Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary management plan

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Management Plan
* STOCKPORT

Hudson River National *TIVOLI
Estuarine Sanctuary

IONA *

PIERMONT *

U.S. DEPAROTMENT OF COMMERCE
Nati� : and Atmospheric Administration
GC
Offic 97.8 I :Zone Management
.N7 ..
STA1 H83 YORK "
Deps nvironmental Conservation 'i

THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY MANAGEMENT PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

Acknowledgements ..................................... v

Executive Summary ................................. .... 1

I: INTRODUCTION ........................ 5

II: BACKGROUND OF THE NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY PROGRAM 12

III: GOALS OF THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY 15

IV: HUDSON RIVER ESTUARY AND COMPONENT DESCRIPTIONS ...... 17

A. Stockport Flats Component .......................... 21

B. Tivoli Bays Component ......29

C. Iona Marsh Component ..31

D. Piermont Marsh Component .34

V: ADMINISTRATION ............................................. 39

VI: SITE MANAGEMENT ...... ........................... 53

A. Protection of Natural Features ..................... 53

B. Archeologic, Historic, and Scenic Resources ........ 59

C. Facilities ....................... ............ 61

D. Existing Rights-of-Way ............................. 67

E. Off-Site Concerns for Sanctuary Site Management .... 67

F. Surveillance, Enforcement, and Maintenance ......... 71

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

PAGE

VII: RESEARCH PROGRAM .. .................................. 77

A. Research Priorities ........................ ..... 78

B. Coordination of Sanctuary Research .............. . 83

C. Sanctuary Research Facilities and Support Services 87

D. Funding Sanctuary Research ....................... 90

E. Sanctuary Data Management and Depositories ...... 91

F. Dissemination of Sanctuary Research Results ...... 92

VIII: EDUCATION PROGRAM .......... ........................ 93

A. Education Facilities, Programs, and Materials 94

B. Education Priorities ............................ 99

IX: OTHER ACTIVITIES ................................. 101

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix I. Vascular Plants of the Hudson River National Estuarine
Sanctuary

Appendix 2 Amphibians Reported in or Near the Hudson River
National Estuarine Sanctuary

Appendix 3 Reptiles Reported in or Near the Hudson River
National Estuarine Sanctuary

Appendix 4 Fishes Reported From the Hudson River National
Estuarine Sanctuary

Appendix 5 Birds Reported in or Near the Hudson River
National Estuarine Sanctuary

Appendix 6 Mammals Reported in or Near the Hudson River
National Estuarine Sanctuary

Appendix 7 Memorandum of Understanding Among Five New York State
Agencies

Appendix 8 Existing Jurisdictions in the Hudson River National
Estuarine Sanctuary

Appendix 9 Memorandum of Understanding Between Bard College and
the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation

Appendix 10 Consistency With Other State and Federal Management
Programs

Appendix 11 Management Needs of-Selected Individual Species

Appendix 12 Selected Off-Site Tidal Wetlands

Appendix 13 Bibliography and Literature Cited

Appendix 14 Current Research and Monitoring Activities on the
Hudson River Estuary
Appendix 15 Survey,.Environmental Monitoring, and Research
Priorities of the Hudson River National Estuarine
Sanctuary

Appendix 16 Sample Research Proposal Form

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table I Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of the Hudson River
National Estuarine Sanctuary.

Table 2 Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Animal Species
of the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary.

Table 3 Ownership and Size of Parcels Within the Hudson River
National Estuarine Sanctuary.

Table 4 Parcels Proposed for Acquisition.

Table 5 Proposed Local Sanctuary Advisory Committee Membership.

Table 6 Allowable Sanctuary Uses of Each Component by State
Agency Jurisdiction.

Acknowiledgements

The Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary Management Plan is
the result of contributions from many individuals, several of whom
assisted over a period of years. The sustained commitment and
contributions of both Erik Kiviat and Fran Dunwell to the Sanctuary
program deserve special mention.

The Management Plan was written by Elizabeth Blair and Albert Hall
from a number of Sanctuary documents and reports, and with the advice
and generous assistance from members of the Sanctuary Steering
Committee, including:

Winthrop Aldrich Eugene McCaffrey
Glenn Cole David McCoy
Herbert Doig Robert McLean
Frances Dunwell James Morton
Harry Earle Clarence T. O'Brien
Erik Kiviat Nancy Pierson
Alan Mapes John Renkavinsky
Langdon Marsh Ann Williams

Assistance in the form of review, comments, and encouragement
from the Sanctuary Programs Division of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management is also gratefully acknowledged.

Theresa Harrison and Maureen Riley handled the typing and many
revisions of this document with a steady supply of patience and
good humor.

The following individuals also contributed to this Management
Plan:

George Furman John Meade
Peter Gregory Edward Radle
Paul Keller Joseph Steeley
Nancy Tobin

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In August 1984, after several years of state and local

efforts to establish an estuarine sanctuary in New York with

assistance from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administsration, the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary

became reality. Four components of the Sanctuary have been

established, including Stockport Flats, Tivoli Bays, Iona Island,

and Piermont Marsh. The primary goals for establishing and

managing the various land ownerships within each of the four com-

ponents as part of a single system are:

o To establish and manage the area within the boundaries
of the Hudson River NationalIstuarine Sanctuary as a
natural field laboratory. 0o protect the natural
resources of the wetlands, transitional areas, and
adjacent uplands. To conduct and facilitate both short-
and long-term estuarine research, education and
interpretation.

o To promote cooperative management by state and municipal
agencies to ensure that the short and long-term uses of
the Sanctaury carry out Sanctuary goals and policies as
articulated in this Sanctuary Management Plan.

o To provide for controlledmultiple use of the Sanctuary
to allow for the continuation of existing low intensity
recreational and commercial fishing uses that are pre-
sently permitted and compatible with the Sanctuary's
character as a natural field laboratory.

This management plan defines how these goals will be met

through its-articulation of Sanctuary objectives, policies, and

programs.

The Department of Environmental conservation (DEC) admin-

isters the Sanctaury and is directly responsible for the expen-

diture of program funds and implementation of the research and

educational programs. A state Sanctuary Steering Committee

advises the Department on all matters relating to Sanctuary

management; this committee is chaired by DEC and comprised of

representatives from the Palisades Interstate Park Commission,

the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, the

Department of State, and the Office of General Services, and the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on an ex-officio

basis. Three local citizen's advisory groups provide advice,

make recommendations, and chanlnel public support and criticism to

the Steering Committee.

Estuarine Sanctuary research and education programs will be

closely coordinated with related programs on the Hudson River,

particularly those of DEC's Hudson River Fisheries Unit and

Fisheries Advisory Committee, the Hudson River Foundation for

Science and Environmental Research, the Hudson River Sloop

Clearwater, and the Hudson Valley's colleges and universities.

Research

The Sanctuary research program emphasizes long-term environ-

mental monitoring, ecosystem studies, and applied problems in the

management of estuary resources. Much research has been done on

the Hudson River Estuary, but efforts have generally been

fragmented and there are many serious gaps in the knowledge

needed to effectively manage the Estuary, particularly with

respect to shorelines, shallows, and tidal wetlands. The Sanctuary

research program will help to coordinate and unify Hudson River

research, provide information to coastal managers at all levels

of government and in the private sector, and improve the manage-

ment of Hudson-River estuarine resources. Research services and

facilities at Tivoli Bays are being upgraded for these purposes.

Education

The Estuarine Sanctuary sites contain a variety of fauna and

flora and estuarine habitats representative of the Hudson River

Estuary located within easy reach of millions of New York State

and greater New York City area residents. The Sanctuary provides

an opportunity for many to learn more about the estuary's

geology, ecology and resources. Sanctuary f~unds are being used

to develop Hudson Estuary related exhibits at the Bear Mountain

Trailside Museums complex near Iona Island Marsh; this complex is

visited by over 600,000 people each year. Funds are also being

used to set up facilities at Tivoli Bays for educational exhi-

bits. In addition, several programs are being developed, such

as guided field trips, self-guided trail brochures, and educa-

tional media available for public groups and schools on loan.

Recreation and Commercial Fishing

Although scientific research and education are the primary

emphasis of the Sanctuary, existing low intensity recreational

and commercial fishing uses will be allowed to continue, provided

that they are compatible with the Sanctuary's character as a

natural field laboratory and are currently permitted. These

include hiking, hunting, fishing, trapping, boating, wildlife

observation, and other low intensity activities.

I. INTRODUCTION

The Hudson River flows through eastern New York State from

the Adirondack high peaks south to New York City where it empties

into New York Harbor, lower New York Bay, and the New York Bight.

Along the 152 miles between the Federal Dam at Troy and Battery

Park at the tip of Manhattan Island the Hudson is an estuary, an

arm of the sea subject to both river currents and ocean tides.

Brackish water may occur as far inland in the Hudson River as

Hyde Park.

The Hudson Estuary is a remarkable system that continues to

sustain an enormous productive potential. A wide variety of

habitat types are present in the Hudson Estuary, including deep

water, shallows, tidal marshes and swamps, upland forests, clay

banks, and rock cliffs. These habitats support an impressively

diverse array of flora and fauna, including a number of

endangered species. The estuary is an invaluable fish and wildlife

resource, which not only provides food, but also breeding habi-

tats and nursery areas. Its commercial importance alone is

staggering; estimates suggest that about 90 percent of the shell

fisheries and 65 percent of the coastal fin fisheries directly

depend on estuarine environments.

This estuarine system is used and enjoyed by millions of

people, although human impacts on this productive and extremely

complex system have gene rally been detrimental. Fortunately,

estuarine systems are highly resilient, and many of these human

impacts are not permanent or irreparable. However now, more than

ever, there is a need for wise, informed management.

The State of New York has demonstrated its commitment to

maintaining the resource productivity of its coastal zone through

its enactment and implementation of a wide range of state protec-

tive programs and by its participation in similar federal

programs. State and federal cooperation on the establishment of

the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary ensures the availa-

bility of research sites for the study of natural processes and

ecological relationships. These investigations will provide

information that is essential to effective coastal resource man-

agement decisions. Information from research and monitoring will

assist resource managers in developing effective programs for

maintaining and improving the quality of estuarine resources.

Results of the investigations will be presented in both scien-

tific documents and public education materials. The on-going

availability of these sites for educational activities is also

ensured.

The Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary consists of

four components (Figure 1) - Stockport Flats, Tivoli Says, Iona

Island Marsh, and Piermont Marsh - spanning an 84-mile stretch of

the Mid and Lower Hudson shoreline from Columbia County south to

Rockland County. These four natural areas are among the-Hudson

River's largest and most productive tidal wetland complexes,

FIGURE 1
THE HUDSON RIVER ESTUARY

Tray
Hudson River drainage basin Albany
Extent of tidal influence

*41 \ S fi /Stockport Flats
Hudson

~ I) / |Tivoli Bays

1 ~ � Kingston �*.Rhinebeck
k� \0 _~I, Lvyde Park

Maximum salt intrusian
/ P ) 9 Poughkeepsie
Hudson River Estuary
>",r- , Newburgh . Beacon

N . West Point
J Iona Island Marsh Peekskill

O mi 30
Nyack ' ' ' '
Piermont Marsh 0 km 50

Yonkers
New York City

Stackport

19 mi Tivoli
35 min

67 ml 49 mi lona
125 min 90 min

84 ml 66 mi 18 mi Piermont
160 min 125 min 35 min

Distances (airline miles) and approximate driving times (minutes) between sites.

which encompass a variety of habitats in both salt water and

freshwater environments. The four components are being managed

as a unified system, but each area is representative of a dif-

ferent geologic segment of the estuary, and each has a unique

character. They represent a salinity gradient which ranges from

freshwater at Stockport and Tivoli to water that varies from

fresh to 12 parts per thousand of salt at Piermont Marsh, the

site nearest the Atlantic. As a system, they support plant and

animal species characteristic of the National Estuarine Sanctuary

System's Virginian Biogeographic Region. Furthermore, the four

Sanctuary components all have histories of observation and

research that greatly facilitate the initiation of research and

education programs, and all are largely state-owned.

The Stockport Flats component (Figure 2) is the northernmost

site. It is located on the east shore of the Hudson River in the

Town of Stockport in Columbia County, 4 miles north of the City

of Hudson and 22 miles south of Albany. Here the Hudson River is

relatively narrow and shallow, with steep, low bluffs rising 100

feet above the shore.

A variety of land forms are assembled within the Stockport

component, which comprises a four-mile series of peninsulas,

islands, marshes, shallows, sand bars, minor stream channels, and

the mouth of Stockport Creek, a tributary stream. Stockport

Middle Ground, Gay's Point, and Fordham Point are to the north of

Stockport Creek, while Unnamed Island, Priming Hook, and the main

Little Nutten Hook

FIGURE 2
STOCKPORT FLATS COMPONENT

Po~~~~~~~~~~i. t t 9J

Rt. 9

Ground~~~~~ Ex~tent of
tdlinfluence

Island

Main Mrhone mile
one km

W ~~tidal wetlands

Flats~~~~~~~ tidal shallows

deep water

(Adapted from USGS Hudson North, N.Y. quadrangle.)

marsh, East Flats, lie to the South. Stockport Middle Ground and

Gay's Point are included in the Hudson River Islands State Park.

The Stockport Flat~s site is noted for its wealth of biologi-

cal resources, including what may be the most extensive wild rice

stand anywhere on the Hudson.

The Tivoli Bays component (Figure 3) is in the northwest

corner of Dutchess County between Tivoli and Barrytown in the

Town of Red Hook. It is 7 miles north of Rhinebeck and 19 miles

north of Poughkeepsie. This site is dominated by two large coves

on the east shore of the Hudson River, North Bay and South Bay,

and includes Cruger Island and Magdalen Island., their associated

tidal shallows, and the mouths of two tributary streams, Stony

Creek and Saw Kill. The Tivoli Bays state lands have been

designated an Experimental Ecological Reserve by the Institute of

Ecology at Butler University. The Tivoli Bays area is listed on

the National Register of Historic Places and is included in the

Mid-Hudson Historic Shorelands State Scenic Area, which extends

from Clermont to Hyde Park.

The large complex of wildlands at Tivoli Bays possess a high

natural diversity. North Tivoli Bay, created by a partial diking

of a shallow estuary edge over a century ago, is a freshwater

tidal marsh, while South Bay is principally freshwater mud flats

and tidal shallows succeeding to marsh. The islands are rocky,

wooded bluffs and ridges. This area stretches two miles, and is

FIGURE 3
TIVOLI BAYS COMPONENT

Tivoli

--/7~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Isl

*~~~~~~~~~~~~t 9.

.~~~~~~~Br olg
.*** Bay* * ~ .*

one~~~~~~~~~~~~. mile
one km

tid~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ald shallows

deep water ~~~~~~(Adapted from USGS Saugerties, N.Y. quadrangle.)

entirely bounded to the east by clay bluffs that support well

developed and nearly undisturbed mixed forest. Tivoli Bays is

an important migration stopover for birds.

The Iona Island Marsh component (Figure 4) lies 6 miles

south of West Point in the Town of Stony Point, Rockland County.

It is a dramatic site in the midst of the Hudson Highlands, set

at the edge of one of the narrowest reaches of the Hudson

Estuary. This Sanctuary site encompasses Iona Marsh (Salisbury

Meadow), Iona Island, Round Island and its associated shallows,

the mouth of Doodletown Brook and Doodletown Bight. The entire

site is part of Bear Mountain State Park, an element of the

Palisades Interstate Park System. Iona Marsh has been designated

a National Natural Landmark by the U.S. National Park Service.

Iona Marsh began to form in the shelter of Iona Island over

6,000 years ago. This intertidal marsh is dominated by

narrowleaf cattail and is laced with tidal creeks, while large

areas of mud flats are exposed at low tide in adjacent Doodletown

Bight. The causeway connecting the mainland to Iona Island faci-

litates access to this portion of the site, which is dominated by

dry, deciduous forest. In recent years, several bald eagles have

used Round and Iona Islands as a wintering area.

Piermont Marsh (Figure 5), in the Town of Orangetown,

Rockland County, is the southernmost Sanctuary site. A

section at the north end of this site is in the Village of

FIGURE 4
IONA ISLAND MARSH COMPONENT

TrailIside

Bear Mtn.

Doodletowrn
BightIo

Iona Isan Mars

Dunderberg Mtn.

one mile
one km

W ~~land

tidal wetlands

~~ ~tidal shallows

deep water
(Adapted from USGS Peekskill, N.Y. quadrangle.)

FIGURE 5
PIERMONT MARSH COMPONENT

Piermont 1m

Wtidal wetlands

tidal *hollows Lmn

one km one mile - ~(Adapted fromUSGS Nyack, N.Y.-N.J. quadrangle.)

one km ~~~~~~~~(Areas shown as 'tIdal wetlands' and 'tidal shallows' are both considered
tidal wetlands under the State Tidal Wetlands Act.)

Piermont. Piermont Marsh extends one-and-one-half miles south from

Erie Pier in Piermont to Sneden's Landing along the west shore of

the Hudson River. This site is largely a part of Tallman Mountain

State Park, also an element of the Palisades Interstate Park System.

The Piermont Marsh overlooks the south end of the very broad

and shallow section of the Hudson River estuary known as

Haverstraw Bay and Tappan Zee. The marsh includes the mouth of

Sparkill Creek, and is surrounded by very extensive tidal

shallows, which are juxtaposed with a mature hardwood forest at

the base of the Palisades Ridge. The Piermont Marsh site is one

of the richest marsh areas on the Hudson River estuary.

The unique qualities of these sites -- their diversity and

productivity -- warranted the establishment of a sanctuary to

safeguard their integrity as prime examples of estuarine environ-

ments found along the Hudson River. These sites are being

managed with advice from both local and state advisory committees.

The local committees offer an unparalleled familiarity with each

site -- the resources present there, their problems, and ways of

managing them to meet the program's goals. The state Steering

Committee provides administrative direction to general Sanctuary

management-and the implementation of research and education

programs.

This management plan specifies both site and off-site man-

agement goals and objectives for the protection and use of

Sanctuary resources. To fulfill these goals, the plan

establishes both general and site-specific policies that enable

research projects, educational activities, and recreational pur-

suits to take place without hindering each other and without

damaging the Sanctuary's resources. The plan outlines ways these

policies will be carried out. It also defines the roles of the

Sanctuary committees and staff.

This management plan is not intended to be a static docu-

ment, but will be amended through deliberate and careful eva-

luation by the Steering Committee of changes proposed by members

of the Steering Committee, the Sanctuary staff, the local advisory

committees, NOAA's Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management,

and the public. This must be a living document in order to be part

of a vital, living estuary. The efforts and contributions of these

groups ensure that the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary is

effectively managed as a valuable resource for the state and the

nation.

II. BACKGROUND ON THE NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY PROGRAM

The Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary is part of

the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program which is supported by the

U.S. Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA). Congress established the National

Estuarine Sanctuary Program in response to disturbing trends

in coastal areas throughout the country -- the pollution of

coastal waters, the closing of shellfish beds, the draining of

marshes, and other human-induced damages to valuable and produc-

tive estuarine systems. Fewer and fewer natural estuarine areas

were available for scientific study and public education. At the

same time, the need was growing for more information about the

processes and functions of estuarine ecosystems, and human

effects on them, to improve the management and development of the

nation's coastal areas. The creation of estuarine sanctuaries

was an important step toward addressing these information needs.

Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (P.L.

92-583), as amended, established the National Estuarine Sanctuary

Program and provided grants on a matching basis to states to

acquire, develop, and operate estuarine areas to be set aside as

natural field laboratories. In addition to providing a wealth of

opportunities for basic and applied scientific research into the

estuarine environment, these sanctuaries are places where stu-

dents and the general public can learn about natural processes in

the coastal region and human effects on them. Other low-

intensity uses of the sanctuaries can be allowed as long as they

do not impede research and educational activities.

To ensure that the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program

includes sites that adequately represent regional and ecological

differences, the program regulations established a biogeographi-

cal classification scheme that reflects geographic and biological

characteristics. Eleven biogeographic categories are defined in

the program regulations. The Hudson River Estuary is represen-

tative of similar ecosystems found in the region that extends

from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras (the Virginian Biogeographic

Region).

The National Estuarine Sanctuary Program regulations

(15 CFR 921) authorize four kinds of 50 percent matching grants:

(1) an optional, initial planning. grant for such preliminary pur-

poses as assessing the lands proposed for acquisition, preparing

an environmental impact statement, and developing draft manage-

ment, research and education plans; (2) grants for acquisition of

the real property within the sanctuary boundaries and development

of interpretive/research facilities; (3) operation grants for

managing the established sanctuary's research and education

programs; and (4) limited research funds on a competitive basis.

New York's involvement in the National Estuarine Sanctuary

Program is not new, but has spanned a period of approximately

four years. An initial proposal for a sanctuary on Long Island

was impracticable, and the State's alternative choice, a sanc-

tuary on the Hudson River Estuary, was proposed. The U. S.

Commerce Department, NOAA, awarded New York's Department of

Environmental Conservation (DEC) a pre-acquisition grant of

$50,000 in September, 1981, which was matched by DEC fund's and

services. Representatives of involved State agencies met to

select sites on the Hudson, and DEC took the role of lead agency,

with cooperation from the Palisades Interstate Park Commission

(PIPC), the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation

(OPRHP), the New York State Department of State (DOS), and the

Office of General Services (OGS).

On October 12, 1982, the Hudson River National Estuarine

Sanctuary system was formally dedicated during a ceremony on the

deck of the aircraft carrier Intrepid, now a floating naval

museum docked on the Hudson River off 40th Street in New York

City. New York State's Coastal Zone Management Program, which is

under the direction of DOS, was also dedicated during those cere-

monies. The dedication of the Hudson River National Estuarine

Sanctuary came shortly after the awarding of a $375,000

Acquisition grant from NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Coastal

Resource Management. This grant, matched by the State, provides

for acquisition of some Sanctuary land, development of research

and educational facilities, and administrative costs.,

III. GOALS OF THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

The Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary is a unique

combination of lands and waters that have been set aside as a

natural field laboratory in which to study the natural and

human processes occurring within estuarine ecosystems. The

Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary will be managed to meet

the following goals:

o To establish and manage the area within the boundaries

of the Hudson River Naitonal Estuarine Sanctuary as a

natural field laboratory. To protect the natural

resources of the wetlands, transitional areas, and

adjacent uplands. To conduct and facilitate both short

and long-term estuarine research, education, and

interpretation.

o To promote cooperative management by state, interstate,

and municipal agencies to ensure that the short and

long-term uses of the Sanctuary contribute to carrying

out Sanctuary goals and policies as articulated in this

Sanctuary Management Plan.

o To provide for controlled multiple use of the-Sanctuary

to allow for the continuation of existing low intensity

recreational uses that are presently permitted, including

fish and wildlife recreation (e.g. hunting, fishing,

wildlife observation), which are compatible with

Sanctuary's character as a natural field laboratory.

This Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary Management Plan

charts how these goals will be met. It is a comprehensive mana-

gement plan that provides direction and guidance for the opera-

tion of the Sanctuary to agency administrators and Sanctuary

staff, and also serves as a guide for others to opportunities,

programs, and facilities associatd with the Sanctuary.

IV. HUDSON RIVER ESTUARY AND SANCTUARY COMPONENT DESCRIPTIONS

The Hudson River flows 315 miles through eastern New York

from Lake Tear of the Clouds on the Southwestern slope of Mount

Marcy in the Adirondacks south to New York City. Except for 20

miles near its mouth where New Jersey forms its western shore,

the river lies entirely in New York State. The tidal Hudson

stretches 152 miles from Troy to Battery Park on the southern tip

of Manhattan Island where the river empties into New York Harbor,

lower New York Bay, and t-he New York Bight.

The human history of the Hudson River is-rich and varied. A

wealth of archeological sites along the Hudson River Estuary

corridor indicate that Native American cultures inhabited the

region as much as 5,000 years ago. These peoples were par-

ticularly drawn to the region's variety and abundance of food

supplies and natural resources, as were the European settlers

that followed them. Large ocean-going vessels are able to navi-

gate as far north as Albany, and-the river has long been a great

commercial artery, and a strategically important one. There has

been a long history of artistic interest in and esthetic appre-

ciation of the Hudson River's varied landscapes and scenic

* ~~resources. The high levels of public concern for and interest in

the Hudson Estuary in recent times is reflected in the designa-.

tion of Stockport Flats, Tivoli Says, Iona Island Marsh, and

Piermont Marsh as components of the Hudson River National

Estuarine Sanctuary.

The Hudson River watershed is one of the most geologically

complex regions in the United States, and the shores of the

estuary encompass a great variety of bedrock types, landforms,

and soils. The bed of the estuary itself is filled with glacial

and post-glacial deposits beneath recent estuarine sediments.

Predominantly steep shores limit the extent of the river's

floodplain, although extensive dikes were constructed below Troy

in the 1930's to control the shifting flow through an area of

broad flats.

The Hudson Estuary is unbranched and relatively narrow; it

varies in width from one-sixth to two-and-one-half miles.

Maximum river depths range from 13 to 200 feet. Tides penetrate

upriver to the Federal Dam at Troy since the river bed is below

sea level from Manhattan to Troy.

Vertical tide fluctuation or tide range is least in the

middle of the Hudson River Estuary, about 2.8 feet at the Iona

Island component, and greatest at the two ends of the estuary.

Tide range increases to 3.2 feet at Piermont Marsh, 3.9 feet at

Tivoli Bays, 4.0 feet at Stockport Flats, and 5.1 feet at Troy.

Salt water usually intrudes less than half the length of the

estuary because of the river's substantial and relatively depen-

dable freshwater flow. As salt water moves upriver from the

ocean, it becomes increasingly dilute. The limit of salt water

penetration is the "salt front", defined as the 0.1 parts per

thousand (ppt) salinity level. Depending on freshwater flow, the

salt front occurs anywhere from Yonkers north to Hyde Park, but

it usually lies between Nyack and Beacon. The water at Stockport

Flats and Tivoli Bays is fresh, at Iona Island it is fresh to 6

ppt salinity, and at Piermont Marsh it is fresh to 12 ppt.

Salinity is normally 30 ppt at New York City.

Salt water has a higher density than freshwater, and a ver-

tical salinity gradient develops in many estuaries as lighter

outf lowing freshwater encounters denser incoming saline water and

moves up in the water column. These vertical salinity gradients

are small in the Hudson estuary, largely due to the river's tur-

bulent flow.

The climate of the Hudson River estuary is humid continental

and the moderating influence of the ocean is important in the

Iona Island and Piermont Marsh components. January average air

temperatures range from 230 to 290F. along the estuary, and July

averages range from 710 to 730F. Average temperatures are

slightly higher to the south. Growing seasons range from 150 to

200 days along the estuary, with slightly longer seasons

occurring in the southern reaches. Precipitation is moderately

well distributed, and annual averages range from 37 to 46 inches.

Climate tends to be slightly wetter to. the south where moist

coastal air masses move into the lower estuary. Annual snowfall

averages range from 39 to 50 inches.

Prevailing winds are north or northwest in winter, and south

or southwest in summer. Average wind speeds are highest in March

and lowest in August. Winds are highly variable, and summer

thunderstorms, sudden squalls, and occasional hurricanes affect

the river. Weather in the estuary is quite variable and shoreline

areas and wetlands are exposed to extremes of temperature,

freezing and thawing, wind, waves and spray, and other factors.

Temperature inversions with night and morning fogs occur frequently

in summer and fall.

A wide variety of habitat types are present in the Hudson

River estuary and represented in the estuarine sanctuary. These

include deep water, shallows, intertidal wetlands, tidal fresh-

water and low-salinity marshes, and tidal swamps. Terrestrial

habitats along the estuary are also diverse. A list of the

vascular plants found in the four Sanctuary components is in

Appendix 1. Endangered, threatened and rare plants found in the

Sanctuary are listed in Table 1.

A host of animal species rely on Hudson River estuarine

habitats as migration and dispersal pathways, stopover habitats,

seasonal homes, or permanent residences. Many animals move bet-

ween two or more habitat types in tidal, daily, or seasonal cycles

in order to fulfill their life requirements. These habitats sup-

port an abundance of animal species, including amphibians

(Appendix 2), reptiles (Appendix 3), nearly 70 fishes (Appendix

4), over 250 birds (Appendix 5), and about 50 mammals (Appendix

6).

TABLE 1. Plants of the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary
Listed in "Rare and Endangered Vascular Plant Species in
New York State" (Mitchell et al., 1980)

Species Site Significance
(NYa)

Spatulate arrowhead, Stockport HAB
Sagittaria spatulata

Ovate spikerush Stockport R, SERL
Eleocharis ovata Tivoli, Iona

Cylindrical bulrush, Iona, SPOR
Scirpus cylindricus Piermont

Parker's pipewort, Stockport, R, VULN
Eriocaulon parkeri Tivoli

Sea Pink, Iona EXT?, NRL,
Sabatia dodecandra SNYS?

Nuttall's micranthemun Tivoli *EXT?, R, SYNS,
Micranthemum micranthemoides SPOR, VULN

Heartleaf Plantain, Stockport, *R, DECL, SPOR
Plantago cordata Tivoli

Eaton's bur-marigold, Tivoli R, HAB, END
Bidens eatonii

Estuary beggar-ticks, Tivoli SRL
Bidens hyperborea

aDECL = Observed to be declining in New York State
EXT? = Possibly extirpated in New York State
HAB = Restricted to habitats rare in the State
R = Rare throughout its range
SYNS = Single New York station
SPOR = Sporadic: scattered populations
VULN = Vulnerable to commercial or private exploitation or
imminent land development
SRL, SERL, NRL = Southern, southeastern, or northern range
limits or nearing the periphery of their
distributions

*Listed in the Federal Register (proposed for Federal
Endangered or Threatened listing).

20a

Thirty endangered, threatened, and special concern amphi-

bians, reptile, fish, bird, and mammal species have been recorded

at or near the Sanctuary sites and are recorded in Table 2.

The four component sites included in the Hudson River

National Estuarine Sanctuary comprise approximately 4,165 acres,

of which 2,860 acres are tidal wetlands and shallows. The bulk

of this property is already state-owned (Table 3), although

approximately 400 acres are privately owned and efforts are

underway to acquire them (see Administration section). These

parcels are identified in Table 4.

A. Stockport Flats Component

Stockport Flats is the northernmost and second largest

Sanctuary component, with approximately 1,150 acres on the east

shore of the river, located between Albany and Hudson in the

Town of Stockport (Figure 2).

History

Artifacts indicate that Native American cultures inhabited

the area surrounding Stockport, Kinderhook, and Claverack creeks

where there was ready access to both the Hudson River and to

terrestrial and estuarine natural resources. Dutch settlers first

arrived in the early 1600s and established a lively trade in

beaver skins; one record indicates that 4,000 skins were shipped

from one trading station in 1657.

TABLE 2. Endangered, Threatened and Special Concern Animal Species
of the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary.

"Endangered" listings are annotated as Federal or State; "Threatened"
and "Special Concern" listings are State only. Site annotations in
parentheses indicate records near but not in the site indicated.

Species Site Status

Shortnose sturgeon, all Endangered
Acipenser brevirostrum (US, NY)

Jefferson salamander,
Ambystoma jeffersonianum all Special Concern

Blue-spotted salamander,
Ambystoma laterale all Special Concern

Spotted salamander, Tivoli, Iona Special Concern
Ambystoma maculatum Stockport,
Piermont

Cricket frog, Acris crepitans Iona Threatened

Mud turtle
Kinosternon subrubrum Iona, Piermont Threatened

Spotted turtle, Clemmys guttata Tivoli Special Concern

Bog Turtle, Clemmys muhlenbergi Iona Endangered (NY)

Wood Turtle, Clemmys insculpta Stockport, Special Concern
Tivoli

Diamondback terrapin, Iona, Piermont Special Concern
Malaclemys terrapin

Hognose snake,
Heterodon platyrhinos Iona Special Concern

Common loon, Gavia immer all Special Concern

Least bittern, all Special Concern
Ixobrychus exilis

Cooper's hawk, Accipiter cooperii all Special Concern

Red-shouldered hawk, all Threatened
Buteo lineatus

21a

Species Site Status

Golden eagle, Tivoli, Iona Endangered (NY)
Aquila chrysaetos Piermont

Bald eagle, -all Endangered (NY)
Haliaeetus leucocephalus

Marsh hawk, all Threatened
Circus cyaneus

Osprey, Pandion haliaetus all Threatened

Peregrine falcon, Iona, Endangered
Falco peregrinus Piermont (US, NY)

Common tern, Tivoli, Iona
Sterna hirundo Piermont Threatened

Black tern, Tivoli,
Chlidonias niger Piermont Special Concern

Short-eared owl, Asio flammeus Piermont Special Concern

Common nighthawk, Tivoli, Iona Special Concern
Chordeiles minor Piermont

Sedge wren, Piermont Special Concern
Cistothorus platensis

Eastern bluebird, Sialia sialis Tivoli, Iona Special Concern
Piermont

Common Raven, Tivoli Special Concern
Corvus corax-

Grasshopper sparrow, Tivoli
Ammodramus savannarum Piermont Special Concern

Henslow's sparrow Tivoli Special Concern
A. henslowii

Vesper sparrow Tivoli Special Concern
Pooecetes gramineus Iona

21b

TABLE 3. Ownership and Size of Parcels Within the Hudson River
National Estuarine Sanctuary Boundaries (see Figures 2-5)a

Stockport Flats: Acres

New York State Office of General Services 692-804b

New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and
Historic Preservation 193

Private (see Table 4) 187-299b

Tivoli Bays:

New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation 707

New York State Office of General Services 729

Private (see Table 4) 45

Iona Island Marsh:

Palisades Interstate Park Commission 556

Piermont Marsh:

Palisades Interstate Park Commission 871

Private (including the Nature Conservancy,
see Table 4) 73

Stockport Flats approximately 1,516 acres
Tivoli Bays approximately 1,481 acres
Iona Island Marsh approximately 556 acres
Piermont Marsh approximately 944 acres

Total approximately 4,165 acres

aThe following ownerships are adjacent to, but will not be part
of the Sanctuary: corridors approximately 75 feet wide passing
through or adjacent to Stockport Flats, Tivoli Bays and Iona Island
Marsh and owned by Consolidated Rail Corporation; a Y-shaped corridor
(undeveloped) 200 feet wide crossing part of the Tivoli Bays State
lands and owned by Cruger Development Corporation of Central Hudson
Gas and Electric Corporation; the Erie Pier properties at the north
end of Piermont Marsh owned by the Village of Piermont, Clevepak
Corporation, and Federal Paper Board Company.

bThe ranges of acreage given are due to the incompletely deter-
mined size of the private holding on the unnamed island, the rest of
which is owned by OGS.

21c

TABLE 4. Parcels Proposed for Acquisition
(not in priority order; see Figures 6, 7 and 8)

At Stockport Flats:

Parcel 1: An approximately 5-acre sandy islet owned by Joseph
Nostrand between Fordham Point and Little Nutten Hook.

Parcel 2: An approximately 57-acre area of shallows and shoreline,
a water grant known as the "Gay Grant", owned by
Irving Domnitch.

Parcel 3: An approximately 18-acre area of water, marsh and
shoreline, a water grant known as the "Judson Grant,"
owned by Irving Domnitch.

Parcel 4: An approximately 10-acre area of water and marsh, a
water grant known as the "Alvord Grant." owned by
Robert L. Pierson.

Parcel 5: An approximately 1-acre area of madeland adjacent to
the railroad and the mouth of Stockport Creek with an
unimproved parking area and landing, owned by
Consolidated Rail Corporation.

Parcel 6: Portions of the "unnamed island" lying off the mouth of
Stockport Creek owned by Porter Fearey, Jr. The extent
of Mr. Fearey's ownership is believed to be between
7 and 119 acres, and to this extent the State is
negotiating with him.

Parcel 7: An approximately 54-acre area of water, marsh and shore-
line, a water grant known as the "French Grant," owned
by Algis C. Saurusaitis,

At Tivoli Bays:

Parcel 8: Approximately 45-acres of land including the approxi-
mately 9-acre Magdalen Island and additional area of
upland at the north end of North Bay, owned by Tivoli
Properties, Inco This acquisition is under negotiation
by the State and the exact size of the parcel has not
been agreed upon.

At Piermont Marsh:

Parcel 9: An approximately 71-acre area of water and marsh now
owned by DEC. This parcel consists of approximately
65-acres donated to this village of Piermont by
Continental Group, Inc. and about 6-acres then owned
by the village, both transferred to the Nature Conser-
vancy and then to DEC.

Parcel 10: An approximately 0,04-acre area in the northwest corner
of Piermont Marsh, owned by Louis Hurban, Jr.

Parcel 11: An approximately 2-acre area in the northwest corner of
Piermont Marsh owned by James Jo MacMurray.
21d

Several plaster, paper, cotton and woolen mills were sub-

sequently built in the vicinity of Stockport Flats by European

settlers. These peaked in activity in the early 1800's, but many

continued operating into the 20th century. In 1850 the Hudson

River railroad crossed the mouth of Stockport Creek, near where

large vineyards, many over 40 acres, produced more than 100 tons

of grapes annually.

Gay's Point and Stockport Middle Ground were created when

the U.S. Corps of Engineers deposited dredged material from chan-

nel deepening efforts begun during World War I. Squatters have

inhabited the islands at Stockport Flats in recent years.

Ownership and Access

The Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation

owns Stockport Middle Ground and the southern end of Gay's Point,

and the Office of General Services owns the remainder of the

state lands in the Stockport component (Figure 6). Seven parcels

have been targeted for acquisition (Table 4).

The main access point to the Stockport component is on

ConRail property at the railroad crossing of Stockport Creek

where there are unimproved parking and boat landing facilities.

Efforts are underway to acquire this parcel for public access.

Land access to this component has traditionally been along

railroad service roads, although these may be closed off by the

railroad in the future. All parts of the component are

FIGURE 6
Fordham PC'n STOCKPORT FLATS COMPONENT: PROPERTY
OWNERSHIPS AND PARCELS PROPOSED FOR
2 ACQUISITION.

OGS

j ~~~~~~~~~~~~~Rt. 9.J
r ayRt 9
I Paint

OPRHP I

Nj I ~~~~Staclkport
i I ~~~~Middle
II / ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~tidal influence

OGS

Isln

I~~~

I -~~~~---- ~~SANCTUARY BOUNDARY

Flats -~~~~~~~~~ OWNERSHIP BOUNDARY

"r ~~Priming
Hook

22a ~~(Adapted from USGS Hudson North, N.Y. quadrangle.)

accessible by boat; Stockport Middle Ground and Unnamed Island may

be reached only by boat. Three improved public boat launching

sites at Coxsackie, Hudson, and Athens are within two miles of the

Sanctuary, and several private marinas are also within easy

reach.

Current Use

Hunting, trapping and fishing have been popular activities

at the Stockport Flats component for years. Waterfowl hunting is

the most popular type of hunting at Stockport, although deer and

small game are also taken. Muskrat is the pri~mary furbearer

sought by trappers, although small numbers of raccoon, mink and

red and gray fox are also trapped.

Most of the recreational fishing takes place from railroad

and highway bridges, although small craft are used to fish the

river side of Stockport Middle Ground and Gay's Point. The tidal

mouth of Stockport Creek is an excellent recreational fishing

area for striped bass. Some commercial fishing for shad occurs

near this component.

Natural Environment

The Stockport Flats component includes the mouth of

Stockport Creek and a four-mile series of peninsulas, islands,

marshes and shallows along the east shore of the Hudson River.

The river is narrow and shallow, bordered on both sides by steep

bluffs that rise to an elevation of 100 feet, and there the land

levels off.

The bluff north of the mouth of Stockport Creek is Cambrian

shale with thin layers of interbedded quartzite, and there are

clay deposits farther inland. The bluff south of the creek is

clay. Terrestrial soils of the site are derived from clay, sand

and till.

The mouth of Stockport Creek is dotted with islands of

floodplain and tidal swamp at elevations up to 3 feet above high

tide level, and these islands are interspersed with areas of

tidal marsh, subsidiary stream channels, and the main creek chan-

nel. The main marsh lies just south of the creek mouth, between

the unnamed island and Priming Hook. The marsh bottom varies

from fine sand to shallow or deep soft muck. The large islands

and peninsulas are sandy and composed in part of old dredged

material. Extensive shallows lie between Gay's Point and the

mainland.

Water celery (Vallisneria americana)is very abundant in the

shallows. The intertidal marshes are dominated by narrowleaf

cattail (Typha angustifolia), wild-rice (Zizania aquatica), spat-

terdock (Nuphar advena), and pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata).

Tidal swamps and floodplain swamps at Stockport Flats are

dominated by mature mixed deciduous forest characteristic of

river bottoms, while oaks (Quercus spp.) and localized stands of

white pine (Pinus strobus) are common on the dryer bluffs. The

sandy islands and points are dominated by more rapidly growing

tree species that quickly take hold in the dredge spoil deposits.

The endangered heartleaf plantain (Plantago cordata) is also pre-

sent at the Stockport site.

A large variety of aniamls rely on the habitats, and fre-

quently on a combination of habitats present at Stockport Flats

to fulfill their life requirements (Appendices 2-6). It is

interesting to note the presence of a newly-described crayfish

(Orconectes kinderhookensis) so far found only in Kinderhook

Creek, a tributary of Stockport Creek.

B. Tivoli Bays

Tivoli Bays is the largest component of the estuarine sanc-

tuary comprised of nearly 1,500 acres of islands, tidal wetlands,

and surrounding uplands, including Cruger and Magdalen Islands,

the North and South Bays, and the mouths of Stony Creek and

Sawkill (Figure 3). This component is located in the Town of Red

Hook, in Dutchess County.

History

Artifacts dating back several thousand years indicate Native

American occupation of the area, particularly near the mouths of

the tributary streams. A variety of mills and factories were

erected along Stony Creek and Sawkill during the 1700s by

European settlers.

Ferry service up and down the Hudson was available in the

late 18th Century from a dock in North Bay. In 1851 Tivoli was

linked to Albany by the Hudson River Railroad. A drawbridge was

opened at Tivoli in 1907 by the New York Central Railroad to

allow ships to unload cargo at a North Bay pier. Train service

was discontinued in 1960.

Cruger Island gets its name from John Church Cruger, whose

-island estate included artificial ruins built around 1840 to simu-

late the romantic atmosphere of Thomas Cole paintings.

Property east of South Bay which was originally owned by L.

G. Hamersley and Robert Boyd Ward passed to Bard College in 1960.

A large parcel including Cruger Island was purchased that same

year by Central Hudson Gas and Electric Company for later deve-

lopment, although when plans for a nuclear power plant on Cruger

Island were abandoned, most of the land was transferred to the

Department of Environmental Conservation.

Ownership and Access

Ownership of the Tivoli Says component is nearly evenly

split between the New York State Office of General Services and

the Department of Environmental Conservation (Figure 7).

FIGURE 7
TIVOLI BAYS COMPONENT: PROPERTY
OWNERSHIPS AND PARCELS PROPOSED FOR
ACQUISITION
Tivoli

I
FIDC DEC- � - �
Magdalen ..' I

Island 8 I

\ North Bay D E
f I I Y I

one km" '- IJ I
DEC DEC

DEC~ ~DEC I

OGS South Bay t. 9

i - Bard Col lege

one mile
one km

l- - i -RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY

- -. CRUGER DEVELOPMENT CORP (CENTRAL HUDSON GAS
&'ELECTRIC CORP. CORRIDOR
SANCTUARY BOUNDARY

- - OWNERSHIP BOUNDARY

26a

Approximately 45 acres, including Magdalen Island and an uplands

area at the north end of North Bay, are privately owned and under

negotiation for state acquisition (Table 4).

Kidd Lane and Cruger Island Road run west from Route 9G and

provide access along the north and south boundaries of the

uplands area east of North Bay; Ward Manor Road bisects this area

and provides access to the interior of the upland. There is

access to the Sanctuary field station from Bard College roads.

The most heavily used access route to the Tivoli Says tidal

wetlands is via the railroad service road that runs both north

and south from Cruger Island Road, although public users of this

route are subject to federal trespass law.

Both private and public landings, including an unimproved

river landing at the Village of Tivoli north of the North Bay

provide access to the component from the river.

Several improvements to the access system are planned,

including renovation of an existing trail system around the east

side of North Bay, construction of several primitive parking

lots, and development of two unimproved boat landings.

Current Use

The Tivoli Bays component draws people from New York City,

Albany, Kingston, Poughkeepsie, and from many smaller communities.

It has provided the public with hunting, fishing, trapping,

hiking, nature study, research and bird watching opportunities

for years.

Hunting is allowed on all species for which there is an open

season, although waterfowl hunting is by far the most popular.

Trapping under general state regulations is permitted, and fox,

raccoon and muskrat are commonly taken.

Recreational fishing for alewife, striped bass, white and

yellow perch, largemouth bass, white sucker, catfish, and del

takes place at this component, and is concentrated at the stream

mouths. Little commercial fishing occurs at the Tivoli Bays,

although considerable shad fishing takes place a few miles south

in the Kingston Flats area.

Old trails on the state-owned and Bard College lands at the

Tivoli Bays are well used for walking, cross-country skiiing,

and some snowshoeing and running. Bird watching is very popular

at the Tivoli Bays, and estimates indicate that bird watching use

rivals hunting activities at this component. These lands are

also frequently used for other nature studies and research

activities.

A variety of recreational boats frequent the Tivoli Says,

and ice boating occurs during periods of smooth, solid ice on the

main river near the Tivoli Bays and occasionally on South Bay.

Natural Environment

The Hudson River that flows by the Tivoli Bays is deep, of

medium width, and bordered by bluffs. The bluffs east of the

bays are composed of clays deposited as thin alternating layers

of clay and slit in a postglacial lake. Bedrock at this site is

ordovician gray sandstone and shale.

North Bay is predominately intertidal marsh, with a well-

developed network of tidal creeks and pools. A similar network

of creeks and pools is beginning to form in South Bay, which is

primarily mudflats and shallows near low tide level. The bottom

in the bays is largely soft muck, as much as 25 feet deep. The

tidal swamp between North Bay and South Bay has 8 feet of peat

overlying silt.

Extensive tidal shallows lie north and south of Cruger

Island, although just west of the island the main river is 50

feet deep.

Water-celery, watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), and

water chestnut (Trapna natans) are the most abundant plants in

the shallows. The intertidal marshes are dominated by narrowleaf

cattail, spatterdock, and purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria).

The tidal swamps are mixed deciduous swamp communities which have

a very well-developed shrub layer and an abundance of moss

species.

The clay bluffs and rocky islands support well-developed

mixed forests dominated by oak, hickory (Carya spp.), hemlock

(Tsuga canadensis), and pine. A grove of particularly large oaks

and hemlocks borders the mouth of Stony Creek.

Tivoli Bays is the only recorded station in New York of the

very rare nuttall's micranthemum (Micranthemum micranthemoides),

a tidal freshwater plant species last seen in 1936, but possibly

still surviving at this sanctuary component. Heartleaf plantain

is also present at Tivoli Bays.

The primary wintering area for the Hudson River estuary

population of shortnose sturgeon (Accipenser brevirostrum) is

approximately 2 to 9 miles south of the Tivoli Bays in the vici-

nity of Esopus Meadow-Kingston Flats.

C. Iona Island Marsh Component

Iona Island Marsh is the smallest sanctuary component

comprised of 556 acres on the west side of the Hudson River, and

it includes Iona Island Marsh, Iona Island, and Round Island,

which is connected to the southern end of Iona Island (Figure 4).

This site is in the Town of Stony Point in Rockland County, and

is Part of the Bear Mountain State Park.

Hi story

In the mid 1800s, orchards and vineyards were developed on

Iona Island by horticulturist C. W. Grant for the experimental

culture of a variety of fruits, including the Iona Grape. This

property subsequently became a fashionable resort attracting the

likes of prize fighter John L. Sullivan, who trained on the

island. The railroad line along the west shore on the Hudson was

constructed around 1880, and it has remained in service.

The land and buildings on Iona Island west of the railroad

were acquired by the federal government in 1900 to house a key

arsenal and supply depot. The U. S. Naval Ammunition Depot was

in operation from the early 1900s through World War II. The

Palisades Interstate Park Commission acquired lands west of the

railroad in 1965 and removed railroad sidings, docks, several

roads, and all but five of the island's 140 buildings. Many of

the formerly occupied areas have been restored to field and

brushl ands.

Ownership and Access

The Iona Island Marsh component is entirely owned by the

Palisades Interstate Park Commission (PIPC).

A dirt causeway connecting Route 9W and lona Island provides

access to Iona Island for researchers and certain other users,

provided the appropriate permits have been acquired from PIPC.

There is access to the marsh from both Route 9W and the causeway.

The Trailside Museums complex north of the site and the Sanctuary

education facility it houses are accessible from the highway. No

dock facilities or boat landings are available to the public on

Iona Island and none are planned. Public access to Bear Mountain

Park via buses and tour boats is excellent.

Current Use

Most of Iona Island is being allowed to revert to a wild

condition and the uplands and marshes are being maintained as a

wildlife sanctuary. Hunting and-trapping are prohibited on all

PIPC lands. Although fishing is prohibited in the marsh, limited

fin f ishing and crabbing take place along the railroad. Bird

watching is a very popular activity, particularly in the spring

and fall. Animals ranging from white-tailed deer to a variety of

reptiles and amphibians are also observed in the interesting and

unique wetlands.

Other recreational activities near Iona include hiking and

skiiing. An occasional group may camp on-the island itself under

special permit; otherwise the island is closed to the public. A

network of hiking trails connects Tallman Mountain State Park and

Bear Mountain State Park, effectively linking the Piermont and

Iona marshes, and the Appalachian Trial passes through Bear

Mountain Park within a mile of Iona, on its way from Georgia to

Maine. A bicycle trail parallels the west shore of the estuary,

and borders the Iona Island Marsh.

PIPC uses the five remaining buildings on Iona Island near

Doodletown Bight as a base for part of its maintenance and

storage operations.

Natural Environment

The highly resistant Precambrian gneiss bedrock forms both

the rocky knobs of Iona Island and the steep surrounding hills.

.These same steep slopes continue under the marsh where sediments

are more than 100 feet deep. The Hudson Highlands is the only

location where the Old Appalachians are breached by an estuary.

The Iona Island Marsh formed in the shelter of the island

in a side channel of the Hudson that was enlarged by glacial ero-

sion and meltwaters. The marsh began to form at least 6,000

years ago, although some of the deepest sediments are 12,500

years old. The marsh surface is peat, but sediments become

increasingly silty beneath. Winding tidal creeks lace the

marsh, and large areas of mud flats are exposed at low tide in

Doodletown Bight. The main river channel east of Iona Island is

quite deep and narrow.

Water-celery is very abundant in the shallows at this com-

ponent. The intertidal marshes are dominted by narrowleaf cat-

tail, with small amounts of common reed (Phragmites communis) and

swamp rose mallow (Hibiscus palustris). There is a healthy stand

of crack willow (Salix fragilis) in one small area of tidal

swamp. The island and mainland slopes are covered with dediduous

forest, with abundant red oak (Quercus borealis), chestnut oak

(Q. prinus), and pignut hickory (Carya glabra).

A few bald eagles (Haliqeetus leucocephalus) have been win-

tering on Iona and Round Islands in recent years, and there are

indications that the Hudson River population is growing.

D. Piermont Marsh Component

Piermont Marsh is the southermost component of the

Sanctuary, comprised of approxiamtely 944 acres of tidal wetlands

between Erie Pier and Sneden Landing, thirty miles north of New

York City (Figure 5). The site is largely a part of Tallman

Mountain State Park, an element of the Palisades Interstate Park

system.

History

Piermont Marsh has historically been rich in natural resour-

ces that attracted a variety of inhabitants. Native Americans

seined the marsh for a large variety of salt and freshwater fish.

In addition, the marsh yielded an abundance of beaver, otter,

mink and muskrat as well as ducks, geese, swans and oysters. The

Dutch were the first Europeans to establish fur trading posts,

although they were soon followed by English, Scottish, Irish,

German and French Huguenot settlers. In the early 1800s a saw

mill, a grist mill and a woolen blanket factory were constructed

along the Slote (the mouth of the Sparkill Creek) which is now

called "Taulman's Landing". A public road and a 500-foot pier

necessary to accommodate larger ships were built through the

marsh just north of Sparkill Creek in 1824.

A new era born with the building of the Erie Railroad was

accompanied by the construction of an iron factory, shops and

roundhouses in 1838, and in 1850 Piermont was the eastern ter-

minus of the Erie Railroad. The raiload era, however, was short-

lived and by 1861 all freight and passenger service was

discontinued, with the exception of one local train to Jersey

City.

Ownership and Access

The Palisades Interstate Park Commission owns nearly all of

Piermont Marsh with the exception of 71 acres recently transferred

from private owners to the New York State Department of

Environmental Conservation and two privately owned acres of the

mouth of Sparkill Creek which are under negotiation for state

acquisition (Table 4).

FIGURE 8
.PIERMONT MAR SH COMPONENT: PROPERTY
.OWNERSHIP AND PARCELS PROPOSED FOR
ACQUISITION

\10 / Piermnont

PIPC~~~~

RL~~~~w ~~PIpcI

lisade s ~ ~ ~ .
S~~~~~~~~~~~~
co" , n~~~~d Paz~
OWESIPBUDR
SACUR BUDR
xxxTENGAPIPEIEC.ESMt
Lamont~~~~~~~
Doherty~~~~~~~~~
on il
observatory mm km~~

(Adptd ro UGS yakN..-.J.qudrnge.

35a~~~~~~~~

The Erie Pier, owned by the village of Piermont, is used for

launching boats and has parking space for about 40 vehicles. The

pier also provides access to the marsh for fishing and bird

watching. The pier is infrequently used for docking by the

Lamon Doherty Geological Observatory oceangoing research vessel,

but not for other large craft.

A network of hiking trails connects Tallman Mountain State

Park and Bear Mountain State Park and effectively links Piermont

and Iona marshes. The hub of this trail system is the Long Path

which begins at the George Washington Bridge in New Jersey,

passes near Piermont Marsh and west of Bear Mountain, and will

eventually extend to the Adirondacks.

A bicycle trail paralleling the west shore of the estuary

passes by the Piermont Marsh partly on highways and partly on old

roads reserved for bicycle and pedestrian use. This trail provi-

des an excellent view of the marsh.

Current Use

Piermont Marsh is actively enjoyed by large numbers of bird

watchers and hikers throughout the seasons. Recreational boating

is also popular at Piermont Marsh.

Hunting and trapping are not permitted on PIPC lands at

Piermont. Hunting and trapping policies on lands DEC may acquire

have not yet been established.

Commercial shad fishermen operate in the shallows near

Piermont Marsh. There is recreational fishing for blue crab and

fin fish (including tomcod in winter) off the end of the Erie

Pier and by boat near the marsh and in the mouth of Sparkill

Creek.

Natural Environment

The west shore of Piermont Marsh is formedby part of the

Palisades Ridge where an abrupt flat-topped, 150-foot cliff and

sliderock formation occurs close to the marsh. The cliff is

Triassic diabase, and the ridge is underlaid by Triassic

sandstone and shale which outcrop in small areas near the marsh.

Soils on the shore near Piermont Marsh are derived from glacial

till and are shallow and acid.

The marsh sediments are peat and organic silt. These depo-

sits are deepest in the western part of the marsh which has been

developing for nearly 5,000 years. A few well-defined but rela-

tively shallow tidal creeks cut the marsh. Piermont Marsh is

located a the south end of the very broad and shallow segment of

the estuary, and very extensive shallows border the east side of

the marsh.

The intertidal marshes are dominated by narrowleaf cattail

and common reed, with lesser amounts of tall cordgrass, (Spartina

cynosuroides), saltwater cordgrass (S. alterniflora), salt meadow

cordgrass (S. patens), saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), swamp rose

mallow, and purple loosestrife. There is no appreciable area of

tidal swamp.

The mainland forest at the base of the Palisades Ridge has

abundant and large beech (Fagus grandifolia), tulip tree

(Liriodendron tulipifera), red oak, black birch (Betula lenta),

and flowering dogwood (Cornus florida).

V. ADMINISTRATION

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

(DEC) has lead responsibility for implementing the Hudson River

National Estuarine Sanctuary management plan through its coor-

dination and oversight of research, education, and monitoring

activities. DEC is responsible for the expenditure of program

funds and for assuring that Sanctuary goals are met.

A memorandum of understanding (Appendix 7) among five New

York State agencies involved in the Sanctuary outlines intera-

gency arrangements and expresses each landowning agency's

agreement to manage the lands it owns within the Sanctuary in

accordance with the management plan. The management plan must be

unanimously approved by the five agencies before it is adopted.

These agencies includ8:

o Department of Environmental Conservation
including Central Office and Regions 3 and 4 -
lead agency;

o Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preser-
vation, Saratoga-Capital District State Park and
Recreation Commission (OPRHP);

o Palisades Interstate Park Commission (PIPC);

o Office of General Services COGS);

o Department of State (DOS) --responsible for New York
State's Coastal Management Program.

Sanctuary Steering Committee

One representative from each of the five state agencies

serves on the Sanctuary Steering Committee, chaired by DEC.

A delegate from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration's Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource

Management and the chairperson from each of three-local

Sanctuary advisory committees will serve as ex-officia, non-

voting representatives to the Steering Committee.

The Steering Committee will review the management plan

annually; any amendments to the plan are subject to the unan-

imous approval of the five participating agencies. The

Steering Committee will also advise DEC on management plan

implementation and the expenditure of program funds, and

will assist in resolving any conflicts that may arise.

Interagency coordination will be achieved through the

activities of the Steering Committee. Cooperative and coor-

dinated management of the Sanctuary by these agencies will

improve consistency, reduce conflicts, and provide better

service to the public.

Local Sanctuary Advisory Committees

Three local Sanctuary advisory committees will be

appointed by DEC to represent the three counties in which

the Sanctuary components are located (Columbia, Dutchess and

Rockland). These local advisory committees represent local

governments, user groups, conservation organizations,

researchers, educators, funding organizations, and adjoining

landowners. A list of the proposed local committee mem-

berships is included in Table 5.

The purpose of the local Sanctuary advisory committees

is to achieve coordination among the public and private

groups participating in the Sanctuary program, and to assist

and advise the state agency Sanctuary Steering Committee.

The local committees will help in securing funding from the

private sector, organizing volunteer efforts in education

and management work, soliciting and channeling public input

to the Sanctuary planning process, reviewing any-proposed

changes in the management plan, and enhancing communication

and cooperation among all interests involved in the

Sanctuary. The chairperson of each local advisory committee

will forward recommendations to the Sanctuary Steering

Committee.

Sanctuary Manager

The Estuarine Sanctuary's programs will be coordinated

through DEC by a full time Sanctuary Manager based at the

Bard College Ecology Field Station at Tivoli Bays. The Manager

will be an individual experienced in natural area manage-

ment, environmental education and/or the environmental

sciences, and grant proposal preparation.

The Sanctuary Manager will report directly to the

Hudson River Coordinator, who was appointed by DEC

Commissioner Williams in 1984 to supervise the development

of the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary and to

coordinate other programs relating to the Hudson River. The

Manager will be assigned to the DEC Office of Natural

Resources. Because the Sanctuary has sites in both DEC

Regions 3 and 4, the Natural Resource Directors from both

regions will provide programmatic direction for the Manager

in matters relating to their respective regions. Support

staff and services will be provided to the Sanctuary Manager

through the DEC Region 3 office in New Paltz. The five

agency delegation memorandum established the necessary

institutional arrangements.

TABLE 5

PROPOSED LOCAL SANCTUARY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS

1. Stockport (Columbia County)

Town Government
County Environmental Advisory Group
Sportsmen's Group
Commercial Fisherman
Conservation Group or Nature Club
Adjoining Landowner
Scientific Researcher
Educator
Business Representative

2. Tivoli (Dutchess County) (This committee will be the same
as the Tivoli Bays State Lands
A.dvisory Committee)

Town Government
Village of Tivoli Representative
Town Conservation Council
Dutchess County Trappers' Association
Ralph T. Waterman Bird Club
Adjoining Landowner
Scientific Researcher
Bard College Educator
Business Representative
Local Waterfowl Hunter
Dutchess County Federation
Dutchess County Environmental Management Council
Regional Field Trialers
Regional FWMA Board
Department of Environmental Conservation

3. Piermont and Iona (Rockland County)

Local Government
Municipal Environmental Advisory Group
Sportsmen's Representative
Commercial Fisherman
Conservation Group or Nature Club
Adjoining Landowner
Scientific Researcher
Educator
Business Representative

The Sanctuary Manager will be immediately responsible

for implementing this management plan and for coordinating

research, monitoring, and education programs with the agen-

cies having jurisdiction over respective Sanctuary sites.

The Sanctuary Manager will:

O Coordinate research and environmental monitoring
within or related to the Sanctuary by publicizing
research sites, facilities, and opportunities;
by organizing a research review process; by
facilitating research that is in keeping with
Sanctuary goals; and by developing liaisons with
other organizations interested in Hudson River
estuarine research and issues.
o Disseminate technical research results to DEC and
other interested government agencies and disseminate
research findings to the public in a non-technical,
accessible form.
o Coordinate the Sanctuary education program by
working with educational institutions and DEC's
Environmental Education Program and Public Affairs
staff to develop public education opportunities,
materials, and programs; by developing relationships
with local media sources; and by developing and
presenting lectures and slide shows on the Sanctuary
program.

O Work with the state agency Sanctuary Steering commit-
tee and the three local Sanctuary advisory committees
to facilitate a coordinated, cooperative implemen-
tation of this management plan consistent with
Sanctuary goals.

o Maintain an effective Sanctuary program by managing
Sanctuary finances; preparing proposals for grants to
enhance the Sanctuary program; acting as a liaison
among participating agencies; coordinating with
related programs on the Hudson River; hiring and
training volunteers and any other staff; overseeing
state, local, and research review-committees; and
advising municipal and county governments on local
issues and projects that will have impacts on the
Sanctuary.

The Sanctuary Manager will report directly to the

Hudson River Coordinator, who was appointed by DEC

Commissioner Williams in 1984 to supervise the development

of the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary and to

coordinate other programs relating to the Hudson River. The

Manager will be assigned to the DEC Office of Natural

Resources. Because the Sanctuary has sites in both DEC

Regions 3 and 4, the Natural Resource Directors from both

regions will provide programmatic direction for the Manager

in matters relating to their respective regions. Support

staff and services will be provided to the Sanctuary Manager

through the DEC Region 3 office in New Paltz. The five

agency delegation memorandum established the necessary

institutional arrangements.

Land Holding Agencies

The four public agencies holding land in the Sanctuary

are Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), Office

of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP),

Palisades Interstate Park Commission (PIPC), and Office

of General Services COGS). These agencies, with the excep-

tion of OGS, will exercise ownership and management respon-

sibilities and prerogatives to achieve implementation of the

plan. They are responsible for reviewing and approving all

projects on lands within their jurisdiction, and for enforce-

*ment of conservation and management goals. OGS lands will

be managed according to an interagency memorandum of

understanding which will be developed with the agency (DEC,

PIPC or OPRHP) having jurisdiction over the adjoining

Sanctuary lands.

Existing laws and regulations will be used to ensure

that conservation goals are met. Land holding agencies will

enforce allowable uses on the lands over which they have

jurisdiction, unless interagency memorandums of understanding

provide otherwise. The jurisdictions of and supporting

legislation for federal, state, county, town and village

agencies are identified in Appendix 8; a number of those

are discussed in the Site Management section.

Coordination with the Coastal Management Program

Implementation of the Hudson River National Estuarine

Sanctuary will be coordinated with the State's Coastal

Management Program through three separate mechanisms.

First, CMP staff will serve on the Steering Committee, whose

most important function initially is to assist with the

development and approval .of the management plan for the

Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary. Secondly, the

Department of State (DOS), as the State's lead'agency for

the Coastal Management Program, is responsible for review of

federal consistency determinations to be made by federal

agencies relative to their direct actions. By this mecha-

nism, the DOS will help assure that the objectives of the

Sanctuary Management Plan are not pre-empted by the actions

of federal agencies. Third, coordination of these two

programs will be reinforced by the state consistency provi-

sions found in regulations (19 NYCRR, Part 600) pursuant to

the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act

(Executive Law, Article 42). The direct actions of state

agencies within Sanctuary boundaries must be found to be

consistent with the policies set forth in those regulations.

Facility Management

The Bard College Ecology Field Station serves as the

research facility for the Hudson River National Estuarine

Sanctuary, in acordance with the memorandum of understanding

developed between the Department of Environmental

Conservation and Bard College for a joint Estuarine

Sanctuary Research Center (Appendix 9). The Department,

through the Sanctuary Manager, has responsibility for

administering Sanctuary research programs and facilities.

The main education facility for the Sanctuary is the

Bear Mountain State Park Trailside Museums complex.

Palisades Interstate Park Commission, through the Museum

Curator, is responsible for managing this Sanctuary education

facility in cooperation with the Sanctuary Manager.

All other facilities built on Sanctuary lands will be

maintained by the agency with jurisdiction over such lands,

unless an agreement is made with another state agency (DEC or

OPRHP) to assume responsibility.

Conflict Resolution

The Sanctuary Manager is responsible for bringing any

violations of the management plan or potential conflicts

with it to the attention of the agency with management

responsibility for action. If such conflict cannot be

resolved, it will be brought up for discussion by the

Steering Committee. The Steering Committee will be the

principal forum for resolving any conflicts which cannot

otherwise be resolved between the Sanctuary Manager and the

agency with management responsiblity. This discussion shall

result in either a) corrective action by the agency with

management responsibility, b) revision of the management

plan, c) withdrawal of the Sanctuary designation for the

area in which the conflict occurs, or d) agreement on an

alternative course of action to resolve the conflict. Any

member of the Steering Committee may bring a conflict to the

Committee's attention and, if necessary, to the Commissioner

of DEC. The Commissioner of DEC is the ultimate arbiter of

Sanctuary conflicts.

Land Acquisition

Lead responsibility for completing acquisition of land

parcels within the Sanctuary will be assumed by the juris-

dictional agency involved, either the Department of

Environmental Conservation (DEC) or the Office of Parks,

Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). These agen-

cies will receive assistance from appropriate state agen-

cies, including Division of Budget and DEC Real Property

Section. In some instances, land transactions will occur

with the assistance and cooperation of private agencies such

as the Nature Conservancy. Techniques that may be used to

acquire land include fee simple acquisition (by purchase or

donation), easements, reserved life certificates, and any

other available techniques. Parcels targeted for acquisi-

tion are identified in Table 4 and in Figures 6, 7, and 8.

Definitive surveys and maps of relevant Sanctuary lands

and riparian uplands contracted by DEC (Region 4) will be

completed by the end of August, 1984. Title searches for

the parcels have been completed by DEC. Once the mapping

is completed, the State Attorney General's office will make

a determination of title on those lands where ownership is

disputed. Appraisals of land value will then be made and

negotiations will be undertaken by DEC.

The highest priorities at Stockport are to protect the

main marsh (Stockport Flats), to protect the endangered

heartleaf plantain, and to acquire the de facto public

access point at the mouth of Stockport Creek through the

acquisition of Parcels 1 to 7 shown in Figure 6.

Because of their central locations, their biological

character, and their role in protecting the main marsh, the

acquisition of Parcels 5, 6, and 7 is of higher priority for

the Sanctuary than the acquisition of parcels I to 4. The

eastern New York Chapter of the Mature Conservancy is

assisting DEC in the acquisition of Parcel 6 (The unnamed

island).

The owner of Parcels 2 and 3 has already expressed

unwillingness to sell. DEC will make an offer, and if this

offer is turned down, the acquisition of Parcels 2 and 3

will be evaluated to determine if eminent proceedings are

warranted. If not, the acquisition will be suspended until

either the owner changes his mind, or title passes to

.another owner, in which case negotiations will be resumed.

Other landowners have thus far been receptive to plans-for

State acquisition of their lands for inclusion in the

Sanctuary.

The Office of General Services (OGS) will retain its

current jurisdiction over State of New York lands in the

Stockport area. Management will be coordinated between

OPRHP and DEC, although OPRHP is the only agency that will

have staff located in this area. Parcel 12 is no longer

under consideration for-acquisition.

The completion of negotiations with the private owner

of Parcel 8 (Figure 7) at the north end of the site (Tivoli

Properties, Inc.) is of highest priority at Tivoli.

Acquisition of Magdalen Island and a small area of shoreline

at the north end of North Bay are essential for assembling a

functional- ecological and management unit at the Tivoli com-

ponent. Tivoli Properties, Inc. has claimed ownership of

underwater lands in the north end of North Bay. However,

the State Attorney General's office issued an opinion that

these underwater lands belong to OGS since they were not

granted to a private owner. If this issue should go to

court and the court decides that Tivoli Properties indeed

owns lands underwater east of the railroad, DEC would also

want to acquire that interest.

No acquisition is planned at the Iona component. All

lands important to the Sanctuary and its surroundings are

owned by PIPC.

At the Piermont component, DEC is pursuing acquisition

of Parcels 10 and 11 (Figure 8) in the northwest corner of

the marsh. Parcel 9 was transferred from the Nature

Conservancy to DEC in 1984.

VI. SITE MANAGEMENT

A number of policies have been established to guide

activities in the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary.

Research, education, recreation, and commercial fishing are

addressed in sections elsewhere in this management plan. All

activities will be managed to ensure the protection of the

Sanctuary's unique resources and natural areas in order that they

will be available to future generations. Consistency with other_

Hudson River management plans and government programs is reviewed

in Appendix 10.

A. Protection of Natural Features

Modification of water movements and dredging

Policy: Water movements will not be blocked, reduced, or

otherwise modified in either the estuarine

environment or in upland streams, ponds and pools.

Water control structures, dams, impoundments, breakwaters or

canals will not be built, with the exception of minor temporary

structures for scientific experiments, such as weirs for

measuring water flow or collecting samples.

Railroad bridges and culverts will be maintained clear of

obstructions, and these drainage structures may be enlarged to

return artificially constricted wetland circulation to a more

nearly natural condition. Although the existing dikes within

Sanctuary boundaries have modified water movements considerably,

these dikes have created a new set of "natural" conditions which

will be perpetuated. Apart from the railroad drainage struc-

tures, snag removal in the tidal creeks and upland streams will

be kept to the minimum necessary to maintain safe access to

streams for Sanctuary purposes.

Dredging is prohibited in the Sanctuary. Minor exceptions

may be made in small areas that have been dredged in recent

years, or if dredging is required to clear obstructed existing

drainage structures, or if the benefits of access for Sanctuary

purposes will outweigh disruptions caused by minor dredging

(e.g., clearing a small segment of a tidal creek).

Disturbance to soils

Policy: Disturbance to soils will be minimized in

estuarine environments and in adjoining uplands

within the Sanctuary boundaries to reduce unnatural

silting of water courses, to protect soil-vegetation

systems, and to protect native vegetation from

unnecessary invasion of introduced species both

directly into mechanically disturbed soil and

indirectly into unnaturally silted areas.

Particular care will be taken to avoid disturbance of soils

in areas prone to soil movement, including shallow subtidal habi-

tats, the intertidal zone,'the floodplain and the upper edges of

the intertidal zone, non-tidal wetlands and watercourses, and

forests and other plant communities on steep slopes (over 10-15%

slope) adjoining or draining directly into estuarine environ-

ments.

Appropriate precautions will be taken in the construction

and maintenance of roads and trails to ensure minimal disturbance

of vegetation and soils. Trail construction and improvement will

be largely confined to existing or former roads and trails, and

steep slopes and poorly drained soils will be avoided. Const-

ruction equipment will not be operated on wetland sediments or

soils. Disturbed areas will be restored to stabilize soil,

retain natural plant communities, and maintain pre-disturbance

water flow.

Drainage to soils resulting from heavy trail and off-trail

traffic will be minimized through appropriate preventive and

restorative measures. All Sanctuary users will be encouraged to

minimize disturbance by using existing trails. Access to trails

and off-trail areas will be limited if necessary to protect soil

and soil-vegetation systems.

Soil movements resulting in areas that are eroding from

natural causes (e.g., slumping of clay bluffs, shifting of

sandbars) will not be stabilized unless rare species, other rare

natural features, or structures such as buildings and roads are

threatened.

Disposition and removal of fill, dredge spoil and other wastes

Policy: Depositing fill, dredge spoil, or wastes of any

kind in the Sanctuary is prohibited. Existing

waste will be removed-and future dumping will be

discouraged.

Minor exceptions to this policy may occasionally be made if

very small areas of fill are needed to ensure the protection of

resources or to enable the use of the Sanctuary. However, any

such exceptions will be assessed very carefully, and floating,

piling-supported, or land-based structures will be preferred to

structures on fill. Existing dredge spoil deposits will be left

in place unless they become hazardous.

Small dumps and derelict vehicles will be removed as soon as

possible. Appropriate signs, trash receptacles, and/or fencing

will be installed to discourage future dumping.

Plant and animal species protection

Policy: No plants or animals will be removed from Sanctuary

sites without permits from the landowning agency

and other appropriate agencies. Special efforts

will be made to protect endangered, threatened,

"special concern", regionally rare, or otherwise

valuable plants, animals, and natural communities.

Sanctuary staff will consult with then Botany office of the

New York State Museum, the DEC Division of Lands and Forests, and

the Nature Conservancy ti develop specific management guidelines

for plants on the State Museum's list of endangered and

threatened species (Table 1). The State Museum botany staff and

DEC Lands and Forests staff will be consulted before the collec-

tion of any endangered plants.

Sanctuary staff will consult with the National Marine

Fisheries Service and the Department of Environmental

Conservation (DEC) Division of Fish and Wildlife about the

endangered shortnose sturgeon; and with DEC Division of Fish and

Wildlife about management of the bald eagle, osprey, and other

endangered or threatened animals listed in Table 2. Appropriate

permits will be obtained before research on these animals is

approved or initiated.

Areas closed to public use may be designated by a land-

owning agency to minimize habitat disturbance and to protect

breeding or wintering grounds. Heartleaf plantain populations on

the west shore of the unnamed is-land near the mouth of Stockport

Creek are particularly vulnerable to habitat disturbance, for

example, and bald eagles have only recently begun to use Iona

Island as a wintering ground. Individual species management

needs identified to date are discussed in Appendix 11.

Policy: Natural or accidental vegetation fires will be put

out using a minimum of chemical fire retardants

and a minimum of digging.

- Control of exotic and pest species

Policy: Use of chemicals such as insecticides, herbicides,

fungicides and other pesticides is strongly dis-

couraged and will be minimized. Chemicals will be

used only where their use does not threaten non-

target organisms.

Regulatory agencies may decide to control water chestnut,

purple loosestrife or other exotic and pest species in the future,

and Sanctuary staff will participate in the decision-making pro-

cess to ensure minimal impact on non-target organisms. Chemicals

may be applied in small quantities to experimental plots for

scientific purposes if it can be demonstrated that these chemi-

cals pose no threat to organisms off the plots. Broadcast use

of herbicides is prohibited. Herbicides may be applied directly

to individual plants as a manual basal spray or as pellets in

cases where local vegetation management is deemed necessary, if

such herbicide application will not affect non-target species of

plants or animals.

Chemicals will not be used for control of mosquitos or other

pest animals unless there is a demonstrated public health

emergency and all non-chemical means of management have been

found to be ineffective. Poison-ivy will not be controlled

except along trails and close to buildings, and the mildest

chemicals that are effective will be used (e.g., ammonium

sulfamate).

Manipulative management

Policy: Manipulative management, including prescribed

burning, use of fertilizers or other chemicals,

and use of other techniques to preferentially per-

petuate species or habitats is discouraged in the

Sanctuary. Manipulative management will be allowed

on a very limited basis to preserve species or com-

munities which would otherwise disappear from the

Sanctuary, to conduct research which addresses

questions directly related to management of coastal

resources, and to control exotic and pest species.

Prescribed on a limited basis burning may be conducted where

evidence indicates that this technique is necessary to perpetuate

certain valued habitats and species or for experimental purposes.

Zones where natural fires will not be controlled may also be

designated for the same reasons. These practices will only be

allowed where there are no threats to buildings or jpersons; per-

mits will be required.

Introduction of exotic plants and animals will not be

allowed in the Sanctuary. Stocking of native fish and wildlife

by DEC's Division of Fish and Wildlife is compatible with the

Sanctuary program, however.

B. Archeologic, Historic, and Scenic Resources

Policy: Significant archeologic, historic, and scenic

resources within the Sanctuary will be identified,

protected, and managed in keeping with Sanctuary

goals.

The Sanctuary Steering Committee will consult with the

appropriate personnel of the State Museum's archeological survey,

the Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation, DEC,

and private groups such as the Hudson RiVer.Shorelands Task

Force, to gain assistance in identifying arnd protecting archeolo-

gic, historic, and scenic resources at the Sanctuary sites.

Advice from these agencies will be sought when planning and

routing trails, improving roads, and siting other facilities.

The 19th century artificial "ruins" on South Cruger Island

at Tivoli Bays will be left as is for their historic value. The

circa 1930 masonry barn on South Cruger Island will also be

retained, and a cost effective public or private use for it will

be sought.

Derel-ict buildings or unapproved cabins or camps will be

removed unless the structure can be adapted to serve Sanctuary

purposes or the structure has significant historic value.

Existing buildings which are used for agency purposes such as

storage or maintenance may remain. The Office of General

Services has inspected and posted about half a dozen seasonally

occupied cabins on Stockport Middleground. Squatters have been

advised to remove personal belongings and-to vacate the premises.

Any derelict cement, brick, stone or wooden docks will be

left in place unless there is clear evidence of either a hazard

or an ecological problem.

C. Facilities

Policy: Facilities in the Sanctuary will be improved or

developed to enhance research and educational

opportunities, and to improve safety, access, and

opportunities for other public uses.

The main research facility for the Hudson River National

Estuarine Sanctuary is the Bard College Field Station at Tivoli

Bays. The Bear Mountain Trailside Museums near Iona Marsh serves

as the Sanctuary's main education facility, although small exhi-

bits, interpretive trails, and educational brochures and activi-

ties will be available at Stockport Flats, Tivoli Bays, and to a

limited extent, Piermont Marsh. Developments to enhance safety,

public access, and recreational opportunities are occurring at all

Sanctuary components. Administrative and interpretive signs will

be posted at Sanctuary sites, and phone numbers on these signs

will allow visitors to contact program managers.

Stockport

Trails have been developed and/or improved on the old dredge

spoil sites at Stockport Middle Ground and Gay's Point penninsula

(Figures 9 & 10), and one will be designed as an interpretive

tile
* t.%C C/AL A/c: nSaratogla

LraA ~ 2*AM- ,o Capita I
P~~j ~District
~~qoDsJA'S. - &C~nC~t�jit I8O4lJ(~T61 AMJ1) Stat.
NLR~~ ~nL* ~cln/k~r~cC~r~S ~W/n~lii k~~WSPark and
Recreation
RP~rCu~/r bALL/-.zoo, Commission

JC4ZC~~~~~~~f~ /p~2OO' ~

MMVOiw SnaTAE

~~~~~~~~~~/A'

,reach~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~&04PA,
--Qz: :N;.YC -ic~al -.~ 41/DZI~!tSKO1W

a, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ or~ LC tZOBKSV/

FIGURE 9~ 4/

pgzw.'/Dcr~av
SO P TIDGODastpanT

CU-4rv ,�ccr ar~c 1 ctr
* ,C~~~494'44.W4~~~Vflt ~~dOK~~tA *..r.4~p

ao~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- -4 -~ ~JX.JL
;E~~~VY//ra~~~~y~~NJRL ~~~~/~~o~~~~�I~~W ~~~'~~,~~ca4/ 0f/02R4/

--...cm~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r~~~~. -I-/C

Ofl~�u~~LA7ca (7, - /Z'A/AJ: 54rdAur AXL, Capita/a
:7- ...."

$it~y~~v�Cp rt9.Mv4/ASL 0
c... ...�F7�, ~i~lL~UP~C~B~rIQ~lC~SldkI~fbL~ijState
~/=z~~~r..ic_~ *iO~r 2 - - - -;/.-'7.L-P. r ..and.
Recreation
Commission

0=1
"---s ~ CLI -----~L~:~llcr~n"' ~S

G't-~~. A ' ON at'"r panb
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~T'M

: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ -~:'-d-. . . : ~--~:..- ~ ,~
-~.:~_~- -~ ..... ... ~ F:~..,~.
z~oso'v /o9r { 1Sv"SO

~voALeA'vfL /~LtFO{0Y364 At. [#4 )Otwd~oy,4t5W74Th1
frSocJ4. ... . ..
"$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. ,,.z,4~ 9~c~

* /~~ V~ d { , P 4~~ 7 4~ 4 ,flr~~ dL F I G U R E 1 0 -,-x ?

.4E4A( 4CV~fli~ttril/LGAY'S POINT master plan I
- A~7Zf~r/a'S'~c~raa/ r~oC~y~4Mct/f-AIL - -
L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~h~~~~~~~~~~~-/.~ ~~/
I-i:~~0- 09 0/fi~M~
- --N
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ u- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~Oo~o
~~~~~~aV ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~C1.b --z~~t

trail for' the Sanctuary. All trails will be restricted to dry

land, but wetlands, shallows, and deep water will be visible

along the trail.

A creek mouth and/or railroad pedestrian crossing which

would provide safe access to the Sanctuary for persons without

boats is under study. Any proposals will be discussed with

Consolidated Rail Corporation.

The Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation

(OPRHP) is considering the development of a new facility at

Coxsackie for maintenance of their Hudson River Islands State

park, portions of which are within the Stockport component. This

facility would also be used for Sanctuary purposes. Alternative

arrangements would be made with a nearby private residence for

storage'of boats and any other small equipment necessary for

research and monitoring the site.

After acquisition of the Stockport Creek mouth site (Parcel

5, Figure 6), improvements will be made to the boat landing, a

parking area will be constructed near the landing, and a safety

fence will be built between the landing and the railroad

(Figure 11). Old pilings and other obstructions will be removed

from under the railroad bridge and culverts.

When land acquisition is completed, any camps or cabins

remaining that cannot be used for Estuarine Sanctuary purposes

will be removed, and all dumps will be cleaned up. Special care

FIGURE 11.:
STOCKPORT FLATSi
CULTURAL FEATURES

POINT 1""9 , /
(SEE FIGURE 9)1 \

MIDDL _ e SOUTHERS ROAD
GROUND ; ..............."'%
(SEE FIGURE 10)l t / UH ROA

| I o f \ I KEY:
X { rt t l ! * PROPOSED BOAT LANDING AND PARKING AREA
_ CONRAIL RIGHT -OF-WAY

y )) g / g ~~~DIKE

GAIY'J , SHORE LINE
/9)1 I| ACC ESS ROAD

HOOKING| C ONE MILEIG
// ONE kmj
(SEE- .....ACCESS RO

SIINGO ORT / .\] // - SOUTHERS ROAD6
I'

I HUDSON: _~,RONE km*

to~~�� p

will be taken to avoid disturbance of endangered plants in the

vicinity of derelict buildings.

Tivoli

The Sanctuary's main research facility will be housed at

Tivoli Bays in the renovated and expanded Bard College Ecology

Field Station, located 100 yards inland from South Bay and a

short distance north of Saw Kill (Figure 12). These agreements

are discussed in a memorandum of understanding between the

Department of Environmental Conservation and Bard College

(Appendix 9).

The Field Station will be used to support research at all

four Sanctuary components, and will be available to scientists

from other institutions and to agency personnel for work in the

area. Scientists will also have limited access to existing

scientific laboratories-at Bard College. Facilities and services

available through the Field Station are described in the research

section of this plan.

Renovation and expansion of the Field Station will be

accomplished with Sanctuary funds, and no structures will be

built closer to South Bay than the existing building.

Improvements will be made to the existing primitive road and

landing, which will remain closed to the general public, except

those on foot.

FIGURE 12.
TIVOLI BAYS CULTURAL FEATURES

A I

MAGDALEN �= ,,. KIDD LANE
.8bAD .*

ISA
T 1k O
I �

CRUGER CEMETARY N , " _
NORTH, I F Il

S/S '-.I I

CRUGER'S BAY i * -

RUINS
~ : t . BARD
|t � COLLEGE

,RUP I P |BARD COLLEGE;'/
.t ..., '~ 'FIELD STAT-ION' S

HUDSON KEY:
RIVER PROPOSED PARKING
~CRUGOER'S E BOAT LANDING

PROPOSED GATE
4 Rg v * BUILDING OR RUIN
........ PROPOSED TRAIL
El * � O J EXISTING TRAIL
\X~~~ ~- -- SANCTUARY BOUNDARY
w.... PAVED ROAD
/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~DIKE
IUi RAILROADRIGHT-OF-WAY

63a
6 3a

The South Cruger Island "ruins" and masonry barn will remain

as historic resources, and uses for these structures will be

sought. The well houses, cinder block garage, and other derelict

buildings will be removed if no public, use for them can be found.

The Cruger Island Road and the Ward Manor Road will be

repaired for administrative, research, and recreational access.

Gates or fencing for control of public use will be installed at

all access po~ints to the DEC upland property and at selected

points along the two roads. Small parking lots (Figure 12) will

be built at several locations not adjoining the estuarine habi-

tats. These will provide access to two cartop hand-carry boat

landings and to selected upland sites. Tentative sites for the

beat landings are in the southeastern corner of North Bay, and on

the east shore of North Bay just north of the mouth of Stony

Creek.

An interpretive trail will be built paralleling the east

edge of North Bay between Cruger-Island Road and Stony Creek.

Existing spur trails on Cruger Island and the uplands will be

pruned and repaired.

All gates, roads, parking areas, trails, and landings will

be located where some form of development existed previously.

Sites and routes are currently being studied to determine feasi-

bility of development and environmental impact. All construction

will be done with special care to protect rare species or corn-

mun'ities, archeologic resources, and erodible soils.

I ona

The Trailside Museums complex will be the Sanctuary's main

educational facility. The museum complex hosts more than one-

half million visitors yearly. Renovation of portions of the Bear

Mountain Trailside Museums complex are underway, and both indoor

and outdoor exhibits adjacent to the Iona Island Marsh component

are being developed as discussed in the education section. In

addition, the Trailside Museums' capability for basic natural

history research in the local area will be augmented by the

purchase of small equipment, specimen storage cabinets, and

library materials for use by Trailside staff.

The remaining buildings on Iona Island will continue to be

used for the Palisades Interstate Park Commission's (PIPC)

storage and maintenance operations.' Arrangements will be made

for storage of selected field equipment and boats for use in

research and monitoring at the Iona Island Marsh. Facilities,

trails, and cultural features at the Iona component are noted on

Figures 13 & 14.

The central fields of the portion of Iona Island east of the

railroad are open to certain large group users by PIPC permit.

PIPC intends to develop additional public uses of the eastern

parts of the island that are harmonious with the site's missions

as a National Natural Landmark and wildlife sanctuary. The gate

FIGURE 13.

IONA ISLAND CULTURAL FEATURES:

TRAILSIDEI
MUSEUMS I
COMPLEX

IONA a
ISLAND \
(SEE FIG. 14)

BEAR MOUNTAINi
STATE PARK ROUN4i

+S +1~ W---X E X ISLANDI

J ~v~~ i X \ HUDSON

KEY:
PARKING AREA
.m..... -- BICYCLE PATH & TRAIL
*� � � ENTRANCE ROAD CAUSEWAY
- - - SANCTUARY BOUNDARY
-I - -- RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY

65a

-~ ~ ~~~~~~OR GAE A A

a~ ~ ~ ~ m FISHING*

PARK ES ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~GROUP PICNIC
MAINTENANCE 1)-AE&OMFORT
AREA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~STATIE44

BOAT ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PICNICKING
ANCHORAGE J'. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~& HIKING

- PICNICKING & HIKING FIGURE 14
GROUP CAMPING
BY PERMIT SCHEMATIC PLAN
Bear Mt. State Park
Iona Island Area

on the east side of the railroad will remain in place for control

of public access.

Pi ermont

No specific facilities are planned for the Sanctuary at

Piermont. Arrangements will be made for storage of field equip-

ment and boat(s) at existing park buildings as space permits.

The Village-owned Erie Pier will be available as an access point,

under a permit system instituted by the Village. Pedestrians may

use the pier without a permit. Permits are required for

vehicles; an annual fee of $10 is charged to Village residents,

$25 to Town residents, and $50 to all others. No boats may be

launched from the pier now, but the Village is planning construc-

tion of a concrete boat ramp and possibly a marina on the pier.

Discussion will take place to consider use of facilities at

Lament-Doherty Geological Observatory (near the Piermont Marsh)

by scientists doing research in the Estuarine Sanctuary.

Derelict wooden barges on the Sanctuary site, and any old

pilings or other structures, will be removed if justifiable for

reasons of hazard ecology, following appropriate study and

depending on availability of funds.

The closed municipal landfill on the DEC property on the

South side of the pier will be monitored periodically for toxic

substances, and any nuisance materials on the surface will be

cleaned up. Habitat restoration, including further capping and

grading, or removal of material, will be done if ecologically

justified, if consistent with Sanctuary goals, and if funds are

available.

D. Existing Right-of-Ways

Policy: Existing right-of-ways which are in use such as

water lines, gas lines, telephone or electric

lines, or sewer lines will be permitted to continue

in use under pre-existing agreement.

Any construction, repair, renovation, or maintenance of

these utilities and rights-of-way are subject to DEC permits

(Protection of Waters, Freshwater Wetlands or Tidal Wetlands

Laws) if dredge or fill is involved. Furthermore, the owners of

such utilities will keep the lines in good repair and not allow

environmental or health hazards to develop.

E. Off-site Concerns for Sanctuary Site Management

Several conditions and activities outside the boundaries of

the Sanctuary have the potential to affect various resources,

patterns, and. processes within its boundaries, and must be con-

sidered in the management of the Sanctuary.

Policy: The Sanctuary Steering Committee, Sanctuary

Manager, and the local advisory committees will

seek to be informed about existing and planned

activities and conditions outside Sanctuary bound-

aries that will or already do affect resources and

conditions within the Sanctuary. The Steering

Committee, Manager, and local advisory committees

will act to inform and influence management deci-

sions that indirectly affect the Sanctuary, and in

doing so, to prevent or mitigate adverse effects of

off-site management practices on the San~ctuary.

Water quality

Among the many off-site activities that have the potential

to affect Sanctuary conditions, those that affect water quality.

are the most pervasive. Water is distributed to the Hudson

Estuary by direct runoff and a network of rivers and streams that

drain large areas of upland watersheds, and water circulation

within the estuary is highly complex. The problems of industrial

discharges, oil leakage, sewage discharges, nutrient loading,

pesticide contamination, metals and metal-like non-metal resi-

duals, and other pollutants are not known to be serious immediate

threats. Yet the presence of these contaminants at persistently

low levels and occasional acute episodes at medium or high levels

may pose long-term threats to the vitality of ecosystems at

Sanctuary component sites. Positive resolution of these problems

will require environmental monitoring, communication with state

permitting systems, and negotiation with the public and private

parties involved.

Management of railroad right-of-ways

Management activities on railroad lands and right-of-way

crossings adjacent to three of the Sanctuary components have the

potential to significantly affect both estuarine ecosystems and

Sanctuary users. Cooperation from the railroads on a number of

management issues will be sought by the Sanctuary Manager and the

Steering Committee through discussions of pedestrian crossings

over railroad right-of-way; the use of herbicides and other rail-

road vegetation management practices; removal of debris from

under railroad bridges and in culverts to maintain drainage

patterns; disposal of old railroad ties and other debris in the

Sanctuary; toxic substances along railroad rights-of-way; and

hazards associated with railroads and other visitor control

measures.

Dredging and spoil disposal

The Federal navigation channel requires periodic dredging

to maintain a safe depth for commercial ships between Kingston

and Troy (including the channel adjacent to the Stockport and

Tivoli sites), in Haverstraw Bay, and in New York Harbor. The

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have prepared a Draft Environmental

Impact Statement on Maintenance and Dredging and a 10-year

Management Plan (U.S. Army Engineers, 1980). According to this

plan, dredging will be conducted in a manner designed to minimize

turbidity and to avoid critical fish spawning periods. Upland

spoil disposal is preferred'over traditional disposal in

estuarine wetlands and shallows. A separate site-specific

environmental assessment and an environmental impact statement

will be prepared for dredging and spoil disposal for each annual

dredging program. The Corps has identified in a generic manner a

list of spoil disposal sites that could be used in the vicinity

of Stockport.

Spoil disposal on upland property near the Sanctuary might

be considered compatible with New York's Coastal Management Plan

assuming that upland property is available for this purpose. In

such a case, the Sanctuary Manager and DEC will determine whether

or not disturbance from temporary slurry pipelines, noise, eroded

sediments, and turbulence resulting from disposal will signifi-

cantly harm the Sanctuary. If so, evidence will be presented and

alternatives offered at the appropriate time in the state per-

mitting process. The behavior of old spoil and volunteer vegeta-

tion on spoil at the Sanctuary should guide future management of

spoil deposits off-site. Other off-site dredging and spoil

disposal proposals will be similarly evaluated by Sanctuary advi-

sors and management.

Emergency plans for spills

The Sanctuary Manager will consult with the Coast Guard and

other appropriate agencies or private groups and devise

appropriate emergency plans for spills of oil or hazardous

materials from ship, train, or truck at or near the Sanctuary

sites if existing plans are found to be inadequate.

Agriculture and forestry

The Sanctuary Manager will consult with the Columbia and

Dutchess County Soil and Water Conservation Districts concerning

erosion control on the farmlands east of the Stockport and Tivoli

Says components. Voluntary agreements with adjoining landowners

concerning erosion control and maintenance of buffer vegetation

on the bluffs south of Stockport Creek and east of Tivoli South

Bay will be sought if necessary.

Off-site tidal wetlands

The Sanctuary research program addresses the entire estuary

with its related terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, and efforts

will be made to track and interpret changes throughout the

estuary. Several off-site tidal wetlands that merit investiga-

tion and protection are identified in Appendix 12.

F. Surveillance, Enforcement, and Maintenance

Protection and maintenance of the Sanctuary's resources is

critical to.preserve the value of the Sanctuary for scientific

research, education, and other activities. Although several

policies throughout this management plan provide direction for

Sanctuary users and managers, the arrangements for reporting

violations, enforcing Sanctuary policies, and providing Sanctuary

maintenance will be addressed here.

Surveillance and enforcement

Policy: Sanctuary staff and enforcement personnel from

state and local agencies will periodically visit

the component sites to determine whether Sanctuary

policies are being violated and to investigate

violations that occur. The Sanctuary will also

rely on researchers, educators, and other users

to report any violations.

Enforcement personnel from several state and local agencies

will cooperate with Sanctuary staff to ensure that management

policies stated in this plan are obeyed. The Department of

Environmental Conservation (DEC) has Conservation Officers who

enforce the State Fish arnd Wildlife Law and other acts and laws

administered by DEC. Forest Rangers from DEC enforce the State

Lands and Forests Law, but often assist Conservation Officers in

their activities. The Palisades Interstate Park Commission

(PIPC) has a police staff to patrol its own lands, and the Office

of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) will have

a seasonal caretaker to oversee their property at Stockport. At

Piermont, Village Officers will aid in enforcing Sanctuary poli-

cies and State regulations. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

will provide assistance to state agencies in matters related to

violation of federal fish and wildlife regulation. In addition,

Sanctuary staff members, regional representatives from DEC and

OPRHP, researchers, educators, and other Sanctuary users will aid

enforcement by reporting violations. Although continuous sur-

veillance is prevented by time and budget limitations, enforce-

ment services will be adequate.

Several regulatory programs guide decisions that will affect

Sanctuary resources. Appendix 8 provides a detailed list of

existing laws and jurisdictions, and the mnost important of these

are briefly discussed below.

o Tidal Wetlands law (Piermont), Freshwater Wetlands law

(Stockport, Tivoli, Iona), and Protection of Waters law

(all sites) require permits for certain uses of areas

below mean high water and a 100-foot strip of adjoining

upland (e.g., construction, dredging, filling, placement

of rip-rap). These laws are administered and enforced by

DEC. Since the Estuarine Sanctuary is a special use of

these areas, the objectives of the Sanctuary Program will

be considered in DEC review of permit applications.

o The Power Plant siting review process under Article 8 of

the Public Service Law will operate as it has previously,

and consideration will be given to Estuarine Sanctuary

policies in siting decisions.

o The Estuarine Sanctuary Program will be given considera-

tion in environmental impact assessments and enforcement

proceedings performed under the National Environmental

Policy Act and under the New York State Environmental

Quality Review Act.

o Zoning decisions will continue to be made by the local

communities. The Towns of Orangetown (Piermont) and Red

Hook (Tivoli) have the capability to use existing zoning

ordinances to give some protection to lands adjoining the

Sanctuary sites. The Sanctuary Steering Committee

requests that the towns inform the Committee of signifi-

cant project proposals.

o The State Park and Recreation Law includes a provision

for OPRHP review of project proposals within 500 feet of

a state park boundary. OPRHP owns land at the Stockport,

iona, and Piermont components.

o The New York Coastal Management Program in the Department

of State requires a federal or state agency approving or

initiating a project in or near the defined Coastal Zone

to undertake actions consistent with a series of Coastal

Management policies and existing environmental protection

laws. The Sanctuary Manager will pursue adoption of an

additional Coastal Management Program policy that specifi-

cally requires consistency with this Sanctuary Management

Plan.

o The Department of State awards block grants for waterfront

development; these constitute a positive financial incen-

tive for local governments to comply with Coastal

Management policies. Among other things, grant money may

be used for environmental impact statement preparation.

o The Department of Environmental Conservation administers

the Coastal Erosion Hazard Act which governs use of areas

with a recession rate of one foot per year or more,

including portions of the old spoil deposits at Stockport

(Gay's Point, Unnamed Island and Priming Hook).

o The Army Corps of Engineers, through the Clean Water Act,

Section 404 and the Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10

regulates hazards to navigation and dredging, filling or

dumping activities in wetlands, the river, and larger

tributaries.

Mai ntenance

Policy: All maintenance activities, including debris

pickup, removal of dangerous obstacles, facility

upkeep, posting, and maintenance of trails and

markers will be conducted by the landowning agency,

unless done under contract by another state agency

(Department of Environmental Conservation or Office

of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation).

The Sanctuary will also rely heavily on volunteers

and Sanctuary users to promote litter control and

habitat protection.

It will be desirable to expand the buffer zone around the

existing Sanctuary sites in order to provide additional protection.

-Protective agreements will be sought at Stockport bluffs and Tivoli

South Bay bluffs. Voluntary cooperation, agreements, and negotiations

will be the means used to attain any additional buffer zones.

VII. RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary Research

Program has the following goals:

o To increase knowledge of the complex natural processes
and ecological relationships that exist in the Estuary;

o To provide information about natural and anthropogenic
influences on estuarine ecosystems that is relevant to
sound management of coastal resources; and

o To foster creative collaboration between sanctuary
research efforts and other Hudson River and estuarine
research programs.

The Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary is a natural

laboratory system that unites a diverse array of sites in each of

the four large wetland complexes. The subsystems within each

sanctuary component provide a wealth of opportunity for a variety

of scientific investigations. The increasingly saline tidal

environments lend themselves to comparative research along the

estuary's north to south salinity gradient. The Hudson River is

also well-suited for studying phenomena that are most easily

observed in a long, narrow, unbranched estuary, such as certain

mixing phenomena.

The Sanctuary research program will emphasize long-term

environmental monitoring, ecosystem studies, and applied problems

in the management of estuary resources. Research will focus on

the estuary and on the interaction of the estuary with

terrestrial and marine systems. Special emphasis will be placed

on shorelines, shallows, and tidal wetlands since these are the

least studied habitats, both on the Hudson Estuary and on other

tidal river. The Sanctuary research program will focus on

Sanctuary sites, but will also encompass off-site research.

Past research on the Hudson has emphasized sport and commer-

cial fish species. Researchers have also investigated

terrestrial and aquatic flora and fauna,-sediments, soils, econo-

mic geology, water quality, and chemical contaminants.

References to published work on the Sanctuary sites appear in the

bibliography (Appendix 13), and a list of current research and

monitoring activities is included as Appendix 14. Appendix 15

provides an extended list of specific survey, environmental

monitoring, and research-priorities.

A. Research Priorities

Research policies and outline of priorities

Policy: Baseline studies, monitoring and research that

pertain directly to the long-term management

of the Sanctuary and Hudson River estuarine

resources will be actively encouraged and will

receive highest priority of any research

supported by Sanctuary funding.

More information is needed about natural conditions at

each component site, human impacts on these natural patterns and

processes, and ways of managing these impacts to ensure each

component's long-term viability, diversity, and productivity.

Several types of research will yield information integral to the

successful long-term management of the Sanctuary and the Hudson

River estuary.

o Baseline studies of each Sanctuary component's

biological, chemical, and physical characteristics to

provide a more comprehensive data and information base

than currently exists for monitoring, research, and

management activities.

- Document the location, extent, and biological
resources of the Sanctuary's various habitats.
- Determine water quality at each site and identify
the factors influencing it.
- Identify the hydrologic and geomorphologic processes
that shape each site, including water currents and
sediment movements.

- Determine chemical quality of sediments and wetland
soils at several sites on each component.

- Document the locations-and population characteristics
of endangered and threatened plant and animal species.

- Document current levels of common bloaccumulating
compounds in selected vertebrates and invertebrates.

- Determine patterns of human use of each component site.

o Monitoring of changes in each component site's biological,

chemical, and physical conditions.

-Track changes over time in the location, extent, and
biological resources of the Sanctuary's habitats and
identify the causes of these changes.

- Track changes in water quality over time (seasonal,
daily, storm event related, etc.) and identify
causes of these changes.

- Track changes over time in land forms and identify
causes of these changes.

- Track quantitative and qualitative changes in
chemical nature of sediments and wetland soils;
identify causes of these changes.

- Track changes in location and success of endangered
and threatened species.

- Track changes in levels of bioaccumulating compounds
in animals.

- Track changes in patterns of human use of the Sanctuary
components.

o Studies of the effects of human activities on the

Sanctuary's water quality, flora, fauna, ecological

processes, and physical processes and studies of ways

to mitigate negative impacts.

- Evaluate the effects of nutrient loading from point
and nonpoint sources on water quality and biota, and
evalute the assimilative capacities.

- Evaluate incidence and effects of on- and off-site
contamination of water, sediments, and biota from
oil spills, industrial processes, pesticide use,
and residual or derelict sources of contaminants.

- Evaluate the effects of ship disturbances on Sanctuary
shorelines and biota, and determine most vulnerable
areas.

- Evaluate the impacts of railroad right-of-way manage-
ment practices on the Sanctuary's resources.

- Evaluate the impacts of hunting, fishing, trapping,
and other recreational uses on the Sanctuary's re-
sources.

Policy: Research about on estuarine ecosystems that is

relevant to coastal resource management in New York

and other states will be encouraged.

The Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary has been set

aside to provide valuable information that can be used to better

manage the resources found in other estuarine environments. The

Sanctuary will help provide information on estuarine ecosystems

by serving both as a reference for comparisons with other systems

and as a model for estuarine processes found in other areas.

Several types of research will yield information with bearing on

coastal resource management, including:

o Comparative studies incorporating measurements at

other estuarine locations and using the Sanctuary as

a reference area.

- Determine the direct and indirect impacts of wetland
alterations on terrestrial and aquatic flora, fauna,
and habitats.

- Assess the direct and indirect impacts of dredging and
covering subtidal and intertidal habitats.

- Assess the direct and indirect impacts of nutrient
loading and chemical contamination of estuarine
habitats.

o Studies of the biological, physical, and chemical pro-

cesses that shape and sustain the estuarine system. These

investigations will be done to draw conclusions about eco-

logical, hydrological, geomorphological, and chemical pro-

cesses and relationships in estuaries, human effects on

them, and ways that resources and human activities can be

managed to minimize negative impacts on estuarine systems.

Policy: Research which has a less direct application to

the management of coastal resources and the

Sanctuary than those types of studies described

above will be permitted and encouraged as long

as it does not conflict with higher priority

research.

Policy: Research involving physical, biological, or chemi-

cal manipulation of the Sanctuary environment is

not encouraged, but will be permitted on a very

limited basis under strict review. The project

site must be restored by the researchers) to its

original condition upon completion of the study.

In general, manipulative studies are incompatible with the

goals of the Sanctuary. However, if benefits to the Sanctuary or

to the Hudson River Estuary can be realized, the studies will be

permitted. Proposals for this type of research will be closely

evaluated by the Sanctuary Manager and Steering Committee to

determine duration of project, the type, extent, and reversibil-

ity of planned activities, the impact on long-term stability of

the Sanctuary environment, and the benefit to coastal resource

management. The landowning agency must grant approval for any

such research.

Ongoing clarification of research needs

Discussions will be initiated and maintained with various

interested groups to clarify research needs, further develop

priorities, and enhance coordination and collaboration among

these interested groups and with Sanctuary research activities.

The local advisory committees will play a key role in maintaining

many of these contacts, particularly those with groups represen-

ted on the local committees. The Hudson River Fisheries Advisory

Committee, Hudson River Environmental Society, Hudson River

Research Council, Heritage Task Force for the Hudson River

Valley, Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, and Scenic Hudson, are

some of the important regional groups with a strong research

interest.

B. Coordination of Sanctuary Research

The Sanctuary Manager will coordinate all research and

environmental monitoring in the Sanctuary, and will ensure a con-

sistent interpretation of Sanctuary goals and research

objectives.

Research proposal

A written proposal for research in the Sanctuary must be

submitted to and approved by the Sanctuary Manager. The proposal

must include the following information:

o name, address, telephone number, and agency
affiliation of principal investigators);

o names of persons to conduct field work;

o objectives of the proposed study and how they
relate to the management of the Sanctuary and
other coastal resources;

o the precise location in the Sanctuary in writing
and on a map;

o explanation of methods, materials, and equipment
to be used; and

o duration of study, including starting and completion
dates.

A sample research proposal is included as Appendix 16.

Routine wildlife management activities and water quality sampling

conducted by state and federal agencies will not require a

research proposal. The agency must notify the Sanctuary Manager

either by telephone or in writing about upcoming research or moni-

toring projects on Sanctuary property.

Proposal evaluation and approval

The Sanctuary Manager will evaluate the feasibility of pro-

posed research projects and the degree to which projects meet

Sanctuary objectives and policies defined in the Sanctuary

management plan. Only research that complies with the management

plan will be permitted, The impacts of proposed research on.

ongoing or other proposed projects at the Sanctuary will be

assessed. When a conflict occurs, preference will go to the pro-

ject more directed to resource management, as long as the proposed

research does not displace or disrupt an existing project.

A research review panel will be selected by the Sanctuary

Manager to provide evaluation and comment on individual research

proposals. The Manager will select three reviewers from public

and private agencies and institutions. Selection will be based

on field of expertise and on familiarity with the Hudson River

Estuary, estuarine research, and coastal management issues. The

Sanctuary Manager will ensure that each proposal receives an

interdisciplinary assessment. Copies of a research proposal will

be sent to research reviewers with a review sheet. The Sanctuary

Manager will use reviewer responses to make a final decision

regarding use of the Sanctuary.

The landowning or landmanaging state agency will review

and approve research proposals selected by the Sanctuary Manager

through the agency's representative on the Sanctuary Steering

Committee.

Field work may not begin in the Sanctuary until the prin-

cipal investigator receives written notification of approval from

the Sanctuary Manager. Major changes in the original research

objectives, materials, or methods must be submitted in writing to

the Sanctuary Manager, who will consult the research reviewers.

Variations from the original research proposal must be approved

in writing by the Sanctuary Manager.

Research that fails to meet the objectives and policies of

the Sanctuary management plan through variation from the approved

research proposal or approved amendments may be terminated imme-

diately by the Sanctuary Manager.

Scientific collection permits

Before research involving the collection of out-of-season

and/or protected species may begin in the-Sanctuary, the research

must obtain all the necessary permits required by New York State

agencies and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

A Scientific Collector's Permit from the Department of

Environmental Conservation is required~ to collect fish or

wildlife protected by state laws. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service requires a Scientific Collecting Permit for work with

endangered species, and for banding, taking, transporting, or

possessing migratory birds, their parts, nests, or eggs for

scientific research or education purposes. For archeological

research or collection, written permission from the New York

State Commissioner of Education is needed. A permit from the

State Museum's Botany Office is required for research or collec-

tion of certain species of plants.

Researcher responsibilities

Researchers bear sole responsibility for maintaining their

own field equipment, for removing their own trash, and for

removing any equipment, structures, or markers when a project is

fini shed.

After a research project is completed, the researcher must

submit to the Sanctuary Manager an abstract summation of the pro-

ject and one copy of any report, publication, dissertation, or

thesis resulting from work in the Sanctuary.

Research recruitment

Researchers will be attracted to work in the Sanctuary or on

Sanctuary-related studies through the placement of advertise-

ments and through active dissemination of information by

Sanctuary committees and staff about work that has taken place at

the Sanctuary and the Sanctuary's value for research. The

accessibility of a variety of facilities and support services, an

expanding information base about Sanctuary and ancillary sites,

the availability of student or volunteer assistants, and oppor-

tunities for interaction with other workers engaged in estuarine

research will be strong inducements to conduct research in the

Sanctuary.

C. Sanctuary Research Facilities and Support Services

The Sanctuary Manager will maintain a directory of facili-

ties and support services available from publi~c and private organ-

izations, potential funding sources, locations of specimen

collections, identification specialists, and other relevant faci-

lities and services.

Bard College facilities and services

The central research facility for the Hudson River National

Estuarine Sanctuary will be the Bard College Ecology Field

Station at Tivoli Bays. The Field Station will house a wet

laboratory; facilities for specimen sorting, identification,

preservation, and storage; facilities for work with experimental

animals on a limited basis; and other laboratory equipment.

The map collection, library, microcomputer, weather station,-and

an office for the Sanctuary Manager will be located at the Field

Station. Office, bunk, and kitchen space for visiting scientists

and students will be available on a limited basis. The Field

Station will also house canoes and a Boston Whaler jonboat for

Sanctuary research.

Other Bard College facilities will be available to visiting

scientists and agency personnel to an extent compatible with

Bard's academic program. Such facilities will be most available

during ~January and the summer months. They include computer

terminals; a library; darkrooms; a machine shop; biology, che-

mistry and physics laboratories; an atomic absorption

spectrometer; nuclear magnetic resonance; a gas chromatograph;

the histology-microbiology laboratory; and a rodent facility.

Although Bard's Field Station is located at Tivoli Bays, use

of a van and a DEC trailer will allow a "mobile laboratory"

approach to field work at the other Sanctuary sites. Canoes and

Boston Whaler jonboats will be available at all Sanctuary sites

or housed near the sites.

Pursuant to the attached Memorandum of Understanding

(ADpendix 9), Bard College will participate in review and appro-

val of all research activities involving Bard facilities.

Cooperation with other institutions

other facilities in the Hudson Valley are potentially

available for field base or laboratory use. The Steering

Committee and Sanctuary Manager will attempt to facilitate

arrangements with other institutions, such as:

American Museum of Natural History

Dutchess Community College Norrie Point Environmental
Museum/Laboratory
Hudson River Foundation for Science and Environmental
Research

Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory of Columbia University

Museum of the Hudson Highlands

New York Botanical Garden's Institute of Ecosystem Studies
at the Mary Flager Cary Arboretum

New York State Museum

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

State University of New York

Vassar College

Student and volunteer assistance

The Sanctuary Manager will seek assistance from graduate

fellows, student interns, and volunteers. A stipend (from the

Operations Grants budget) will be provided to a graduate student

who will assist researchers with environmental monitoring and

other research on a part-time basis while pursuing master's or

doctoral thesis research on a priority Sanctuary-related project.

Unpaid internships will be open to college students (and possibly

some older high school students) for work on specific research or

monitoring projects. Volunteers will be drawn from the general

public and will help with a variety of projects in the Sanctuary.

Other assistance may be drawn from institutionalized popula-

tions (e.g., minimum security prisons). This can be done in the

form of supervised work crews. "Earthwatch"-type arrangements,

where a group of persons pay to participate in a scientific pro-

ject such as an archeologic dig or vegetation study, will also be

explored.

D. Funding Sanctuary Research

The Sanctuary Programs Division of the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration's Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource

Management provides limited financial support on a competitive

basis for management related research in national estuarine sanc-

tuaries. Research funded partially or wholly with these funds

may only be conducted within Sanctuary boundaries.

With the exception of limited contract work, the Hudson

River National Estuarine Sanctuary does not award research

funding.

The Steering Committee and Sanctuary Manager will keep

apprised of other funding sources, and will initiate discussions

with the Hudson River Foundation, New York State Sea Grant, and

other appropriate foundations concerning areas of mutual

interest. Representatives from these groups will be invited to

attend Steering Committee meetings.

Local Sanctuary advisory committees will also act to raise

private sector funds or to make contacts with private sector

funding sources in connection with needed work on coastal manage-

ment probl ems.

E. Sanctuary Data Management and Depositories

The Sanctuary Manager will develop a strict protocol for

storing data collected in the Sanctuary. This program will

include design of a central depository for both paper copy and

computer files, as well as a system for maintaining duplicate

copies of all data at another location. The program will be

designed to facilitate the use and analysis of data, particularly

through the use of computers.

The Sanctuary Manager will also develop procedures for

recording observations and events,.and for receiving and routing

information. For example, all agency information on the

Sanctuary sites will be centralized and available'to the Manager

and to scientists working in the Sanctuary -- information such as

fish or game stocking dates and numbers, monitoring data, or

toxic substance analyses. Efforts will be made to obtain similar

types of information for the rest of the Estuary. In addition,

a procedure will be developed for obtaining and recording

public observations of short-lived phenomena such as unusual spe-

cies dances, migrations, and natural or unnatural events that

damage the environment (such as ice storms or oil spills).

A limited set of samples and specimens will be retained by

the Sanctuary for historical purposes. Conventions for accurate

labeling and suitable storage will be developed for these samples

and specimens.

F. Dissemination of Sanctuary Research Results

The Sanctuary Manager will disseminate information about

Sanctuary research to academic institutions, research organiza-

tions, and government agencies in a variety of way s, including

brochures about Sanctuary programs and research opportunities,

group presentations, and newsletters. Press releases about

research projects will be prepared for the news media.

The Sanctuary Manager, with assistance from the Steering

Committee, will also ensure that the general public is informed

about the initiation and progress of research projects in the

Sanctuary, and that the results of such research (including rele-

vant past research) are made available to decision-makers and to

the public in an accessible form (see Education Program).

VIII. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM

The educational goals of the Hudson River National Estuarine

Sanctuary are:

o To increase public awareness and understanding of

estuarine ecosystems, their importance, human effects on

them, and the need for sensible resource management;

o To disseminate scientific information generated in the

Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary, as well as

elsewhere on the Hudson and in other estuaries, in lay

terms that meet the information needs of the general

public, educators, and natural resource managers;

o To increase public awareness of the Sanctuary components

and facilities, and to encourage public use that is con-

sonant with the management plan;

The establishment of the Hudson River National Estuarine

Sanctuary focuses special attention on the need for long-term

protection, wise use, and proper management of estuarine areas.

The Sanctuary environments and the dynamics of the Hudson River

will be introduced through effective interpretive programs geared

to a wide range of people. Visitors will be encouraged to learn

more about the Hudson Estuary, to support wise resource manage-

ment policies, and to participate in the development of future

policies related to the estuary and its environs.,

Every year several million people visit the shores of the

Hudson River for recreation and other activities. It is Possible

to accomodate many people at locations on or adjacent to the four

Sanctuary components for educational purposes without damage to

natural resources or conflicts with other uses. In addition,

facilities outside the immediate vicinity of the Sanctuary will

be used to further extend the Sanctuaryas. education program.

A. Educational Facilities, Programs, and Materials

Facilities

Policy: Sanctuary education programs will be provided

from and supported by several facilities in

order to provide access to a wide segment of

the public.

The Bear Mountain State Park Trailside Museum is the

Sanctuary's main education facility. The Trailside Museum and

Zoo complex overlooks the Hudson River and the Iona Marsh com-

ponent at the southern gateway to the Hudson Highlands, and is

visited by over half a million visitors annually.

Native habitat exhibits will be constructed at the Trailsi-de

Small Animal Museum to represent many of the terrestrial and

aquatic habitats that exist around the Hudson River and to exhi-

bit a variety of plants and animals native to these habitats.

Natural tides will be simulated in some of the aquatic exhibits,

and tape recordings of sounds associated with the individual ani-

mals and their habitats will accompany the exhibits wherever

possible. Color slides associated with each exhibit will further

illuminate aspects of the natural habitats. The delicate rela-

tionship that exists between the animal life of the region and

its varied habitats will be emphasized throughout these exhibits.

Two illustrated exhibits will also be developed for the

Geology Point overlook at the Bear Mountain State Park. The Iona

Island Estuarine Marsh exhibit will relate the history of this

site and discuss the complex nature of this and other marshes,

their beneficial qualities, and problems confronting these eco-

systems. The second exhibit will illustrate the geologic history

of the Hudson River through cross-sections of the Hudson

Highlands which show the area's evolution over millions of years.

Several exhibits will be developed for the renovated wing of

the Ecology Field Station at Bard College. These exhibits will

describe ecosystems at the Tivoli Bays component and the impor-

tant relationships that exist between the Hudson River and the

surrounding area. Space will also be available at the Field

Station for special educational activities such as research

program openhouses.

The Department of Environmental Conservation's Five Rivers

and Stony Kill Farm Environmental Education Centers in Delmar and

Fishkill, and the Department's Camp DeBruce will play a role in

the Sanctuary's education program. Staff at these facilities

will provide assistance in planning nature trail, exhibits, and

other interpretive facilities and in developing educational

materials and activities; conduct interpretive walks for the

general public each year at Sanctuary sites; and provide

assistance with teacher and youth leader training workshops.

Sanctuary education programs

Policy: Sanctuary education programs and activities will

actively draw on and be coordinated with existing

programs offered by public and private

organizations.

The Sanctuary Manager will coordinate the sanctuary educa-

tion programs with existing educational programs and activities,

and will seek assistance in the development of instructional

materials, slide shows, and permanent displays from institutions

with these programs. Cooperative arrangements will be developed

with schools and other groups to incorporate existing information

about the Sanctuary and information generated by Sanctuary

,research with their education programs and materials.

Specialized courses and workshops on the Sanctuary's re-

sources and estuarine ecosystems will be offered to science

teachers and other educators. The Sanctuary staff will accept

speaking engagements about the Sanctuary with audiences such as

conservation groups, school classes, service organizations, and

others. Forums, meetings and workshops on subjects related to

the Hudson River Estuary may be sponsored by the Department 'of

Environmental Conservation or other agencies represented on the

Steering Committee.

Interpretive nature walks will be offered to public groups,

school groups, and special groups on request. Guided field trips

starting from public transportation stations will be scheduled.

Volunteers and teachers will receive training and materials as

preparation for taking groups to the Sanctuary on their own.

Researchers will be encouraged to give site tours for

college students and other groups in order to acquaint students

with the practical *aspects of equipment design, research proto-

col, and raw data collection. These tours will be coordinated by

the Sanctuary Manager with researchers.

Policy: The Sanctuary will actively encourage the

dissemination of scientific information from the

Sanctuary to resource managers and the public.

Several avenues are open within the scientific community for

presenting new information and data. In addition, Sanctuary

staff will issue press releases, prepare non-technical newspaper

and magazine articles, write letters to the editor, and use other

means to attract media coverage of Sanctuary research accomplish-

ments. Research abstracts will also be made available.

The Sanctuary Manager will monitor the progress of research

activities, and will ensure that information relevant to manage-

ment of Sanctuary lands is transmitted to landowning and managing

agencies and individuals in memo and other forms.

Education materials

Policy: Literature, visual aids, and related materials will

be developed, distributed, and routinely updated in

order to convey information to the general public

and specialized groups about the resources, goals,

and accomplishments of the Hudson River National

Estuarine Sanctuary.

Several pamphlets, maps, and brochures will be available to

Sanctuary visitors who wish to take self-guided tours.

Checklists of plant and animal species will be available. Rules

and regulations will be clearly outlined to familiarize visitors

with the Sanctuary's management policies.

The Sanctuary Manager will work with science teachers and

other educators to develop or update materials for science

curricula. Instructional materials already being used will be

adapted for Sanctuary use. Materials will be geared to different

levels of students. Information kits for on-site instructors

will include scientific information, rules and regulations, and

other pertinent information. Instructors will receive both field

workshops and instruction and off-site presentations.

Slide shows and mobile exhibits will be developed and adapted for

use in classrooms, seminars, lectures, and other speaking engage-

ments.

Press releases and a Sanctuary newsletter will be issued

periodically by the Sanctuary Manager. The newsletter will

include notes on Sanctuary activities, current research projects,

and Hudson River related activities of other organizations,

including field trips, talks, and courses.

B. Education Priorities

Sanctuary educational activities have been designated as

short-term or five-year objectives. Short-term activities will

be completed within 18 months of approval of the Sanctuary mana-

gement plan. Within these divisions, two levels of priority are

recognized.

Short-term educational activities

Highest priority is assigned to developing the following

materials, programs and facilities:

o Small animal museum and Geology Point exhibits at
Bear Mountain State Park;
o Interpretive exhibits at Ecology Field Station at Bard
College;

o Sanctuary newsletter;

o Component site brochures and maps;

o Press rel eases;

o Undergraduate internships;

o Graduate fellowship; and

o Brochure about the Hudson River shortnose sturgeon
population.

High priority assigned to developing the following

materials, programs, and facilities:

o Information kits for instructor's use in preparing class
units or field trips to Sanctuary;

o Interpretive nature trails-at the Stockport Flats and
Tivoli Bays components;

o Staff or volunteer field trip leaders and lecturers;

o Training workshops for instructors and other field trip
leaders;
o Placement of Sanctuary reports and informational material
in Hudson Valley libraries; and
o Slide-tape presentations on the Sanctuary

Five-year educational activities

Highest priority is assigned to developing the following
materials and programs:

o Regular on-site and off-site school and summer camp
programs;

o Educational posters;

o Short training courses and workshops for teachers and
others;
o Symposia or workshops an Hudson River Estuary;

o Regular guided field trips to Sanctuary sites beginning
at public transportation stations;

o Slide-tape presentations on specific subjects to accompany
existing slide-tape program

Moderate priority is assigned to developing the following
materials and programs:

o Video programs;

o Brochures on Sanctuary sites and other points of interest
for Amtrack riders

100

IX. OTHER ACTIVITIES

Public use of the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary

for activities other than research and education will be guided

by the need to protect Sanctuary resources and to ensure that

these activities do not interfere with research, monitoring, and

education programs, which are the priority uses. Traditional

uses such as-*recreation, hunting, fishing, and trapping will be

allowed in appropriate areas, consistent with pre-existing land

management policies. Some of the'uses will be restricted to cer-

tain areas of the Sanctuary to protect fragile environments or to

avoid disruption of research or education projects.

Policy: Traditional uses of the Sanctuary components will

be allowed to continue as long as they do not

disrupt the natural integrity of the Sanctuary or

any research or education projects.

Table 6 indicates by component and state agency jurisdiction

activities that are prohibited, allowed, allowed only under per-

mit, or pending state agency decision (refer to figures 2 through

5), Information about permits will be available from'the

Sanctuary Manager and landowning or managing agencies.

Guidelines and use policies for all components

Conservation, research, monitoring, and education are the

priority uses for all Sanctuary lands and waters.

101

TABLE 6

ALLOWABLE SANCTUARY USES OF EACH COMPONENT

BY STATE AGENCY JURISDICTION

SANCTUARY USES

RESEARCH P P P P P P
COLLECTING SCIENTIFIC SPECIMENS P P P P P P
ARCHEOLOGIC DIGGING N N P N P N
GUIDED FIELD TRIPS Y Y Y P Y P
LARGE GROUP USE (over 25 People) P P P P P P

BIRD WATCHING, OTHER NATURE STUDY Y Y Y Y Y Y
PICKING OR GATHERING PLANTS P P P P P P
COLLECTING OR REMOVING ANIMALS P P P P P P
WOOD CUTTING OR COLLECTION P N P N P N

PICNICKING Y Y Y N N Y
PRIMITIVE CAMPING P N N N N N

WALKING, SKIING, SNOWSHOEING Y Y Y Y Y Y
BICYCLING N N Y Y N N
CANOEING, KAYAKING, ROWBOATING V Y. Y Y Y Y
POWER BOATING Y Y N N N N
OFF-ROAD VEHICLE OPERATION N N N N N N

COMMERCIAL FISHING AND CRABBING Y Y Y N Y N
NON-COMMERCIAL CRABBING n.a. n.a Y Y Y
SPORT FISHING Y Y Y Y Y Y
BAITFISHING (SEINE) Y Y Y Y Y N
HUNTING Y Y Y N U N

FUR TRAPPING Y Y Y N U N

N=Not Allowed, Y=Allowed, P=Allowed Under Permit Only, U=Undecided.

102

Nature study, birdwatching, walking, skiing, snowshoeing,

canoeing, kayaking, rowboating, and sport fishing are allowed

without permit on all components. Sanctuary users are requested

to use trails, and must comply with seasonal or area restrictions

which are established to protect fragile habitats or research in

progress. At Stockport Flats and Tivoli Bays (and other Sanctuary

sites if hunting or trapping are allowed in the future), hunters

and trappers are required to turn over carcasses or body parts to

the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) upon request,

for research purposes. These requests will normally not include

edible meat of game animals, but may include pelted muskrat or

mink carcasses, or waterfowl wings or gizzards.

Plants may not be picked or gathered without a permit,

except for cattails used to build temporary hunting blinds.

Permits are also required for collection or removal of Sanctuary

animals for any purpose. Any group of more than 25 people must

obtain a permit identifying time and places of activities before

engaging in these activities.

The use of off-road vehicles, including trail bikes and

snowmobiles is prohibited on all Sanctuary lands. Regulation of

several other activities is described below by component.

Stockport Flats

Several activities are allowed without permit at Stockport

Flats, including picnicking, power boating, and conducting guided

103

field trips. Ice boating is allowed on the ice on open waters.

Fishing, hunting, and trapping are allowed at Stockport, subject

to federal and state laws and regulations.

Woodcutting and primitive camping are allowed in certain

areas under permit on lands owned by the Office of Parks,

Recreation, and Historic Preservation; neither activity is

allowed on DEC property.

Bicycling and archeologic digging are not allowed on the

Stockport Flats component.

Tivoli Bays

Guided field trips may be conducted at the Tivoli component

without permit, and picnicking, power boating, and ice boating

are all allowed without permit. Fishing, hunting, and trapping

are also allowed without permit, subject to federal and state

laws and regulations. Bicycling is allowed on Cruger Island and

Ward Manor Roads, but not on trails and foot paths.

Archeologic digging may be conducted on Sanctuary property

at Tivoli under permit. Woodcutting, wood collection, and camping

are all prohibited at Tivoli Bays.

.Iona Marsh

Non-commercial crabbing and sport fishing are allowed at

Iona, and bicycling is allowed on the bicycle path along the

104

southwest edge of the component. Guided field trips may be con-

ducted, but only under permit.

Hunting, trapping, baitfishing, commercial fishing and

crabbing, archeologic digging, woodcutting, picnicking, camping,

powerboating, and ice boating are all prohibited at the Iona

Marsh component.

Piermont Marsh

Piermont Marsh may be used for guided field trips, but a

permit is required to guide field trips on lands owned by the

Palisades Interstate Park Commission (PIPC). Archeologic digging

and woodcutting are not allowed on PIPC lands, but are allowed

under permit on Department of Environmental Conserv-ation (DEC)

lands. Picnicking is allowed on PIPC lands, but is prohibited

on DEC lands.

Camping, bicycling, powerboating, and ice boating are all

prohibited on the Piermont component.

Non-commercial crabbing and sport fishing are allowed

throughout the Piermont component. Commercial fishing, commer-

cial crabbing, and baitfishing are allowed on DEC property, but

not on PIPC property. Hunting and trapping are prohibited on

PIPC property. A policy for hunting and trapping on the DEC por-

tion of Piermont has not yet been established.

Policy: Activities and levels of use of the Sanctuary lands

and waters for all activities will be monitored.

105

Activities other than research and education will

be the first to be restricted if levels of use

cause damage to habitats or biota, or interfere

with research, monitoring, and education activi-

ties.

106

Appendix I

VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

Appendix 1

VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

Presence at the Stockport, Tivoli, Iona, and Piermont Sanctuary components is
indicated by S.T.I. and P. Revised by Erik Kiviat in September 1984 from the
list in the Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary Final Environmental Impact
Statement list compiled by Nancy Zeising and Kiviat.

Common name Scientific name Component

ACERACEAE

Boxelder Acer negundo S T
Red maple A. rubrum S T I
Silver maple A. saccharinum S T

ALISMATACEAE

Water-plantain Alisma sp. T
Water-plantain A. subcordatum I P
Arrowhead Sagittaria eatonii S T I
Broadleaf arrowhead S. latifolia S T I P
Stiff arrowhead S. rigida S T
Arrowhead S. spatulata (S. calycina,
Lophotocarpus spongiosus) S I
Subulate arrowhead S. subulata S T I P

AMARANTHACEAE

Tidewater-hemp Amaranthus cannabinus S T I P

ANACARDINACEAE

Smoke tree Cotinus coggygria T
Poison ivy Rhus radicans T I
Staghorn sumac R. typhina S
Poison sumac R. vernix I

APOCYNACEAE

Black swallowwort Cynanchum nigrum S

AQUIFOLIACEAE

Winterberry Ilex verticillata T I

Al-l

Appendix 1 (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

ARACEAE

Sweet flag Acorus calamus S T
Jack-in-the-pulpit Arisaema triphyllum T
Goldenclub Orontium aquaticum S T
Arrow arum Peltandra virginica S T I P
Skunk cabbage Symplocarpus foetidus S T I

ASCLEPIADACEAE

Swamp milkweed Asclepias incarnata T I

BALSAMINACEAE

Jewelweed Impatiens biflora S T I P

BERBERIDACEAE

Japanese barberry Berberis thunbergii T

BETULACEAE

Speckled alder Alnus rugosa I
Smooth alder A. serrulata S T I
Yellow birch Betula lutea T
Gray birch B. populifolia T
American hornbeam Carpinus caroliniana T
American hazel Corylus americana T
Hop hornbeam Ostrya virginiana T

BIGNONIACEAE

Catalpa Catalpa sp. T

80RAGINACEAE

Forget-me-knot Myosotis sp. S T I

CAESALPINIACEAE

Wild senna Cassia hebecarpa S

CALLITRICHACEAE

Water starwort Callitriche sp. P
Water starwort C. verna T

A1-2

Appendix I (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

CAPRIFOL IACEAE

Bell's honeysuckle Lonicera x. bell'a S T
Elderberry Sambucus canadensis S T I
Arrowwood Viburnum dentatum S T I
Nannyberry V. lentago T
Highbush cranberry V. opulus T
Black haw V. prunifolium I

CARYOPHYLLACEAE

Water chickweed Stellaria aquatica T

CELAST RACEAE

Bittersweet Celastrus scandens T

CE RATO PHYL LA CEAE

Coontail Ceratophyllum demersum S T I

CL ETHRACEAE

Sweet pepperbush Clethra alnifolia I

CHENOPODIACEAE

Spearscal e Atriplex patula P

COMMEL INACEAE

Dayf lower Comrnelina communis S T

COMPOS ITAE

Giant ragweed Ambrosia trifida T
Aster Aster sp. I
Aster A. puniceus T
Aster A. subullatus P
Bur-mari gold Bidens sp. P
Beggar-ticks Bidens bientoides S T I
Bur-marigold B. cernua, S T
Eaton's bur-marigold B. eat-oni T
Beggar-ticks Bf. frondosa T
Estuary beggar-ticks B. hyperborea T

Al -3

Appendix I (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

Beggar-ticks B. laevis T
Ox-eye daisy Chrysanthemum leucanthemum T
Fireweed Erechtites hieracifolia I P
Fleabane Erigeron philadelphicus T
Joe Pyemweed Eupatorium maculatum T
Boneset E. perfoliatum S T
Sneezeweed Heleniunm autumnale S T I
Marsh elder Iva frutesc ens P
Climbing hempweed Mikania scandens T I P
Marsh fleabane Pluchea purpurascens
(P. odorata) I P
Greenhead conef lower Rudbeckia laciniata T
Groundsel Senecio aureus T
Goldenrod Solidago Sp. S I
Goldenrod S. altissinma T
Goldenrod S. graminifolia T
Goldenrod S. sempervirens P
Dandelion Taraxacum officinale T
Cocklebur Xanthium strumariumS

CON VOL VULACEAE

Bindweed Convolvulvus sepiumi T
Dodder Cuscuta sp. S
Dodder C. cephalanthiI
Dodder C. gronovii T

CORNACEAE

Silky dogwood Cornus amomum S T I
Gray dogwood C. racemosa T
Red-osier dogwood C. stolonifera T

C RA SSU LACEAE

Ditch stonecrop Penthorum sedoides T

CRUCIFERAE

Garlic-mustard Alliaria officinalis T
Wintercress Barbarea vulgaris T
Bittercress Cardamine pensylvanica T
Cuckoo flower C. pratensis T
Dame's rocket Hesperis matronalis S T
Marshcress Rorippa islandica T P

Al -

Appendix 1 (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

CUCURBITACEAE

Balsam-apple Echinocystis lobata S
Bur-cucumber Sicyos angulatus S

CUPRESSACEAE

Arborvitae Thuja occidentalis S T

CYPERACEAE

Sedge Carex grayii T
Sedge C. hormathodes P
Sedge C. stipata T I
Tussock sedge C. stricta T I
Galingale Cyperus rivularis T I
Galingale C. flavescens P
Galingale C. strigosus T
Three-way sedge Dulichium arundinaceum T
Spikerush Eleocharis acicularis S
Spikerush E, ovata S T
Spikerush Eo diandra S T I
Spikerush E. palustris S T P
Spikerush E. parvula P
Bulrush Scirpus acutus S
Threesquare S. americanus (S. pungens) S T I P
Bulrush S. atrovirens T
Cylindrical bulrush S. cylindricus I P
Wool-grass S. cyperinus I
River bulrush S. fluviatilis S T P
Bulrush S. maritimus P
Threesquare S. olneyi (S. americanus) I P
Saltmarsh bulrush S. robustus I P
Bluntscale bulrush S. smithii S T I
Bulrush S. validus
(S. tabernaemontanii) S T I P

DIOSCOREACEAE

Wild yam Dioscorea villosa T

ELATINACEAE

Waterwort Elatine americana S T

A1-5

Appendix I (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

EQU ISETACEAE

Equisetum sp. Equisetum sp. S
Field horsetail E. arvense T
Horsetai E. fTluTvia le T
Marsh horsetail E. palustre T

ER ICACEAE

Highbush blueberry Vaccinium corymbosum T

ERIOCAULACEAE

Pipewort Eriocaulon parkeri T

FABACEAE

False-indigo Amorpha.fruticosa T I
Hog-peanut Amphicarpa bracteata T I
Groundnut Apios americana T I
Wild pea Lathyrus palustris T
Wild bean Strophostyles helvolaI

FAGACEAE

Swamp white oak Quercus bicolorT

GENT IANACEAE

Closed gentian Gentiana andrewsii T
Floating heart Nymphoides cordata T
GERANIACEAE

Wild geranium Geranium maculatum T

GRAMI NEAE

Bentgrass Agrostis sp.
Bentgrass A. hyemalis T
Redtop A. stolonifera (A. alba) P
Wood-reed Cinna sp.
Wood-reed C. arundinacea T

AI-6

Appendix I (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

Grass Diplachne maritima P
Saltgrass Distichlis spicata P
Barnyard grass Echinochloa crusgalli T
Water-millet E. walteri T I P
Wild-rye Elymus -virginicus T I
Rice cutgrass Leersia oryzoides T I
White grass L. virginica S T
Panic grass Panicum sp. S I
Panic grass Panicum capillare S
Panic grass P. dichotomiflorum S T
Panic grass P. virgatum P
Reed canary grass Phalaris arundinacea S T
Common reed Phragmites communis
(P. australis) S T I P
Saltwater cordgrass Spartina alterniflora P
Tall cordgrass S. cynosuroides IP
Saltmeadow cordgrass S. patens P
Freshwater cordgrass, S. pectinata S T P
Wild-rice Zizania, aquatica S T I P

HALO RAGACEAE

Watermilfoil Myriophyllum sp. S , I
Watermi lfoilI M. humile T
Eurasian watermilfoil M. spicatum S T I P

HY DROCARYAC EA E

Water-chestnut Trapa natans S T I

HYDROCHARITACEAE

Waterweed Anacharis canadensis
(Elodea c.) S T I
Waterweed A. nuttallii (Elodea n.) S T I P
Water-celery Vallisneria americana S T I P

HYPERICACEAE

Marsh St. John's-wort Triadenum virginicum

IRIDACEAE

Yellow iris Iris pseudacorus S T I
Blue flag I. versicolor S T I
Blue-eyed-grass Sisyrhynchium sp.I

Al -7

Appendix I (continued)

Common name - Scientific name Component

ISOETACEAE

Guillwort Isoetes riparia T

JUN CAC EAE

Rush Juncus brachycephalus T
Black-grass J. gerardi P
Path rush J. tenuis T

LAB IATAE

Stoneroot Collinsonia canadensis T
Ground-ivy Glecoma hederacea T
Bugleweed Lycopus americanus T
Bugleweed L. europaeus T
Mint Mentha SP. S I
Field mint Mentha arvensis T
Skullcap Scutellaria galericulata I
Skullcap S. lateriflora T
Hedge-nettle Stachys palustris T
Wood sage Teucrium canadense P

LAURACEAE

Spicebush Lindera benzoin ST
Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua P
LEMNACEAE

Common duckweed Lemnna minor S T I P
Great duckweed Spirodela polyrhiza S T I
Watermeal Wolff ia columbiana T

LENTIBULARIACEAE

Bladderwort Utricularia vulgaris S I

L IL IACEAE

Wild onion Allium sp.
Adder's-tongue Erythronium americanum S
Day-lily Hemerocallis fulva T
Canada lilly Lilium canadense T
Greenbrier Smilax herbacea T
Greenbrier S. hispida T

Al -8

Appendix .1 (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

LOBEL IACEAE

Cardinal flower Lobelia cardinalis S T I
Great blue lobelia L. siphilitica T

L YT HRAC EA E

Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicarcia S T I P

MALVACEAE

Swamp rose mallow Hibiscus palustris
(H. moscheutos) T I P
MORACEAE

Hops Humulus lupulus T

NAJADACEAE

Naiad Najas flexilis S T I
Naiad N. guadalupensis S P
Naiad N. minor S T
Muenscher's naiad N. muenscheri S T I
Curlyleaf pondweed Potamogeton crispus T I P
Pondweed P. epihydrus S T
Leafy pondweed P. foliosus S T I
Long-leaved pondweed P. nodosus S T
Saga pondweed P. pec~tinatus S I P
Pondweed P. perfoliatus S T I P
Pondweed P. pusillus S
Pondweed P. richardsonii S T I
Flat-stemmed pondweed P. zosteriformis S T
Horned pondweed Zannichellia palustris S T I P

NYMPHAEACEAE

Spatterdock Nuphar advena (N. luteum) S T I
White water-lily Nymphaea sp. T

OL EACEAE

Ash Fraxinus sp.I
Black ash F,.nira S T
Red ash F. pennsylvanica S T

Al -9

Appendix I (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

ONAGRACEAE

Willow herby Epilobium sp.I
Willow herby E. adenocaulon T
Willow herb E. glandulosum P
Water-purslane Ludwigia palustris S T P
Evening-primrose Qenothera sp. S T

ORCHI DACEAE

Helleborine Epipactis helleborine T

OSMIJNDACEAE

Cinnamon fern Osmunda cinnamomea T I
Interrupted fern 0. claytoniana I
Royal fern 0. regalis T I

PINACEAE

.White pine Pinus strobus T

PLANTAGINACEAE

Heartleaf plantain Plantago cordata S T

PLATANACEAE

Sycamore Platanus occidentalis S

POLYGONACEAE

Tearthumb Polygonum arifolium I I P
Smartweed P. caespitosum T
Japanese knotweed P. cuspidatum S
Seabeach knotweed P. glaucum P
Water-pepper P. hydr'opiper T
Swamp smartweed P. hydropiperoides I
Dotted smartweed P. punctatum S T I P
Tearthumb P. sagittatum S T I
Jumpseed P. virginianum T
Dock Rumex mexicanusI
Water dock R. verticillatus T

Al-10

Appendix 1.(continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

POLYPOD IACEAE

Ostrich fern Matteuccia struthiopterisS
Sensitive fern Onoclea sensibilis S T I
Marsh fern - Thelypteris palustris T I P

PONTEDERIACEAE

Mud-plantain Heteranthera reniformis S T P
Pickerelweed Pontederia cordata S T I
Water star-grass Zosterella dubia S T I

PORTULACACEAE

Spring beauty Claytonia virginica T

PRIMULACEAE

Fringed losestrife Lysimachia ciliata S T
Moneywort L..nummnularia T
Water pimpernel Samolus parviflorus I P

RANU NCULACEAE

Marsh-marigold Caitha palustris S T
Virgin's bower Clematis virginiana S T
Crowfoot Ranunculus abortivus T
Cursed crowfoot R. sceleratus T P
Buttercup R. septentrionalis S T
Tall meadow-rue Thalictrum polygamum S T

RHAMNACEAE

Buckthorn Rhamnus catharticus T

ROSACEAE
41
Chokeberry Aronia sp.
Ninebark Physocarpus opulifolius T I
Black cherry Prunus serotina T
Multiflora rose Rosa multiflora T
Swamp-rose R. palustris T I
Meadowsweet Spiraea latifolia T I
Hardhack S. tomentosaI

Al-lI

Appendix 1 (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

RUBIACEAE

Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis T I
Bedstraw Galium asprellum T
Bedstraw G. palustre T
Bedstraw G. trifidum T

SALICACEAE

Cottonwood Populus deltoides S T I P
Quaking aspen P. tremuloides T
Willow Salix sp. S
Crackwillow S. gragl'is T I
Blackwillow S. nira I
Basket willow S. purpurea I
Heart-leaved willow S. rigida T

SCROPHULARIACEAE

Turtlehead Chelone glabra T I
Mudwort Limosella subulata S T
False-pimpernel Lindernia dubia S T P
Nuttall's micranthemum Micranthemum micranthemoides T
Monkeyflower Mimulus ringens T

SOLANACEAE

Climbing nightshade Solanum dulcamara T

SPARGANIACEAE

Burreed Sparganium americanum T
Big burreed S. eurycarpum S T

STAPHYLEACEAE

Bladdernut Staphylea trifolia T
4,
TILIACEAE

Basswood Tilia americana S T

TYPHACEAE

Narrowleaf cattail Typha angustifolia S T I P
Broadleaf cattail T. latifolia S T I P
Hybrid cattail T. x. glauca S T I P

Al-12

Appendix 1 (continued)

Common name Scientific name Component

ULMACEAE

Elm Ulmus sp. T
American elm U. americana S I

UMBELLIFERAE

Angelica Angelica atropurpurea T
Bulb-bearing water-
hemlock Cicuta bulbifera T I
Water-hemlock C. maculata T
Honewort Cryptotaenia canadensis T
Lilaeopsis Lilaeopsis chinensis P
Mock bishop weed Ptilimnium capillaceum P
Water-parsnip Sium suave S T I P

URTICACEAE

False nettle Boehmeria cylindrica T I
Wood nettle Laportea canadensis S T
Clearweed Pilea sp. S
Clearwood P. fontana I
Clearweed P. pumila T
Nettles Urtica dioica S

VIOLACEAE

Blue violet Viola sp. T I

VITACEAE

Virginia creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia S T
Grape Vitis sp. S T

Sources of data for plant lis). (brackets indicate locations of voucher specimens
if any): Buckley and Ristich (1976). (Manhattan College or College of Mount St.
Vincent]; Foley and Taber (1951); Kiviat (1978) [Bard College Field Station];
Erik Kiviat (1971-84, unpublished data) [Bard College Field Station]; Lehr
(1967a, b) [New York Botanical Garden]; McVaugh (1958) [New York State Museum];
John C. Orth (unpublished data at Bear Mountain State Park Trailside Museums);
Schuyler (1975) [Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciencies]; Schuyler 1984
(unpublished data); Torrey (1931). Scientific names in most cases are from
Gleason, Henry A. and Arthur Cronquist, 1963, Manual of vascular plants of
Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New
York.

Al-13

Appendix 2

AMPHIBIANS REPORTED IN OR NEAR

THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

APPENDIX 2

AMPHIBIANS REPORTED IN OR NEAR
THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

Verified reports for the Stockport, Tivoli, Iona, and Piermont
Sanctuary components are indicated by upper case S,T,I,P; lower case
s,t,i,p indicate unverified reports considered reliable, or verified
reports outside the Sanctuary boundary. A species listed with no site
annotation is known from the Hudson River corridor but has not been
reported from the Sanctuary. Names follow: Collins, Joseph T. et al.
19820 Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North
American Amphibians and Reptiles. 2nd ed. Herpetological Circular 12,
Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Compiled by Erik
Kiviat, 1984.

Common Scientific
Name Name Components
S T I P

Mudpuppy, Necturus maculosus (a) t
Marbled salamander, Ambystoma opacum
Jefferson salamander, Ambystoma jeffersonianum t
Blue-spotted salamander, Ambystoma laterale
Spotted salamander, Ambystoma maculatum T I
Eastern newt (red-spotted newt, red eft),
Notophthalmus viridescens T i p
Dusky salamander, Desmognathus fuscus T i
Redback salamander (leadback salamander),
Plethodon cinereus T I P
Slimy salamander, Plethodon qlutinosus t I P
Four-toed salamander, Hemidactylium scutatum
Red salamander, Pseudotriton ruber p
Two-lined salamander, Eurycea bislineata T p
American toad, Bufo americanus S T I
Fowler's toad, Bu-fo woodhousii
Spring peeper, Hyla crucifer S T I P
Gray treefrog, Hyla versicolor T I
Bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana S T I P
Green frog, Rana clamitans S T I p
Wood frog, Rana sylvatica T I p
Northern leopard frog (northern meadow frog),
Rana pipiens (b) S t
Pickerel frog, Rana palustris T I

Data from: Burt (1931) (I, P), Jack Focht (I), Erik Kiviat (all
sites), William T. Maple (S, P), and Orth (in Clarke and Rapuano 1976)
(I).

a Canal introduction to Hudson River; probably extirpated.
b Specimens from Stockport and Barrytown are at the American Museum
of Natural History, and a paper is in preparation by Michael Klemens
et al.

Appendix 3

REPTILES REPORTED IN OR NEAR

THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

APPENDIX 3

REPTILES REPORTED IN OR NEAR
THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

Verified reports for the Stockport, Tivoli, Iona and Piermont
Sanctuary components are indicated by upper case S,T,I,P; lower case
s,t,i,p indicate unverified reports considered reliable, or verified
reports outside the Sanctuary boundary. A species listed with no site
annotation is known from the Hudson River corridor but has not been
reported from the sanctuary. Names follow: Collins, Joseph T. et al
1982. Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North American
Amphibians and Reptiles. 2nd ed. Herpetological Circular 12, Society
for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Compiled by Erik Kiviat,
1984.

Components
Common Name Scientific Name S T I P

Snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina S T I P
Stinkpot (musk turtle) Sternotherus odoratus
Spotted turtle Clemmys guttata S T
Bog turtle (Muhlenberg's turtle),
Clemmys muhlenbergii
Wood turtle Clemmys insculpta S T
Eastern box turtle Terrapene carolina T I
Diamondback terrapin Malaclemys terrapin I P
Map turtle Graptemys geographica S T
Painted turtle Chrysemys picta
Blanding's turtle Emydoidea blandingii
Spiny softshell turtle Trionyx spiniferus
Eastern fence lizard Sceloporus undulatus i
Five-lined skink Eumeces fasciatus I
Northern water snake Nerodia sipedon S T I p
Brown snake Storeria dekayi T
Redbelly snake Storeria Eccip'itomaculata
Eastern ribbon snake Thamnophis sauritus t
Common garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis S T I
Eastern hognose snake Heteroaon platyrhinos I
Ringneck snake Diadophis punctatus t
Worm snake Carphophis amoenus
Black racer Coluber constrictor T i p
Smooth green snake Opheodrys vernalis
Black rat snake (pilot blacksnake),
Elaphe obsoleta i
Milk snake Lampropeltis Fiangulum T
Cooperhead Agkistrodon contortrix
Timber rattlesnake Crotalus horridus

Data from: Boyle (1969) (P), Burt (1931), Jack Focht (I), Erik Kiviat
(all sites), William T. Maple (S, P), Orth (in Clarke and Rapuano
1976) (I), Platt (1978) (I), John Serrao (I).

a Canal introduction to Hudson River, probably extirpated.

Appendix 4

FISHES REPORTED FROM THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE

SANCTUARY

APPENDIX 4

FISHES REPORTED FROM THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

Letters in the Ecological Classification column refer to the relationship of the
fish to the estuary following McHugh (10): A=Freshwater fishes that enter
brackish water, B=Truly estuarine species, C=Anadromous/catadromous species,
D=Seasonal adult marine species, E=Estuarine nursery species, and F=Adventitious
marine species. Numbers listed under the Sanctuary components S, T, I, P indi-
cate presence of the species at Stockport, Tivoli, Iona, and Piermont, and the
source of the data; only one source is listed although several sources may have
reported that species. Compiled by Robert Schmidt in 1982 and updated by Erik
Kiviat in October, 1984.

Ecological Components
Common name Scientific name Classification S T I P

PETROMYZONTIDAE

American brook lamprey Lampetra appendix A 1
Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus C 1

ACIPENSERIDAE

Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum B 11 11 11 11
Atlantic sturgeon A. oxyrhynchus C 12

ANGUILLIDAE

American eel Anguilla rostrata C 8 1 2 5

CLUPEIDAE

Blueback herring Alosa aestivalis C 1 2 4
Alewife A. pseudoharengus C 9 1 8
American shad A. sapidissima C 9 2 8 7
Atlantic Menhaden 1)-evoortia ,tyrannus E 12 7
Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum A 12

ENGRAULIDAE

Bay anchovy Anchoa mitchilli B 7

SALMONIDAE

Rainbow trout Salmo gairdneri A 1
Brown trout S. trutta A 9 1
Brook trout alv7e1inus fontinalis A 1

OSMERIDAE

Rainbow smelt Osmerus mordax C 9 1

A4-1

APPENDIX 4 (continued)

Ecological Components
Common name Scientific name Classification S T I P

UMBRIDAE

Central mudminnow Umbra limi A 1
Eastern mudminnow U. pygmaea A 5

ESOCIDAE

Redfin pickerel Esox americanus A 3 1 2 6
Northern pike E. l-Tucius A 9
Chain pickerel ' niger A 1

CYPRINIDAE

Goldfish Carassius auratus A 4 1 2
Carp Cyprinus carpio A 8 1 2
Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua A 1
Eastern silvery minnow Hybognathus regius A 3 1
Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas A 3 1 2 7
Satinfin shiner Notrolis analostanus A 1
Bridle shiner N. bifrenatus A 3 1
Common shiner N. corn!utus A 3 1
Spottail shiner I - -hudsonius A 8 1 8 7
Spotfin shiner N. spilopterus A 3
Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus A 1 5
Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus A 1
Fallfish S. corporalis A 3 1

CATOSTOMIDAE

White sucker Catostomus commersoni A 4 1 2 5
Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus A 6
Northern hogsucker Hypentelium nigricans A 3 1

ICTALURIDAE

White catfish Ictalurus catus A 4 1 12
Yellow bullhead I. natalis A 2
Brown bullhead fT nebulosus A 4 1 2

GADI DAE

Atlantic tomcod Microgadus tomcod B 2 7

BELONIDAE

Atlantic needlefish Strongylura marina D 12

A4-2

APPENDIX 4 (continued)

Ecological Components
Common name Scientific name Classification S T f P

FUNDULIDAE

Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus A 8 8 1 7
Mummichog F. heteroclitus B 8 1 8 8

ATHERINIDAE

Inland silverside Menidia beryllina E 7
Atlantic silverside M. menidia E 7

GASTEROSTEIDAE

Fourspine stickleback Apeltes quadracus B 8 1 8 7
Threespine stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus B 2

SYNGNATHIDAE

Northern pipefish Syngnathus fuscus 0 7

PERCICHTHYIDAE

Black seabass Centropristis striata F 12
White perch Morone americana B 9 1 8 8
Striped bass M. saxatilis C 4 1 8 7

CENTRARCHIDAE

Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris A 1
Bluespotted sunfish enneacanthus gloriosus A 2
Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus A 3 1 8 8
Pumpkinseed Lz. gibbosus A 3 1 2 6
Warmouth L. gulosus A 1
Bluegill L. macrochirus A 9 1 7
Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui A 9 1
Largemouth bass M. salmoides- A 4 1 2 7
Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus A 1

PERCIDAE

Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi A 3 1 2 5
Yellow perch Perca flavescens A 3 1 8

POMATOMIDAE

Bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix E 8 7

A4-3

APPENDIX 4 (continued)

Ecological Components
Common name Scientific name Classification .. F T I P

LABRIDAE

Tautog Tautoga onitis F 12

CARANGIDAE

Crevalle jack Carane hippos D 12 12

COTTIDAE

Longhorn sculpin Myoxcephalus
octodecemspinosus A 12

SCIAENIDAE

Weakfish Cynoscion regalis E 7

SOLEIDAE

Hogchoker Trinectes maculatus B 12

1. Kiviat, E. In press. Natural history of the fish fauna of Tivoli Bays.
Hudson River Fisheries Symposium, Hudson River Environmental Society.
(Includes a few species found in nontidal waters close to the
proposed site.

2. Orth, J. D. ca. 1965. Vertebrates of Iona Island and vicinity. Bear
Mountain State Park Trailside Museums. 17 p.

3. Greeley, J. R. 1937. Fishes of the area with annotated list, pp. 45-85.
In. Anonymous. A biological survey of the lower Hudson watershed.
In. Anonymous. A biological survey of the lower Hudson watershed.
Supplement to 26th Annual Report, New York Conservation Department,
Part II.

4. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 1971 Stream Survey.

5. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Sparkill Creek
Stream Surveys.

6. Bailey, R. M. 1936. Stream survey records. New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation.

7. Smith, C. L. Stream survey records, American Museum of Natural History.

A4-4

8. Hudsonia Limited. Miscellaneous collections, 1981-84.

9. Observations by Everett Nack (Claverack, New York), Salvatore Cozzolino
(Department of Environmental Conservation), or Louis Gerrain (DEC).

10. McHugh, J. L. 1967. Estuarine Nekton, pp. 581-620.
In. Go H. Lauff (Ed.) Estuaries. AAAS Publ. No. 83, Washington, D.C.

11. Letter from Ruth Rehfus (National Marine Fisheries Service) to
Richard B. Mieremet, dated June 4, 1982.

12. Tom Lake, personal communication, or Steve Stanne, personal communication,
miscellaneous seine or trawl observations in or near Piermont Marsh
many of these species likely to enter the Sanctuary.

13. Texas Instruments, Inc., beach seine survey, beach 99 (Cruger Island).

A4-5

Appendix 5

BIRDS REPORTED IN OR NEAR THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL

ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

APPENDIX 5

BIRDS REPORTED IN OR NEAR THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

Upper case S, T, I, P, indicate verified reports for the Stockport, Tivoli,
Iona, and Piermont Sanctuary components; lower case s indicates verified reports
near the Stockport component. Common and scientific names are current with the
American Ornithologists' union usage per supplement to Auk 99(3), 1982.
Compiled by Erik Kiviat, revised in 1984.

Common Name Scientific Components
Name S T I P

Red-throated loon Gavia stellata s T I P
Common loon G. immer S T I P
Pied-billed grebe Podilymbus podiceps S T I P
Horned grebe Podiceps auritus S T I P
Red-necked grebe P. grsegena S T I
Northern gannet iila bassanus T
Great cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo P
Double-crested cormorant P. auritus S T I P
American bittern Botaurus lentiginosus S T I P
Least bittern Ixobrychus exilis S T I P
Great blue heron Ardea herodias S T I P
Great egret Casmerodius albus S T I P
Snowy egret Egretta thula S T I P
Tricolored heron E. tricolor P
Little blue heron Florida caerulea s T I P
Cattle egret Bubulcus ibis s
Green-backed heron Butorides striatus S T I P
Black-crowned night-heron Nycticorax nycticorax S T I P
Yellow-crowned night-heron Nyctanassa violacea P
Glossy ibis Plegadis falcinellus T P
Fulvous whistling duck Dendrocygna bicolor T
Tundra swan Cygnus columbianus S T
Mute swan Cygnus olor S I P
Greater white-fronted goose Anser albifrons P
Snow goose Chen caerulescens S T I P
Brant BT bernicla S T I P
Canada goose Branta canadensis S T I P
Wood duck Aix sponsa S T I
Green-winged teal Anas crecca crecca S
American green-winged teal A. crecca caroTlinensis S T I P
American black duck A. rubripes S T I P
Mallard A. platyrhynchos S T I P
Northern pintail A. acuta S T I P
Blue-winged teal A. discors S T I P
Northern shoveler A. clypeata S T
Gadwall A. strepera S T I P

A5-1

APPENDIX 5 (continued)

Common Name Scientific Components
Name S T I

Eurasian wigeon A. penelope T
American wigeon W. americana S T I P
Canvasback T.- valisineria S T I P
Redhead Aythya americana S T I
Ring-necked duck A. collaris S T I P
Greater scaup A.'marila S T I P
Lesser scaup A. af fin is S T I P
Oldsquaw Z-1angula hyenmalis S T I P
Black scoter Melanittaffnigr S T I
Surf scoter M. perspicillata s T I P
White-winged scoter iKi dglandi s T I P
Common goldeneye -5epaa clangula S T I P
Buffilehead B. albeola S T I P
Hooded merganser Lophodytes cucullatus S T I P
Common merganser Mergus merganser S T I P
Red-breasted merganser M. serrator s T I P
Ruddy duck 0 xy'u-ra j'-a ma i cen s is T I P
Turkey vulture -Cathartes aura S T I P
Osprey Pandion haliaetus S T I P
Bald eagle HaiaTTeetus leucocephalus S T I P
Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus .5 T I P
Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus S T I P
Cooper's hawk A. cooperii S T I P
Northern goshawk 'A. ~ifTs S T I P
Red-shouldered hawk Buiteo lineatus S T I P
Broad-winged hawk B. platypterus s T I P
Red-tailed hawk B. jamaicensis S T I P
Rough-legged hawk B . lagopus, s T I P
Golden eagle Aqu1la chrFysaetos T I P
American kestrel Fa-1co sparverius S T I P
Merlin F. co umbarius T I P
Peregrine falcon 77 peregrinus T I P
Gyrfalcon F. rusticolus' T
Gray partridge Perdix perdix T
Ring-necked pheasant P1hasianus -c-lchicus S T I P
Ruffed grouse Bonasa umbellus S T I
Wild turkey Meleagris -ga-l-Topavo S
Clapper rail Rallus longirostris p
King rail R. elegans s T I P
Virginia rail -R'. limicola S T I P
Sora _~5rzana carolina S T I P
Common moorhen Gallinula chloropus s T I P
American coot Ful1ica americana S T I P
Sandhill crane Grus canae'n'sis T
Black-bellied plover Pluvialis squatarola T P

A5-2

APPENDIX 5 (continued)

Common Name Scientific Components
Name S T I P

Lesser golden plover P. dominica T
Semipalmated plover Charadrius semipalmatus S T P
Killdeer C. vociferus S T I P
Greater yellowlegs linga melanoleuca S T I P
Lesser yellowlegs T. flavipes S T I P
Solitary sandpiper T-inga solitaria s T P
Willet Catoptrophorus semipalmatus P
Spotted sandpiper Actitis macularia S T I P
Upland sandpiper Bartramia longicauda I P
Ruddy turnstone Arenaria interpres T P
Red knot Calidris canutus P
Sanderling C. alba T P
Semipalmated sandpiper T.. pusillus T P
Western sandpiper C. mauri P
Least sandpiper C. minutilla s T P
White-rumped sandpiper .. fuscicollis P
Pectoral sandpiper T. melanotos S T P
Dunlin CT alpina S T P
Short-billed dowitcher C-mnodromus griseus T. P
Long-billed dowitcher L. scolopaceus P
Common snipe Capella gallinago S T I P
American woodcock Philohela minor S T I P
Red-necked phalarope Lobipes lobatus I P
Laughing gull Larus atricilla T I P
Bonaparte's gull L. philadelphia S T I P
Ring-billed gull L. delawarensis S T I P
Herring gull L. argentatus S T I P
Iceland gull L. gaucoides s I
Glaucous gull L. hyperboreus s I P
Great black-backed gull L. marinus S T I P
Black-legged kittiwake Rissa tridactyla T
Caspian tern Sterna caspia T P
Royal tern S. maximus S P
Sandwich tern 7. sandvicensis P
Roseate tern 3S dougallii P
Common tern S. hirundo s I I P
Forster's tern S. forsteri P
Least tern S. albifrons P
Sooty tern S fuscata S I P
Black tern Fi-lidonias niger S T I P
Rock dove Columbia livia S T I P

A5-3

APPENDIX 5 (continued)

Common Name Scientific Components
Name S T I P

Mourning dove Zenaida macroura S T I P
Monk parakeet Myiopsitta monachus P
Black-billed cuckoo Coccyzas erythrophthalmus S T I P
Yellow-billed cuckoo C. americanus s T I P
Common barn owl Tyto alba s
Eastern screech owl Otus asio s T I P
Great horned owl Bubo virginianus S T I
Snowy owl Nyctea scandiaca P
Barred owl Strix varia T I
Long-eared owl Asio otus T P
Short-eared owl A, flammeus s P
Northern saw-whet owl Aegolius acadicus s T
Common nighthawk Chordeiles minor S T I P
Whip-poor-will Caprimulgus vociferus s T I P
Chimney swift Chaetura pelagica S T I P
Ruby-throated hummingbird Archilochus colubris S T I P
Belted kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon S T I P
Red-headed woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus T
Red-bellied woodpecker M. carolinus s T P
Yellow-bellied sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius S T I P
Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens S T I P
Hairy woodpecker P. villosus S T I P
Black-backed three-toed
woodpecker P. arcticus T
Northern flicker Colaptes auratus S T I P
Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus S T I P
Olive-sided flycatcher Contopus borealis T I
Eastern wood pewee C. virens S T I P
Yellow-bellied flycatchePr Eii-pidon'ax flaviventris T I
Acadian flycatcher E. virescens T
Alder flycatcher E. alnorum
Willow flycatcher E. traillii S T I P
Least flycatcher F minimus S T I P
Eastern phoebe Sjyornis phoebe S T I P
Great crested flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus S T I P
Western kingbird Tyrannus verticalis T
Eastern kingbird T. tyrannus S T I P
Horned lark EFemophila alpestris s T I P
Purple martin Progne subis s T I P
Tree swallow IrTdoprocne bicolor S T I P
Northern rough-winged swallow Stelgidopteryx ruficollis s T I P

A5-4

APPENDIX 5 (continued)

Common Name Scientific Components
Name S T I P

Bank swallow Riparia riparia -S T I
Cliff swallow Petrocheildon pyrrhonota s T I P
Barn swallow Hirundo rustica S T I P
Blue jay Cyactta FiTstata S T I P
American crow Corvus brachynhynchos S T I P
Fish crow C. os-sifragus S T I P
Common raven C. corax T I
Black-capped chickadee Parus atricapillus S T I P
Boreal chickadee Phusonicus S T P
Tufted titmouse P.-'bicolor S T I P
Red-breasted nuthatch Sitta cana~densis s T I P
White-breased nuthatch S. carolinensis S T I P
Brown creeper Certhia familiaris S T I P
Carolina wren Throyothorus Tu-dovicianus S T P
House wren Troglodytes aedon S T I P
Winter wren T7T 5trold tes .S T I P
Sedge marsh wren tUstothorus platensis P
Marsh wren C. palustris S T I P
Gol~den-crowned kinglet Regulus satrapa S T I P
Ruby-crowned kinglet. R. calendula S T I P
Blue-gray gnatcatcher PoliToptlTacaerulea S T I P
Northern wheatear Oenanthe oenanthe T
Eastern bluebird 3 Ta-- T -a-ial- is S T I P
Veery Catharus fuscescens S T I P
Gray-cheeked thrush C. minima T I
Swainson's thrush C. ustulata s T I P
Hermit thrush 'G. guttata s T I P
Wood thrush C. mustei ~a S T I P
American robin Tuirdus migratorius S T I P
Gray catbird DGumetella carolinensis S T I P
Northern mockingbird Muspyglottos S T I P
Brown thrasher Toxostoma rufurn S T I P
Water pipit Anthus S:-pi no]letta s T I P
Cedar waxwing Bgombycilla cedrorum S T I P
Northern shrike Lanius excubitor T p
Loggerhead shrike L . ludovicianus T P
European starling 3-turnus vulgaris S T I P
White-eyed vireo VTF7ogriseu-s T I
Solitary vireo V. Solitru s T I P
Yellow-throated vireo V. flavifrons S T I P
Warbling vireo V. gilvus S T P

A5-5

APPENDIX 5 (continued)

Common Name Scientific Components
Name S T I P

Philadelphia vireo V. philadelphicus T P
Red-eyed vireo V. Olivaceus S T I P
Blue-winged warbler Vermivora pinus S T I P
Golden-winged warbler V. chrysoptera T I
Tennessee warbler V. peregrina S T I P
Orange-crowned warbler V. celata T P
Nashville warbler V. ruficapilla T I P
Northern parula Parula americana T I P
Yellow warbler Dedroica petechia S T I P
Chestnut-sized warbler D. pensylvanica S T I P
Magnolia warbler U. magnolia s T I P
Cape May warbler D. tigrina S T I
Black-throated blue warbler U. caerulescens s T I P
Yellow-rumped warbler D. coronata S T I P
Black-throated green warbler b. virens S T I P
Blackburnian warbler U. fusca s T I P
Yellow-throated warbler U. dominica T
Pine warbler U. pinus s T I
Prairie warbler D. iscolor S T I P
Palm warbler D. palmarum
Bay-breasted warbler D. castanea s T I P
Blackpoll warbler . striata . S T I P
Cerulean warbler D. cerulea s T I P
Black-and-white warbler lnniotilta varia S T I P
American redstart Setophaga ruticilla S T I P
Prothonotary warbler Protonotaria citrea S T P
Worm-eating warbler Helmitheros vermivorus T I P
Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapillus S T I P
Northern waterthrush S. noveboracensis s T I P
Louisiana waterthrush S. motacilla s T I P
Kentucky warbler Opovovnis formosus T P
Connecticut warbler . agilis T
Mourning warbler O. philadelphia T
Common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas S T I P
Hooded warbler Wilsonia citrina T I P
Wilson's warbler W. pusilla S T I P
Canada warbler W. canadensis S T I P
Yellow-breasted chat Tcteria virens T I P
Summer tanager Piranga rubra T
Scarlet tanager P. olivacea S T I P
Northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis S T I P

A5-6

APPENDIX 5 (continued)

Common Name Scientific *Components
Name 5 TFIT

Rose-breasted grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus S T I P
Blue grosbeak Guiraca caerulea T
Indigo bunting FaseiFna cyanea S T I P
Rufous-sided towhee Pipilo eryth-ro-phthalmus S T I P
American tree sparrow Spizella arborea S T I P
Chipping sparrow 5-.-PasserTna S T I P
Field sparrow S~. pusilla S T I P
Vesper sparrow Pooecetes gramineus T I P
Lark sparrow Chondestes grammacus P
Savannah sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis S T I P
Grasshopper sparrow Ammodramus savannarum T P
Henslow's sparrow A. henslo~wii T
Sharp-tailed sparrow Wmopz adacuta T P
Seaside sparrow A. maritima P
Fox sparrow passerella iliaca s T I P
Song sparrow Melospiza-rmiTloda S T I P
Lincoln's sparrow M. lincolnii s T I P
Swamp sparrow -ff. georgiana S T I P
White-throated sparrow Yonotrichia albicollis S T I P
White-crowned sparrow Z. leucophrys S T I P
Dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis S T I P
Lapland longspur Calcarius lapponicus T
Chestnut-collard langspur C. ornatus T
Snow bunting 7lectrophenax nivalis S T I P
Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivoruis S T I P
Red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus S T I P
Eastern meadowlark Strella magna S T I P
Yellow-headed blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus T
Rusty blackbird E haus carolina S T I P
Common grackle Quiscaius quiscula S T I P
Brown-headed cowbird MoIoth~rus' aler S T I P
Orchard oriole Icterus spuiuFis S T P
Northern oriole I. galbula S T I P
Pine grosbeak PFinicola enucleator T I P
Purpl ej finch Carpodacus purpureus S T I P
House finch C. mexicanus S T P
Red crossbill -coxila curvirostra T
White-winged crossbill L. leucoptera T I
Common redpoll cati ammea S T I P
Hoary redpoll A. hornemanni T
Pine siskin '~arduelis pinus S T I P
American goldfinch C..tristis S T I P

A5-7

APPENDIX 5 (continued)

Common Name Scientific Components
Name S T I P

Evening grosbeak Hesperiphona vespertina S T I P
House sparrow Passer demesticus S T I P

a) Sources of data:

Stockport: Lawrence Biegel, Arlene Brown, Tom Brown, William Cook, Kate Durham,
Elizabeth Grace, Richard Guthrie, Nancy Kern and Erik Kiviat. S (upper case)
indicates sight record of the site; s (lower case) indicates species likely to
occur based on records from nearby areas.

Tivoli: from Kiviat (1978) (includes a few species recorded from areas near,
but not within, Sanctuary boundaries); and Richard Gunthrie

Iona: from Orth (1965).

Piermont: Robert Deed, includes species of land birds observed within about 50
yards of the landward edge of the marsh (landward boundary of the Sanctuary
site); all sight records. Sedge marsh wren datum from Joseph Hickey field
notes.

4,~~~~~A5-8

A5-8

Appendix 6

MAMMALS REPORTED IN OR NEAR THE

HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

APPENDIX 6

MAMMALS REPORTED IN OR NEAR
THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

Verified reports for the Stockport, Tivoli, Iona, and Piermont Sanctuary
components are indicated by upper case S, T, I, P; lower case s, t, i, indicate
unverified reports considered reliable, or verified reports outside the
Sanctuary boundary. A species listed with no site annotation is known from the
Hudson River corridor but has not been reported from the Sanctuary. Names
follow: Jones, J. Knox, Jr,, Dilford C. Carter and Hugh H. Genoways. 1979.
Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 1979. Occasional
Papers, the Museum of Texas Technical University 62, 17 p. Compiled by Erik
Kiviat, 1984.

Common Name Scientific Components
Name S T I P

Virginia opossum Didelphis virginiana T i
Masked shrew Sorex cinereus
Smokey shrew Sorex fumeus
Short-tailed shrew Blarina brlevicauda T I
Hairy-tailed mole Parascalops breweri s
Eastern mole Scalopus aquaticus
Star-nosed mole CZondylura cristata T
Little brown bat Myotis lucifugus T
Keen's bat Myotis keenii T
Indiana bat Myot sodalis
Eastern pipistrelle Pipistrellus subflavus
Big brown bat Eptesicus fuscus t
Red bat Lasiurus boreTis t
Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus
Eastern cottontail Sylilaguflordanus S T i P
Eastern chipmunk Tamias striatus T I P
Woodchuck Marmota monax S T i
Gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis S T I p
Red squirrel Tamiasciurus hudsonicus s T I
Southern flying squirrel Glaucomys volans T I
Beaver Castor canadensis (a) T I P
Deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus
White-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopus (b) S T I
Eastern woodrat Neotoma floridana i p
Southern red-backed vole Clethrionomys gapperi
Meadow vole Microtus pennsylvanicus T I
Woodland vole (pine vole) Microtus pinetorum
Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus S T I P
Southern bog lemming Synaptomys cooperi

A6-1

Common Name Scientific Components
Name ST I P

Norway rat Rattus norvegicus T i
House mouse Mus musculus t
Meadow jumping mouse Zapus hudsonius T
Woodland jumping mouse Napaeozapus insignis
Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum t
Common dolphin Delphinus delphis (c) t
Harbor porpoise Phocoena phocoena (d)
Coyote Canis latrans
Red fox Vulpes vulpes S T I
Gray fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus T
Black bear Ursus americanus t P
Raccoon Procyon lotor S T I P
Fisher Martes pennanti i
Ermine (short-tailed weasel) Mustela erminea t
Long-tailed weasel Mustela frenata T
Mink Mustela vison T I
Striped skunk Mephitis mephitis T I
River otter Lutra canadensis (g) T I
Habor seal Phoca vitulina (h)
Bobcat Felis rufus t
White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus S T I P

Data from: Jack Focht (I), Michael Hardy (P), Erik Kiviat (all sites),
William T. Maple (S, P), John Orth (in Clarke and Rapuano 1976) (I), Jasz
Rodziewicz (T, I), Robert Speiser (I).

a Very rarely seen in Hudson River and not resident.
b Deer mouse rare in Hudson Valley; (Peromyscus found in sanctuary assumed
to be white-footed mouse).
c Reports of this species in the Hudson River are limited to the 1930s and
may have involved a single school.
d No Hudson River reports from the current century; probably extirpated.
e Rare individuals; not resident along Hudson River.
f Single old report.
g Very rare in Hudson River.
h Verified occasionally elsewhere in Hudson River; 1984 reports of a seal in
the Cold Spring to Stony Point reach assumed to be this species.

A6-2

Appendix 7

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AMONG FIVE

NEW YORK STATE AGENCIES

APPENDIX 7

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

This Memorandum serves as an expression of intent among five
parties-in-interest hereinafter called the Signatories: the New York
State Department of Environmental Conservation (Lead Agency), the New
York State Office of General Services, the Palisades Interstate Park
Commission, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic
Preservation, and the New York State Department of State.

Wi tnesseth:

WHEREAS, New York State has received a grant from the United States
Secretary of Commerce for acquisition, development and operation of
certain portions of the Hudson River Estuary (see Appendix A) as the
Hudson River National Estuarine Sanctuary (the Sanctuary), and

WHEREAS, the purpose of such grant is to create new opportunities
for coordinated Hudson River research and public education (the
Program), and

WHEREAS, such Program has wide public support, and

WHEREAS, the Signatories have already evidenced support for such
Program through the formation in 1981 of a Hudson River Estuarine
Sanctuary Steering Committee which has met regularly to coordinate the
efforts of the Signatories in establishing the Sanctuary,

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits- to be
derived from implementing this Program, the Signatories agree to the
following:

1. The lands described in Appendix A are hereby designated as the
Hudson River Estuarine Sanctuary.

2. There shall be a Management Plan for the Sanctuary, which
Management Plan shall provide a framework for conducting research and
educational programs. The Management Plan shall be developed by the
Estuarinie Sanctuary staff and reviewed by the Steering Committee. Such
Management Plan shall set forth compatible and non-compatible uses for
each site in the Sanctuary. The Management Plan shall not take effect-
except upon unanimous approval of the Signatories. The Management Plan
shall be reviewed annually and shall be revised as needed, but no
revisions shall take place except upon unanimous approval of the
Signatories.

3. No land ownership and management prerogatives in the Sanctuary
shall be changed except as specified in the Management Plan.

4. The purpose of the Program is the protection of such lands for
use as a natural field laboratory in which to gather data and make
studies of the natural and human processes occurring within the Hudson
River estuary.

A7-1

5. The Signatories shall adhere to the Management Plan in their
land ownership and management activities within the Sanctuary.

6. Multiple uses of such lands are encouraged to the extent such
uses are compatible with the Program and its purpose as expressed in the
Management Plan. These areas are being managed to facilitate ecological
research and education. Uses and/or levels of use, which are not
compatible with the use of the Sanctuary as a natural field laboratory,
shall be prohibited or limited to the greatest extent feasible, by the
agency having jurisdiction.

7. Management Structure

a. There shall be a Sanctuary Steering Committee, comprised
of one member from each of the Signatories, which shall review the
recommendations of Sanctuary Advisory Committees and shall submit them
to the agencies having jurisdiction over lands in the Sanctuary. The
Steering Committee shall review the Management Plan annually and shall
advise the Lead Agency regarding its implementation. The chairman of
each Sanctuary Advisory Committee and a representative of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall serve as non-voting,
ex-officio representatives to the Steering Committee.

b. There -shall be three Sanctuary Advisory Committees
appointed by the Lead Agency, in consultation with the Steering
Committ~ee, which shall meet regularly to discuss the progress of the
Sanctuary and to make recommendations to the Steering Committee.

c. The Lead Agency shall implement the Program by hiring and
directing Estuarine Sanctuary staff, supervise and coordinate
implementation of the provisions of the Management Plan, and by
receiving and acting upon-the recommendations of the Steering Committee.

d. The Estuarine Sanctuary staff, hired by and reporting to
the Lead Agency, is immediately responsible for Program coordination
with the agencies having jurisdiction over respective Sanctuary sites.

B. No projects shall be carried out on Sanctuary lands without the
approval of the agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Such agency
shall maintain all facilities built on its lands in furtherance of a
project, and shall cooperate with Sanctuary staff in carrying out the
Program.

9. The Lead Agency and the Department of State shall confer
regularly to ensure coordination between the Estuarine Sanctuary Program
and the Coastal Management Program.

10. This flemorandum shall not be construed so as to preclude
additional transfers of property among the Signatories,,or to preclude
additions of appropriate lands to the Estuarine Sanctuary.

A7-2

ll. This Memorandum shall continue in effect in perpetuity;
additional Signatories may join by unanimous approval of existing
Signatories, and the Memorandum may be amended or terminated by majority
vote of the Signatories at any time. Nothing in this Memorandum shall,
however, preclude the unilateral withdrawal of any of the-Signatories.
In such latter eventuality is understood that the lands of such
withdrawing Signatory would be dedesignated from the Sanctuary, and it
is understood that the federal Office of Management and Budget will take
appropriate action with respect to grant funds as may be indicated by
its regulations.

~-~~~~ ~Signed,

Depar n nQ rIonmenal Conservation

By / 4gAC

Date Titl (2t 1
/ ,. J

Offi Gene Servi es

Date 9134 *2, Title ' 'z
.//! ' 'M -

Palisades Interstate Park Commission

x , - By , , ' . ! ~ tr'"
Date C' # Title -: .. ' ,- ....

Office :of Parks, Recreation and Historic
Preservatipn

By ,~/4J't< /h * /Aer-_

Date i t I
I / I'.

Department of State I,'

By ...Y' a . '

Date 3 . Title . .... ...; i, .;.'-jj .� :;ai .

A7-3

APPENDIX A

to the Memorandum of Understanding

OGS ~~~~~Stockport Flats Area, approximate property
1 Fordham Point ownerships. The Consolidated Rail Cara. corridor
I ~~~~~is not shown.
(Adopted from USGS Hudson North, N.Y. quadrangle.)
12
OGS 1

- -- I ~~~~~~~~~Rt. 9.J
r-Gays F t. 9
I point

OPRHP 1 4: ~~~~~Columbiavil le tiainlec

II ~~~~~Middle

II~~~~~rudExeto

Isa

Main Marsh ~~~one mile

I ~~~~~~~~~~~Proposed sanctuary boundary

Flats 17 - ownership boundary

Hook

A7-4

Tivoli

r r

'] DE C

) Island 8 DE \
1

\! OGS OGS

Cruger I l a

o ns Sourth oy

fOGS
A7-5
;/DECBC

Crger Islounda - y

Ao-5

Electric Corp. corridor

(Adapted from USGS Saugerties, N.Y. quadrngle.)

Troalside ~~~~~~~N
Museums

Bear Mtn. ~, .~

Doodletown 1P
Bight

0~~~~~~~~~ Round island

one mile
one kcm

Proposed sanctuary boundary Iona Island Marsh Area
(Adopted from USGS Peekcskill, N.Y. quadrangle.)
Ownership all PIPC

A7-6

NX~~~~~~~~~~~~

Piermont -

PIPc

State Park

Sneden~~~~~~~~

-~~~xx x -T-nn Ga -ipn Co

Lamont easement
Doherty
Geological
Observatory one mile
one km

Piermont Marsh Area.
(Adopted from UJSGS Nyack, N.Y. - N.J. quadrangle.]

A7-7'

Appendix.8

EXISTING JURISDICTIONS IN THE HUDSON RIVER

NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

APPENDIX 8

EXISTING JURISDICTIONS IN THE HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

AGENCY JURISDICTION LEGISLATION (if any)

Federal:

Army Corps of Engineers dredging, filling, Sec. 404 of Clean Water
dumping, hazards to Act, Rivers & Harbors Act,
navigation, wetlands Section 10, as amended
in river and larger
tributaries

Dept. of Commerce: oversight of National Coastal Zone Management
Office of Coastal Estuarine Sanctuary Act, as amended
Zone Management Program

National Marine marine fishery resources, Fishing Conservation and
Fisheries Service endangered species, Management Act of 1976,
marine mammals Fish and Wildlife Coor-dination,
Act of 1934, Endangered
Species Act of 1972,
Commercial Fisheries Research
and Development Act of 1964,
Anadromous Fish Conservation
Act of 1965, all as amended

Sea Grant Preogram research, education, Public Law 94461
and conservation in
the coastal zone

Dept. of the Interior, migratory birds, endan- Migratory Bird Treaty
Fish & Wildlife gered species, marine Act, Endangered Species
Service mammals, interstate Conservation Act, Lacey
commerce of organisms Act, Marine Mammal
Protection Act, all as
amended

National Park Service Natl. Register of His- Historic Preservation
toric Places, Natl. Act, as amended
Natural Landmarks, Natl.
Trust for Historic
Preservation

Dept. of Transportation: maintenance of navigable 14 USC 2, Primary
Coast Guard waters, shipping, small Responsibilities of the
craft, aids to naviga- Coast Guard
tion search and rescue

A8-1

AGENCY JURISDICTION LEGISLATION (if any)

Federal (cont.):

Environmental Protection air and water quality Clean Air Act, Clean
Agency guidelines, solid waste Water Act, TOSCA, RCRA,
and toxic materials FIFRA, Superfund, NEPA,
guidelines, spills all as amended
noise pollution, PCB
reclamation demonstration,
environmental review of
projects

Nuclear Regulatory oversight over operation Energy Reorgani-
Commission Indian Point power plants zation Act

Consolidated Rail right-of-way improvement
Corporation and maintenance

State:

Department of Environ- lead agency in Hudson River Environmental
mental Conservation Estuarine Sanctuary Program, Conservation Law
landowner at Tivoli Bays & and regulations
Piermont, fish & game, pro- promulgated
tected animals, collecting thereunder (as amended)
and marking licenses, including the Fish &
freshwater and tidal wet- Wildlife Law, Water
lands, water and air quality Resources Law,
solid water & toxic substances Freshwater Wetlands
pesticides, mining, scenic Act, Tidal Wetlands
areas, project review. The Act, Resource
Heritage Task Force for Conservation and
the Hudson River Valley, Inc. Recovery Act, and
Wild, Scenic, and
Recreational River
System, State
Envi ronmental
Quality Act

Department of Commerce tourism developement Tourist Promotion
Act

Department of Health food quality (e.g., fish) Public Health
Law

Department of State cooperating agency in Waterfront
Hudson River Estuarine Revitalization
Sanctuary Program, & Coastal Re-
coastal management sources Act

A8-2

AGENCY JURISDICTION LEGISLATION

State.(cont.):

Department of navigation channel, Transportation
Transportation spoil disposal, roads, Law
bridges

Office of General cooperating agency in Public Lands Law,
Services Hudson River Estuarine Art. 6
Sanctuary Program, landowner
at Stockport and Tivoli

Office of Parks, ' cooperating agency in Parks, Recreation,
Recreation and Hudson River Estuarine and Historic
Historic Sanctuary Program, land- Preservation Law, as
Preservation owner at Stockport, park amended
land management, historic
preservation, promotion
and regulation of pleasure
boati ng

Palisades Interstate cooperating ageny in Hudson Parks, Recreation and
Parks Commission River Estuarine Sanctuary and Historic Preservation
Program, landowner at Law, as amended
Piermont & Iona, management
of the interstate park

State Energy Office energy policy Energy Law, as amended
Public Service energy facility Public Service Law
siting and regulations

County:

Departments of Health facility safety and General Municipal Law,
sanitation, water supply, NYCR&R, as amended
landfills, pest control laws of various counties

Environmental Manage- advice to legislatures, General Municipal Law
ment Councils natural resource inven- (as above)
tories, public information

Highway Departments county roads (as above)

A8- 3

AGENCY JURISDICTION LEGISLATION

County (cont.):

Planning Departments review of Federal spending (as above)
(A-95), planning recommen-
dations and coordination of
planning activities

Town:

Planning, Zoning, and planning, zoning, advice (as above)
Conservation Boards & to town boards on environ- also town ordinances
Commissions mental issues, natural including zoning
resource inventories, ordinances*
conformance to existing
laws

Highway Departments maintenance of town roads
and town landfills

Village:

Piermont owner of pier, portion of See under Town
marsh within its jurisdiction

Tivoli small portion of Tivoli Bay See under Town
within its jurisdiction

*Zoning classifications for the four Proposed Estuarine Sanctuary areas:

Piermont - Village of Piermont - - - Use by special permit from Village
Town of Orangetown - - - Residential, 2 acre minimum

Iona - wholly within the Palisades Interstate Park

Tivoli - Town of Red Hook - - - Agricultural (uplands), Land Conservation
(wetlands and Cruger Island)
Village of Tivoli

Stockport - no zoning ordinances

A8-4

- ~~~~~Appendix 9

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN

BARD COLLEGE AND

THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION

IIEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

This Memorandum of Understanding between Bard College and the New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation outlines the
establishment of a cooperative effort to develop and enhance the
existing research capability of Bard College at the Ecology Field
Station, entered Into as of the 19th day of July, 1983.

Witnesseth:

WHEREAS, New York State through the Department of Environmental
Conservation has received a grant for the acquisition, development, and
operation of sanctuaries in the Hudson River as part of the National
Estuarine Sanctuary System, and

WHEREAS, a major goal of this program is to facilitate research
that will result in improved knowledge of the human and natural
processes occurring within the estuary, and

WHEREAS, Bard College is a well established and involved
institution with research interests in and physical facilities on the
Hudson Estuary in close proximity to the estuary at Tivoli, and

WHEREAS, the Estuarine Sanctuary Program would be .facilitated
greatly by establishment of a science center and $115,000 has been
budgeted to achieve research capability, and

WHEREAS, a cooperative effort between Bard College and the
Department of Environmental Conservation in supporting research
capability would be cost effective,

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be
gained by this cooperative effort, Bard College and the Department of
Environmental Conservation agree as follows:

1. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and
Bard College will confer on the modifications to be-made to the existing
Ecology Field Station and will mutually agree to the final construction
plans.

2. The Department agrees to make available up to $115,.000 to
complete the agreed to capital modifications the Field Station,
contingent upon receipt of monies in this amount from the Federal
government.

3. All modifications to the Field Station are to be carried out by
Bard College personnel during the Acquisition Grant Period (September
30, 1982, to September 30, 1983). If Bard College cannot meet this
deadline, they will notify the Department by August 1, 1983. The
Department will request an extension-for the Acquisition Grant from the
Grants and Loans Operations Branch of the Office of Coastal Zone
Management.

A9-1

4. Bard College will continue to be responsible for maintenance of
the Field Station after construction is completed.

5. Research equipment purchased for the Hudson River Estuarine
Sanctuary Program using funds provided through a Federal grant shall be
subject to the provisions of Office of Management and Budget Circular
A-102 concerning- the use and disposition of property funded by the
Federal Government, which document is incorporated by reference into
this Memorandum of Understanding. Research equipment donated through
the Estuarine Sanctuaries Program by private parties will be under the
ownership and control of the Department. Use of facilities and
equipment at the Field Station will be shared by both parties as well as
by approved outside scientists in furthering estuarine-related research.

6. In the unlikely event the Sanctuary is terminated through an
action initiated by the Fe~deral government for reasons attributable to
the Department, the Department, but not Bard College would be
responsible to reimburse the Federal government according to 01MB
Circular A-102 for the value of the unexpired life of the property.
(improvements and equipment);. However, it should be noted that the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has the capacity to
permit the recipient (Bard College) to keep the improvements, if the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration so decides.

7. In the unlikely event that Bard College chooses to withdraw
from this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING for good cause and cease to offer
the availability of the Field Station research facilities for Estuarine
'Sanctuary research purposes., then Bard College will -reimburse the value
of the unexpired life of the property (improvements) depreciated
according to 0MB Circular A-102 to the Departme nt; and it is further
understood that the Department remains ultimately responsible 'for
reimbursing the Federal government, if the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration should request such reimbursement, for the
value of the unexpired life of the property (improvements).

8. In the unlikely event that the Department for good cause
chooses to withdraw from this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, the
Department is responsible for reimbursement to the Federal government
according to 0MB Circular A-102 for the value of the unexpired life of
the property (improvements), if the national Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration should request such reimbursement. If the Department
terminates this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING because Bard College does
not make the research facility available for Estuarine Sanctuary
research work and/or fails to meet other conditions of the MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING, then Bard College will reimburse the Department for the
value of the unexpired life of the property (improvements). However, if
the Department terminates this MEMORA14DUM OF UNDERSTANDING for reasons
other than those cited above, Bard College will not be liable to make
reimbursement to the Department for the value of the life of the
unexpired property (improvements).

A9-2

9, Tere ill e an Ecology Field Station--Sanctuary Management
Committee responsible for recommending approval of outside scientists
who wish to perform Sanctuary research at the Field Station. The
committee will be made up of one representative each from the
Department, Bard College, and the Adviso-ry Committee of the Sanctuary on
which the research will be conducted, and non-voting, ex-office
representatives f-rom the Estuarine Sanctuaries Steering Committee, the
Federal Office of Coastal Zone Management, add Bard College
admini stration.

10. This memorandum shall1 remain in effect so long as the
Sanctuary remains in operation as a designated Sanctuary under the
Federal program, and may be amended with the approval of both parties.
Either Bard College or the Department may terminate this agreement with
60 days written notice.,

11. For a period of'three years after the termination of this
M4EMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, the State, the-Federal Government, the-
comptroller General of the United States, or any duly authorized
representatives shall have access, at such reasonable times. and for such
reasonable periods as may be mutually agreed upon, to any of the
recipient's books, documents, papers and records directly to the subject
matter of this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING for the purpose of making
audits, examinations, excerpts or transcripts.

12. During the term of this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, Bard
College agrees to increase insurance on the Field Station against damage
-or loss by the amount expended pursuant to paragraph 2 above, and
further agrees that all insurance monies received as a result of damage
or loss of the Field Station be applied to the restoration of the Field
Station. Bard College is not responsible for maintenance or insurance
of the Department's equipment housed at the Ecology Field-Station.

IN WITiNESS 'WHEREOF, the parties have caused this MEMO0RANIDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING to be signed the day and year first above written.
BARD COLLEGE

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF
EN4VI RONMENTAL CONSERVATION

A9- 3

A I . COLLEGE ACKNOWLEDGMENT

STATE OF NEW YORK )
) SS:
COUNTY OF DUTCHESS )

Qnth J4 day.qf /'rt , 1983, before me personally came
%,r~,q-~ 8 qo ,q , to me known, who, being by me duly
sworn, did depo e and say that he rgsidef in the County of
New York; that he is the '.tr',vve V-,e - of BARD COLLEGE, the
institution described in and which executed the foregoing instrument;
that he knows the seal of said institution; that the seal affixed to
said instrunent J spch corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order
of the Co- O -ius of said. institution and that he signed his name
thereto by like order.

/ Noa,~tar Pub ic
HOWARD
Notary Public, State of New York
Qualified in Dutchess County
Commission Expires March 30,19j,'
4709656

A9-4

Appendix 10

CONSISTENCY WITH THE OTHER STATE AND FEDERAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

Appendix 10

CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER STATE AND FEDERAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

Programs and activities of the Hudson River National
Estuarine Sanctuary are consistent wit~h the goals of other
government programs on the Hudson River and particularly at the
Sanctuary sites, and insofar as is reasonable, consistent with
private sector initiatives in estuarine research and education
on the Hudson. The jurisdictions of various government agencies
are listed in Appendix 8.

New York State Coastal Management Program:

The role of the New York State Coastal Management Program in
maintaining environmental quality at and near the Sanctuary sites
is discussed in the Administration section of this plan.

National Natural Landmark's Program:

Iona Island is a designated National Natural Landmark under
the National Park Service National Natural Landmarks Program
(NNLP). Tivoli Bays has been nominated and is under con-
sideration for Landmark status. This program selects sites that
best represent defined types of biological and geological
features and the Landmarks are considered to have special educa-
tional and scientific value. NNLP management guidelines stipu-
late that the site be protected and maintained in a natural
condition.

Mid-Hudson Historic Shorelands State~ Scenic Area:

The Mid-Hudson Historic Shorelands State Scenic Area
stretches from Hyde Park to Germantown on the east bank only of
the Hudson River (Figure 15), and includes the Tivoli Bays
Estuarine Sanctuary site in its entirety. The Scenic'Area was
the first of its kind to be designated by the Commissioner of
The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). The manage-
ment plan prepared by the Hudson River Shorelands Task Force
under contract to the Heritage Task Force for the Hudson River
Valley emphasizes guidelines for public works activities, and
voluntary cooperation by private landowners. The Plan's emphasis
on historic and aesthetic preservation is compatible with the
goals of the National Estuarine Sanctuary program and vice versa.

Federal "118-Mile" Historic District

The Mid-Hudson Historic Shorelands State Scenic Area
approximately covers the "118-mile" federal Historic District
and includes the Tivoli Bays Estuarine Sanctuary site. All

AlO-l

FIGURE 15
ALBINY

SCALE-

/ GERMANTW

RHINEBECK

~~~~~INt Shoreland
Ic District )

HYDE PARK

NEW1

structures in the Historic District are automatically on the
Federal and State Registers of Historic Places, whether they have
been specifically studied or not. This provision affects the
derelict buildings on the Ward Manor property (eastern portion of
Sanctuary site) and the contrived "ruins" on South Cruger Island.
Permission is required from the appropriate State and Federal
historic preservation agencies before modifying any of these,
structures. It is intended, in DEC's management plan for Tivoli,
that the South Cruger Island ruins be left as is, and that all of
the buildings and ruins on the upland areas be razed excepting
only the ca. 1930 masonry and wood barn - the barn will be saved
only if a financially self-maintaining use can be found for it.
Although the barn appears to be structurally sound, the roof of
the main section is in serious disrepair and all of the windows
and doors are damaged; furthermore, all of the utilities and fur-
nishings were stripped from the building before the property was
acquired by DEC. The building appears to be somewhat unusual
architecturally, but it is not clear to what extent it is
historically valuable.

Experimental Ecological Reserve Program:

The Tivoli Bays - Bard College Field Station Experimental
Ecological Reserve (EER) program is a private initiative of the
Institute of Ecology at Butler University, partly funded by the
National Science Foundation and national in scope. Several
sites, in public or semi-public ownership represent specific
types of ecosystems that are in a relatively natural condition
and are considered suitable for long-term ecological research.
The Tivoli Bays component (state-owned portion-s) was designated an
EER in 1981. The designation does not bring any direct funding,
nor does it impose scientific management requirements. The
prestige of the program should help in attracting research scien-
tists and grant money, much as does the National Estuarine
Sanctuary program. The Tivoli Bays EER is conterminous with the
Estuarine Sanctuary site and with the state ownership.

Although some EERs (e.g., Hubbard Brook Experimental
Forest in New Hampshire) are well known for large-scale manipula-
tive ecological experiments, such experiments are neither
desirable at Tivoli nor consistent with Estuarine Sanctuary
guidelines. DEC will not issue permits for any manipulative pro-
cedures that would damage the site- for future scientific use,
adversely affect rare or endangere'd species or communities,
or seriously affect the aesthetic or recreational values of the
site. However, DEC will entertain proposals for small-scale
manipulations if these procedures are designed to yield valuable
scientific knowledge and if serious damage would not be likely to
result. Experiments that involve small-scale transplantation of
marsh plants between different sites within the Tivoli Bays area
or fertilization of small plots for example, might be acceptable.

A10-2

Areas outside the Estuarine Sanctuary (with the permission of
the owners and the appropriate government permits) could be used
for other types of manipulative experiments to assess the effects
or values of various management practices or simulate the impacts
of various natural or artificial stresses to tidal wetlands. The
effects could then be compared with results from control or
reference sites on Estuarine Sanctuary sites. Procedures of this
type might be useful to evaluate appropriate management tech-
niques for the Estuarine Sanctuary sites.

Apart from manipulative experiments, EERs are also sites for
long-term monitoring and measurement of biotic and abiotic com-
ponents of ecosystems, and for comparisons of patterns and pro-
cesses in relatively undisturbed natural areas and those more
highly modified by human activities. This mission is shared by
the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program.

Tivoli Bays Unique Area:

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
prepared a draft management plan for the Tivoli Bays Unique Area.
This land is managed to protect the freshwater tidal wetlands,
perpetuate fish and wildlife resources, and provide the public
with opportunities for research, education, and recreation.
Multiple use management has traditionally accommodated hunting,
fishing, trapping, research, bird watching and hiking at this
site. More opportunity for research and education will be pro-
vided through the construction of trails and provision of better
access.

State Park Regulations

The Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation
publishes statewide rules and regulations for all activities on
state lands, including those which-are regulated, prohibited, or
allowed only under permit. Provisions of this management plan
are compatible with these rules and regulations.

Hudson River Islands State Park, Gays Point - Stockport
Middleground Management Plan:

The Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation
manages the Hudson River islands State Park to protect natural
resources and provide opportunities for low intensity public
recreation, including fishing and hiking. Plans to improve
public access and provide primitive facilities are compatible
with sanctuary management.

A10-3

Appendix 11

MANAGEMENT NEEDS OF SELECTED INDIVIDUAL SPECIES

Appendix 5

MANAGEMENT NEEDS OF SELECTED INDIVIDUAL SPECIES

Rare and Endangered Plants:

Nuttall's micranthemum (Micranthenuum micranthemoides). This spe-
cies has not been seen in many years, but is believed to survive at
Tivoli Bays. This species was last known from either the tidal
wetland of the mouth of Stony Creek or between the northern part of
Cruger Island and the railroad ("North Sinus"). Both of these areas
should be stringently protected from disturbance (other rare plant
species also occur in these types of environments). Because Nuttall's
micranthemum is unquestionably the most endangered organism known from
the Sanctuary, special priority should be given to arranging searches
by competent botanists, particularly in September when it is most
easily spotted.

Heartleaf plantain (Plantago cordata). This species occurs as a
large population at Stockport and a small but stable population at
Tivoli. This species requires shade from trees, reasonable freedom
from mechanical disturbance, and good water quality. Bank erosion
could eventually be a problem at Stockport, particularly on the west
shore of Unnamed Island. Boat landing and any use other than research
should be prohibited.

Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern Animal Species:

Shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum). No specific manage-
ment practices are required now. Water quality should be maintained.
Information is needed on the extent to which shortnose sturgeon enter
the Sanctuary sites (shallows and wetland creeks) and why.

Jefferson salamander (Ambystoma jeffersonianum), spotted sala-
mander (A. maculatum), marbled salamander (A. opacum), and wood frog
(Rana syTvatica) are species that depend on-intermittent woodland
pools for reproduction and larval development, and occur or could
occur at the Sanctuary sites. There is concern in New York that spe-
cies breeding in acidic woodland pools could be affected by acidic
precipitation. All intermittent or shallow permanent pools in forest
or open habitats will be protected from pollution, filling, dumping or
draining, or other stresses, on the Sanctuary sites.

The northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens) has been found at the
Stockport site and near the Tivoi'- site. The species is rare in the
Hudson Valley and deserves study.

Spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata). State "Special Concern." This
species is rare at Stockport and Tivoli. No specific management
required.

All-I

The bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenberqi), State Endangered, and the
mud turtle (Kinosternon subrubrum), State Threatened, could be found at
the Sanctuary sites. The general provisions of this plan protect any
potential habitat. If found, special provisions for protection of
these species will be instituted.

Hognose snake (Heterodon platyrhinos), black racer (Coluber
constrictor), ribbon snake (Thamnophis sauritus) and smooth green
snake (Opheodrys vernalis) are all species that appear to have
declined in numbers in the Hudson Valley in the last decade or two,
and are found or could be found at the Sanctaury sites. Further study
is required to see if specific management is needed.

Common loon (Gavia immer), double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax
auritus), common tern (Sterna hirundo), black tern (Chlidonias niger),
common raven (Corvus corax). All these species are migrants or
visitants withi noiinown threat in the Sanctuary sites. No specific
management required.

Least bittern (Ixobrychus exilis). State "Special Concern." In
the Hudson River estuary, requires extensive stands of cattail for
nesting. Health of cattail stands should be protected.

Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii) and red-shouldered hawk (Buteo
lineatus). Not known to nest on the Sanctuary sites now, but poten-
tial nesting habitat is present. If either species nests in the
future, appropriate management actions can be taken, possibly
including closed areas around the nest sites during breeding season.

Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). Very rare visitant now. It has
been suggested that the -fields of Iona Island might provide wintering
habitat. If golden eagles ever use the Sanctuary regularly,
appropriate measures can be taken to reduce habitat disturbance.

Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). Occasional visitor at any
time of the year at any site, most often seen at times of partial ice
cover. In the last few years, bald eagles have more-or-less regularly
roosted on Iona Island in winter. Iona Island is closed to the public
December-February to reduce potential disturbance.

Marsh hawk (Circus cyaneus). Migrant, no known nesting at
Sanctuary sites. If nesting occurs, appropriate measures can be
taken. ,

Osprey (Pandion haliaetus). Regular and persistent visitor in
spring, irregular or occasional in summer and fall. Unverified
reports of nesting. Further study is required to tell if erection of
artificial nest platforms is justified, or if any existing or proposed
Sanctuary activities might disturb osprey, especially during the
spring.

All-2

Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus). Extremely rare visitor in
recent years. Study opipotential use of the Sanctuary sites is
needed.

It may be appropriate to erect nesting structures for the eastern
bluebird (Sialia sialis) in areas where such structures would not be
esthetically intrusive, but only with predator-proof boxes.

Grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), Henslow's sparrow (A.
henslowii), and vesper sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus). State "SpeciaT
Concern." potential nesting habitat may exist at Stockport, Tivoli,
and Iona, in field and oldfield type habitats. Study is required to
see if these secretive birds are present, or if these secretive birds
are present, or if manipulation of dry field habitats (e.g., some type
of mowing or burning) could attract them to nest.

Other Species:

A small population of the Baltimore butterfly (Baltimore
checkerspot) (Euphydrayas phaeton) in the tidal swamp at the Cruger
Island Neck (Tivoli) depends upon its larval food plant turtlehead
(Chelone glabra) for survival. Turtleheads grow on the shoulders of
the CrugerIsland Road causeway, in the tidal swamp at this site,
along the upland margins of North Bay, and probably in the mouth of
Stony Creek. Care should be taken not to disturb the turtlehead
during any road maintenance at the Neck. Turtlehead and the Baltimore
could also occur at Stockport.

The American brook lamprey (Lampetra lamottei), a nonparasitic
species, has been found in the mouth of the Saw Kill, Tivoli South
Bay. Further study is needed, and this area should be protected from
disturbance (fishing is not harmful). Central mudminnow (Umbra limi)
occurs in two ponds on Cruger Island (Tivoli) just above high tiei-d
level, and possibly elsewhere in the Sanctuary. These ponds should be
maintained in a natural condition, and not cleared of snags or
dredged. The outlet (spillway) of the North Pond is formed by an old
road which should be maintained at its present level during trail
maintenance operations. (Spotted salamanders also breed in these
ponds.) The eastern mudminnow (U. pygmaea) occurs in Sparkill Creek;
further study is needed to see if management is required. Both mud-
minnows are rare in the Hudson Valley although common elsewhere in
their ranges. Northern hogsucker (Hupentelium nigricans) has been
found in the mouth of the Saw Kill and in the mouth of Stockport Creek
it needs further study to determine the significance of the Hudson
River estuary population. Records of yellow bullhead (Ictalurus
natalis), three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and blue-
spotted sunfish (Enneacanthus gloriosus) from Iona Island Marsh
require verification; these may be regionally rare species.

All-3

The cerulean warbler is a species of special interest to bird-
watchers; it breeds at Tivoli in some years and can be found at
the other sanctuary sites. Patches of forest with large hardwoods
near water or wetland appear to be the requirement for this species.

Evidence of nesting by great blue heron and black-crowned night
heron should be watched for. If these species nest, disturbance
buffer zones may be indicated.

Other marsh-nesting birds (American bittern, king rail, Virginia
rail, sora, common gallinule, long-billed marsh wren, short-billed
marsh wren) require particular plant communities, usually graminoids,
for breeding on the Hudson. Maintenance of healthy cattail stands and
other graminoid communities is needed to preserve habitat for these
birds. -

Muskrat populations have been low in the Sanctuary
in the last few years. Further study is recommended to identify any
special problems affecting muskrats in the Hudson estuary apart from
normal population fluctuations.

Study is needed to determine whether PCB affects the survival of
mink and river otter in the Hudson River estuary.

Extensive, nearly monospecific stands of narrowleaf cattail (Typha
angustifolia), wild rice (Zizania aquatica), and water-celery
(Vallisneria americana) are valuable communities characteristic of
high quality freshwater tidal marshes in the Virginian biogeographic
region. These stands need study to determine what factors control
their structure. Meanwhile, mechanical disturbance (e.g., over-
trampling, construction, fill, channelization) in these community
types should be avoided to reduce the risk of invasion by introduced
species of vascular plants.

Certain species of introduced vascular plants may require manage-
ment to prevent their becoming overabundant and replacing native vege-
tation in special habitat types. Among the species that are of most
concern are purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), water-chestnut
(Trapa natans), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), turasian water-
milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), -ellT's honeysuckle (Lonicera bella),
Japanese honeysuckle (L. japonica), and yellow iris (Iris
pseudacorus). The best protection is to prevent all unnecessary
mechanical disturbance to natural soil and vegetation. Water-chestnut
(Trapa natans) is too abundant in Tivoli South Bay for control at the
present time. However, in North Bay and possibly at Stockport it could
be easily controlled by hand-pulling in early July before seeds
mature. This can be done at North Bay working at low tide by canoe.

All-4

Appendix 12

SELECTED OFF-SITE TIDAL WETLANDS

Appendix 12

SELECTED OFF-SITE TIDAL WETLANDS

Selected off-site tidal'wetlands, USGS sheets, believed
ownership, and possible guides. The "possible guides" are per-
sons familiar with the wetlands, not necessarily scientists, and
who may not have been contacted in this capacity. Refer to
Figure 16 for locations.

1. Schodack complex

USGS Delmar, Ravena; Jim Dunn

2. Papscanee Creek Complex

USGS Delmar, East Greenbush; largely private?; Paul F.
Connor, Robert McLean

3. Mill Creek Swamp

USGS Ravena; private?

4o West Flats

USGS Hudson North; private?; Robert McLean, Everett Nack

5. Hudson Bays (North Bay, South Bay)

USGS Hudson North, Hudson South; Doug Carlson, Erik
Kiviat, Joe Murell, Everett Nack

6. Rogers Island Complex

.USGS Hudson South; largely public; Everett Nack

7. Catskill - Ramshorn - Livingston Complex

USGS Hudson South; private (incl. National Audubon
Society); Everett Nack, Jim Rod

8. Inbocht Bay - Duck Cove

USGS Cementon; largely private?; Everett Nack

9. Saugerties marshes

USGS Saugerties; largely public?

10.o Kingston Point - Sleightsburg marshes

USGS Kingston east; largel'y' public?; Paul Huth, Al Brayton

A12-l

11. Vanderburgh Cove

USGS Kingston East, Hyde Park; largely public; Bill
Jacobs, Erik Kiviat

small wetlands between Vanderburgh Cove and Tivoli Bays,
east shore only

USGS Kingston East, Hyde Park; largely private; Erik Kiviat

12. Fishkill Creek

USGS West Point; private?

13. Moodna Marsh - Cornwall Bay

USGS Cornwall; private & public; Paul Jeheber, Beth
Yanuck-Platt

14. Constitution Island Marsh

West Point; private & public; Edward H. Buckley, Walter
S. Newman, Samuel Ristich, Jim Rod, Robert H. Boyle,
Michael Selender

15. Con Hook Marsh

USGS Peekskill; private; Edward H. Buckley, Walter S.
Newman, Samuel Ristich

16. Manitou Marsh

USGS Peekskill; private?; John Cronin, Edward H.
Buckley, Samuel Ristich

17. Peekskill Bay complex

USGS Peekskill; public (& private?); Edward H. Buckley

18. Grassy Point - Haverstraw - Minisceongo complex

USGS Haverstraw; private; Edward H. Buckley, Jack Focht,
Tom Corette, Zipporah Fleischer, Alan Gussow, Samuel
Ristich

19. Croton Point - Croton River complex

USGS Haverstraw, Ossining; mostly public; Robert H.
Boyle, Edward H. Buckley, Samuel Ristich, Michael
Selender, John Muenzinger

A12-2

FIGURE 16

LOCATIONS OF SELECTED OFF-SITE
TIDAL WETLANDS NEAR HUDSON RIVER
NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY SITES
AND SELECTED MUNICIPALITIES.

* TROY
ALBANY0
* RENSSELAER

1 CASTLETON
2
3

COXSACKIEI * STOCKPORT FLATS

CATSKILL@ HUDSON

* TIVOLI BAYS

KINGSTON
)1 1

POUGHKEEPSIE

NEWBURGH �* 0 BEACON
13 12
WEST POINTe 14
15 )).16
IONA ISLAND MARSH-* 17
PEEKSKILL
18
HAVERSTRAW 19

TARRYTOWN
PIERMONT MARSH*

YONKERS

MANHATTAN

A12-3

Appendix 13

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND LITERATURE CITED

Appendix 13

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND LITERATURE CITED

The annotations S (Stockport), T (Tivoli), I (Iona), and P (Piermont)
indicate references specifically treating the indicated sites.

Adams, Ao G. 1981. The Hudson: A Guidebook to the River. State
University of New York Press, Albany. 424 p. S,T,I,P.

Aldrich, J. W. 1979. A brief account of Cruger's Island, Magdalen
Island, the North Bays and adjoining uplands. Year Book Dutchess
County Historical Society 64:72-86. T.

Anonymous. nd. Bear Mountain Trailside Museums, Nature Trails & Zoo.
Trailside Museums, Bear Mountain NY. 10 p. brochure. I.

. 1968. The Bear Mountain Trailside Museums and Nature Trails.
Palisades Interstate Park Commission. Trailside Museums, Bear
Mountain NY. 10 p. brochure. I.

o 1975. Hudson River Recreationway: Master Development Plan for
Gays Point, Stockport Middle Ground Islands and Middle Ground
Flats. New York Office of Parks and Recreation. 7 p. unpubl.
rept. S.

. 1977. Bear Mountain Trailside Museums, Nature Trails & Zoo.
Palisades Interstate Park Commission. Bear Mountain State Park,
NY. 12 p. brochure. I.

. 1979. Two river island parksites planned. Hudson Register-Star,
19 July: Al, back page. S.

. 1980a. The Tivoli Bays. Hudson River Heritage News 5(2):4-5. T.

. 1980b. Bear Mountain State Park. Iona Island - Program of
utilization. New York State Office of Parks and Recreation. 26 p.
unpubl. rept. I.

. 1981. Tidal marsh saved. Land Lines (Lower Hudson Chap. Nature
Conservancy), spring:1.P.

Arbib, R. S., Jr., O.S. Pettingill, Jr. and S. H. Spofford. 1966.
Enjoying birds around New York City. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.
171 p. T, I, P.

Averill, S. P., R. R. Pardi, W. S. Newman and R. J. Dineen. nd. Late
Wisconsin - Holocene history of the lower Hudson region: new evi-
dence from the Hackensack and Hudson River valleys. Pp. 160-186 in
Warren Manspeizer, ed. Field Studies of New Jersey Geology and
Guide to Field Trips: 52nd Annual Meeting of the New York State
Geological Association. I, P.

A13-l

Barbour, Spider. 1982. Nature walk. Tidal gardens. Woodstock Times,
5 Aug.: 32-33. T.

Barlow, M. 1981. Company giving pier to Piermont. Bird's-eye view of
Piermont Marsh. West Nyack Journal-News, 4 Jan.:Al, back p. P.

. 1982. Piermont studies sewage link to silt buildup near pier.
Journal News (Rockland Co.), 18 April:1. P.

Barron, James. 1983. Eagles once again gathering in the New York area.
New York Times, 4 April. 1.

Beauchamp, W. M. 1900. Aboriginal occupation of New York. New York
State Museum Bulletin 32, 187 p. S, T, I.

Boyle, R. H. 1969. The Hudson River; a natural and unnatural history.
W. W. Norton, NY. 304 p. S, T, P.

Breisch, A., et al. 1981. Final report. The development and
evaluation of a system for rating fish and wildlife habitats in
the coastal zone of New York State (Task 1.1B). N.Y.S. DEC
FW-P172 (2/81). New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation. S, T, I, P.

Brown, D. 1981. Tivoli Bay to be kept for nature. Albany Times-Union,
2 Aug. T.

Buckley, E. H. and S. S. Ristich. 1976. Distribution of rooted vegeta-
tion in the brackish marshes and shallows of the Hudson River
Estuary. Paper 20, 30 p. in Fourth Symposium on Hudson River
Ecology. Hudson River Environmental Society, Bronx NY.

Burmeister, W. F. 1974. Appalachian waters 2: the Hudson River and its
tributaries. Apalachian Books, Oakton VA. 488 p. S, T, I, P.

Burt, Charles E. 1931. A report on some amphibians and reptiles from
New York and New Jersey. Journal of the Washington Academy of
Sciences 21(9):198-203. I, P.

Butler, J. R., E. S. Custer, Jr., and W. A. White. 1975. Potential
geological Natural Landmarks Piedmont Region, eastern United
States. Dept. Geology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill,
NC. 240 p. P.

Carr, W. H. 1940. Birds of Bear Mountain Park; A check-list. Bear
Mountain Trailside Museum, 31 p. I.

Cinquemani, L. J., W. S. Newman, J. A. Sperling, L. F. Marcus and
R. R. Pardi. In press. Holocene sea level changes and vertical
movements along the East Coast of the United States: a preliminary
report. (Dept. Earth and Environmental Sciences, Queens College,
Flushing, NY.) I.

Clarke & Rapuano, Inc. 1976. Iona Island Bear Mountain State Park
entrance road environmental assessment design feasibility.
Palisades Interstate Park Commission. 90 p. & maps. I.

A13-2

Coastal Zone Management Study Program. 1977a. Final report on
Geographic Areas of Particular Concern (GAPC) recommendations.
(Task 7.3). New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation, Division of Land Resources and Forest Management,
Coastal Zone Management Study Program, Albany, NY. S, T, I, P.

1977bo Final report on significant coastal related fish and
wildlife habitats of New York State (Task 7.3). New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Land
Resources and Forest Management, Coastal Zone Management Study
Program, Albany, NY. 5, T, I, P.

Connor, J. 1978. Osprey trapped by water chestnut. Auk 95:610-611. T.

Craig, R. J., M. W. Klemens, and S. S. Craig. 1980. The northeastern
range limit of the eastern mud turtle Kinosternon s. subrubrum
(Lacepede). Journal of Herpetology 14(3):295-297.

Dalmas, J. 1980. Eye on Iona. Of an isolated island in the Hudson.
West Nyack Journal-News, 12 Octo:3M-4M. I.

Deed, R. F. 1959. Birds of Rockland County and the Hudson Highlands.
44 p. Rockland Audubon Society, West Nyack, NY. I, P.

. 1968. Supplement to Birds of Rockland County and the Hudson
Highlands. 27 p. Rockland Audubon Society, West Nyack, NY. I, P.

Birds of Rockland County N.Y. and the Hudson Highlands, 1844-
1976. 220 p.

1976. Rockland County's on-again, off-again resting places for
shorebirds. Linnaean News-Letter 29(7):1-3. I, P.

. 1981a. The endless change in a local checklist. Linnaean
News-Letter 34(7-8):1-2. I, P.

o 1981b. The Piermont Pier and marsh. The Observer 34(2):1-2. P.

Dovel, W. L. 1981. The Endangered Shortnose Sturgeon of the Hudson
Estuary; Its Life History and Vulnerability to the Activities
of Man. Final Report. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Contract No. DE-AC 39-79 RC-10074. 139 pages.

Drennan, S. R. 1981. Where to Find Birds in New York State; the Top
500 Sites. Syracuse University Press, 499p. S, T, I, P.

Duch, T. M. 1976. Aspects of the feeding habits of Viviparus
georgianus. Nautilus 90(1):7-10. T.

Dutchess County Environmental Management Council Significant Areas
Committee. In press. Significant areas. In Natural Resources of
Dutchess County, New York. Dutchess County Department of
Planning, Poughkeepsie, NY. T.

A13-3

Faulds, C. A., ed. 1969. The Piermont study. Rockland Community
College (Suffern, NY) and the Hudson River Valley Commission.
np. P.

Ferren, W. R., Jr., and A. E. Schuyler. 1980. Intertidal vascular
plants of river systems near Philadelphia. Proceedings of the
Academy of Natural Sciencies of Philadelphia 132:86-120.

Fitzpatrick, J. F., Jr. and J. F. Pickett, Sr. 1980. A new crawfish
of the genus Orconectes from eastern New York (Decapoda: Cambaridae).
Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 93:373-382. S.

Foley, D. D. and R. W. Taber. 1951. Lower Hudson waterfowl
investigation. Pittman-Robertson project 47-R. New York State
Conservation Department, Albany, NY. 796 p. S, T, I, P.

Funk, 1967. The Hudson; archeological sites. A report on archeological
resources in the Hudson River Valley. State of New York Hudson
River Valley Commission, Iona Island, Bear Mountain, NY. 19 p.
S, T, I.

. 1976. Recent contributions to Hudson Valley prehistory. New York
State Museum Memoir 2, 325 p. S, T, I.

Garlinghouse, H. M. 1976. William Seward Treator (1860-1930).
Nautilus 90(4);148-149. T.

Gleason, H. A. and A. Cronquist.'1963. Manual of vascular plants of
northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. Van Nostrand,
Princeton, NJ. 861 p.

Goldhammer, A. 1981. Canoeing the Hudson's marshes. Clearwater
Navigator 12(6):4-6.

Goldring, W. 1943. Geology of the Coxsackie quadrangle, New York; with
a chapter on glacial geology by J. H. Cook. New York State Museum
Bulletin 322, 374 p. & maps. S.

Griscom, L. 1933. The birds of Dutchess County, New York. Transactions
of the Linnaean Society of New York 3, 184 p. T.

Hall, A. J. 1978. The Hudson: "That river's alive". National
Geographic 153(1):62-89. T, P.

Hardy, Michael and Erik Kiviat. 1982. Hudson River Estuarine
Sanctuary. Slide-and-tape presentation, 12 minutes. Hudsonia
Limited, Annandale, NY. S, T, I, P.

Hickey, J. J. 1969. Peregrine falcon populations; their biology and
decline. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. 596 p. I, P.

A13-4

Hill, Norman P. 1968. Ammospiza caudacuta caudacuta (Gmelin);
Eastern sharp-tailed sparrow. P. 795-812 in Arthur Cleveland
Bent (Oliver Austin). Life Histories of North American Cardinals,
Grosbeaks, Buntings, Towhees, Finches, Sparrows, and Allies.
Dover Publications, New York. P.

Hudson River Research Council. 1980. Results of Hudson River Field
Weeks April 1977 and August 1978. Water temeprature, conductivity,
dissolved oxygen, and total suspended solids at spring high flow
and summer low flow. HRRC, Bronx, NY. 50 p. S, T, P.

Jorgenson, S. E. 1980. Some international values of wetlands. Parks
5(3):5-8.

Key, M. C. 1981. Fulvous whistling duck. Wings over Dutchess 22(5):8.
T.

Kipp, Dennis. 1981. Toxic metals, PCB's found in Tivoli Bay.
Poughkeepsie Journal, 26 November. T.

Kiviat, E. 1973. Down along the cove. Bard Review, spring:21-23. T.

. 1974. A fresh-water tidal marsh on the Hudson, Tivoli North
Bay. Paper 14, 33 p. in Third Symposium on Hudson River Ecology.
Hudson River Environmental Society, Bronx, NY. T.

. 1976a. Goldenclub, a threatened plant in the tidal Hudson River.
Paper 21, 13 p. in Fourth Symposium on Hudson River Ecology.
Hudson River Env'ionmental Society, Bronx, NY. S, T.

. 1976bo (Notes on Hudson River Tidal Marsh Workshop, 2 June 1976
at Bard College, sponsored by Hudson River Environmental Society).
Currents (HRES) 6(2): 1, (3): 3-4.

* 1977. Reptiles and amphibians of the Hudson Estuary. North River
Navigator (Hudson River Sloop Clearwater) 8(9):4-5.

. 1978. Hudson River east bank natural areas, Clermont to Norrie.
Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA 115 p. T.

. 1979a. Hudson Estuary shore zone: ecology and management.
Master's thesis (unpubl.), State University College at New Paltz,
NYo 159 p. T, I, P. ,

. 1979b. Cattail marshes, birds, good water, and people. Dutchess
Life 8:13. T.

. 1980a. A Hudson River tidemarsh snapping turtle population.
Transactions of the Northeast section, Wildlife Society
37:158-158. T.

A13-5

� 1980b. Low tides and turtle trails. Hudson Valley 9(5):27-29. T.

1981a. Hudson River Estuary shore zone annotated natural history
bibliography with index. Scenic Hudson, Poughkeepsie, NY. 76 p.
S, T, I, P.

. 1981b. Profile of the Hudson. Hudson Valley 9(9):24-28. T, I, P.

1981c. Profile of the Hudson: the air. Hudson Valley 9(12):39-
41. T.

1981d. A Hudson river fresh - tidal marsh: management planning.
Restoration and Management Notes 1(1): 14-15. T.

. 1982. Eastern bluebird remote natural nest sites. Kingbird
32(1): 6-8.1

Kiviat, Erik. 1983. The river's land; seeking sanctuary in tidal
marshes. Hudson Valley Living 1(1):13-14. S, T, I, P.

. In press. Natural history of the fish fauna of Tivoli Bays. In
C. L. Smith and R. Klauda, eds. Hudson River Fisheries Symposium.
Hudson River Environmental Society, Bronx, NY. T.

. and F. Dunwell. 1981. The marshes stand watch. Hudson Valley
10(5):33-37. 5, T, I, P.

Kiviat, Erik and J. Stapleton. 1983. Bufo americanus (American Toad)
Estuarine habitat. Herpetological Review 14(2):46. I.

Kiviat, Erik, et al. 1982. Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Hudson River Estuarine Sanctuary. U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, DC. 343 p. S, T, I, P.

Lehr, J. H. 1967a. The plants of Iona Island; a field report.
Sarracenia (New York Botanical Garden) 11:31-34. P.

Mack, Arthur C. 1909. The Palisades of the Hudson. Palisade Press,
Edgewater NJ. P.

Malcolm Pirnie Engineers. 1981. Draft Environmental Impact Statement
and 10-year management plan. Hudson River Federal Channel main-
tenance dredging. For Department of the Army, New York District,
Corps of Engineers. S.

McKeon, W. Ca. 1974. An appraisal of the current status of marshes
or wetland areas along the Hudson River. Hudson River
Environmental Society, Bronx, NY. 7 p. unpubl. ms. T, I, P.

McVaugh, R. 1958. Flora of the Columbia County area, New York. New
York State Museum and Science Service Bulletins 360-360A. 433 p.
S, T.

A13-6

Merrill, T. B. 1981. Piermont double donation "worth a celebration'.
Clearwater Navigator (Hudson River Sloop Clearwater), April:3. P.

Meyer, Go 1980. the ecological perspective. Piermont Newsletter
14(1):7. P.

Mitchell, R. S., C. J. Sheviak and J. K. Dean. 1980. Rare and
endangered vascular plant species in New York State. New York
State Museum, Albany. 38 p. T, I.

Muenscher, W. C. 1935. Aquatic vegetation of the Mohawk watershed.
Supplement, 24th Annual Report of the New York State Conservation
Department, Biological Survey 9 (Mohawk-Hudson Watershed):228-249.
S.

. 1937. Aquatic vegetation of the lower Hudson area. Supplement,
26th Annual Report of the New York Conservation Department,
Biological Survey 11 (Lower Hudson Watershed):231-248. S, T, I, P.

Muenscher, W. C. 1944. Aquatic plants of the United States. Cornell
University Press, Ithaca, NY. 374 p. T.

Mylod, J. 1969. Biography of a river; the people and legends of the
Hudson Valley. Bonanza Books, New York. 244 p. I.

Newman, W. S. 1973. Iona Island - the last fifteen millenia.
Communicator (Journal of the New York State Outdoor Education
Association) 5(1):28-30. I.

D. H. Thurber, H. S. Zeiss, A. Rokach and L. Musich. 1969.
Late Quaternary geology of the Hudson LRiver estuary: a
preliminary report. Transactions of the New York Academy of
Science, Series 2, 31(5):548-570. I.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and United
States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1978. Hudson River fish and
wildlife report; Hudson River Level B Study. NYS DEC, Albany, NY.

Nicholas, G. Lo 1900. The swallow-tailed kite at Piermont, New York.
Auk 17:386. P.

Nordstrom, C. 1973. Frontier elements in a Hudson River village.
Kennikat Press, Port Washington, NY. P.

Oceanic Society. 1980. Hudson River Fishery Management Program Study.
A Report to the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation.

Olsen, C. R., H. J. Simpson and R. M. Trier. 1981. Plutonium,
radiocesium and radiocobalt in sediments of the Hudson River
estuary. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 55: 377-392. P.

A13-7

Olsen, C. R., H. J. Simpson, T. H. Peng, R. F. Bopp, and R. M. Trier.
1981. Sediment mixing and accumulation rate effects on
radionuclide depth profiles in Hudson estuary sediments.
Journal of Geographical Research 86 (CII):11020-11028. P.

(Orth, J. C.) (Ca. 1965.) Vertebrates of Iona Island and vicinity.
Bear Mountain State Park Trailside Museums. 17 p. I.

Orth, John C. nd. The Iona Island Marsh. Unpublished report.
Trailside Museums, Bear Mountain State Park. I.

Palisades Interstate Park Commission. 1929. Palisades Interstate Park;
a history of its origin and development, 1900-1929. PIPC, Bear
Mountain, NY. I, P.

Palisades Interstate Park Commission. 1947. Palisades Interstate
Park, 1929-1947. PIPC, Bear Mountain, NY. I, P.

Pink, E. and 0. Waterman. 1967. Birds of Dutchess County 1933-1964.
Ralph T. Waterman Bird Club, Dutchess County, NY. 124 p. T.

and . 1980. Birds of Dutchess County 1964-1979. Ralph T.
Waterman Bird Club, Dutchess County, NY. 93 p. T.

Platt, Jerry L. 1978. Geographic distribution. Malaclemys terrapin
terrapin (northern diamondback terrapin). Herpetological Review
9(3):107. I.

Raymond, Parish, Pine and Weiner, Inc., and A. Gussow. 1979. Hudson
River Valley Study. New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation, New Paltz, NY. 180 p. T, I, P.

Ritchie, W. A. 1958. An introduction to Hudson Valley prehistory.
New York State Museum Science Service Bulletin 367, 112 p. T.

Rockland County Planning Board. 1974. Piermont community development
goals and Erie Pier assessment. Piermont Planning Commission,
Village Hall, Piermont NY. 22 p. P.

Romero, A. B., et al. 1977. Where to bird in Dutchess County. Ralph T.
Waterman Bird Club, Moores Mills, Pleasant Valley, NY. T.

Rosenthal, M. 1977. Monitoring prevents creek deterioration. New
York State Association of Conservation Councils 3(4):4-5. T.

. 1977-present. The Sawkill Newsletter. Bard College, Annandale-
on-Hudson, NY. Monthly.

Rubinstein, L. C. 1969. Historic resources of the Hudson: a prelimi-
nary inventory January 1969. Hudson River Valley Commission.
96 p. I.

Saratoga Capital District State Park and Recreation Commission. nd.
Hudson River Islands State Park. Master Plan. Gays Point.
Stockport Middle Ground. Middle Ground Flats. Unpubl. rept.

A13-8

Schuyler, A. E. 1975. Scirpus cylindricus: an ecologically restricted
eastern North American tuberous bulrush. Bartonia (43):29-37. I, P.

Sheppard, J. D. 1976. Valuation of the Hudson River Fishery
Resources: Past, Present and Future. New York State Department
of Environmental Conseryation 51 p.

Smith, D. G. 1981. A note on the morphological variability of
Orconectes kinderhookensis (Decapoda: Cambaridae) from the
Hudson River system in New York. Journal of Crustacean Biology
1(3):389-391. S.

Smith, S. J., J. A. Wilcox, and E. M. Reilly, Jr. (1967?). The Hudson;
biological resources. A report on areas of biological significance
in the Hudson River Valley. State of New York Hudson River Valley
Commission, Iona Island, Bear Mountain, NY. 43 p. S, T, I, P.

Stapleton, J. and E. Kiviat. 1979. Rights of birds and rights of way;
vegetation management on a railroad causeway and its effects on
breeding birds. American Birds 33(1):7-10. T.

Stone, W. B., E. Kiviat and S. Butkas. 1980. Toxicants in snapping
turtles. New York Fish and Game Journal 27(1):39-50. T, I, P.

Svenson, H. K. 1935. Plants from the estuary of the Hudson River.
Torreya 35(5):117-125. T.

Tate, J., Jr. 1981. The Blue List for 1981. American Birds 35(1): 3-10.

Tauber, G., ed. 1976. Conference on the enhancement of environmental
research in the Hudson Basin region. 16-18 June 1976 at Bard
College. Report of the Bard Conference: Proceedings of a
Conference on the enhancement of environmental research in the
Hudson Basin region. State of New York Department of Environmenal
Conservation, Albany, NY. 63 p.

Taylor, N. 1915. Flora of the vicinity of New York. Memoirs of the
New York Botanical Garden.

Teator, W. S. 1890. Collecting land shells in eastern New York.
Nautilus 3(10):109-110; (11):129-132. T.

Toole, Robert M. M980. Inventory and evaluation - landscape
architecture in the Sixteen Mile and Clermont Estates Historic
Districts. Report to the Hudson River Shorelands Task Force,
Red Hook, NY. T.

Torrey, R. H. 1931. Trip of August 2. Torreya 31:153-154. I (plants)
. 1932. Lichen observations on winter walks of the Club.
Torreya 32:45-47. I.

A13-9

Webster, W., ed. 1971. New York walk book. 4th ed. With an intro-
duction to the geology of the region by C. J. Schuberth.
New York - New Jersey Trail Conference and American Geographical
Society. Doubleday/Natural History Press, Garden City, NY.
326 p. & 23 maps. I, P.

Weinstein, L. H., ed. 1977. An atlas of the biologic resources of the
Hudson Estuary. Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research,
Yonkers (now Ithaca), NY. 105 p. I, P.

Wilkie, R. W. The illustrated Hudson River Pilot; being a smallcraft
sailor's pictorial guide to the tidewater Hudson Albany to
New York. Three City Press, Albany, NY. 183 p. S, T, I, P.

Williams, Lena. 1982. The Hudson is shaping up as the river of big
return. New York Times, 26 September. I, P.

Williams, S. C., H. J. Simpson, C. R. Olsen and R. F. Bopp. 1978.
Sources of heavy metals in sediments of the Hudson River.
Marine Chemistry 6(1978):195-213. P.

Worley, I. A. 1974. Natural landmark brief. Iona Island Marsh,
Rockland-County, New York. unpubl. rept.

A13-10

Appendix 14

CURRENT RESEARCH AND MONITORING ACTIVITIES

ON THE HUDSON RIVER ESTUARY

Appendix"14

CURRENT RESEARCH AND MONITORING ACTIVITIES ON THE HUDSON RIVER
ESTUARY.

PHYSICAL:

Tide stage - measured by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) at a few
Hudson River estuaries, although none are at Sanctuary sites.

Freshwater discharge - measured by USGS at Green Island (Troy).

Water Quality - sampled by New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC) at several Hudson River sta-
tions, including one at Bear Mountain.

Weather - measured by cooperating weather stations located close
to estuary at several locations including Albany, Kingston and
West Point. There are no official stations on sites; Bard
College has an unofficial weather station at the Field Station.

Air quality - sampled by DEC or New York State Department of
Health (DOH) at a few selected locations near the Hudson River.

Seismic activity - monitored at Lamont-Doherty Geological
Observatory where research is conducted on activity of Ramapo
Fault.

Geology - mapped at NYS Museum by R. Dineen and others.

Soils - mapped by U.S. Soil Conservation Service, counties are
at various stages of completion (see Secor et al.).

Marsh geology - data from sediment borings including microfossil
analyses. Much work done at lona and Piermont, and also at other
wetlands including Tivoli, by Walter S. Newman (Newman et al.
1969 and unpublished data.

Survey and analysis of sediments in Tivoli Bays - Wesley Krawiec
(planned).

Sedimentation history of marshes - Walter S. Newman (particularly
Iona Island, Piermont; also Tivoli and others).

A14-1

ENDANGERED SPECIES:

Distribution and abundance of rare or endangered species of ani-
mals and plants - monitored (only the rarest species) by DEC
(animals) and the NYS Museum (vascular plants).

FLORA:

Vegetation mapping: conducted on several lower-estuary marshes
including Piermont and Iona for several years in 1970s by E. H.
Buckley (in preparation for publication).

Semiquantitative study of vegetation patterns in Tivoli Bays and
several smaller marshes on the Dutchess County shore - Kiviat
(1978) and unpublished data.

Flora of Iona Island Marsh - Jack Focht (in progress).

Vegetation and breeding birds of a small fresh-tidal swamp near
Tivoli Bays (Mudder Kill) - Erik Kiviat (report in preparation).

Natural history and ecology of purple loosestrife - mostly
Tivoli,.including vegetational role, relation to muskrats, and
associated insect communities (E. Kiviat, Nancy Zeising).

Annual surveys of the extent of water-chestnut infestations -
DEC.

FISH:

Fish occurrence records - maintained by C. Lavett Smith (American
Museum of Natural History) and C. Allen Beebe (Dutchess County
Community College Norrie Point Lab).

Fisheries surveys and stock assessments - conducted by DEC and by
the electrical utilities on a limited basis.

Commercial fishing - monitored by DEC.

REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS:

Reptile and amphibian occurrence records - maintained by Erik
Kiviat (Hudsonia).

A14-2

Snapping turtle population in Tivoli North Bay - tagged turtles
studied 1972-75 are still monitored by E. Kiviat.

BIRDS:

Bird occurrence records - maintained by Alan Devoe Bird Club
(Stockport and Columbia Co. shores), Ralph T. Waterman Bird Club
(Tivoli and Dutchess Co. shores), Rockland Audubon Society (Iona
and Piermont, Rockland Co. shores), and other programs.

"May Census" bird counts - Dutchess County-wide, annual mid-May
one-day survey; Tivoli Bays covered .by E. Kiviat et al. (Ralph
T. Waterman Bird Club). Published summaries not broken down by
areas but unpublished data available.

Mid-winter aerial waterfowl surveys - flown annually in January
by DEC statewide, including a route along the Hudson River.

Christmas bird counts - coordinated by National Audubon Society
at a few localities along the Hudson River (count totals are not
broken down into estuarine and non-estuarine habitats).

New York State Breeding Bird Atlas - a 5-year project (begun in
1980) to map the distribution of breeding bird species in 5-km
square blocks over entire state. Coverage includes Piermont,
Iona, and Tivoli.

Breeding birds and vegetation of the railroad right-of-way at
Tivoli North Bay and Vanderburgh Cove (Dutchess Co.) - surveyed
yearly on two 2-km strips (starting in 1978) by Jim Stapleton
and Erik Kiviat of Hudsoniao

Behavioral ecology of long-billed marsh wren - observations made
at Tivoli North Bay by Donal Kroodsma (unpublished data).

MAMMALS:

Muskrat lodge counts - made from 1980 oblique color airphotos, E.
Kiviat (unpublished data).

Statewide aerial muskrat lodge counts - flown each winter by DEC,
including a section of the upper estuary from Stockport to Albany.

A14-3

OTHER FAUNA:

Xerces Society Annual Butterfly Count - began 1982 at Tivoli Bays
by Spider Barbour and Erik Kiviat of Hudsonia.

Survey of mollusks at Tivoli Bays and Stockport areas - Erik
Kiviat, R. E. Schmidt, Douglas G. Smith (in progress). Specimens
at Bard College Field Station and Museum of Comparative Zoology.

CONTAMINANTS:

Levels of PCBs, selected metals, and a few-other contaminants in
fish - monitored annually be DEC on large samples of a few species.

Toxic substances in muskrats - urrder the study at Tivoli and
other localities by DEC (Shawn Keeler, Ward Stone, Ron Sloan).

Toxic substances in fish and sediments - a few samples have been
analyzed from Tivoli (DEC, Shawn Keeler).

Toxic substances in sediments, vascular plants, small animals -
samples from four sites within the Estuarine Sanctuary being ana-
lyzed (DEC, Hudsonia).

Toxic substances - movement and distribution in Estuary, various
studies by H. J. Simpson, and others at Lamont-Doherty Geological
Observatory, including samples from Piermont Marsh.

Metals in vascular marsh plants - preliminary measurements by
Michael Selender (unpublished data), including samples from Iona
and Piermont.

Metals partitioning in subtidal and intertidal vascular plants -
grant proposed by Cornell University.

A14-4

Appendix 15

SURVEY, ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING, AND RESEARCH PRIORITIES OF THE

HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY

APPENDIX 15

SURVEY, ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING, AND RESEARCH PRIORITIES OF THE
HUDSON RIVER NATIONAL ESTUARINE SANCTUARY RESEARCH PROGRAM

HIGHEST PRIORITY

Surveys:

- Algae, including those species associated with mud and plant
surfaces.
- Flora of tidal swamps.
Microbiota of estuarine habitats.
- Insect fauna of intertidal marshes.
- Macrobenthic invertebrates.
- Amphibian and reptile fauna, especially at Stockport and
Piermont,

Environmental Monitoring:

Water quality, with monthly sampling of tributary'mouth,
river channel, shallows, and marsh creek for coliform
bacteria, dissolved oxygen, BOD, nitrogen and phosphorus
species, pH, alkalinity, salinity, conductivity, and
dissolved and suspended solids at all sites.
- Weather patterns at Bard College Field Station and at the
Trailside Museum, in cooperation with the U.S. Weather
Bureau.
- Tide, using continuous recording gauge at Tivoli Bays.
- Vascular vegetation, using oblique color airphotos taken
every five years, ground truthing as needed.
- Waterfowl use of wetland habitats at all sites.
- Muskrat lodges in intertidal marshes at all sites, using
late fall and winter aerial photos with ground truthing.
- Sanctuary user numbers and activities.

Research:

- Role of tidal wetlands and shallows in spawning, nursery, and
feeding activities of fishes.
- Ecology and management of federally endangered flora and
fauna.
- Sources and cycling or toxic substances in tidal wetlands;
effects on flora and fauna.
- Muskrat population biology.
- Microbiology and chemistry of surface scums.

A15-1

HIGH PRIORITY

Surveys:

- Patterns, community composition, and quantitative surveys of
vascular vegetation in Stockport and Tivoli estuarine
habitats.
- Vascular vegetation of the upland-estuarine edge habitats
at all components.
- Invertebrate fauna of all estuarinehabitats.
- Amphibians and reptiles, particularly at Stockport and
Piermont.
- Quantitative sampling of birds.
- Mammals, particularly at Stockport and Piermont in estuarine
and upland habitats.

Environmental Monitoring:

- Toxic substances in selected plant and animal species at
all components for PCBs, organochloride pesticides, herbi-
cides, 13 elements of health concern, petroleum, heavy
metals, and metal-like elements.
- Macrobenthic invertebrates at permanent stations in marshes,
shallows, and stream mouths at all components.
- Seasonal sampling of fish at permanent stations in marsh
creeks, shallows, tributary stream mouths at all components.
- Breeding bird communities in various estuarine habitats
at all components, and on Tivoli railroad causeway.

Research:

- Nutrient budgets of wetlands and patterns of nutrient
exchange between wetlands and associated ecosystems.
- Role of terrestrial and aquatic plant detritus in nutrition
of estuarine organisms; role of individual species in
detritus food chains.
- Species composition and biomass production in Hudson River
compared to other estuaries.
- Ecology of major estuarine plants, including primary wild-
life food plants (cattail, wild rice, water-celery), intro-
duced plants (purple loosestrife, water-chestnut, Eurasian
watermilfoil, yellow iris), and other major plants (spatter-
dock, common reed, cordgrasses, swamp rose mallow).
- Mitigation of channel maintenance and dredge spoil disposal;
development of vegetation and wildlife populations on dredge
spoil.

A15-2

High Priority Research: (cont'do)

- Management of shoreline erosion.
- Role of wetland environments as sinks for nutrients and
waste substances.
- Patterns of estuarine circulation and transport of sediment
and toxic substances.
- Techniques for wetland creation.
- Role of tidal wetlands and shallows in resting, feeding,
breeding, and wintering activities; role of Hudson River
compared to other flyways.
- Role of benthic and planktonic invertebrates as fish and
wildlife food and in sediment processes and nutrient
cycling.
- Comparitive studies of habitats and processes in the
Sanctuary to comparable sites in more human perturbed
systems.
- Role of killifishes in estuarine food webs and the effects
of baitfishing on killifishes.
- Snapping turtle ecology, behavior, and use as an indicator
species for toxic substances.
- Role Of microbial communities in ecosystem processes.
- Blue crab life history and ecology.
- Feasibility of reestablishing shellfisheries in estuary.
- Impacts of sanctuary visitors on wildlife, vegetation, and
soil.
- Lead shot leaching, circulation, and accumulation patterns.
- Manipulative studies (outside sanctuary) on effects of
wetland, shoreline, pest, wildlife, and railroad management
practices on estuarine habitats.
- Geological character and history of wetland sediments;
vegetation history of wetlands.

A15-3

Appendix 16

SAMPLE RESEARCH PROPOSAL FORM

APPENDIX 16

SAMPLE RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Telephone No. Date

NAME OF PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

AGENCY AFFILIATION

NAMES OF PERSONS CONDUCTING FIELD WORK:

FUNDING AGENCY

ADDRESS

Describe the objectives of the proposed study and how they
relate to the management of the Sanctuary and other coastal
resources (use additional pages if necessary):

Explain methods, materials, and equipment to be used:

A16-1

Will any equipment be left on site for the duration of the
investigation?
( ) YES ( )NO Please explain:

Has an on-site visit been conducted? C )YES C )NO

Will the investigation require the removal of plants or
animals? C )YES ( )No

Have all the necessary collection permits been obtained?
C ) YES C ) NO (see notice below)

DURATION OF THE STUDY:

Starting Date

Completion Date

Using Sanctuary maps available from Sanctuary Manager, please
indicate (x the areas within the Sanctuary to be used for the
investigation. Give dimensions of study plot in a sketch if
necessary.

NOTICE: COLLECTION PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED FOR PLANTS AND ANIMALS;
SEE SANCTUARY MANAGER

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR DATE

SANCTUARY MANAGER DATE

____APPROVED ____DENIED

____APPROVED WITH SPECIAL CONDITIONS (Attached)

A16-2