By Will Atwater
North Carolina watersheds like Durham’s Third Fork Creek are increasingly under stress from industrial discharges, plastic litter, sewage spills and sediment‑laden runoff caused by development, according to a new study.
Researchers from Durham-based RTI International and North Carolina Central University found more than 1,300 chemical signals from everyday products in the creek through their recently-released study. And a Waterkeepers Carolina guide lays out steps local governments can take to keep more of that pollution out of streams across the state.
While the exact number of impaired water bodies statewide can be hard to pin down, a draft list produced in 2024 by North Carolina’s Department of Environmental Quality shows hundreds of creeks, rivers and lakes that fail to meet water‑quality standards. It would add 70 more to the roster while removing 56 that have improved, underscoring how widespread the problem has become.
Durham’s Third Fork Creek, which eventually discharges into Jordan Lake, has been an impaired watershed for years. The local riverkeeper and volunteers have led ongoing efforts to track and reduce plastic litter that collects there, even as less-visible chemical pollution has built up in the water and sediment.
Researchers sampled Third Fork Creek monthly at three sites from July to December 2022, tracking how contamination changed with storms and seasons. They detected pharmaceuticals, per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), plastic additives, germ‑killing chemicals and residue of personal care products, with some levels spiking during wetter months.
One of the pharmaceutical drugs found was an erectile dysfunction medication, a detail that Carresse Gerald, an NCCU associate professor in the Department of Environmental, Earth and Geospatial Sciences, uses to show her students how chemical fingerprints can point back to the source.
She said when she presents this data to her students, she stresses the importance of what these chemicals in the watershed mean. “One is an erectile dysfunction drug, and so I kind of have a joke about that,” Gerald said. “I don’t think the squirrels are taking Cialis and Viagra, so [the source] is probably sewage.”
A closer look
Unlike the 2014 U.S. Geological Survey targeted analysis of the Third Fork Creek, which focused on a limited list of pre-selected chemicals, the 2022 non-targeted approach cast a broader net and detected 30 more confirmed compounds, according to the report.
Researchers used non-targeted analysis as they collected the samples. They tested during the wetter summer-to-fall period — hurricane season — when storms drive runoff and contaminant releases.
Third Fork Creek is a 16.6-square-mile watershed that originates in East Durham near the Forest Hills neighborhood and flows southeast through South Durham near Hope Valley and Woodcroft neighborhoods. Its waters eventually flow into Jordan Lake, which is a drinking water source for hundreds of thousands North Carolina residents.
“Non-targeted analysis helps us spot emerging contaminants and get a clearer picture of what’s in our waterways,” said RTI Research Scientist Imari Walker-Franklin. “Seeing how those patterns shift over time can help communities make more informed decisions about water quality.”
The chemical company Brendtag Mid-South has been identified as one of the sources of pollutants in an east Durham neighborhood creek that flows into Third Fork Creek. The company says it has taken steps to remediate chemical contamination that was left behind by previous property owners. A statement on the company’s website says that since 2022, it has been disposing of all of the water used in its processes off site.
Next steps
While the 2022 non-targeted analysis found more confirmed compounds than the 2014 study, there is more work that could be done, researchers said.
“If we received additional funding for this project, I would love to see a follow up study that runs year round and examines larger distances in the creek up to and including Jordan Lake,” Walker-Franklin said in email. “Ideally it would include sampling water and fish, focusing on pollution sources and how to mitigate.”
But non-targeted analysis is labor-intensive and expensive, costing hundreds to thousands of dollars per sample.
“It’s best used for baseline studies in areas with known water quality issues or storm risks,” Walker-Franklin said. “After a storm or an intervention, we can use this kind of data to compare post-event chemical levels and understand the impact on water quality.”
While the 2022 non-targeted analysis found more confirmed compounds than the 2014 study, it detected 1,300 more chemical features but verified only 30 compounds, highlighting its power for discovery over routine monitoring. Overall, the 2022 analysis found 13 times more chemical signals than the 2014 targeted scan.
Gerald said there are practical things individuals can do to protect local creeks and streams.
The most effective way to tackle pollution is to stop it at the source, Gerald said, with actions like properly disposing of pharmaceuticals, throwing away trash, cutting back on single‑use plastics and using reusable bags and bottles.
“Individuals matter,” she tells her students.
She also urges consumers to support companies that switch to more sustainable packaging, like moving from plastic tubs to paper or cardboard, because “the trash originates from somewhere,” and market pressure can help change what ends up in watersheds such as Third Fork Creek.
Environmentalists weigh in
These personal habits complement policy solutions from local advocates. Waterkeepers Carolina’s “Gold Standard Development Practices for Watershed Protection” lays out ways local governments can curb development-driven pollution before it reaches creeks like Third Fork.
In April, environmental advocates gathered at the Southern Coalition for Social Justice in Durham for a “Designing Communities That Protect Our Waters” forum. Panelists discussed how local policies can better protect streams and drinking water.
Haw Riverkeeper Emily Sutton spoke about the need for stronger, more uniform standards to protect waterways from erosion, sedimentation, runoff and other issues that impair water quality.
She said those protections matter more as development encroaches on waterways.
Impervious surfaces send more runoff rushing into creeks during storms, carving out channels and washing pollution downstream.
Sutton also noted that drought — such as the one currently gripping the state — leaves less water to dilute contaminants such as PFAS and 1,4‑dioxane. In dry spells, she said, wastewater discharges can make up a larger share of river flow, concentrating whatever is in them for communities that draw drinking water from lakes and reservoirs.
Tools such as riparian buffers, green stormwater infrastructure and stricter limits on impervious surface in local Unified Development Ordinances are some of the last places cities and counties can build that resilience into everyday development decisions, Sutton and other advocates say. The Gold Standard guide is meant to help local governments write those protections into their codes before more creeks are pushed past their limits.
“We have to start using these protections — green stormwater infrastructure, rethinking impervious surfaces throughout our urban areas,” Sutton said. “The Unified Development Ordinance, the city’s rulebook for how and where development happens, is the vehicle that we have to use to get there.”
“The amount that [Third Fork Creek] has changed just in the past 10 years, with incised streams and eroding banks — it’s almost unrecognizable in some spots, and it changes after every flood.”
The post Problems at Durham’s Third Fork Creek point to fixes needed to protect NC watersheds appeared first on North Carolina Health News.
