedar Creek or the Congaree River may increase Cedar Creek turbidity to high concentrations. 

We note that these elevated turbidity measurements well exceed those seen in blackwater 

streams in southeastern North Carolina except during pollution incidents (Ensign and Mallin 

2001; Mallin et al. 2006). 

Figure 10. Regression equation predicting Cedar Creek turbidity at CONGccbr site using USGSgenerated stream gage height in Cedar Creek Station 02169672, July 18 – August 14, 2008. 

y = 307.53x - 597.83

R2

 = 0.8031

p < 0.001

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

0123456

Cedar Creek USGS gage height (ft.)

Turbidity (NTU) in Cedar Creek
53 

Because Cedar Creek has been designated by the State as Outstanding National Resource Waters 

(ONRW) from Wise Lake to the Congaree River, this issue needs further attention. We 

recommend that CONG perform a study to determine the sources of the turbidity in Cedar Creek. 

This can take the form of a rainfall/runoff study; i.e. when heavy or persistent rain events are 

detected in the Cedar Creek watershed CONG staff can spot sample (daily) by truck various 

bridge or other locations upstream of CONG to measure turbidity to compare with data from 

CONGccbr. To test for turbidity coming into CONG from the Congaree River a similar series of 

samples can be obtained, although boat use would be required. Additionally, in either case 

sampling the creek by canoe within CONG would enhance the strength of the study. If results 

show a strong statistical relationship between turbidity within CONG and runoff from either the 

Cedar Creek or Congaree watersheds then these data can be used by NPS to push SCDHEC to 

force mitigative measures (Best Management Practices) on upstream areas to reduce stormwater 

runoff inputs to protect these designated protected park areas from pollution. In addition to field 

measurements, gage height data generated by USGS in both Cedar Creek and the Congaree 

River can be correlated to turbidity concentrations as in Figure 10 from CONGccbr to provide 

further analysis, and presumably, justification for runoff mitigative measures outside of the park 

boundaries. 

Sampling by SCDHEC (2004a) has indicated that Cedar Creek upstream of the park is fully 

supportive of aquatic life at all three sites sampled. The portion of Cedar Creek within CONG is 

designated as Outstanding Resources Waters (ORW), except, as mentioned, the portion of this 

creek from Wise Lake to the Congaree River, reclassified as ONRW by the South Carolina 

General Assembly (the Cedar Creek designation was the first such designation of its kind for 

South Carolina waters). ONRW is the highest level of protection the State can offer. As such, 

there is no discharge permitted from domestic, industrial, agricultural or aquaculture facilities, 

and no open water dredged soil disposal. There is also no non-point source discharge permitted, 

including from agriculture, aquaculture, or concentrated animal feeding operations, and no 

dumping of trash or refuse. The USGS maintains a station (02169672) monitoring stream height. 

A limited SCDHEC data set was presented in NPS (1998) for Cedar Creek just before it enters 

the park from Station C-075 (Table 18). None of the physical, chemical, or biological 

parameters showed excessive values in that data set. The United States Geological Survey 

(USGS) performed an intensive study on several Cedar Creek locations in and near CONG, 

sampling a broad variety of physical, chemical and biological parameters, some of which was 

reported in Maluk and Abrahamsen (1985). NPS (1998) provided summary data from that study 

for a Cedar Creek location just upstream of the park (Table 19). The data indicated that pH of 

the stream was low, as can be expected of a blackwater coastal Plain stream (Meyer 1990). 

There were no evident problems with low dissolved oxygen, in contrast to many blackwater 

streams in general (Meyer 1990; Mallin et al. 2004). Inorganic nutrients and chlorophyll a were 

low, characteristic of canopied blackwater streams not impacted by large nutrient sources, point 

or non-point (Mallin et al. 2004); the planktonic chlorophyll a would place this stream in the 

oligotrophic (low productivity, no algal bloom problems) category, based on an analysis of 

hundreds of temperate stream sites (Dodds et al. 1998). Thus, the historical data show Cedar 

Creek to maintain excellent water quality just upstream of the park. 

Summary information provided in SCDHEC (2004a) for Station C-075 just upstream of the park 

showed no problems with dissolved oxygen, turbidity, nutrients or fecal coliform bacteria, and 
54 

decreasing trends from 1987-2001 in turbidity and BOD5. There was an increasing trend for pH 

as well (SCDHEC 2004a). However, the STORET fecal coliform data for 2005-2006 showed 

some bacteria problems, with 21% of samples exceeding 200 CFU/100 mL (Table 18). 

Subsequent 2007 showed no samples exceeding the standard. The 2005-2006 data (Table 18) 

showed no problems with dissolved oxygen or turbidity, and nutrient concentrations were typical 

of wooded blackwater streams (Ensign and Mallin 2001; Mallin et al. 2004). 

At the Cedar Creek site C-069 well upstream of the park SCDHEC (2004a) has rated this site as 

partially supportive for recreational uses based on fecal coliforms. However, the lower station 

C-075 (Figure 9) nearest the park is rated as fully supportive of recreational uses. 

Table 18. Cedar Creek water quality collected at USGS gauging platform near S-40-734; SCDHEC 

Station C-075. Data presented as mean + standard deviation / range / median. Sample size (n) = 24 for 

all data unless otherwise noted. 

11/1996 - 06/1997 

SCDHEC data in NPS (1998) 

1/2005 - 12/2006 

Most Recent STORET data 

Parameter Mean Range Median Mean Range Median

Turbidity (NTU) 3.7+2.2 a 1.1-7.1 a

 2.8 a 4.0+3.0 2.0-17.0 2 

Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 9.0+1.5 b 7.4-11.3 b 8.7 b 7.5+1.3 4.6-9.8 7.3 

BOD5 (mg/L) 1.7+0.48 a 1.0-2.3 a

 1.8 a 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 0.106+0.093 a 0.040-0.340 a

 0.09 a 0.050+0.030 0.010-0.110 0.04 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 0.038+0.027 c 0.025-0.090 b 0.025 b 0.120+0.060 0.030-0.290 0.01 

Total Kjeldahl nitrogen 

(mg-N/L) 

0.567+0.229 a 0.250-0.960 a

 0.5 a 0.540+0.210 0.240-0.980 0.05 

Total phosphorus 

(mg-P/L) 

0.026+0.010 a 0.010-0.040 a

 0.03 a 0.020+0.010 0.010-0.050 0.02 

Fecal coliform bacteria 

(CFU/100 mL) 

152+105 d 23-280 d 113 d, e 171+392 9-2,000 70 e

a n=9 samples, b n=8 samples, c n<9 samples, d n=8 samples, e geometric mean 

Table 19. Cedar Creek water quality, 1/96 – 3/97, collected 500 ft. downstream from junction of Reeves 

and Myers Creeks with Cedar Creek (near SCDHEC Station C-075). Data presented as mean + standard 

deviation / range / median (USGS data summarized in NPS 1998). 

Parameter Sample Size Mean Range Median 

pH 55 5.8+0.7 4.5-7.8 5.7 

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 423 8.9+1.8 6.1-14.8 8.7 

Chlorophyll a (μg/L) 113 1.8+1.4 0.3-8.2 1.4 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 82 0.092+0.089 0.020-0.400 0.060 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 82 0.039+0.020 0.015-0.096 0.032 

Orthophosphate (mg-P/L) 82 0.028+0.043 0.001-0.150 0.007 

Water Quality in Toms Creek. Toms Creek within CONG is designated as ORW by the State. 

However, Toms Creek in the vicinity of SC 48 (Station C-072) at and Red Bluff Road is 
55 

considered by SCDHEC to be impaired by elevated fecal coliform bacteria, and at Red Bluff 

Road and near the power lines considered to have an impaired biological community (see Table 

24). Summary information provided in SCDHEC (2004a) for 1987-2001 showed no dissolved 

oxygen, nutrient or turbidity problems at this site in Toms Creek just upstream of the park, and 

significant decreasing turbidity and BOD5 trends (and an increasing pH trend). From 1987-2001 

23% of the samples collected exceeded the fecal coliform bacteria standard (SCDHEC 2004a). 

STORET data for 2005-2006 (Table 20) showed continuing bacterial problems with 29% of 

samples exceeding 200 CFU/100 mL, while 2007 data from SCDHEC showed 42% of samples 

exceeding the standard. Dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and nutrients were non-problematic for 

2005-2006 (Table 20). A set of samples collected in 1996-1997 by USGS and summarized in 

NPS (1998) near SCDHEC Station C-579 found no problems with dissolved oxygen and low 

chlorophyll a and nutrients (Table 19). SCDHEC rates this site as partially supportive of aquatic 

life based on benthic macroinvertebrtate community data. 

A set of samples was collected In Toms Creek just upstream of the park during 1988-1990 by the 

NPS consisting primarily of physical measurements and metals. Dissolved oxygen was suitable 

for stream life on all occasions sampled (Rikard 1991). However, concentrations of aluminum in 

the water column were considered to be at levels that could harm aquatic life (Rikard 1991 – also 

see subsequent section Ecosystem Effects). 

Table 20. Toms Creek water quality, 1/96 – 3/97. Data presented as mean + standard deviation / range / 

median. Left panel is USGS data collected from bridge over Toms Creek 1.5 mi NW of Kingville near 

SCDHEC Station C-579 summarized in NPS (1998), variable n, right panel is SCDHEC data collected at 

Station C-072. Sample size (n) = 24 for all data unless otherwise noted. 

 1/1996 - 03/1997 1/2005 - 12/2006 

Parameter Mean Range Median Mean Range Median

pH 5.6+0.5 a 4.3-6.6 a

 5.5 a 6.0+0.5 5.5-7.4 5.8 

Turbidity (NTU) -- -- -- 3.0+1.0 2.0-4.0 3 

Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 8.1+1.8 b 5.0-12.9 b

 8 b 7.3+1.4 4.2-9.8 7.1 

Chlorophyll a (μg/L) 0.8+0.9 c 0.0-7.7 c

 0.5 c -- -- -- 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 0.171+0.103 d 0.020-0.400 d

 0.1 d 0.220+0.100 0.050-0.430 0.22 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 0.034+0.017 d 0.013-0.087 d 0.03 d 0.130+0.070 0.030-0.360 0.11 

Orthophosphate (mg-P/L) 0.034+0.073 d 0.001-0.570 d

 0.009 d 0.020+0.010 e 0.010-0.050 e 0.01 e

Fecal coliform bacteria 

(CFU/100 mL) 

-- -- -- 344+861 40-4,400 143 f

a n=55 samples, b n=383 samples, c n=112 samples, d n=80 samples, e measured as total phosphorus, f geometric 

mean 

In lower Toms Creek, after it is joined by Cedar Creek and just before it enters the Congaree 

River USGS also conducted an intensive study of several water quality parameters, including 

physical parameters, dissolved nutrients and chlorophyll a, summarized in NPS (1998). 

Interestingly, pH was higher within CONG than upstream of it (Table 21), possibly a result of 

inputs from oxbow lakes, sloughs, or groundwater as the stream meanders through the park. 

Dissolved oxygen concentrations were not problematic (Table 21), nitrate concentrations were 

somewhat higher than they were upstream of CONG, but chlorophyll a concentrations were low, 
56 

likely due to the closed canopy and subsequent reduced sunlight availability in the forest. 

Chlorophyll a concentrations were within the oligotrophic category as defined by Dodds et al. 

(1993). 

Table 21. Lower Toms Creek water quality, 2/96 – 11/97, collected in creek just before it enters the 

Congaree River within Congaree National Park. Data presented as mean + standard deviation / range / 

median (USGS data summarized in NPS 1998). 

Parameter Sample Size Mean Range Median 

pH 48 6.5+0.4 5.3-7.5 6.5 

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 840 8.1+2.4 4.5-20.0 7.9 

Chlorophyll a (μg/L) 97 1.1+0.8 0.0-4.2 0.8 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 72 0.300+0.171 0.020-0.600 0.3 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 72 0.052+0.020 0.024-0.111 0.051 

Orthophosphate (mg-P/L) 80 0.030+0.033 0.004-0.150 0.02 

Water Quality in Congaree Park Oxbow Lakes. Oxbows within CONG are classified as 

ORW by South Carolina; however, these lakes are not sampled by SCDHEC. An analysis by 

USGS in 1996-1997 provided data on three oxbow lakes: Weston Lake, Wise Lake, and Bates 

Old River, which was outside of the park at the time of study but now forms the border of the 

Bates Fork Tract - Figure 4; Plate 5). In contrast to the lotic systems discussed above, these 

lakes are subject to periodic low dissolved oxygen problems, especially Wise Lake (Tables 22-

24). Also in contrast to the rivers and streams these lakes host algal blooms, sometimes of 

considerable magnitude (see chlorophyll a concentrations in Tables 22-24). We reiterate that 

Wise Lake hosted a large blue-green algal bloom in 2007, according to SCDHEC. For lakes 

exceeding 40 acres in size the State of South Carolina uses a chlorophyll a standard of 40 g/L 

as a measure of waters impaired by nutrient loading. The oxbows are of course much smaller 

than 40 acres, but these values can serve as a guide at least. Based on a broad variety of lakes 

and reservoirs (Wetzel 2001, Tables 15-20) the mean chlorophyll a concentrations in Weston 

Lake and Bates Old River are characteristic of eutrophic systems (high productivity, with 

frequent algal blooms) while those of Wise Lake are characteristic of mesotrophic systems, 

which are moderately productive with occasional algal blooms. The analysis by Dodds et al. 

(1993) places all three lakes in the mesotrophic range. 

A series of experiments on blackwater streams in southeastern North Carolina have demonstrated 

that, contrary to previous dogma, shallow blackwater streams can and do host algal blooms 

provided nutrients and sufficient light are available (Mallin et al. 2001; 2004). The North 

Carolina experiments demonstrated that phytoplankton growth was stimulated by nitrogen, but 

not phosphorus additions. When we computed inorganic N/P molar ratios for the CONG 

oxbows (Tables 22-24), mean values ranged from 4.3 (Weston Lake) to 6.8 (Bates Old River) 

and median ratios ranged from 6.2 (Weston Lake) to 9.8 (Wise Lake). These ratios are well 

below the Redfield Ratio of 16; values considerably greater than the Redfield Ratio are 

considered to be indicative of systems in which phytoplankton growth is phosphorus limited, 

while lakes with ratios well below the Redfield Ratio are generally considered to be nitrogen 

limited. Thus, phytoplankton production in these oxbows appears to be limited by nitrogen in 

general. These oxbows likely obtain nutrients from periodic flooding (and possibly groundwater 
57 

inputs), and the canopy is open above the majority of the lake surface area, which would set the 

stage for algal blooms. Based on the mean and maximum chlorophyll a values and the 

occasional severe hypoxia, eutrophication is a periodic problem in the oxbow lakes of CONG. 

Table 22. Weston Lake water quality, 1/96 – 3/97, collected within Congaree National Park. Data 

presented as mean + standard deviation / range / median / n (USGS data summarized in NPS 1998). 

Bolded value exceeds the SC chlorophyll a standard for large lakes (no standard as such for small lakes). 

Parameter Sample Size Mean Range Median 

pH 57 6.1+0.6 6.0-7.5 6.7 

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 648 6.0+2.7 0.1-12.4 5.9 

Chlorophyll a (μg/L) 116 8.2+8.0 0.1-40.1 5.3 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 81 0.037+0.074 0.002-0.400 0.01 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 81 0.023+0.017 0.006-0.108 0.018 

Orthophosphate (mg-P/L) 81 0.031+0.041 0.010-0.150 0.01 

Inorganic N/P ‐‐  4.3 ‐‐  6.2 

Table 23. Wise Lake water quality, 1/96 – 3/97, collected within Congaree National Park. Data presented 

as mean + standard deviation / range / median / n (USGS data summarized in NPS 1998). Bolded value 

exceeds the SC chlorophyll a standard for large lakes (no standard as such for small lakes). 

Parameter Sample Size Mean Range Median 

pH 51 5.8+0.5 4.1-6.8 5.9 

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 503 4.7+2.5 0.1-10.0 4.6 

Chlorophyll a (μg/L) 104 18.4+21.4 0.4-115.4 8.4 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 74 0.033+0.040 0.001-0.200 0.02 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 74 0.029+0.035 0.009-0.305 0.022 

Orthophosphate (mg-P/L) 74 0.022+0.032 0.001-0.140 0.01 

Inorganic N/P ‐‐  6.2 ‐‐  9.4 

Table 24. Bates Old River water quality, 1/96 – 3/97, collected within Congaree National Park. Data 

presented as mean + standard deviation / range / median / n (USGS data summarized in NPS 1998). 

Bolded value exceeds the SC chlorophyll a standard for large lakes (no standard as such for small lakes). 

Parameter Sample 

Size 

Mean Range Median 

pH 12 6.7+0.4 4.8-7.1 6.1 

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 95 7.5+3.0 2.9-11.6 7.2 

Chlorophyll a (μg/L) 24 18.2+32.9 1.0-164.0 10.7 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 17 0.090+0.016 0.002-0.300 0.04 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 17 0.060+0.060 0.010-0.180 0.037 

Orthophosphate (mg-P/L) 17 0.049+0.074 0.005-0.290 0.02 

Inorganic N/P ‐‐  6.8 ‐‐  8.5 
58 

Water Quality in the Wateree River. Much of the Wateree River downstream of Lake 

Wateree is impaired for fish consumption by mercury. In addition, SCDHEC considers the 

Wateree River well upstream of the park at I20 impaired by low dissolved oxygen (see Table 

28). At the SCDHEC station nearest the park, CW-222/SC-002, summary information provided 

in SCDHEC (2005) found no problems with dissolved oxygen, turbidity, nutrients or fecal 

coliform bacteria, and found significant decreasing trends in turbidity and fecal coliform bacteria 

from 1988-2002. STORET data from 2005-2006 showed only one of 23 fecal coliform samples 

exceeding the standard of 200 CFU/100 mL, while SCDHEC data for 2007 showed all samples 

to be less than 200 CFU/100 mL. Data from 2005-2006 showed dissolved oxygen reflecting 

good conditions, while turbidity on rare occasions will exceed the standard (Table 25), while 

1984-1996 data showed generally good dissolved oxygen, low average BOD5 and turbidity that 

was elevated on occasion (Table 25). Nutrients in the Wateree River were low to moderate 

compared with other regional riverine systems (Meyer 1992; Mallin et al. 1999; Burkholder et al. 

2006). 

Table 25. Wateree River water quality collected 2.5 km upstream of confluence with the Congaree River; 

SCDHEC Station CW-222/SC-002. Data presented as mean + standard deviation / range / median. 

02/1984 - 12/1996 

SCDHEC data in NPS (1998) 

1/2005 - 12/2006 

Most Recent SCDHEC STORET data 

Parameter Mean Range Median Mean Range Median

Turbidity (NTU) 17.6+10.2 a 1.4-80.0 a 16.1 a 21.0+13.0 5.0-56.0 18 

Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 8.0+1.8 b 4.7-13.2 b 7.8 b 8.0+1.6 5.7-11.0 7.8 

BOD5 (mg/L) 1.1+1.7 c 0.1-17.0 c

 0.9 c -- -- -- 

Nitrate-N (mg-N/L) 0.386+0.189 d 0.010-1.15 d

 0.37 d 0.460+0.110 0.200-0.640 0.47 

Ammonium-N (mg-N/L) 0.083+0.083 e 0.010-0.500 e 0.06 e 0.150+0.080 0.030-0.390 0.12 

Total Kjeldahl nitrogen 

(mg-N/L) 

 0.524+0.605 d 0.050-6.640 d

 0.605 d 0.400+0.140 0.110-0.670 0.39 

Total phosphorus 

(mg-P/L) 

0.088+0.06 f 0.010-0.600 f

 0.08 f 0.070+0.020 0.030-0.100 0.07 

Fecal coliform bacteria 

(CFU/100 mL) 

-- -- -- 716+855 5-2,100 36 g

a n=166 samples, b n=126 samples, c n=99 samples, d n=122 samples, e n=121 samples, f n=123 samples, 

g geometric mean 

Groundwater Quality 

Groundwater quality in terms of nutrients or toxins is not sampled within the park. USGS 

monitors water levels only. There are two wells for drinking water in the park, located at the 

Harry Hampton Visitors Center and Old-Growth Bottomland Forest Research and Education 

Center that are screened at different depths. As mentioned, well water is drawn from 36 m (118 

ft), chlorinated and monitored for fecal bacteria by DHEC. There are at least two old supply 

wells in the park that are non-potable and no longer in use located near Wise Lake and Dawson’s 

Cabin. In addition, the Old-Growth Bottomland Forest Research and Education Center at CONG 

maintains a groundwater well network along Sims Trail that consists of 10 shallow groundwater 

wells up to 7 meters deep. Data loggers measure water height and temperature every 30 minutes. 

Data are downloaded periodically. These wells are maintained by CONG staff through a 

partnership with College of Charleston and Furman University (Shelley et al. 2008). 
59 

Ecosystem Effects 

Water quality issues that could affect the flora and fauna of park waters include natural or 

anthropogenically caused hypoxia, excessive nutrient loading leading to eutrophic conditions 

(and subsequent hypoxia) and toxic compounds in the surface or groundwaters that could affect 

survival or growth. 

Hypoxia and Anoxia. Blackwater streams in coastal lowland areas are often afflicted with 

hypoxia (< 4.0 mg/L DO) during summer. This is because these streams have abundant 

sediment bacteria populations, are fed by drainage from swamp water already low in dissolved 

oxygen, and have high organic carbon (principally dissolved) loads that exert a biochemical 

oxygen demand on the water (Meyer 1992). Because these streams already have low summer 

DO levels, they are especially sensitive to additional anthropogenic inputs of BOD that can drive 

DO concentrations even further to stressful levels (Mallin et al. 2004). However, the Congaree 

River, the lower Wateree River, Cedar Creek and Toms Creek do not appear to have low 

dissolved oxygen problems. As mentioned, the Wateree River upstream is impaired by low DO 

but that problem is not an issue downstream near the park. 

The dissolved oxygen data on the oxbow lakes are not long term and not recent, but the existing 

data (Tables 22-24) shows that DO mimima can reach near-anoxic conditions, and a set of over 

500 samples showed Wise Lake to have mean and median DO concentrations below 5.0 mg/L. 

Thus, these oxbows are subject to this ecosystem problem at times. Such hypoxia and anoxia 

issues can be exacerbated by eutrophication. This problem can be exacerbated by inputs of 

either nitrogen or phosphorus, or both together. As mentioned above, blackwater systems can 

and do host algal blooms provided nutrients and sufficient light are available, and experiments 

demonstrated that phytoplankton growth was stimulated by nitrogen, but not phosphorus 

additions, and that bacterial growth was stimulated by phosphorus, especially organic 

phosphorus (Mallin et al. 2001; 2004). In the experiments significantly increased BOD occurred 

due to the indirect photosynthetic pathway of nitrogen inputs stimulating algal growth, which in 

turn dies and becomes organic matter, stimulating bacterial growth and BOD. Phosphorus inputs 

increased BOD by directly stimulating bacterial growth (heterotrophs). In a variety of rivers, 

lakes and streams in southeastern North Carolina (Mallin et al. 2006) have shown strong 

correlations between chlorophyll a concentrations and BOD. Since the oxbow lakes within 

Congaree Park have been shown to host periodic algal blooms, and are likely limited by nitrogen 

they may be subject to periods of hypoxia following nitrogen-induced blooms through 

floodwater inputs. Likewise, inputs of phosphorus may stimulate bacterial growth and BOD. 

Thus, a limnologically based research program focused on the oxbow lakes is a desirable goal. 

Fish kill information is accumulated by SCDHEC (J.R. Rice, personal communication) in data 

files but is presently in the process of reorganization. The available information showed that fish 

kills have not been reported from CONG specifically, but a number (<20) fish kills have been 

reported in the Congaree and Wateree Rivers and their tributaries since 1985 over the years for 

various reasons, including temperature changes, low dissolved oxygen, and turbine blades. 

Species affected were generally sunfish and shad, with the number affected ranging from less 

than 10 to 2,000 individuals. 

Water Column Toxicity. Exposure to toxicants including pesticides, PCBs, PAHs, metals and 

other compounds can affect organism reproduction and community health. There is a fish 
60 

consumption advisory mainly for mercury in several fish species in the Congaree area; this is 

discussed further below. In terms of fish reproduction, experiments run using water from the 

Congaree, Wateree and Santee Rivers found that striped bass Morone saxatilis larvae had high 

mortality when exposed to Wateree River water, whereas water from the other two rivers was not 

toxic but the larvae swam lethargically compared with control water (Finger and Bulak 1988). 

The specific cause of toxicity was not determined, although elevated concentrations of the 

phenolic compound pentachloroanisole (PCA) were found in the Wateree. This compound, 

along with possibly other phenolic compounds was suspected in playing a role in the low larval 

survival in the Wateree (Finger and Bulak 1988). 

An NPS study (Rikard 1991) found concentrations of aluminum in the water column of Myers, 

Toms and Reeves Creeks that were considered to be at levels that could harm aquatic life (>0.25 

mg/L). A USGS study (Maluk and Abrahamsen 1999) found the presence of 12 pesticides in 

park stream waters. However, all concentrations were below criteria for the protection of aquatic 

life or human health. A USGS/SCDNR study on mercury in organisms and sediments in CONG 

found generally low levels of Hg in sediments (May et al. 2005). However, the authors found 

that approximately 10% of the whole fish samples analyzed exceeded the USEPA consumption 

advisory standard; the authors noted that most of the fish analyzed were small, and suspected that 

larger fish would have even greater body burdens. The impacted fish were widespread 

throughout CONG, collected at locations in Cedar Creek, Toms Creek, Dry Branch, Weston 

Lake and various tributaries. 

Sediment Toxicity and Quality. Exposure to toxicants such as metals, pesticides and other 

organic contaminants can cause toxicity to benthic organisms and adversely impact living habitat 

of invertebrates and fish. Researchers have compiled sediment concentration data and 

consequent effects on benthic macroinvertebrates from multiple studies to produce a set of 

consensus-based guidelines for metals and organic contaminants for freshwater systems 

(MacDonald et al. 2000). While these are not Federal legal standards they provide helpful 

guidelines for researchers and natural resource managers freshwater as well (Table 26). 
61 

Table 26. Freshwater guideline values for sediment metals and organic pollutant concentrations (ppm, or 

g/g, dry wt.) potentially harmful to aquatic life, based on consensus (MacDonald et al. 2000). TEC = 

(Threshold effect concentration). Concentrations below the TEC are those in which harmful effects on 

aquatic communities are not expected to occur. PEC = (Probable effect concentration). Concentrations 

above the PEC are those in which adverse effects are expected to occur more often than not. 

Concentrations between the TEC and PEC are those in which harmful effects occasionally occur. 

Metal TEC PEC 

Arsenic (As) 9.79 33 

Cadmium (Cd) 0.99 4.98 

Chromium (Cr) 43.4 111 

Copper (Cu) 31.6 149 

Lead (Pb) 35.8 128 

Mercury (Hg) 0.18 1.06 

Nickel (Ni) 22.7 48.6 

Zinc (Zn) 121 459 

Total PCBs 0.0598 0.676 

Total PAHs 1.61 22.8 

Total DDT 0.0058 0.572 

Chlordane 0.00324 0.0176 

Dieldrin 0.0019 0.0618 

Table 27. Locations near or in Congaree Park where sediment metals have been found in potentially 

toxic concentrations according to estuarine guidelines (revised from Maluk and Abrahamsen 1999). 

Bolded indicates concentrations exceeding the TEC; none of the concentrations exceeded the PEC 

(MacDonald et al. 2000). 

Cr Cu Pb Ni Total DDT 

Congaree R. Columbia Left Bank 74 46 68 28 0.0093 

Congaree R. Columbia Right Bank 85 50 36 35 0.0084 

Congaree R. at Hwy 601 92 39 55 35 0.0038 

Myers Creek 70 18 76 27 0.0147 

Cedar Creek before park 70 20 49 22 0.0002 

Cedar Creek near Wise Lake 92 37 54 35 0.0042 

Toms Creek 68 13 50 20 0.0051 

A study by USGS (Maluk and Abrahamsen 1999) collected sediment metals data from the 

Congaree River, Cedar Creek and Toms Creek. Metals found in potentially harmful 

concentrations included chromium, copper, lead and nickel (Table 27). We note that these 

collections did not find metals levels that were likely to produce adverse effects (i.e. >PECs) but 

many concentrations exceeded the TECs (those below where adverse effects were unlikely to 

occur). The mercury study performed by May et al (2005) likewise found all sediment Hg 

samples to contain less than the TEC. Thus, there are potential metals toxicity problems in 

sediments in and near CONG; however, the concentrations found are not associated with the 

strong likelihood of sediment toxicity (Table 26). Several organochlorine pesticides were also 

sampled from the sediments in the Maluk and Abrahamsen (1999) study. Of these, only total 
62 

DDT exceeded the TEC in three locations, the Congaree River at Columbia and Myers Creek 

(Tables 26, 27). 

Groundwater Toxicity. There are no known underground storage tanks within the park, 

however groundwater contamination is of concern from CERCLA sites, underground storage 

tanks, and landfills within the watershed. The Water Resources Management Plan for Congaree 

National Park (Knowles et al. 1996) specifically addresses an EPA-NPL site located 

approximately 4 miles from the northeast boundary of the park. This site includes a groundwater 

contaminant plume and soil contamination from various containerized toxic and hazardous 

materials. Underground storage tanks are also mentioned (Knowles et al. 1996), which includes 

2 sites in Eastover, SC that may border the Tom’s Creek watershed that present the possibility of 

groundwater contamination in the park from petroleum. As of 1996, there were eleven permitted 

solid waste landfills in Richland County, and their potential to contaminate groundwater in the 

park is addressed (see Knowles et al. 1996 p. 75). Testing and monitoring groundwater within 

the park for xenobiotic compounds remains an need. 

Human Health Issues 

Waterborne factors potentially influencing human health can be assessed by several metrics. 

These metrics include water contact safety in terms of either fecal coliform bacterial, 

Enterococci or E. coli counts, and water contact or aerosol safety in terms of toxic algal blooms, 

and finfish or shellfish toxicant body burdens. Human contact with toxic or otherwise dangerous 

chemicals in surface or groundwaters is another potential issue. 

Microbial Pathogens and Human Contact: Humans can contract illness through contact with 

microbially contaminated waters while swimming, wading, or working in contaminated water if 

pathogenic viruses, bacteria or protozoans enter the individual through the mouth, nose, eyes, or 

open wounds. The South Carolina freshwater standard for human contact is not to exceed a 

geometric mean of 200 CFU/100 ml of fecal coliform bacteria based on five samples during a 30 

day period, nor shall more than 10% of the total samples during a 30 day period exceed 400 

CFU/100 mL (SCDHEC 2004a). 

At Station C-074 in the Congaree River at the west edge of the park (Figure 9), fecal coliform 

data collected by SCDHEC and placed into STORET showed few problems at this site 

historically but 2005-2006 data showed a recent upswing in fecal coliform bacteria counts. 

Farther downstream at C-007 near Highway 601 there were minor fecal coliform problems 

according to the most recent data. Cedar Creek as it enters the park (Station C-075) had 

historically good quality water in terms of fecal coliform bacteria, but had some problems in 

2005-2006, with a return to excellent conditions in 2007. As indicated in Table 28, Toms Creek 

is considered by SCDHEC to be impaired by excessive fecal coliform counts. Historical and 

recent SCDHEC data from Toms Creek show poor bacteriological water quality (SCDHEC 

2004a; Table 18). The sources may be agriculture, animal waste, or land disturbing activity 

upstream of the park, or septic system failures upstream of the park. All dwellings in this 

watershed are utilizing septic systems (Maliszewski 2005). The Wateree River near CONG 

continues to manifest good water quality in terms of fecal bacteria. 

Montebello (2008) performed a study of Enterococcus and Escherichia coli abundance at several 

stations located in Cedar Creek, Toms Creek, Wise Lake and Weston Lake (as a high school 
63 

project for the state science fair). Based on EPA criteria, the stations in upper Cedar Creek at the 

canoe launch, Wise Lake, and Weston Lake maintained safe water quality at all times for these 

two fecal bacteria indicators. However, lower Cedar Creek near Wise Lake and farther 

downstream at the canoe landing, as well as two stations on Toms Creek, often did not meet the 

EPA criteria (Montebello 2008). A limited number of samples were sent to a contracting 

laboratory to determine if human DNA markers were present. The samples were negative for 

human presence except for one sample from Toms Creek, which showed a human gene 

biomarker based on a fecal Bacteroides test (Montebello 2008). As mentioned earlier, we saw 

evidence of feral hog rooting activity near lower Cedar Creek in the vicinity of Wise Lake, and 

we also spotted a feral hog in the vicinity of the lake. Thus, we suspect that these large 

mammals may be contributing at times to fecal water pollution within the park. 

Wastewater within the park is treated by septic systems, which are potential sources of fecal 

pathogens. However, all are well away from Cedar Creek and other water bodies and have posed 

no problems technically, and thus should pose no threat to the park surface water quality. Since 

the drinking well water is drawn from over 118 ft (36 m) depth in the lower aquifer these septic 

systems pose no threat to the well water (which is chlorinated and tested regardless). 

Exposure to Toxic Algae: Humans can also be adversely affected by skin contact with water 

containing toxic algae or breathing aerosols containing toxins from such algae. In freshwater 

systems, a number of cyanobacterial (blue-green algal) species contain toxins injurious to 

humans (Burkholder 2002). There is presently no information available on the presence or 

absence of toxic algal blooms in the waters of CONG. There was a documented blue-green algal 

bloom in Wise Lake in 2007 that was identified to genus Oscillatoria (T. Thom, NPS, personal 

communication). However, no fish kill was noted and there was no other information on 

potential toxicity of this bloom. Additionally, the oxbow lakes are subject to period excessive 

chlorophyll a concentrations (Tables 22-24). This, the occurrence of a toxic blue-green algal 

bloom within the park is possible but would probably be rare. 

Fish Toxicant Body Burdens: Eating fish with body burdens high in contaminants can be a 

human health hazard. Several fish species in this region have high mercury body burdens and 

consuming more than four meals per month of these fish is considered hazardous. In the 

Congaree River from Columbia to the Santee River the consumption of bowfin, largemouth bass, 

and chain pickerel is restricted to one meal per week, and in the Wateree River from Lake 

Wateree to the Congaree River consumption of bowfin and flathead catfish is restricted to one 

meal per week. Fish advisory information can be found at this website: 

http://www.scdhec.net/environment/water/fish/index.htm. Fishing is permitted in all waters of 

the park except for Weston Lake, so toxicant body burdens are a concern. 

List of impairments (State and Federal listings) 

South Carolina DHEC determines if the water quality of the water bodies of the state meet their 

intended use classifications, or if they are impaired. To make these determinations they utilize 

water quality data, benthic macroinvertebrate data, and/or fish and shellfish consumption 

advisories based on fecal bacteria pollution or toxicant body burden data. Briefly, for parameters 

such as dissolved oxygen, pH, turbidity, phosphorus, nitrogen, and chlorophyll a, when the state 

standard is exceeded in more than 25% of samples collected the criterion for that particular 

measure is not supported. Benthic macroinvertebrate community impairment is determined 
64 

utilizing the already-mentioned EPT Index and the North Carolina Biotic Index (BI). Stream 

stations can be rated for either Recreation or Aquatic Life, or both, depending upon classification 

and what is measured at any given site. Water bodies are rated at point locations; however, the 

impairment is considered to extend for some distance upstream and downstream of the listed 

point location (SCDHEC 2004a; 2004b). There are several water bodies outside of but upstream 

of and within reasonable proximity of the park that are listed on the 2008 South Carolina 303(D) 

list as Impaired Waters, located in Richland, Fairfield, Sumter and Kershaw Counties. These 

waters will require a TMDL (total maximum daily load) to bring them into water quality 

compliance (South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control records). These 

water bodies are listed in Table 28; further information on determination of impairment is 

available at the following website: 

http://www.scdhec.net/environment/water/tmdl/docs/tmdl_08_303d.pdf. 

List of Water Bodies with Undocumented Conditions/ Status 

Most rivers and streams immediately adjacent to or impacting the park have ratings for 

designated uses (SCDHEC 2004a; SCDHEC 2005, Table 28), with the exception of McKenzie 

Creek, Dry Branch, Griffins Creek, Singleton Creek and Running Creek/Running Lake. DHEC 

only provides use support ratings to water bodies that have DHEC monitoring sites. These 

streams have no SCDHEC monitoring sites on them and are thus not rated (simply designated as 

FW), except for portions lying within CONG, which are rated ORW as noted earlier. To 

reiterate, all waters within CONG are rated ORW except for the portion of Cedar Creek from 

Wise Lake to the Congaree River, which is rated ONRW. The Congaree River itself is not rated 

ORW, although it adjoins the park. 
65 

Table 28. Water bodies located upstream and near Congaree National Park that are considered impaired 

and are on the South Carolina 303(d) list, including the reason and target date for completed TMDL. 

Locations are limited to the areas on the Broad, Saluda and Congaree Rivers near and downstream of 

Columbia, creeks directly entering Congaree Park, and on the Wateree River downstream of Lake 

Wateree. We note that a number of locations in Lake Wateree are impaired for phosphorus, dissolved 

oxygen and pH. Also, areas in Lake Murray are impaired for chlorophyll a, phosphorus, copper and pH. 

Basin Water body and location Reason TMDL target 

date 

Broad Broad River at SO. RR trestle, 0.5 mi DS of SC 213 Cu 2018 

Broad Broad River at US 176 (Broad River Rd.) in Columbia Cu 2018 

Broad Smith Branch at N. Main St. (US 21) in Cola biological community 2013 

Broad Crane Creek at US 321 biological community 2013 

Broad Crane Creek at S-40-43 under I-20 in Cola dissolved oxygen 2021 

Saluda Saluda just below Lake Murray Dam Hg 2017 

Saluda Broad River diversion canal at Cola Water Plant fecal coliforms 2009 

Saluda Congaree River at Barney Jordan Ramp Hg 2017 

Saluda Congaree River at State Highway 378 Hg 2017 

Saluda Congaree River at Blossom St. fecal coliforms 2011 

Saluda Congaree River at west boundary of Congaree Park fecal coliforms 2011 

Saluda Congaree River at Devro-Teepak discharge outfall Cu 2011 

Saluda Congaree River at US 601 Cu, fecal coliforms, Hg 2011, 2017 

Saluda Cedar Creek at S-40-734 biological community 2015 

Saluda Toms Creek at SC 48 fecal coliforms 2008 

Saluda Toms Creek at power line and railroad track biological community 2013 

Saluda Toms Creek at Red Bluff Rd. biological community 2013 

Saluda Toms Creek at Red Bluff Rd. fecal coliforms 2013 

Catawba Wateree River below Lake Wateree Dam Hg 2017 

Catawba Wateree River at I-20 Hg, dissolved oxygen 2010, 2017 

Catawba Wateree River at US 378/76 Hg 2017 

67 

Other Areas of Concern 

Development Trends 

Land Use 

Land use affecting CONG includes both the immediate area within the park, and the watershed 

upstream that drains into it. As mentioned earlier (Figure 6), the Congaree River Basin drains 

668 mi2

 (1730 km2), and it’s land use consists of 51.7% forested land, 16.9% agricultural land, 

15.8% is forested wetland, 10.8% is urban land, 2.8% is barren land, 1.6% is water and 0.4% is 

marsh (SCDHEC 2004a). The Bates Fork Tract is officially within the lower Congaree River 

Watershed, but is also strongly influenced by flooding from the Wateree River Watershed 

(SCDHEC 2005). Land use within the Wateree 11-digit hydrologic unit (Figure 6) consists of 

56.5% forested land, 19.4% forested wetland, 13.0% agricultural land, 4.7% scrub/shrub land, 

and 3.6% urban land, 2.4% water, 0.3% marsh and 0.1% barren land (SCDHEC 2005). Thus, of 

the watersheds immediately impacting CONG, approximately 70% of the Congaree and 76% of 

the Wateree watersheds are either forested or wetland of various types. This is good in that these 

forest and wetlands serve as buffers to reduce overland runoff pollution to the creeks and rivers 

impacting the park. The challenge is to keep the wetlands from being drained and developed 

(which may impact groundwater levels within CONG by incising Cedar or Toms Creeks (see 

Shelley et al. 2008), and keep clearcutting of forests to a minimum to reduce runoff impacts. 

Congaree Park Land Use Issues: One potential concern is stormwater runoff from impervious 

surfaces, leading to increased loading of pollutants into waterways. Pollutants that are often 

associated with stormwater runoff include fecal coliform bacteria, nutrients, BOD, PAHs and 

airborne pollutants. The parking lot near the Visitors Center (Figure 1) is situated well away 

from any of the creek channels passing through the park. Therefore, thus rain events and not 

likely to cause runoff within the park that will impact the water features and associated biota. 

Presently there are two septic systems used to treat human sewage in Congaree National Park. 

But as mentioned, their location appears to pose no threat to the creek or drinking well water. 

Watershed Land Use Issues: SCDHEC (2004a) notes that the Congaree River Watershed 

03050110-010 has a high potential for growth, especially in various areas of the City of 

Columbia and its metropolitan area, and they note in particular that the Bluff Road area of 

Columbia should experience heavy growth. Heavy urban growth will increase the amount of 

watershed impervious surface area and subsequent pollution runoff into the streams and river. 

Along Bluff Road west of CONG several clearcut areas are visible from the road. Clearcuts 

increase the amount of pollutant loading to nearby creeks, including suspended sediments, 

nutrients, and fecal bacteria, and can lead to algal blooms and low dissolved oxygen problems as 

well (Ensign and Mallin 2001). The Cedar Creek Watershed is considered by SCDHEC (2004a) 

to have low to moderate growth potential. This watershed contains part of the City of Columbia, 

and part of Bluff Road, which was mentioned above. The upper portion of the watershed drains 

Fort Jackson Army Base. There are no listed major NPDES dischargers in the fort, but chemical 

spills from military activities on the base could impact the park. CONG personnel have 

indicated that it would be desirable to have agreements between the base and park in which the 

park will be immediately notified if a pollutant spill occurs on the base that impacts Cedar Creek 

or its tributaries. Toms Creek is described as having low potential for growth by SCDHEC 

(2004a). It is largely rural and agricultural. As mentioned, this creek is impaired by fecal 
68 

bacteria and has an impaired biological community. Sources of fecal pollution including septic 

systems and the horse farm bear investigation, and potentially one of the afore-mentioned poultry 

farms (ND0068268). The lower Congaree River Watershed 03050110-070 is described by 

SCDHEC (2004a) as having low growth potential. The Wateree River Watershed is described 

by SCDHEC (2005) as having a high growth potential. The upper portions of the watershed 

contain the City of Camden, the Town of Lugoff, and military bases. Along with the increased 

runoff potential from more impervious surface coverage, expansion of wastewater discharges is 

planned. All of this will increase pressure on the water quality of the lower Wateree River that 

impacts (through flooding) the Bates Fork Tract of the park. 

Surface and Groundwater Withdrawals 

Whereas the Mountains and Piedmont provinces utilize mostly surface waters for human use, the 

Sandhills and Coastal Plain have several aquifers presently in use, including the Florida Aquifer 

system, Black Mingo Aquifer, Pee Dee Aquifer, Black Creek Aquifer, Middendorf Aquifer and 

Cape Fear Aquifer (SCDHEC 2007). SCDHEC has some relevant available information on 

water use in the watersheds impacting CONG, including specific information on the 

Catawba/Wateree basin facilities for 2004 (SCDHEC 2006), and a summary report on South 

Carolina water usage by county for 2006 (SCDHEC 2007). Only withdrawals exceeding three 

million gallons/month are required to report water use to the State. In the counties upstream of 

CONG, the major water use is hydroelectric power (flow-through) followed by thermoelectric 

power, which is primarily cooling water for fossil fuel and nuclear power plants (SCDHEC 

2007). Industrial and municipal water supply are distant third and fourth uses, while golf course 

and crop irrigation consume far less water (SCDHEC 2007). In general groundwater usage 

comprises only a small percentage compared with surface water use. 

For the Catawba/Wateree basin, there are 25 facilities withdrawing surface water and 13 

withdrawing groundwater, and 11 with dual withdrawal (SCDHEC 2006). Total water 

withdrawal for 2004 in the basin was 5,714,252.22 million gallons, of which 95.4% was flowthrough hydroelectric power generation. Of the non-hydroelectric use, groundwater withdrawals 

comprised only 1,647.55 million gallons, or less than one percent. For the total 2004 surface 

withdrawals, besides hydroelectric power production there was 207,486.20 million gallons used 

for thermoelectric generation, 34,933.37 used for industrial purposes, 15,768.62 million gallons 

for water supply, 394.30 million gallons for crop irrigation and 218.18 million gallons used for 

golf course irrigation. Of the total 2004 groundwater withdrawals, 803.28 million gallons were 

for industrial purposes, 610.78 million gallons were for water supply, 125.57 million gallons for 

golf course irrigation, 94.93 million gallons for crop irrigation and 13.00 million gallons for 

mining. Permitted transfers out of the basin accounted for 17.79 million gallons per day while 

permitted transfers into the basin totaled 4.5 million gallons per day, for a net transfer out of the 

basin of 13.29 million gallons per day. 

Within CONG proper, surface waters are not utilized for drinking purposes. Well water is used 

for drinking, drawn up from a 36 m (118 ft depth - the deep aquifer). Patterson et al. (1985) 

noted that ground water pumping at current rates has had little effect on water levels in CONG, 

and only a major increase in pumpage near CONG would be likely to affect water levels in the 

shallow aquifer. Patterson et al. (1985) also emphasized that the deep aquifer, from where water 

is presently drawn, is largely isolated from the shallow aquifer (and the park plant root zone) by 

a confining layer. As noted previously, shallow groundwater within CONG is largely fed by 
69 

rainfall and from groundwater moving into CONG from outside the park, and it reaches the 

surface in seeps in upper areas of the park. 

Nuisance and Invasive Species 

Non-native aquatic organisms such as fish, nuisance bivalves, or other food web-altering 

organisms would most likely enter CONG through the Congaree River when it floods, or the 

Wateree River (for the new tract). There are also (more rare) introduction possibilities such as 

deliberate release by humans, introduction via fishing bait or on tackle, and brought in by birds. 

As of now, invasives and non-natives have been confined to either terrestrial mammals including 

feral hogs, the Asian clam Corbicula or terrestrial plants, although the status of aquatic 

macrophytes within the park is presently unknown. 

Physical Impacts 

Physical changes to the landscape may impact water quality. Disturbances such as hurricanes 

and floods are natural phenomenon that impact flora and fauna. Hurricane Hugo caused a 

considerable amount of tree damage within CONG, particularly in mixed bottomland forests 

(Putz and Sharitz 1991). However, water quality degradation by hurricanes is most often a 

function of impacts to upstream human infrastructure and pollution sources (Mallin and Corbett 

2006). A severe hurricane impacting Columbia would likely bring polluted water into the park 

during flooding. 

Continuous Land Impacts 

Within CONG there are nature trails used by the public, which need to be surveyed periodically 

to see if overuse and degradation of the resource occurs. There are three designated camping 

areas in the park, which can lead to some land disturbance. Upstream of the park are areas where 

powerlines cross streams that later enter the park. Spraying of herbicides may potentially lead to 

runoff of such chemicals entering the streams; likewise cutting/bush-hogging/mowing in these 

areas can enhance runoff. A railroad runs through the park and crosses streams and the river. 

Maintenance activities by the railroad can potentially impact the water locally. Active 

construction/expansion along the railroad is expected to begin in 2011, and active construction is 

currently occurring along the 601 Highway bridge corridor on the Congaree River.. The major 

physical impacts caused by feral hogs within the park are continuous, as mentioned earlier. 

Acute Land Impacts in the Park 

There is presently no construction activity ongoing within the park that can impact water quality. 

Land clearing or watershed construction activity upstream of the park has the potential to impact 

the creeks entering CONG, especially in terms of suspended sediments, turbidity and possibly 

fecal bacteria. 

Stressors to Congaree National Park Water Bodies 

The body of this report details water quality issues impacting the rich aquatic resources within 

CONG. The most pressing issues are termed stressors, and are displayed below (Table 29) for 

each of the major water systems within or impacting humans, wildlife or the ecosystems within 

CONG. More detail explaining the table’s conclusions is provided subsequently. 
70 

Table 29. Current and potential stressors that are affecting or may affect Congaree National Park 

habitats. [EP – existing problem, OK – low or no problem, PP – potential problem, ND – no data to make 

judgment]. 

Stressor Cedar Creek Toms Creek Wellwater Oxbows Congaree 

River Wateree River

Algal Blooms OK OK OK EP OK OK 

Toxic Algae OK OK OK PP OK OK 

Nutrient Loading OK OK OK PP PP PP 

Excessive Nitrate OK OK OK OK OK OK 

Hypoxia OK OK OK EP OK OK 

Sedimentation OK OK OK OK PP PP 

Turbidity PP OK OK OK PP PP 

Erosion PP PP OK OK OK OK 

Fecal Bacteria PP EP OK OK EP OK 

Excessive Metals PP PP OK EP EP1, 2 EP1

Toxic Compounds OK PP OK ND OK ND 

Invasive Species EP EP OK EP OK OK 

Habitat Disruption EPe EPe OK EPe OK OK 

1 Fish tissue mercury consumption advisory by SCDHEC 

2

 Excessive copper in water 

3

 Feral hogs 

4

 Feral hog streambank and inland damage from rooting

Explanation of Stressors 

Cedar Creek 

This creek, where it enters the park, is not presently impaired by excessive fecal bacteria, low 

dissolved oxygen, nor is it experiencing algal blooms. However, there are data from one study 

that indicate elevated fecal bacteria in the creek near Wise Lake – which may be due to feral hog 

manure. There are also potential problems in the park with erosion of stream banks due to 

visible habitat damage by feral swine rooting; thus, feral hogs in particular may be causing a 

number of problems within the park. Within the park there is some evidence of elevated metals 

in sediments, which should be investigated further. That same USGS study (Maluk and 

Abrahamsen 1999) also found a substandard fish community in the creek near Wise Lake, 

although sampling problems may have contributed to that assessment. This stream has been 

designated as Outstanding National Resource Waters and has some protections outside of the 

park as such, but visible clearcutting along Bluff Road west of the park is cause for concern as 

well as urbanization moving eastward from Columbia. Automated water quality instrumentation 

operated by NPS and located within Cedar Creek has detected elevated turbidity pulses that can 

be quite severe, potentially linked to elevated stream discharge in both Cedar Creek and the 

Congaree River. To protect this important stream we recommend NPS initiate a study of the 

relationship between these turbidity pulses and rainfall/runoff episodes in the watersheds of both 

these streams. 
71 

Toms Creek 

Toms Creek where it enters the park is considered impaired by SCDHEC due to an impaired 

biological community as well as elevated fecal coliform bacteria. As this is largely a 

rural/agricultural area the fecal coliform impairment is potentially due to poorly functioning 

septic systems and/or domesticated animal wastes. Metals pollution is potentially an issue for 

this creek system, and possibly toxic compounds that may contribute to impairment of the 

biological community. As with Cedar Creek, within the park rooting by feral hogs causes habitat 

destruction. 

Drinking Water Wells 

Drinking water is chlorinated and is thus not at risk from fecal bacteria. Furthermore, septic 

contamination, nitrate loading, or toxin contamination of drinking water is not likely due to the 

depth (118 ft) of the well supplying the Visitor Center, and the well (134 ft) supplying the OldGrowth Bottomland Forest Research and Education Center and associated buildings. 

Oxbow Lakes 

Limited existing data from a USGS project showed periodic algal blooms in which chlorophyll a

well exceeded the state water quality standard, and average chlorophyll a concentrations put 

these oxbows in the mesotrophic and eutrophic ranges for freshwater lakes in general. It seems 

likely that nutrients periodically enter the oxbows from river flooding; the systems are poorly 

flushed, and there is an open canopy to provide plenty of sunlight for photosynthesis. There are 

periodic low dissolved oxygen problems as well, which can be caused in part by algal blooms. 

There is visible habitat damage near some of these oxbows from feral hog rooting. 

Congaree River 

Congaree River water quality is an issue from the constituents the floodwaters carry into the park 

aquatic habitats. There is a fish consumption advisory due to high mercury levels, and excessive 

copper concentrations are also listed as a cause for impaired waters by SCDHEC. The Congaree 

River well upstream of the park in Columbia, as well as in the reaches bordering the park is 

impaired by excessive fecal coliform bacteria. We reiterate that floodwaters bring pollutants into 

the park, and this would include fecal bacteria and metals. While not impaired for turbidity, this 

river clearly can become very turbid after significant rain events (Plate 9). Turbidity is often 

correlated with various pollutants so flooding with high turbidity (i.e. suspended sediments) will 

deposit pollutants in the park. While nutrients are not continually excessive in the river water, 

both nitrogen and phosphorus can reach very high concentrations at times. These nutrients are 

subject to movement into the oxbow lakes in the park, which support algal blooms. 

Wateree River 

The lower Wateree River near the park is not impaired except for fish consumption by mercury. 

This river does flood the portion of the park known as the Bates Fork Tract, and some of the 

same cautionary material described above for the Congaree River bears repeating here. 

Floodwaters bring pollutants into the park; while not impaired for turbidity, this river can 

become turbid after significant rain events. Turbidity is often significantly correlated with 

various pollutants so flooding with high turbidity (i.e. suspended sediments) will deposit 

pollutants in the park. While nutrients are not normally excessive in the river water, both 

nitrogen and phosphorus can reach high concentrations at times. These nutrients are subject to 

movement into the oxbow lakes in the park, which in turn support algal blooms. 

73 

Recommendations for Addressing Impairments, Potential 

Impacts and Undocumented Water Bodies 

Human Health Issues 

 We recommend that CONG, possibly in cooperation with SCDHEC, sponsor a bacterial 

source tracking project to investigate the fecal bacterial contamination impacting Toms 

Creek and portions of Cedar Creek within the park near Wise Lake. An approach 

utilizing molecular/PCR based methods may be most appropriate, with capability to 

detect fecal contamination from human sources (i.e. septic systems) as well as feral swine 

signatures (a problem within the park) and ruminant signatures (for example, a 100 unit 

horse farm in the watershed upstream of the park may be a contributor). 

Monitoring Needs 

 Various sources point toward a potential problem of excessive metals within park stream 

sediments. We recommend sampling of sediments in Cedar Creek within and upstream 

of the park, Toms Creek within and upstream of the park, and at least three oxbow lakes 

in the park, Wise Lake, Weston Lake, and Bates Old River. Other potential toxic 

compounds such as PCBs, pesticides, and PAHs should be sampled as well. These data 

can be compared with academically-derived published benthic community impairment 

standards. Where feasible, fish and clam body burdens for metals and toxicants should 

be sampled as well, and compared with Federal and State consumption advisory 

standards. Performing such sampling following a dry period and then following a large 

flooding event would provide useful information on resident toxicity status and that of 

sediments deposited by flooding events. 

 We recommend that the park sponsor benthic macroinvertebrate community assessments 

within park streams and selected oxbows lakes on a three-year basis if feasible. 

SCDHEC performs such surveys outside of the park as part of its watershed assessments, 

and the same methodology should be applied within the park. The increased urbanization 

in the Congaree, Wateree, and Cedar Creek watersheds are likely to have ecosystem level 

impacts on the park biological communities and benthic community assessments are a 

useful tool for monitoring such impacts. 

Research Needs 

 We recommend the park have a limnological investigation performed on three oxbow 

lakes; Wise, Weston, and Bates Old River. These lakes are systems that host algal 

blooms and have periodic low dissolved oxygen problems, and at least one of these lakes 

is open to fishing. The study should run one to two years with monthly collections. 

Parameters should include water temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, turbidity, 

conductivity (as vertical profiles), nitrate, ammonium, TN, orthophosphate, TP, 

chlorophyll a, BOD5, and fecal coliform bacteria. Basic lake morphology characteristics 

should also be obtained (i.e. lake bottom mapping). Phytoplankton and zooplankton 

collections should also be made. Lake conditions prior to and following large flooding 

events would especially be of interest, such as change in chemical parameters and 

biological communities. Because of the potential for groundwater inputs, bottom-water 

nutrient samples should be included as well in the collection scheme. 
74 

 A survey should be completed for inventorying aquatic macrophytes within park water 

bodies, in particular the streams and oxbow lakes, as well as selected sloughs and guts. 

This will provide baseline survey data for the park and network; additionally, it will 

allow the park to determine if invasive species are impacting local aquatic plant 

communities. 

 We recommend NPS perform a Cedar Creek turbidity source study. This would require 

manual sampling of upper Cedar Creek and the Congaree River outside of the park 

during periods of elevated discharge to determine if stormwater runoff from outside of 

CONG causes elevated turbidity as recorded by NPS instrumentation within Cedar Creek. 

Statistical correlation of gage heights and creek turbidity measures would add further 

strength to such a study. If a relationship between watershed runoff outside of CONG 

and turbidity within CONG proves to be the case, these data can be used by NPS to 

provide evidence to SCDHEC that Best Management Practices and other mitigative 

measures need to be enacted to protect water quality within CONG. 

 Perform a hydrological study (perhaps in partnership with USGS) on the relationship 

between groundwater and Cedar Creek, especially in reference to how upstream swamp 

drainage contributes to incising of Cedar Creek and potential draining of CONG 

wetlands. 

 Perform a hydrological study determining how various flood stages of the Wateree River 

impacts flooding in the Bates Fork Tract of Congaree National Park. This is useful both 

for scientific purposes and those of public safety. A similar study was done for the main 

section of the park by Patterson et al. (1985). 

 We also suggest that this park presents an excellent opportunity to study the movement of 

fishes onto a lowland floodplain and their uses of such a floodplain for breeding and/or 

feeding. This is important for basic science and applied science both, as the Saluda Dam 

releases affect flooding of park areas adjoining the Congaree River and the reproductive 

health of the native fisheries may be impacted by operations. 

 Vertical accretion rates of sediment within the park have not been studied, and a program 

should be designed to do so (including pollutant composition of accreting sediments). 

Such a program would provide needed information related to river discharge and 

upstream land use and stormwater runoff interactions on park biotic communities. 

 The Bates Fork Tract presents new habitats; thus a survey of the Bates Fork Tract reptiles 

and amphibians would be appropriate to form a baseline by which to compare with other 

parks and future surveys of CONG. 

 Outside of the present park but between the two present tracts are several creeks 

(McKenzie Creek, Dry Branch, Griffins Creek, Singleton Creek, and Running 

Creek/Running Lake). These water bodies are not assessed by SCDHEC and it would be 

wise for NPS to begin gathering water quality data such as dissolved oxygen, turbidity, 

nutrients, fecal bacteria, etc., at least monthly from key locations (bridges or road 
75 

accesses as close to the potential new park boundaries as possible). Also, any survey data 

of flora and fauna within the potential new tract would be useful. 

Ecosystem Health Needs 

 Proper river discharge and water level management on the CONG floodplain are critical 

to success of various key species of plants and animals. A stakeholder’s group (detailed 

in NPS 2008) utilized a multifaceted approach called the Ecologically Sustainable Water 

Management Process (ESWM) to provide science-based recommendations for discharge 

management from the Saluda River Dam so as to protect and enhance natural biological 

processes in the Congaree River and the floodplain within CONG. This approach called 

for funding and devising a monitoring program of key species using various metrics 

overseen by an Adaptive Management Council of experts and other stakeholders. We 

recommend that NPS pursue these goals in collaboration with state and federal regulatory 

agencies. Actual monitoring could be carried out by university researchers, 

consultancies, or State personnel. This approach has been pioneered in North Carolina 

previously in the Cape Fear River system, and funding may have to come from private 

stakeholders as is done for the Lower Cape Fear River Program, see details of 

organization, funding, and products at: 

http://www.uncw.edu/cmsr/aquaticecology/Laboratory/LCFRP/index.htm. 

 As a companion effort to the stakeholder approach above, long-term monitoring of 

vegetation on the floodplain should be carried out with emphasis on impacts of water 

level changes due to Saluda Dam operations or natural floods and droughts. Tree ring 

analysis should play a role in such monitoring to obtain information on tree growth 

variability as a response to water quantity changes (i.e. use of “living records”. 

 We understand that the National Park Service is pursuing a feral swine control program. 

Due to the visibly obvious habitat damage (Plate 11) and the potential for waterborne 

fecal microbial contamination we reiterate that such a program be pursued with vigor. 

 CONG should commission high resolution maps of tributary watersheds that break out 

sub-basins in detail, to better assess or predict potential or realized pollution or flooding 

events. 

Community Relations/Cooperation Needs 

 Park personnel have expressed a need for formal cooperative agreements with upstream 

entities that have the potential to pollute the park’s waters. Such agreements (with for 

instance major municipal wastewater treatment plants and military bases) would be 

designed so that the park is immediately alerted when a pollutant spill or unusual 

discharge event occurs upstream either in the Congaree or Wateree Rivers, or Cedar or 

Toms Creeks. 

 Southland Fisheries operates a series of aquaculture ponds upstream of Cedar Creek. We 

recommend that the owners be asked to alert CONG whenever a pond drainage is 

planned or flooding occurs. 
76 

 SCDHEC should be communicated with and urged to continue regular water quality 

sampling at points around CONG (especially Cedar Creek). In times of tight budgets 

such programs often fall by the wayside for state agencies. 

 
77 

Annotated Bibliography 

Alderman, J. M. 2006. Reconnaissance survey of the freshwater mussel fauna of the lower 

Saluda and Congaree Rivers, Lake Murray, and selected tributaries. Report prepared for 

Kleinschmidt Associates, West Columbia, SC. Alderman Environmental Services, Inc., 

Pittsboro, NC. (This survey found a number of threatened or endangered mussels, or species 

of otherwise concern in the above listed systems). 

Bogan, A. E. and J. M. Alderman. 2008. Workbook and key to the freshwater bivalves of South 

Carolina. Revised Second Edition. (This 66 page workbook with color plates of freshwater 

bivalves in South Carolina includes a dichotomous key for identification, distribution, type 

locality, and general description of each of 29 native Unionid mussels, glossary, and 

literature cited). 

Burkholder, J. M. 2002. Cyanobacteria. pgs. 952-982 in (G. Bitton, ed.) Encyclopedia of 

Environmental Microbiology. Wiley Publishers, N.Y. (This paper provides an overview of 

the current taxonomy, ecology, and toxicity of the cyanobacteria, also known as the 

Cyanophyceae of blue-green algae). 

Burkholder, J. M., D. A. Dickey, C. Kinder, R. E. Reed, M. A. Mallin, G. Melia, M. R. McIver, 

L. B. Cahoon, C. Brownie, N. Deamer, J. Springer, H. B. Glasgow, D. Toms and J. Smith. 

2006. Comprehensive trend analysis of nutrients and related variables in a large eutrophic 

estuary: A decadal study of anthropogenic and climatic influences. Limnology and 

Oceanography 51:463-487 (This paper provides long-term nutrient and pollutant data on the 

Neuse Estuary, and found a long term increase in ammonium in the Neuse and Northeast 

Cape Fear Rivers). 

Burkholder, J. M., B. Libra, P. Weyer, S.Heathcote, D. Kolpin, P. S. Thorne and M. Wichman. 

2007. Impacts of waste from concentrated animal feeding operations. Environmental Health 

Perspectives 115:308-312. (This paper provides a mini-review of pollution problems from 

CAFOs, especially in reference to toxic compounds, microbial pathogens, and 

pharmaceutical wastes that enter the environment through animal excretion. A list of 

recommendations concerning monitoring, surveillance and policy efforts is provided). 

Cain, P. W., J. R. Wagner and J. B. Berry. 2000. R .D. White (Editor). South Carolina Maps and 

Aerial Photographic Systems SC MAPS Teaching Manual. Fourth Edition. SC DNR, 

Columbia, SC (http://www.cas.sc.edu/cege/resources/scmaps/manual/chap6.pdf). 

Carlough, L. A. 1994. Origins, structure, and trophic significance of amorphous seston in a 

blackwater river. Freshwater Biology 31:227-237. (This paper describes how nutritious 

particulate matter is formed by physical and chemical means in blackwater rivers, and used 

for food by invertebrate consumers). 

Carter, R. 2000. Birds of Congaree National Park. Checklist available at Congaree Park Visitors 

Center. List maintained by the Columbia Audubon Society, P.O. Box 5923, Columbia, S.C. 

29250 (Checklist divides birds into various broad phylogenetic groups and ranks the 

individuals according to chance of encounter within the park). 
78 

Carter, Robin M. 2005. An Annotated Checklist of the Birds of Congaree National Park. The 

Chat, v. 69, #1, Raleigh, NC, Carolina Bird Club, pp 1-28. (Notes that 191 species have been 

seen within, and provides some detail on sightings of the more rare species/sightings). 

Cely, J. E. 2004. Map of Congaree National Park, v. 3.8, 1:12,000: Columbia, SC, Friends of 

Congaree Swamp, 1 Plate. (This is a hand-drawn map of the original sections of Congaree 

National Park that includes navigational features such as guts, bridges, and large trees). 

Collins, M. R., D. Cooke, B. Post, J. Crane, J. Bulak, T. I. J. Smith, T.W. Greig and J.M. 

Quattro. 2003. Shortnose sturgeon in the Santee-Cooper reservoir system, South Carolina. 

Transactions of the American Fisheries society 132:1244-1250. (This paper discusses the 

movements and habitat of shortnose sturgeon above and below Lakes Marion and Moultrie, 

as well as noting the presence of and spawning of this endangered species in the Congaree 

River). 

Conrads, P. A., T. D. Feaster, and E. A. Roehl, Jr., 2007. Separating anthropogenic influences on 

hydrology using data mining techniques – A case study of Congaree National Park, South 

Carolina, Water Environment Federation Technical Exhibition Conference 2007, San Diego, 

California, October 2007. (This paper takes issue with previously held belief that the Saluda 

Dam led to fewer major floods in the park. By utilizing a selection of data mining and 

statistical approaches these authors determined that the lack of large floods after 1930 was 

due to natural causes, and the main impact of the dam was to cause lower river gauge heights 

in the first half of the year (December to May) and higher gauge heights in the second half of 

the year (June to November). 

Crane, J. 1987. Lower Saluda River Fishery Study, Preliminary Report. South Carolina Wildlife 

and Marine Resources Department, Wateree-Congaree Project. (This report presents data 

from SC state biologists in which the lower Saluda river below the Lake Murray Dam was 

sampled for fish by electroshocking and seining. The results consisted of 889 fish 

representing 29 species and 11 families collected, with the community described as typical of 

a lower piedmont/upper coastal plain community, with no exclusively cold water species 

collected). 

Dodds, W. K., J. R. Jones and E. B. Welch. 1998. Suggested classification of stream trophic 

state: distributions of temperate stream types by chlorophyll, total nitrogen, and phosphorus. 

Water Research 32:1455-1462. (The authors statistically analyze hundreds of temperate 

stream sites to determine oligotrophic,, mesotrophic and eutrophic categories based on 

benthic chlorophyll, sestonic chlorophyll, TN and TP; reanalysis of much lake and reservoir 

is also done to provide such categories). 

Ensign, S. E. and M. A. Mallin. 2001. Stream water quality following timber harvest in a Coastal 

Plain swamp forest. Water Research 35:3381-3390. (This paper provides a before and after 

clearcut analysis of water quality in Goshen Swamp, a third order stream in the Northeast 

Cape fear river basin. The clearcut led to high nutrient and suspended sediment inputs, low 

dissolved oxygen, and algal blooms, including blue-green algae). 
79 

Finger, S. E. and J. S. Bulak. 1988. Toxicity of water from three South Carolina rivers to larval 

striped bass. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 117:521-528. (In this paper 

experiments run using water from the Congaree, Wateree and Santee Rivers found that 

striped bass Morone saxatilis larvae had high mortality when exposed to Wateree River 

water, whereas water from the other two rivers was not toxic but the larvae swam 

lethargically compared with control water. The specific cause of toxicity was not 

determined, although the elevated concentrations of the phenolic compound 

pentachloroanisole (PCA) were found in the Wateree. This compound, along with possibly 

other phenolic compounds was suspected in playing a role in the low larval survival in the 

Wateree). 

Friebel, B. A. 2007. Home range and habitat use of feral hogs (Sus scrofa) in Congaree National 

Park. M.S. Thesis, Wildlife and Fisheries Biology, Clemson University. (This thesis involved 

radio collaring and tracking feral hogs in Congaree Park in 2005 and 2006 and indicated that 

individuals maintained comparatively compact home ranges and spatial fidelity, suggesting 

an abundant resource base in Congaree. While recording feral hogs within all types of 

habitats studies within the park, the author found evidence that the hogs particularly selected 

habitats for availability of oak mast, and suggested its prevalence within the park may be 

critical to hogs). 

Gaddy, L. L., J. B. Nelson and A. B. Pittman. 2000. Endangered, threatened, and rare plants of 

Congaree Swamp national Monument, Richland County, South Carolina. Report prepared for 

Congaree swamp National Monument, 200 Caroline Sims Road, Hopkins, SC 29061. 

Contract Numbers 1443PX524097009 and 144CA509097009. (The authors found 18 species 

that were either exotic (i.e. not native to the U.S.) or invasive (not native to the local plant 

communities, but could be native to other U.S. areas). These authors noted two species in 

particular that should be monitored for spreading; Pueraria lobata (kudzu) and Lygodium 

japonicum (Japanese climbing fern). 

Hauk, W. 2005. An Analysis of Genetic Variation in the Prostrate Grapefern (Botrychium 

lunarioides) at Congaree National Park. Investigator Annual Report Number: 33046 for 

Permit Number: COSW-2005-SCI-0001 December 08, 2005. (Investigator Annual Report 

work included surveys of the park, and examiniation of voucher specimens at CONG and 

USC; https://science.nature.nps.gov/research/ac/search/iars/pdf/IAR.pdf?reportId=33046) 

Hinton, M. and M. J. Bale. 1991. Bacterial pathogens in domesticated animals and their 

environment. Journal of Applied Bacteriology Symposium Supplement 70:81S-90S. (This 

paper lists various pathogenic bacteria, what animals that harbor them, their survival in the 

environment, and information on their spread and containment). 

Hupp, C. R. 2000. Hydrology, geomorphology and vegetation of Coastal Plain rivers in the 

south-eastern USA. Hydrological Processes 14:2991-3010. (this review article explains have 

rivers are formed, maintained and changed by rainfall, erode materials and create meanders, 

deposit sediment on floodplains and how vegetation slows flow and helps the deposition of 

sediments). 
80 

Jones, R. H. 1997. Status and habitat of big trees in Congaree Swamp National Monument. 

Castanea 62:22-31. (Jones found 29 individuals representing 25 species that are state 

champions. In addition to the state champions, three species, including possumhaw Ilex 

decidua, persimmon Diospyros virginiana, and water hickory Carya aquatica were large 

enough to quality as national champions). 

Knowles, D. B., M. M. Brinson, R. A. Clark and M. D. Flora. 1996. Water Resources 

Management Plan. Congaree Swamp National Monument. National Park Service, U.S. 

Department of the Interior. (This document provides much basic information on park history, 

hydrology, geology, pollutant sources and water quality, and also provides some proposed 

projects for increasing park water quality and management knowledge). 

Krueger, E. A. 2009. Freshwater Mussels (Family Unionidae) of the Congaree National Park, 

2008. Final Report to the Congaree National Park. March 27, 2009. (Report summarizing 

research conducted with TNC, the SC Aquarium, and NPS along the Congaree and Wateree 

rivers, and selected oxbow lakes in newly acquired park property). 

Lacy, C. M. 1992. Assessment of zooplankton in response to nonpoint source loadings to the 

Santee-Cooper lake system. Technical Report SCP 002-92, South Carolina Department of 

Health and Environmental Control. (This report is the result of a two-year study of 

zooplankton in the Congaree and Wateree Rivers near Congaree Park. Zooplankton 

community composition in both rivers was dominated by rotifers, copepods (particularly 

nauplii) and much fewer cladocerans, with spring and fall peaks and summer minima. 

Chlorophyll a concentrations were moderate with no evident seasonality, and zooplankton 

responded positively to elevated river discharge, turbidity and TSS rather than chlorophyll). 

Lenat, D. R. 1993. A biotic index for the southeastern United States: derivation and list of 

tolerance values, with criteria for assigning water-quality ratings. Journal of the North 

American Benthological Society 1:279-290 (This paper describes how the NC Biotic Index 

was derived as a companion to the EPT index in order to rate NC streams segments on water 

quality in terms of supporting aquatic life. It is based on analysis of 2,000 macroinvertebrate 

samples from various ecoegions). 

Lockhart, M. 2006. The trouble with wilderness education in the National Park Service: the case 

of the lost cattle mounts of Congaree. The Public Historian 28:11-30. (This article provides a 

history of Congaree National Park and the slave-built cattle mounts within the park. It also 

discusses how current wilderness regulations prohibit some valuable cultural educational 

opportunities by denying reasonable access to the mounts and dikes and prohibiting 

educational signage). 

MacDonald, D. D., C. G. Ingersol and T. A. Berger. 2000. Development and evaluation of 

consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Archives of 

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 39:20-31. (This paper presents a consensus 

based set of standards for freshwater sediments for metals and various toxicants, and 

describes the process of deriving these standards. It also supplies standards developed by 

other researchers). 
81 

Maliszewski, L. M. 2005. Assessment of contaminant sources and pathways affecting Congaree 

National Park, South Carolina. M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental 

Engineering, University of South Carolina, Columbia, S.C. (This thesis provides a literature 

review on water quality of the park, including sources, government sampling efforts and 

stations, and pollutant sources, and develops a water quality data base for use in Microsoft 

Access. It also presents proposals on assessing heavy metals pollution, source tracking of 

fecal bacteria, and educational outreach). 

Mallin, M. A. 2000. Impacts of industrial-scale swine and poultry production on rivers and 

estuaries. American Scientist 88:26-37. (This paper provides an introduction to concentrated 

animal feeding operations (CAFOs); their history, operations, and waste-generating 

capabilities, and provides data on pollutants released through spills, floods and leaks and how 

these incidents have polluted downstream waters). 

Mallin, M. A. and C. A. Corbett. 2006. Multiple hurricanes and different coastal systems: How 

hurricane attributes determine the extent of environmental impacts. Estuaries and Coasts 

29:1046-1061. (This paper summarizes various water quality effects caused by hurricanes in 

Florida, North Carolina and South Carolina, and what meteorological and anthropogenic 

factors exacerbate those impacts). 

Mallin, M. A., L. B. Cahoon, M. R. McIver, D. C. Parsons and G. C. Shank. 1999. Alternation of 

factors limiting phytoplankton production in the Cape Fear Estuary. Estuaries 22:985-996. 

(This paper provides nutrient and physical parameter data along the axis of the Cape Fear 

River estuary and results of experiments determining limiting nutrients). 

Mallin, M. A., L. B. Cahoon, D. C. Parsons and S. H. Ensign. 2001. Effect of nitrogen and 

phosphorus loading on plankton in Coastal Plain blackwater streams. Journal of Freshwater 

Ecology 16:455-466. (This paper provides results of nutrient addition experiments to water 

from the Black and Northeast Cape Fear Rivers. Ammonium and urea inputs stimulated 

phytoplankton growth, while orthophosphate and glycerophosphate stimulated ATP but not 

phytoplankton). 

Mallin, M. A., M. R. McIver, S. H. Ensign and L. B. Cahoon. 2004. Photosynthetic and 

heterotrophic impacts of nutrient loading to blackwater streams. Ecological Applications 

14:823-838. (This paper summarizes nutrient addition experiments on water from several 

blackwater streams in the Cape Fear basin. Collectively, nitrate, ammonium, and urea 

additions stimulated phytoplankton growth and increased BOD. Phosphorus, particularly 

organic P additions stimulated bacteria growth, ATP, and BOD). 

Mallin, M. A., V. L. Johnson, S. H. Ensign and T. A. MacPherson. 2006. Factors contributing to 

hypoxia in rivers, lakes and streams. Limnology and Oceanography 51:690-701. (This paper 

draws on extensive BOD and water quality data collected in southeastern North Carolina. 

BOD was strongly related to chlorophyll a in the Cape Fear River, several tidal creeks, and 

two urban lakes. In blackwater streams BOD was significantly related mainly to phosphorus 

and fecal coliform bacteria, and to urban runoff in an urban stream). 
82 

Maluk, T. L. and T. A. Abrahamsen. 1999. Results of Water-Quality Sampling and Ecological 

Characterization of Streams in Congaree Swamp, South Carolina, 1995-98. Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 99-4121, U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia, South Carolina. (Shows 

excessive metals in sediments in some park locations, also provides indices showing poor 

macroinvertebrate and fish community structure in a few areas in and near the park. Most 

water column data for common pollutant parameters are not remarkable). 

Marzolf, R. 1990. Reservoirs as environments for zooplankton. Pgs. 195-208 in Thornton, K. W., 

B. L. Kimmel and F. E. Payne, (Eds.) Reservoir Limnology: Ecological Perspectives. WileyInterscience, New York. (This book chapter deals primarily with how zooplankton get 

nutrition in reservoirs, especially under turbid situations, and how the differences between 

natural lakes and reservoirs influence zooplankton). 

May, T., W. Brumbaugh, M. Walther, B. Poulton and L. Rose. 2005. Concentrations of Total 

Mercury in Sediment, Invertebrates, and Fish from Congaree National Park, S.C. Final 

Report CERC-8335-FY05-32-11, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Columbia, MO. (This report found that approximately 10% of fish samples in CONG had Hg 

levels exceeding the USEPA consumption advisory. Also, Hg levels in invertebrates were 

elevated compared with reference specimens, while sediment concentrations were relatively 

low, with a different spatial distribution than the wildlife. They recommend further 

monitoring on a three year basis due to continuing airborne emissions). 

McCann, K. S. 2000. The diversity-stability debate. Nature 405:228-233. (This paper discusses 

how early research lead to the conclusion that increased diversity led to more ecosystem 

stability, but some recent papers have found exceptions to this. The author concludes that 

within a given ecosystem diversity is positively correlated with stability, but this correlation 

does not extend to population-level stability). 

Meyer, J. L. 1990. A blackwater perspective on riverine ecosystems. BioScience 40:643-651. 

(This is a summary article explaining how blackwater streams differ from clearwater streams, 

especially in terms of their organic carbon loads and intense heterotrophic activity). 

Meyer, J. L. 1992. Seasonal patterns of water quality in blackwater rivers of the coastal plain, 

southeastern United States. In Becker, C.D. and D.A. Neitzel (eds.) Water Quality in North 

American River Systems. Batelle Press, Columbus. (This article provides water quality 

information on the Ogeechee and Satilla Rivers in Georgia, and discusses various 

characteristics of blackwater streams). 

Minchin, P. R. and R. R. Sharitz. 2007. Age Structure and Potential long-Term Dynamics of the 

Floodplain Forests of Congaree National Park. A report for the Park, submitted August 31, 

2007. (This report notes that in area >3 km from the river there has been a change in 

vegetation composition to one that is less water tolerant, attributed to the operation of the 

Saluda Dam reducing the major flood height and persistence). 

Montebello, S. 2008. an analysis of the concentrations of Enterococci and Escherichia coli in 

Cedar Creek, Toms Creek, Wise Lake and Weston Lake in Congaree National Park. Artefix 

Academy, Cayce, South Carolina. (This is a very helpful student paper in which the author 
83 

measured fecal indicator abundances in several locations in Congaree Park’s waterways over 

a six month period in 2007. She found generally good microbial conditions in Wise and 

Weston Lakes and upper Cedar Creek, but frequent violations of EPA criteria in lower Cedar 

Creek and Toms Creek; genetic testing by a contract lab detected a human source present at 

one station in Toms Creek). 

Neves, R. J., A. E. Bogan, J. D. Williams, S. A. Ahlstedt and P. W. Hartfield. 1997. Status of 

mollusks in the Southeastern United States: a downward spiral of diversity. Chapter 3 in 

(Benz, G.W. and D.E. Collins, Eds.) Aquatic Fauna in Peril: the Southeastern Perspective. 

Special Publication 1, southeast Aquatic research institute, Lenz Design and communication, 

Decatur, GA. 554 pp. (Provides listings and statuses of snails and bivalves in the U.S. 

southeast, discusses them by State, and provides information on anthropogenic forces leading 

to their losses, including dam building, pollution, and species introductions). 

NCDENR. 2006. Standard Operating Procedures for Benthic Macroinvertebrates, Biological 

Assessment Unit. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 

Division of Water Quality, Environmental Sciences Section, Raleigh, N.C. (This manual 

presents the methods for monitoring benthos in various areas of North Carolina, the differing 

indices used to assess community health, and the key indicator organisms. Swamp water on 

the Coastal Plain is assessed differently than the Piedmont, and Mountains). 

NPS. 1998. Baseline Water quality data inventory and analysis, Congaree Swamp National 

Monument. Technical Report, Volume I. NPS/NRWRD/NRTR-98/148, National Park 

Service, Water Resources Division, Fort Collins, CO. (this is a report by the Park Service 

that collects any official on-line water quality data (i.e. STORET) for stations within 3 miles 

upstream and one mile downstream of the Park. Data are presented for Congaree National 

Park for many sites providing basic statistics and graphs, and relation to State or federal 

water quality standards. An ecological analysis is not provided). 

NPS. Undated. Congaree National Park History. (Brochure explaining the park’s history; 

contains a timeline of relevant events, and is available at the park office). 

NPS. 2004. Resource Management Plan: Congaree National Park. December 1, 2004. (This 63 

page management plan provides an update to the 1990 resource management plan for 

Congaree National Park, covering present status, baseline information, and an overview of 

current program needs, goals and objectives for park natural and cultural resources). 

NPS. 2006. Congaree. GPO:2006-320-369/00476. (NPS brochure providing a park map and 

discussing the park’s ecosystem, providing some historical background as well). 

NPS. 2008. Final Report and Recommendations of the Saluda/Congaree Ecologically 

Sustainable Water Management Process; a cooperative effort led by the National Park 

Service, American Rivers, The Nature Conservancy, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and 

the Carolina Coastal Conservation League. (This report represent findings of a group of 

stakeholders with interest in allocation of water in Lake Murray, the lower Saluda River and 

the Congaree River, specifically regarding operations of the Saluda Dam. It results from a 

literature review, meetings, expert opinions on plant and animal species water needs, and a 
84 

model, and lays out a proposed future process designed to promote and protect the native 

wildlife and flora in CONG and the rivers). 

Patterson, G. G., G. K. Sperry and B. J. Whetstone. 1985. Hydrology and its effects on 

distribution of vegetation in Congaree Swamp National Monument, South Carolina. U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4256. Columbia, S.C. (This 

report provides very useful information on groundwater aquifers, river and floodplain flow 

patters, impacts of the Lake Murray dam, impacts of Congaree River discharge on flooding 

within Congaree Park). 

Pescador, M. L., B. A. Richard and A. K. Rasmussen. 2004. An Aquatic Invertebrate Study for 

the Congaree Swamp National Park, Richland County, South Carolina. (Prepared for 

Congaree Swamp National Park; Task Order Number one (1): J5240 01 0555 Modification 

No. 1. Entomology/Center for Water Quality, Division of Agricultural Sciences, Florida 

A&M University, Tallahassee, Fl. (Report concluded that Congaree contains relatively high 

aquatic insect diversity, particularly for aquatic beetles, caddisflies, and damselflies and 

dragonflies. It focused on five insect orders, and in terms of species diversity ranked them is 

descending order as follows: Coleoptera (beetles), Trichoptera (caddisflies), Odonata 

(dragonflies and damselflies), Ephemeroptera (mayflies) and Plecoptera (stoneflies)). 

Pimentel, D., A. L. Lach, R. Zuniga and D. Morrison. 2000. Environmental and economic costs 

of nonindigenous species in the United States. BioScience 50:53-64. (This paper examines 

both plant and animal nonindigenous invasions and puts monetary costs on the damage that 

they cause in terms of crops losses, veterinary bills, waterway cleanups, infrastructure 

damage, pest control, etc. It also describes how natural communities are degraded with 

consequent effects on ecosystem stability and function). 

Price, J. 2005. Species diversity and habitat partitioning of the crayfish community in Congaree 

National Park. Study completion Report, F-63. Division of Wildlife and Freshwater 

Fisheries, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. (Habitats sampled included 

oxbow lakes, gum ponds, sloughs, streams, guts and floodplains. Six species of crayfish 

were collected, which the report author considered relatively high diversity compared with 

other protected areas in the region). 

Putz, F. E. and R. R. Sharitz. 1991. Hurricane damage to old growth forest in the Congaree 

Swamp National Monument, South Carolina, USA. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 

21:1765-1770. (This paper discusses impacts of Hurricane Hugo on the forest, and notes 

most damage was due to crown breakage and defoliation, while severe damage was most 

common in mixed bottomland forest and sloughs). 

Rikard, M. 1991. A Water Quality Study at the Congaree Swamp National Monument of Myers 

Creek, Reeves Creek and Toms Creek. Unpublished manuscript, National Park Service, Cape 

Lookout National Seashore, Morehead City, North Carolina (This paper presents physical 

and chemical water quality (mainly metals) data collected in 1989 and 1990 from three 

creeks impacting the park. Most parameters were unremarkable with the exception of 

aluminum, which was at concentration considered to be harmful to aquatic life). 
85 

Rose, L. 2002. Species diversity and condition of the fish community of Congaree Swamp 

National Monument. Annual Report, CA No. H5240-00-0290, South Carolina Department of 

Natural Resources and National Park Service. (SCDNR completed a total of 50 fishery 

surveys from 33 sites within CONG from 1999-2002 sampling mainly streams but in 2002 a 

number of collections were made from guts, sloughs, ponds and the two larger lakes, Weston 

and Wise. A total of 56 species belonging to 17 different families were collected within the 

(main section) park boundaries). 

Rose, L. and J. Bulak. 2004. Species diversity and condition of the fish community during a 

drought in Congaree National Park. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, 

Freshwater Fisheries, Eastover, South Carolina. (These researchers used cluster analyses and 

identified four community groups associated with differing habitat characteristics. 

Community group 1 indicator species were characterized by relatively low flows and 

dissolved oxygen. Community group 2 ’s habitat was comprised of faster flowing, deeper 

streams such as Cedar Creek. Community group 3’s sites were characterized by high flow 

and firm, sandy bottoms, and were located in the transition area between bluff and swamp. 

Community group 4 was a single outlier site located in McKenzie Creek, which had low 

dissolved oxygen and comparatively high conductivity and farming, grazing, and a poultry 

facility in its watershed. They considered this creek a degraded stream and suggested further 

study of the creek and its drainage). 

Rose, L. and J. Bulak. 2007. Flood mediated change of the fish community in Congaree National 

Park streams. Final Report, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Freshwater 

Fisheries, Eastover, South Carolina.( These researchers found similar species richness 

between periods (38 species pre-flood and 37 species post-flood). However, seven taxa 

(blackbanded sunfish, channel catfish, flat bullhead, green sunfish, piedmont darter, snail 

bullhead and spotted sucker) were only collected in the pre-flood sampling while seven other 

taxa (bowfin, black crappie, carp, longnose gar, mud sunfish, pumpkinseed and redear 

sunfish) were only collected in the post-flood sampling). 

Ryan, T. S. 2007. Congaree National Park: the potential for eutrophication of Wise and Weston 

lakes. MS Thesis, School of the Environment, University of South Carolina, Columbia. (This 

thesis attempts to predict potential oxbow lake eutrophication through phosphorus loading 

changes in Cedar and Toms Creeks by a model (EUTROMOD) that was not based on 

blackwater systems. This approach is flawed in that N rather than P is likely the limiting 

nutrient in these oxbows, and inputs from the rivers are ignored). 

SCDHEC. 2004a. Saluda River Basin Watershed Water Quality Assessment, South Carolina 

Department of Health and Environmental Control. (This report provides detailed information 

on the watersheds within the Saluda Basin, including water quality data summaries, lists of 

impaired waters, NPDES discharges, land use, issues, and strategies). 

SCDHEC. 2004b. Water Classifications and Standards, Regulation 61-68, South Carolina 

Department of Health and Environmental Control, Bureau of Water. (Regulation presenting 

chemical standards and narrative detail for evaluating water quality for various types of water 

classifications). 
86 

SCDHEC. 2005. Catawba River Basin Watershed Water Quality Assessment, South Carolina 

Department of Health and Environmental Control. (This report provides detailed information 

on the watersheds within the Catawba Basin, including water quality data summaries, lists of 

impaired waters, NPDES discharges, land use, issues, and strategies). 

SCDHEC. 2006. South Carolina Catawba/Wateree River Basin Facilities Water Withdrawal 

Report 2004. South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Technical 

Report 014-05. (This report describes the various types of water use (including agriculture, 

golf course, industrial, water supply, thermoelectric and hydroelectric), and the amounts used 

in the Catawba/Wateree watersheds broken down by category and county for 2004). 

SCDHEC. 2007. South Carolina Water Use Report 2006 Annual Summary. South Carolina 

Department of Health and Environmental Control. (this report provides a summary of surface 

and groundwater use in South Carolina for 2004 as broken down by county and use; also 

includes some information on aquifers and watersheds). 

SCDNR. 1995. Wetland resource characterization of the Congaree Swamp National Monument, 

South Carolina. Final Project Report for the United States Department of the Interior, 

National Park Service. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Land Resources 

and Conservation Districts Division. (report representing an effort to incorporate several data 

bases for use in geographic information systems (GIS); primarily methodology with some 

maps; no details provided on amounts or coverage of wetlands area for the park, however.). 

Sexton, W. J. 1999. Alluvial valleys of the middle Coastal Plain of South Carolina. Southeastern 

Geology 39:1-15. (This paper provides geological and hydrological information on the 

Congaree, Wateree and Santee Rivers, with information on discharge, depth, meanders, and 

sediments). 

Shelley, D. C., A. D. Cohen and T. A. Thom. 2008. Floodplain geomorphology and depositional 

environments of Congaree national Park. Congaree Geology Field Guide Version 1.0. 

Geological Society of America, Southeastern Section Meeting, Filed trip #4, Congaree 

National Park, 53 pp. (This field guide provides background and exercises for students and 

professionals interested in the geology and hydrology of Congaree Park, including rim 

swamps, Cedar Creek and an alluvial fan). 

Shelley, D. C., T. A. Thom, M. French, and B. Dolphin. 2008, Piezometers as Tools for 

Floodplain Hydrology Monitoring, Research, and Education Programs at Congaree National 

Park [abs.]: Floodplain Ecosystem Symposium: Integrating Science into the Restoration and 

Management of Floodplain Ecosystems of the Southeast. March 4-6, 2008, Little Rock, AR. 

(This abstract relates to the Congaree Observation Well Network, which is starting to yield 

some groundwater hydrology/chemistry results) 

Smock, L. A. and E. Gilinsky. 1982. Benthic macroinvertebrate communities of a floodplain 

creek in the Congaree Swamp Monument. Contact No. CX5000-0-0946. Department of 

Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. (These authors determined 

that benthic species composition, species richness and species diversity reflected excellent 

water quality for Cedar Creek). 
87 

Smock, L. A. and C. E. Roeding. 1986. The trophic basis of production of the macroinvertebrate 

community of a southeastern U.S.A. blackwater stream. Holarctic Ecology 9:165-174. 

(Smock and Roeding assessed what were the food sources supporting the invertebrate 

production in Cedar Creek and found that fine particulate organic matter (FPOM) was the 

major food source, supporting 47-64% of total production, while algae (mainly filamentous 

algae and diatoms) supported 15-34% of production. Animal material supported 16-26% of 

macroinvertebrate production while coarse particulate organic matter (CPOM) only 

supported 1-3% of total production. These authors suggested that the floodplain provides a 

similar function for lowland blackwater stream systems that low order streams provide for 

streams in upland areas in terms of CPOM processing). 

Smock, L. A., E. Gilinsky and D. L. Stoneburner. 1985. Macroinvertebrate production in a 

southeastern United States blackwater stream. Ecology 66:1491-1503. (These researchers 

found that the caddisfly Macronema carolina yielded the highest production among 

individual taxa (4.90 g/m2) while the chironomids Rheotanytarsus and Tanytarsus also had 

relatively high annual production. Productivity was highest in the Cedar Creek upstream of 

the swamp, and decreased as the stream passed through the swamp. Overall this study found 

that the stream bottom yielded the highest invertebrate production (39-44% of the total 

production) due to the sediments being the largest habitat, while snags, with their far lower 

habitat area but much higher productivity yielded 28-35% of total invertebrate production). 

Tilman, D. 2000. Causes, consequences and ethics of biodiversity. Nature 405:208-211. (This 

paper presents an overview of biodiversity (primarily plant biodiversity) and explains how 

diversity leads to stability via reducing variability as a whole and generally increasing 

community abundance. He notes how loss of biodiversity diminishes the capacity of 

ecosystems to supply society with sustainable goods and services, but realizes that many 

actions that harm biodiversity provide societal benefits.). 

Tuberville, T. D., J. D. Wilson, M. E. Dorcas and J. W. Gibbons. 2005. Herpetofaunal species 

richness of southeastern national parks. Southeastern Naturalist 4: 537-569. (This paper 

provides a series of lists of reptile and amphibian species found at 16 southeastern national 

parks, broken down by taxa, with introduced species noted. There was a significant 

correlation between park area and species richness.) 

USGS. 2005. Feral hog impact monitoring, management plan development, and initial 

management for Congaree National Park. Final Report. COSW-N-XX.XXX. United States 

Geological Survey/National Park Service/Clemson University. (This is one section of a larger 

report that contains a draft management plan. This section discusses feral hog disturbance 

monitoring, and found that average total disturbance in individual plots was 19% in cypresstupelo forest, 9% in mixed bottomland hardwoods, 9% in seepage forest and <1% in uplands, 

showing a preference for wetter areas. However, the study found that once widespread 

flooding recurred, differences in disturbance between uplands and wetlands were no longer 

statistically significant. That report noted that severe rooting in the seepage forest plots 

remained visible for months to even years). 

Wetzel, R. G. 2001. Limnology: Lake and River Ecosystems, 3rd Ed. Academic Press, San 

Diego. (This is the most comprehensive textbook/reference volume on all aspects of the 
88 

limnology of lakes, reservoirs, and running water; it also provides detailed information on the 

trophic classification of water bodies). 

Williams, J. D. and A. J. Benson. 2004. Freshwater mussels (Family Unionidae) of the Congaree 

Swamp National Park. Final Report to the Congaree Swamp National Park. U.S. Geological 

Survey, Gainesville, Florida. (Sampling was conducted in the Congaree River along the 

southern boundary of the park, Cedar Creek, Toms Creek, McKenzie Creek, Myers Creek, 

Weston Lake and Wise Lake. Several Federal or State Species of concern were found). 

Worthen, W. B. 2008. A survey of Odonates at Congaree National Park and experiments on 

perch selection. IAR Number: 46446 for permit: CONG-2008-SCI-0008. December 15, 

2008. (Investigator annual report detailing permitted research for Odonates in various aquatic 

habitats; https://science.nature.nps.gov/research/ac/search/iars/pdf/IAR.pdf?reportId=46446) 

Worthen, W. B. 2009. A survey of Odonates at Congaree National Park and experiments on 

perch selection. IAR Number: 51421 for permit:CONG-2008-SCI-0008: January 04, 2010. 

(Investigator annual report detailing permiited research for Odonates in various aquatic 

habitats; https://science.nature.nps.gov/research/ac/search/iars/pdf/IAR.pdf?reportId=51421) 
89 

Appendix A. Individuals Providing Information Through 

Interviews During the Preparation of this Report 

Mr. Bill Hulsander, Assateague Island National Seashore, National Park Service, 

bill_hulslander@nps.gov 

Dr. Theresa Thom, Congaree National Park, National Park Service, theresa_thom@nps.gov

Dr. David Shelley, Congaree National Park, National Park Service, david_shelley@nps.gov 

Dr. W. David Webster, University of North Carolina Wilmington Department of Biology and 

Marine Biology, Wilmington, N.C. http://www.uncw.edu/bio/faculty_webster.htm

91 

Appendix B. Channel Types within Congaree National Park 

As a tributary creek, Cedar Creek is only one of six types of channels classified by Shelley and 

Meitzen (2005). 

Table B-1. Channel types found within Congaree National Park. 

Tributary Creeks The main tributary on the floodplain is Cedar Creek, but other tributaries include Tom's 

Creek, Griffin's Creek and Dry Branch. These channels conduct overland flow from the 

adjacent uplands. Tributary creeks are the largest and most significant channel type in 

terms of discharge and resulting geomorphic signature. 

Scroll Complex Channels These are small channels organized within the ridge-swale complexes. Typically they 

are characterized by swale-parallel channels that are connected by small cuts through 

the intervening ridges. These systems often empty into larger batture channels. 

Batture Channels These channels, termed batture channels by Saucier (1994), are those dominant 

drainages that follow the courses of well-defined abandoned channels. Cely (2001) 

refers to many of these as "guts." They are often associated with ox-bow lakes. In 

many cases, they have been captured by larger tributary systems, such as Cedar 

Creek, and integrated into the floodplain stream network outside of the abandoned 

channel. Tributaries that flow within abandoned channel may locally be recognized as 

batture channels. 

Backswamp Channels These are small, relatively unorganized networks of sinuous channels in low-lying areas 

of the floodplain. They do not appear to be influenced by any relict channel features 

such as abandoned channels, scrolls, or levees. In many cases these networks appear 

to be deranged, semi-closed, and connected with larger streams only at high water 

levels. 

Crevasse Channels These fairly linear channels, which are incised up to 2m into the levee deposits, connect 

the main channel to the low lying backswamp areas. Cely (2001) refers to many of 

these as "guts." Paleocurrent indicators and clear association of levees indicate the 

importance of back-flooding in these areas. These channels are likely the conduits for 

incorporation of channel-derived coarse grained sediments to the floodplain 

Artificial Cuts There is one significant cut, known as Mazycks cut, that connects the main river 

channel to Cedar Creek. This channel was constructed to aid in the export of logged 

timber. It cuts through the levees adjacent to the channel, and is similar to a crevasse 

channel. There are some other minor ditches on the floodplain as well, which are often 

associated with the construction of nearby roads, dikes, and cattlemounds (artificially 

raised areas for livestock). 

93 

Appendix C. Aquatic Benthic Macroinvertebrate Species at 

Congaree National Park 

Table C-1. Species list of aquatic benthic macroinvertebrates from five insect orders in Congaree 

National Park (modified from Pescador et al. 2004; consult for more detail). 

Order Family Species 

Coleoptera (beetles) Carabidae Clivina Americana 

C. dentipes 

Semiardistomis viridis 

Chelonarium Chelonarium lecontei 

Curculionidae Bagonus transversus 

Listronotus porcellus 

Stenopelmus rufiansus 

Tanysphyrus lemnae 

Tyloderma aerea 

T. capitale 

Dryopidae Helichus lithophilus 

Dytiscidae Acilius fraternus 

Agabus gagates

Anodocheilus exiguous 

Bidessonotus inconspicuous 

B. longovalis 

B. pulicarius 

Celina angustata 

C. contiger 

C. slossoni 

Copelatus caelatipennis princes 

C. lenticus 

C. loticus 

C. venustus 

Desmopachria convexa 

Dytiscus carolinus 

Hoperius planatus 

Hydaticus bimarginatus 

Hydroporus rufilabris 

H. signatus youngi 

Laccophilus fasciatus rufus 

L. proximus 

Lioporeus triangularis 

Neobidessus pullus 

 
94 

Table C-1. (Continued). 

Order Family Species 

Coleoptera (beetles) Dytiscidae Neoprus aulicus 

N. carolinus 

N. cimicoides 

N. clypealis 

N. effeminatus 

N. hybridus 

N. lobatus 

N. shermani 

N. undulates 

N. venustus 

N. vittatipennis 

Rhantus calidus 

Thermonectus basillaris bacillaris 

Uvarus falli 

U. granarius 

U. lacustris 

Elmidae Ancyronyx variegate 

Dubiraphia vittata 

Macronychus glabratus 

Microcylloepus pusillus pusillus 

Stenelmis bicarinata 

S. convexula 

S. decorata 

S. fuscata 

S. lignicola 

S. sinuate 

Stenelmis spp.

Gyrinidae Dineutus americanus 

D. carolinus 

D. ciliatus 

D. discolor 

D. emarginatus 

D. serrulatus serrulatus 

Gyrinus analis 

G. gibber 

G. sayi 

Haliplidae Haliplus fasciatus 

H. leopardus 
95 

Table C-1. (Continued). 

Order Family Species 

Coleoptera (beetles) Haliplidae H. pantherinus 

H.puctatus 

H. triopsis 

Peltodytes bradleyi 

P. dunavani 

P. floridensis 

P. muticus 

P. oppositus 

P. sexmaculatus 

P. shermani 

Heteroceridae Heterocerus fatuus 

H. mollinus 

H. tenuis 

H. texanus 

Tropicus pusillus 

Hydraenidae Hydraena marginicollis 

Hydrophilidae Berosus aculeatus 

B. corrini 

B. exiguous 

B. infuscatus 

B. ordinatus 

B. pantherinus 

B. peregrinus 

B. pugnax 

B. striatus 

Cymbiodyta blanchardi 

C. chamberlaini 

C. vindicata 

Enochrus blatchleyi 

E. cinctus 

E. consors 

E. consortus 

E. interuptus 

E. ochraceus 

E. perplexus 

E. pygmaeus 

E. sayi 

E. sublongus 

Helocombus bifidus 
96 

Table C-1. (Continued). 

Order Family Species 

Coleoptera (beetles) Hydrophilidae Helophorus marginicollis 

Hydrobius melaenus 

Hydrochara soror 

Hydrochus excavatus 

H. inaequalis 

H. rufipes 

H. simplex 

H. subcupreus 

Hydrochus spp. 

Hydrophilus ovatus 

Paracymus disperses 

P. reductus 

P. subcupreus 

Phaenonotum exstriatum 

Sperchopsis tessellata 

Tropisternus blatchleyi blatchleyi 

T. collaris 

T. lateralis nimbatus 

Limnichidae Eulimnichus ater 

E. nitidulus 

Noteridae 

Hydrocanhtus atripennis 

Suphisellus pucticollis 

Ptilodactylidae 

Ptilodactyla acuta 

P. angustata 

P. carinata 

P. serricollis 

Ptilodactyla spp.

Scirtidae Cyphon americanus 

C. padi 

C. perplexus 

C. variabilis 

Elodes pulchella 

Prionocyphon discoideus 

Scirtes tibalis 

Staphylinidae Anotylus insignitus

Bledius punctatissimus 

B. semiferrugineus 
97 

Table C-1. (Continued). 

Order Family Species 

Coleoptera (beetles) Staphylinidae B. wudus 

Bledius sp.

Carpelimus dentiger 

Carpelimus sp.

Thinodromus arcifer 

T. corvinus 

Ephemeroptera (mayflies) Baetidae Acerpenna pygmaea 

Callibaetis pretiosus 

Heterocloeon sp.

Procloeon viridoculare 

Procloen sp.

Psuedocloeon ephippiatum 

P. frondale 

Caenidae Brachycercus maculates 

Caenis macafferti 

Caenis sp.

Ephemerellidae Eurylophella doris 

Ephemeridae Hexagenia bilineata 

H. limbata 

Heptageniidae Stenacron interpunctatum 

Stenonema lenati

S. modestum 

Isonychiidae Isonychia arida 

Isonychia sp.

Leptophlebiidae Leptophlebia bradleyi 

L. intermedia 

Paraleptophlebia volitans 

Paraleptophlebia sp.

Metretopodidae Siphloplecton sp.

Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies) Aeshnidae Anax junius 

Basiaeschna junata 

Boyeria vinosa 

Epiaeschna heros 

Gomphaeschna antilope 

Nasiaeschna pentacantha 

Cordulegastridae Cordulegaster oblique 

Gomphidae Dromogomphus armatus 

D. spinsus 

Erpetogomphus designatus 
98 

Table C-1. (Continued). 

Order Family Species 

Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies) Gomphidae Gomphus abbreviates 

G. exilis 

G. hybridus 

G. lividus 

G. parvidens 

Gomphus sp. 

Hagenus bevistylus 

Progomphus obscurus 

Stylurus ivae 

Libellulidae Celithemis elisa 

C. fasciata 

C. ornate 

C. verna 

Didymops transversa 

Epicordulia pinceps 

Erythemis simplicicollis 

Erythrodiplax minuscule 

Ladona deplanata 

Libellula auripennis 

L. cyanea 

L. incesta 

L. semifasciata 

L. vibrans 

Macromia illinoiensis 

Macromia sp. 

Neurocordulia alabamensis 

N. obseleta 

Orthemis ferruginea 

Pachydiplax longipennis 

Pantala flavescens 

Perithemis tenera 

Plathemis lydia 

Tetragoneuria costalis 

T. cynosure 

T. semiaquea 

T. spinosa 

Tetragoneuria sp.

Tramea carolina 

Coenagrionidae Argia bipunctulata 
99 

Table C-1. (Continued). 

Order Family Species 

Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies) Coenagrionidae A. fumipennis 

A. moesta 

A. tibialis 

Argia sp. 

Chomagrion conditum 

Enallagma divagans 

E. basidens 

Enallagma sp.

Ischnura posita 

Calopterygidae Calopteryx dimidiate 

C. maculate 

Calopteryx sp.

Plecoptera (stoneflies) Nemouridae Amphinemura sp.

Prostoia sp.

Perlidae Neoperla carlsoni 

N. clymene 

Perlesta shubuta 

Perlesta sp.

Perlinella sp.

Perlodidae Helopicus bogaloosa 

Taeniopterygidae Taeniopteryx lonicera 

Taeniopteryx sp.

Trichoptera (caddisflies) Brachycentridae Brachycentrus chelatus 

Brachycentrus sp.

Calamoceratidae Anisocentropus pyraloides 

Heteroplecton americanum 

Dipsuedopsidae Phylocentropus placidus 

Phylocentropus sp.

Hydopsychidae Cheumatopsyche pasella 

C. pettiti 

C. pinaca 

Cheumatopsyche sp.

Hydropsyche alvata 

H. incommode 

H. rossi 

Hydropsyche sp.

Macrostemum carolina 

Macrostemum sp.

Hydroptilidae Hydroptila armata 
100 

Table C-1. (Continued). 

Order Family Species 

Trichoptera (caddisflies) Hydroptilidae H. delineate 

H. molsonae 

H. novicola 

H. quinola 

H. remita 

H. scheiringi 

H. waubesiana 

Neotrichia vibrans 

Ochrotrichia tarsalis 

O. aegerfasciella 

Oxythira grisea 

O. janella 

O. lumosa 

O. novastota 

O. pallida 

O. pescadori 

Leptoceridae Ceraclea cancellata 

C. diluta 

C. maculate 

C. ophioderus 

C. protonepha 

C. tarsipunctata 

C. transversa 

Leptocerus americanus 

Nectopsyche candida 

N. candita/equisita 

N. pavida 

Oecetis cinerascens 

O. ditissa 

O. georgia 

O. inconspicua complex 

O. nocturna 

O. osteni 

O. persimilis 

O. scala 

Triaenodes helo 

T. igitus 

T. perna 

Limnephilidae Ironoquia sp.
101 

Table C-1. (Continued). 

Order Family Species 

Trichoptera (caddisflies) Limnephilidae Pycnopsyche sp.

Molannidae Molanna tryphena 

M. ulmerina 

Philopotamidae Chimarra florida 

Chimarra sp.

Phryganeidae Agrypnia vestita 

Ptilostomis ocellifera 

Ptilopstomis sp.

Polycentropodidae Cernotina calcea 

C. spicata 

Cyrnellus fraternus 

Neureclipsis crepuscularis 

N. melco 

Nyctiophylax affinis 

N. serratus 

Nyctiophylax sp. 

Polycentropus sp.

Psychomyiidae Lype diversa 

Sericostomatidae Agarodes libalis

103 

Appendix D. Permitted Animal Production Facilities 

Table D-1. List of permitted animal production facilities in the five 11-digit hydrologic units surrounding 

Congaree National Park, with facility name underneath descriptors (data courtesy of Dr. J. Eidson, 

SCDHEC, Bureau of Water, Information Services). 

Facility 

NPDES 

Designation Operation Type 

Designated 

Count CAFO size 

Kaigler Swine Farm ND0065323 swine 60 small 

Shealy Broiler Farm ND0080543 poultry (broilers) 98,000 medium 

Beaver Creek Poultry Farm ND0082961 poultry (broilers) 47,000 medium 

Hoffman Broiler Facility ND0071501 poultry (broilers) 57,000 medium 

Woodward Vale Broiler Facility ND0068268 poultry (broilers) 83,000 medium 

Walker Poultry ND0072923 poultry (broilers) 176,000 large 

Sans Souci Farm ND0078620 pigeons 4,400 N/A 

Sumter Lodge and Farm LLC ND0084204 poultry (broilers) 135,000 large 

Wateree Corr. Institute – Layer Farm ND0080519 poultry (layers) 80,000 medium 

Bennett Turkey Growout Facility ND0076899 turkey 22,500 medium 

Dennis Growout Turkey Facility ND0078506 turkey 45,000 medium 

Red Level Farm Turkey Facility ND0075574 poultry (broilers) 25,000 small 

Frost Brooder Turkey Facility ND0076201 turkey 25,000 medium 

Cover Story Farms ND0073148 horse 10 small 

Denton Farms Inc. ND0076015 turkey 25,000 medium 

RR & B #38 ND0078514 turkey 25,000 medium 

Drake Farms ND0082210 poultry (broilers) 200,000 large 

Ponderosa Farms ND0084310 poultry (broilers) 135,000 large 

Sunnyview Farms ND0010057 poultry (broilers) 104,000 medium 

Hamilton Stables ND0086428 horse 100 small 

Ziegler Poultry Farm ND0085979 poultry (broilers) 99,000 large 

Prickett Poultry Farm ND0084581 poultry (breeders) 75,000 medium 
 
The Department of the Interior protects and manages the nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and 

other information about those resources; and honors its special responsibilities to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated 

Island Communities. 

NPS 178/106142, December 2010 
National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Natural Resource Program Center

1201 Oakridge Drive, Suite 150 

Fort Collins, CO 80525 

www.nature.nps.gov 

EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICA TM