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



                            THE@NORTHERN DELAWARE
                  WETLANDS REHABILITATION PLAN
                           The Christina & Delaware Rivers
                   Urban Wetland Corridor Rehabilitation






                                                                                 Al -Aal



                                                                                                        Robert Hossler
                                                                                   Preparedby.
                                                                          Fish and Wildlife Regional Manager
                                                                      Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife
                                                                             Department of Natural Resources
                                                                                        and Environmental Control

                                                                                                        February 1994
                                                                                                         DRAFT



                                                                  ow-






                               Funded  through a Federal grant from the CIfice of Coastal -Zone Management,
                                 NOAA, under provision of Section 309 of the Coastal Zone Management Act
                                                          of 1972 as amended.





                                                                    DRAFT

                                            PREFACE



                   Coastal northern Delaware had several thousand acres of high
             quality tidal wetlands that have gradually been degraded since
             European colonization. Although these wetlands are now protected
             under federal and state statutes, little has been done to restore
             and reintegrate them as a viable part of the Delaware Estuary.
             The lack of concern for these urban wetlands has been arguably due
             to the long-term commitment and tremendous resources necessary to
             restore wetlands that have been degraded for over three centuries.
             This document details the long-term, regional rehabilitation
             strategy that the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
             Environmental Control is undertaking to restore a significant
             portion of these tidal wetlands along the urban corridor of the
             Christina and Delaware Rivers. These details are based on the
             findings and recommendations of a multi-agency rehabilitation
             team, constituting the Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation
             Program (NDWRP).

                   This planning document defines the regional objectives of
             this  strategy, and specifiep guidelines for the development and
             implementation of both site-specific wetland rehabilitation plans
             and a long-term restoration approach for the region. This
             document identifies the organizational framework of the NDWRP, and
             the programmatic involvement and responsibilities of various
             participating agencies and organizations. It also identifies
             rehabilitation sites within the corridor and their site-specific
             environmental needs.

                   The document will be used to provide long-term guidance of
             wetland restoration efforts within the urban corridor of the
             Christina and Delaware Rivers. It will act as a planning
             document, an implementation strategy, and a reference text; and
             will be periodically updated with new site-specific rehabilitation
             plans and post-implementation evaluations. Additional updates and
             minor modifications of ongoing projects will be necessary as
             rehabilitation efforts progress. These ongoing changes will be
             incorporated following review and approval by the multi-agency
             NDWRP team. Finally, besides serving as the plan for the long-
             term rehabilitation needs of the tidal wetlands and related
             aquatic habitats of Northern Delaware, this document is expected
             to serve as a model from which future coastal and wetland
             restoration programs can be developed.






                                          TABLE OF CONTENTS                         PAGE

                      Preface  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

                      List of Tables and Figures    . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

                      Executive Summary    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       iv

                      Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .        vi

                   I. Introduction and Historical Background     . . . . . . . .       1

                II.   Project Description    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         4

                III.  Regional Multiple-Use Objectives    . . . . . . . . . . .        6

                IV.   Multi-Agency Rehabilitation Team    . . . . . . . . . . .        7

                  V.  Components of the Rehabilitation Plan      . . . . . . . .     16

                VI.   Systematic Rehabilitation Procedure      . . . . . . . . .     19

                VII.  Site Specific Rehabilitation Proje     ct Updates . . . . .    21

                      A.   Broad Dyke Marsh  . . . . .                               21
                      B.   Gambacorta Marsh  . . . . .                               25
                      C.   Thousand Acre Marsh   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       27
                      D.   D.P. & L. Impoundment    . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      29
                      E.   Newport Marsh   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       31
                      F.   Artesian Marsh  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       32
                      G.   Augustine Creek Wetland Complex     . . . . . . . . .     33
                      H.   Old Wilmington Marsh  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       34
                      I.   Army Creek Marsh  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .       35
                      J.   Airport Marsh Wetland Complex     . . . . . . . . . .     36
                      K.   ICI Marsh  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .        37

               VIII.  Project Summary and Assessment of      Future Needs . . . .    38

                IX.   Literature Cited  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .        43

                  X.  Appendices

                      A.   Broad Dyke Marsh rehabilitation plan
                      B.   Gambacorta Marsh rehabilitation plan
                      C.   Thousand Acre Marsh rehabilitation plan
                      D.   D.P. & L. Impoundment rehabilitation plan
                      E.   Artesian Marsh rehabilitation plan
                      F.   Augustine Creek Marsh biotic inventory and natural
                           community evaluation
                      G.   Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation Program
                           brochure


                                                  ii











                                      LIST OF TABLES MM FIGURES



               TABLES                                                                 PAGE



                  1.   Current members of the Northern Delaware Wetlands
                       Rehabilitation Program (NDWRP) Steering and adjunct
                       committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          8

                  2.   Wetland sites proposed for rehabilitation under
                       the Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation
                       Program (NDWRP)   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .        22

                 3.    Secured and pending funding sources for the
                       Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation Program
                       (NDWRP)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         41



                FIGURES



                  1.   New Castle, Delaware depicting the Wilmington and
                       New Castle areas and the Christina and Delaware
                       Rivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          2

                  2.   Wetlands sites along the Christina/Delaware Rivers
                       wetland corridor proposed for rehabilitation under
                       the Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation
                       Program (NDWRP)   . . . . . . . . . . . .     * . I  . . .        3

                  3.   Wetlands restoration sites currently being
                       developed or implemented by the Northern Delaware
                       Wetlands Rehabilitation Program (NDWRP)       . . . . . . . .    23












                                      EXECUTIVE BUIMRY



                  The Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
             Environmental Control (DNREC), in cooperation with numerous other
             public and private organizations, has initiated an ambitious
             program to rehabilitate more than 10,000 acres of highly degraded
             tidal freshwater and brackish wetlands along the urban corridors
             of the Christina and Delaware Rivers in New Castle County. This
             portion of the State has a long history of wetland loss and abuse.
             Wetland degradation in northern Delaware began as early as the
             17th century, when settlers extensively diked and drained tidal
             freshwater marshes along these rivers to accommodate agriculture
             and development of adjacent upland areas. Maintenance of this
             dike system promoted the filling and additional draining of many
             wetlands until the passage of state and federal wetland acts and
             executive orders in the 19701s. Although these and subsequent
             regulations prevented most tidal wetlands from continued
             degradation, little if any emphasis has been placed on
             rehabilitating those wetlands degraded prior to the passage of
             these laws. Unfortunately, these same severely degraded or lost
             wetlands were historically among the state's most important areas
             in terms of wetland wildlife and vegetation diversity.

                  The Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation Program (NDWRP)
             is a regional, non-regulatory restoration program for wetland
             areas degraded prior to the enactment of wetland protection acts.
             Currently, 31 potential wetland sites have been identified as
             needing rehabilitation and are proposed to be restored on a site-
             by-site basis. The NDWRP emphasizes three approaches to wetland
             restoration: 1) developing and implementing management practices
             designed to achieve regional multiple use objectives; 2)
             developing a multi-agency rehabilitation team; and 3)
             rehabilitating an urban corridor through a watershed-based
             approach whereby numerous individual wetland sites are
             ecologically improved, eventually forming a chain of restored
             wetlands. The NDWRP has developed a plan that provides DNREC with
             a systematic process to rehabilitate degraded wetlands and
             incorporate these strategies into local land-use plans. This plan
             is expected to serve as a model for future coastal rehabilitation
             programs, and will establish resource management/protection
             agreements among various government agencies, private
             organizations and industries, landowners, and environmental
             groups, thus replacing the traditional individual agency approach
             to similar programs.

                  Success of this regional wetland rehabilitation process
             depends on the cooperation and involvement of federal, state, and
             local agencies; private industries; landowners, and environmental
             groups. This multi-agency approach increases the available
             resources and funding opportunities, while including private
             industries, landowners, and environmental groups to provide

                                             iv








             corporate sponsorships, property access, and broad-based public
             support, respectively. In order to promote this cooperation and
             involvement without burdening agency personnel that were only
             periodically involved in the program, a two-tiered organizational
             approach was established. This approach consisted of a NDWRP
             Steering Committee comprised of DNREC and New Castle Conservation
             District staff, and a adjunct committee comprised of various
             outside agencies and organizations. The Steering Committee
             convenes on a monthly basis and addresses a wide range of program-
             related topics, whereas the adjunct committee members were
             periodically included in the planning and evaluation process
             during permit review, funding requests, or rehabilitation plan
             review.

                  The NDWRP has developed a systematic procedure to facilitate
             the development and implementation of site-specific wetland
             rehabilitation plans. This process promotes frequent input by
             various participants and encourages utilizing the technical
             expertise of the rehabilitation team and allocating task
             responsibilities to various members. An important element in this
             systematic procedure is the development of a detailed restoration
             plan. This plan provides a foundation from which all
             rehabilitation efforts are based. Wetland rehabilitation plans
             should be constructed around scientifically-based biological
             inventories and ecological evaluations of the site and its
             surrounding landscape. The plan should also clearly define the
             site-specific objectives. A requisite to the long-term needs of
             this regional wetland rehabilitation strategy is development of
             site-specific operation, maintenance, and management plans. This
             component of the rehabilitation plan provides assurances that
             rehabilitation efforts will be implemented and maintained. The
             final component of the rehabilitation plan is a provision to
             actively involve the landowners and local environmental groups in
             the rehabilitation effort. Active involvement by the public not
             only promotes a increased awareness and understanding of wetland
             functions and values, but it also provides additional assurance of
             the long-term success of the project.















                                              v











                                      AC=0WMDGEXE=S



                  The Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
             Environmental Control (DNREC) provided State funding, staff
             support, equipment, and facilities necessary for the completion of
             this planning and implementation document. Additionally, the
             Delaware Coastal Management Program (DCMP) provided Federal
             funding during the past two years from the National Oceanic and
             Atmospheric Administration, Office of Coastal Zone Management, to
             assist with plan development, in particular helping to support
             biotic inventories and site-specific assessments of potential
             wetland rehabilitation projects. These federal and state funds
             were used to help undertake the DNREC's Northern Delaware Wetlands
             Rehabilitation Program (NDWRP), co-administered by C.J. Stachecki
             and S.W. Cooksey.

                  I would like to acknowledge the former Secretary of the
             DNREC, E.H. Clark II, and former Director of the Division of Fish
             and Wildlife, W.C. Wagner, under whom the NDWRP was initiated and
             developed. Today, this wetland rehabilitation effort has been
             continued and expanded by C.A.G. Tulou, Secretary of the DNREC,
             and A.T. Manus, Director of the Division of Fish and Wildlife
             Both individuals have shown enthusiasm and commitment to wetl@nds
             restoration, and the future success of the NDWRP depends heavily
             upon their guidance and support.

                  I would like to thank all the NDWRP Steering Committee
             members who made valuable contributions to the restoration program
             and the development of this planning and implementation document.
             These individuals, although occasionally polarized, all
             contributed to developing a quality end product. I am especially
             grateful to C.J. Stachecki, co-administrator of the program, and
             W.H. Meredith for their advice, guidance, and encouragement
             throughout the development of this program and document. Their
             humor and assistance kept me sane during trying times in a
             turbulent bureaucracy. S.W. Cooksey provided the prodding
             occasionally necessary to complete quarterly reports or meet
             deadlines of other DCMP deliverables. L.R. Irelan and J.E.
             Tarburton of the New Castle Conservation District made valuable
             contributions in terms of grant and budget initiatives, and local
             land-use issues. I would like to acknowledge D.B. Carter for his
             collation of a preliminary inventory of potential wetland
             rehabilitation sites, and his lead participation in the
             preparation of the DCMP grant. Finally, I would like to thank my
             staff (S.J. Link, A.A. Loveless III, J.G. Masten II, T.J. Moran)
             and others in (or formerly in) the Division of Fish and Wildlife
             (R.V. Cole, T.F. Cole, S.H. Innvaer, R.J. Wolfe) for their
             assistance throughout the development of this project.




                                             vi











                           XNTRODUCTION AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND



                  Northern Delaware, like many other urbanized areas on the
             East Coast, has a long history of wetland loss and abuse.
             Similarly, Delaware's wetlands degradation can be traced back to a
             predominately negative view of these areas. Wetlands were deemed
             as waste places, vermin haunts, and of little socioeconomic value.
             These negative views promoted the draining, diking, and filling of
             wetlands for a variety of purposes including agricultural
             practices, landfills, and industrial and residential developments
             in the Wilmington and New Castle areas (Fig. 1).

                  In Northern Delaware this degradation began as early as the
             mid-1600's, when Dutch and Swedish settlers extensively diked and
             drained tidal freshwater marshes along the Christina and Delaware
             Rivers to accommodate agriculture and development of adjacent
             upland areas (Weslager 1947). This extensive system of dikes and
             tide gates has, for the most part, been maintained since its
             initial construction, a practice that essentially prohibited
             several thousand acres of tidal wetlands from receiving-normal
             tidal exchange with the Delaware Estuary for up to 340 years
             (Carter 1991). Maintenance of this dike system promoted the
             filling and additional draining of many wetlands for industrial,
             maritime, and residential development during the Industrial
             Revolution of the late 1800's and early 1900's. The construction
             of various transportation systems, particularly Interstate 95 in
             the mid-1960's, led to the draining and filling of over 1,000
             acres of additional tidal freshwater marshes and the rerouting of
             a 1-mile stretch of the Christina River.

                  This continuous neglect along the Christina and Delaware
             Rivers over a 300-year period caused the permanent loss of
             approximately 6,000 acres of tidal wetlands (Tiner 1985), and the
             degradation of approximately 10,000 more (Carter 1992). Present
             estimates are that 1,000 acres are extremely degraded, another
             2,500 acres are in poor condition, 5,300 acres are in moderate
             condition, and 1,200 had only limited degradation or recovered
             sufficiently to warrant very good condition (Fig. 2).

                  Unfortunately, these same severely degraded or lost wetlands
             were historically among the state's most important areas in terms
             of waterfowl abundance, wading bird and aquatic furbearer
             production, and vegetation diversity (Chamberlain 1951). Several
             of these marshes contained excellent stands of cattail (Typha
             spp.) and wild rice (Zizania aguatica). These marshes were
             important habitat for black ducks (Anas rubripes), pintails (Anas
             acuta), green-winged teal (Anas crecca), and Canada geese (Branta
             canadensis) during spring and fall migrations. The larger marshes
             in this region supported the best muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus)
             populations in the state and several of the best waterfowl
             production areas. Also two heronries, one the largest on the
             Atlantic Coast north of Florida, are currently located within and
             supported by the wetlands of this region. Because these




  I
  1                                                                            2
  1
  1
  1
  1
  1
  I
  I
  I

                                                                 11
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
             Fig. 1.   New Castle, Delaware depicting the Wilmington and New
  I          Castle areas and the Christina and Delaware Rivers.
  I





                                                                          LEGENb7---------
            Chr'shna/Delaware                      FMROADS   Fj@ EXTREMELY DEGRADED    TIDEGATE FOR DRAINAGE
                       1                                                                                                    3
                       Rivers                      0 WATER   El POOR CONDITION         TIDECATE VIRISER BOARD
                                                             IfT;j MODERATE TO COOD    F&W PUBLIC BOAT RAMP
              Wetland Corridor                                  VERY COOD TO EXCELLENT E] SUPERFUND&flPL SITES
                                                                                                                            @4
                                                                                                                            0




                                                                                                                            Ul
                                                                                                                            0 04

                                                                                                                            0
                                                                                                                            @4
                                                                                                                            134

                                                                                                                            @4
                                                                                                                            0


                                                                                                                            $4M
                                                                                                                            @40
                                                                                                                            0p





                                                                                                                            r-A 4j
                                                                                                                            4-) to
                                                                                                                            (D 4-)


                                                                                                                            M-4







                                                                                                                            @4 rCl
                                                                                                                            0 z
                                                                                                                            @:0
                                                                                                                            0r-4
                                                                                                                            r-4 4j




                                                                                                                            @4
                                                                                                                            H(d
                                                                                                                            4j @:
                                                                                                                            En tu
                                                                                                                            .@l




                                                                                                                            @4


                                                                                                                            41
                                                                                                                            tP @4
                                                                                                                            90
                                                                                                                            0z
                                                                                                                            r I






                                                                                                                            En




                                                                                                                            (d0

                                                                                                                            4J 4J
                                                                                                                            4) (a
                                                                                                                            :3: 41
                                                     lc@I.                                                                  H
                                                                                                                            N-1

                                                                                                                            03


                                                                                                                            44 @4


                                                                           Mapscale is 1:48,000
                                                                              I i=h 4,000 ffai

                                                                                     12.M== =1840 ZO












                                                                               4

             historically rich wetlands of the Christina/Delaware Rivers are
             capable of being restored, they have been identified as a focus
             area under the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture of the North American
             Waterfowl Management Plan. This international plan seeks to
             protect and improve six million acres of wetlands (85,000 acres of
             which are along the Atlantic Coast) to increase migrating and
             breeding waterfowl populations to levels of the 19701s.

                  Degradation of Delaware's coastal wetlands was curtailed with
             the passage of state and federal wetland acts and executive orders
             in the 19701s. In fact, since the passage of the Delaware Wetlands
             Act of 1973, annual loss of tidal wetlands in Delaware has been
             reduced by approximately 22-fold (444 to 20 acres/year, Hardisky
             and Klemas 1983). Although current and proposed state and federal
             regulations should protect most coastal wetlands from continued
             degradation, little if any emphasis has been placed on
             rehabilitating those wetlands degraded prior to the passage of
             Delaware's tidal wetland regulations.

                  Annually, an increasingly larger percentage of our population
             resides in urban and suburban areas. Unfortunately, these
             urbanized communities are usually the least educated about the
             functions and values of wetlands. One possible explanation for
             this deficiency of wetland education among metropolitan residents
             is that urban wetlands are historically the most degraded and have
             received the least management and protection. The rehabilitation
             of these degraded wetlands can provide outdoor classrooms and
             effectively educate the public about wetland functions and values.
             A Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife survey of needs in
             aquatic resources education (Kreamer 1993) presented to 306
             elementary and high school teachers, community groups, nature
             centers, and state personnel indicated that wetland education was
             a priority topic.





                                     PROJECT DESCRIPTION



                  The Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
             Environmental Control (DNREC), in cooperation with numerous other
             public and private organizations, has initiated an ambitious
             program to rehabilitate more-than 10,000 acres of highly degraded
             tidal freshwater and brackish wetlands along the urban corridors
             of the Christina and Delaware Rivers in New Castle County (Fig.
             2). The Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation Program (NDWRP)
             is a regional, non-regulatory restoration program for wetland
             areas degraded prior to the enactment of wetland protection acts.
             Currently, 31 potential wetland sites have been identified as
             needing rehabilitation and are proposed to be restored on a site-
             by-site basis. On a larger scale, the rehabilitation plans and











                                                                               5

             management practices of these sites address regional objectives
             and are integrated to restore an urban wetland corridor. The
             NDWRP is a long-term commitment by DNREC to wetland restoration.
             Many of the proposed wetland rehabilitation sites have been
             degraded for over three centuries, and it is anticipated that it
             might take several decades to restore many of their functions and
             values. However, it should be noted that land-use practices,
             manmade infrastructure, and other forms of economic development
             presently limit and will continue to limit full ecological
             restoration of many sites.

                  The NDWRP was officially unveiled at an October 1992 press
             conference held by former Governor M.N. Castle and former
             Secretary of the DNREC, E.H. Clark II. This outdoor press event
             held at one of the NDWRP sites, Gambacorta Marsh), was attended by
             civic and business leaders, resource managers, environmental
             scientists, and property owners. The conference outlined the
             program's goals, importance, rehabilitation strategy, and
             participants. At that time the NDWRP was in existence for
             approximately 6 months and attendees received an extensive press
             package describing the program.

                  The DNREC has recently completed a Comprehensive Conservation
             and Management Plan for Delaware's Tidal Wetlands (DNREC 1994), in
             part as a response to the National Wetlands Policy Forum's request
             for state-based comprehensive wetlands planning. The
             comprehensive tidal wetlands plan was developed by state, federal,
             and regional agencies; scientific academicians; private
             conservation organizations; user groups, and landowners. The plan
             is intended to provide guidance for the widest range of tidal
             wetlands issues, problems, and protection and stewardship needs.
             This comprehensive plan identified as one of its 10 "priority
             action projects" to recognize, support, and expedite
             implementation of the NDWRP.

                  The NDWRP emphasizes three approaches to wetland restoration:
             1) developing and implementing management practices designed to
             achieve regional multiple use objectives; 2) developing a multi-
             agency rehabilitation team; and 3) rehabilitating an urban
             corridor through a watershed-based approach whereby numerous
             individual wetland sites are ecologically improved, eventually
             forming a chain of restored wetlands.

                  Besides the rehabilitation of several thousand acres of tidal
             wetlands along two major rivers and their reintegration into the
             Delaware Estuary, this program has developed a plan that provides
             DNREC with a systematic process to rehabilitate degraded wetlands
             and incorporate these strategies into local land-use plans. This
             plan is expected to serve as a model for future coastal
             rehabilitation programs, and will establish resource
             management/protection agreements among various government
             agencies, private organizations and industries, landowners, and












                                                                                6

             environmental groups, thus replacing the traditional individual
             agency approach to similar programs. Several of these resource
             management/protection agreements might involve enforceable
             actions. Finally, this program establishes a wetland
             rehabilitation policy upon which federal consistency
             determinations and environmental reviews can be based.





                               REGIONAL MULTIPLE-USE OWECTIVES


                  An emphasis  of the NDWRP is to rehabilitate an extremely
             degraded wetland  corridor by addressing regional multiple-use
             objectives. The   development and implementation of management
             practices that address multiple objectives provide a mechanism
             whereby the benefits of individual restoration projects can be
             maximized over an entire corridor. Although many rehabilitation
             projects will be unable to adequately address all these objectives
             because of site-specific limitations and landowner demands,
             efforts will be made to address as many regional objectives at
             each specific restoration site as possible. The development of
             measurable, evaluative criteria for each specific objective is
             also essential to provide temporal measurements of success. The
             following specific regional objectives were developed and approved
             by the DNREC/NDWRP Steering Committee and have been favorably
             received by several other governmental agencies and@,environmental
             groups.

                  -  Improve water quality in both wetlands and rivers through
                     tidal exchange and wetland filtering.

                  -  Restore and improve spawning, nursery, and feeding sites
                     for anadromous, estuarine, and riverine fishes.

                  -  Increase biological diversity and improve wetland,
                     riparian, and adjacent upland habitats for waterbirds and
                     other wetland wildlife.

                  -  Protect and enhance existing populations and critical
                     habitats of threatened and endangered species and other
                     species of concern.

                  -  Increase diversity of shallow-water habitats and emergent
                     vegetation.

                     Control nuisance and exotic plant species (phragmites and
                     purple loosestrife).










                     Control pestiferous mosquito populations by water
                     management where practical, thereby reducing the amount of
                     chemical insecticides required.

                     Reduce stormwater flooding through increased storage
                     capacity and timely releases.

                     Reduce shoreline erosion where needed for ecological or
                     economic purposes, using environmentally acceptable
                     methods.

                     Improve a wide variety of recreational opportunities in
                     wetland, riverine, and adjacent upland habitats and
                     improve the aesthetic value of these areas.

                     Increase environmental education opportunities for both
                     general public and school groups.





                              XULTI-AGENCY REHABILITATION TRAX


                  The DNREC's Division of Fish and Wildlife initially
             administered this Departmental program; however, because of the
             complexity of rehabilitation issues, the scope of this effort, and
             the interests of staff, the Division of Soil and Water
             Conservation was designated as co-administrator of the program.
             This shared responsibility takes advantage of both Divisions,
             administrative, technical, and personnel resources. The formal
             inclusion of the Division of Soil and Water as co-administrator
             will add expertise in other technical fields beneficial to
             developing wetland rehabilitation plans, particularly for issues
             concerned with control of nonpoint source pollution.

                  To expand upon the strategy of maximizing Departmental
             resources and technical expertise while avoiding the traditional
             individual agency approach, representatives from all five DNREC
             Divisions and the Office of the Secretary were solicited as
             members of the DNREC/NDWRP Steering Committee (Table 1).
             Additionally, because of the close working relationship that the
             New Castle Conservation District (NCCD) has had with the
             Department in the development of this program, representatives
             from this agency were also included in the Steering Committee
             (Table 1).

                  Initially, additional representatives from other governmental
             agencies.(federal, state, and county), academic institutions,
             environmental groups, private industry, and local communities were
             to be included in the Steering Committee. However, many of these
             "outside" committee members indicated that they would be best able












                                                                            8


           Table 1. Current members of the Northern Delaware Wetlands
           Rehabilitation Program (NDWRP) Steering and adjunct committees.


           Steering--Committee Members and Affiliation

             Tulous Christophe - Office of the Secretary, DNREC
             Allenj Robert - Division of Air & Waste Management, DNREC
             Baker, John - Divisions of Fish and Wildlife/Parks and
                Recreation, DNREC
             Carter, David - Division of Soil & Water Conservation, DNREC
             Chura, Mark - Division of Parks & Recreation, DNREC
             Cooksey, Sarah - Division of Soil & Water Conservation, DNREC
             Esposito, Gerald   Division of Water Resources, DNREC
             Hossler, Robert   Division of Fish & Wildlife, DNREC
             Hughes, John - Division of Soil & Water Conservation, DNREC
             Irelanp Larry - New Castle Conservation District
             Mahaffie, Michael - Office of the Secretary, DNREC
             Manus, Andrew - Division of Fish & Wildlife, DNREC
             Meredith, William   Division of Fish & Wildlife, DNREC
             Stachecki, Chester   Division of Fish & Wildlife, DNREC
             Tarburton, John - New Castle Conservation District
             Vickers, Charles - Division of Parks & Recreation, DNREC
             vacant position - Tidal Wetlands Regulatory Program, Division of
                Water Resources, DNREC


           Adjunct Committee Members and Affiliation

             Appleby, Richard - Trustees of New Castle Common
             Daiber, Franklin - University of Delaware, College of Marine
                Studies (emeritus)
             Gallagher, John - University of Delaware, College of Marine
                Studies
             Goodger, Timothy - National Marine Fisheries Service
             Hassell Richard - Army Corps of Engineers
             Husband, Jonathan - New Castle County
             Lapp, Jeffery - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
             Mitchell, Laura - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
             Patrick, Ruth - Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences
             Shevock, Daniel - Delaware Ducks Unlimited
             Stocum, Faye - Delaware Historic Preservation Office
             Verrico, Donald - Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Counsel
             Nutka, Joseph - Delaware Department of Transportation












                                                                               9

             to serve the program by providing input periodically on a site-
             specific basis, e.g., during permit review, funding requests, or
             rehabilitation plan review. The logistical problems associated
             with scheduling and convening a Steering Committee of 30+ members,
             and the relative inefficiency revealed during such large meetings,
             were additional reasons for not including all rehabilitation team
             members in the Steering Committee. Instead, a two-tiered
             rehabilitation team was developed in which members from agencies
             other than DNREC or NCCD were designated adjunct committee status,
             and were not requested to convene at monthly Steering Committee
             meetings (Table 1). This two-tiered representation functions
             adequately, because many of the adjunct committee members are on
             the Delaware Wetland Joint Permit Processing Committee and review
             all wetland associated projects prior to implementation or
             advanced development. Additionally, other adjunct committee
             members are closely associated to the program in other capacities,
             e.g., Superfund Natural Resource Damage Trustees, funding source
             representatives, landowners, researchers of pertinent management
             practices, and project collaborators.

                  The organizational purposes of the DNREC/NDWRP Steering
             Committee are: 1) to assist with restoration plan development and
             to facilitate a high level of cooperation among DNREC Divisions;
             2) to define the regional wetland rehabilitation goals,
             objectives, guidelines, and criteria for project evaluation; 3) to
             coordinate site-specific wetland rehabilitation activities; and 4)
             to identify the existing and future agency infrastructure needed
             to establish long-term maintenance and management of restored
             areas based on localized.needs. The purposes of the adjunct
             committee members are: 1) to assist DNREC in restoration plan
             development and implementation; 2) to ensure a high level of
             cooperation among governmental agencies, private industries,
             environmental groups, and the public; 3) to assist DNREC in
             providing a mechanism to provide public input and increase public
             awareness, support, participation, and communication between
             resource managers and the public.

                  The personnel organization of the NDWRP includes DNREC
             program administrators, a DNREC/NDWRP program manager, and several
             DNREC/NDWRP project managers. The program administrators from the
             Divisions of Fish and Wildlife and Soil and Water Conservation are
             responsible for administration of the NDWRP, including
             coordinating efforts to acquire funding and technical assistance,
             and to foster inter- and intra-agency participation and
             cooperation.

                  Responsibilities of the NDWRP program manager include
             coordinating activities of NDWRP project managers, with emphasis
             on overall program goals and interactions among agencies.
             Additional responsibilities include: 1) reporting to granting and
             funding agencies and meeting established benchmarks; 2) allocating
             and setting priorities for resources among projects; 3)












                                                                               10

             maintaining a centralized tracking system for all individual
             projects; and 4) coordinating the work plan for permit application
             submission and responses to permit review. The NDWRP program
             manager is also a fish and wildlife regional manager with the
             Division of Fish and Wildlife, stationed in northern Delaware.

                  NDWRP project managers are other DNREC employees responsible
             for coordinating the activities associated with a specific wetland
             rehabilitation project. These duties include: 1) coordinating
             activities and interactions among individuals from other DNREC
             Divisions, federal, state, county, or municipal agencies; 2)
             coordinating landowner contacts for purposes of project
             orientation, explanation of project goals, landowner education,
             obtaining landowner input and support, and building a consensus
             for project cooperation; 3) coordinating collection of site-
             specific environmental information; 4) coordinating development of
             site-specific restoration and management plans; 5) preparing and
             reviewing environmental assessments and applications for federal
             404 and state wetland permits; 6) implementing restoration and
             management activities; 7) developing broad-based public support
             and participation in the project; and 8) coordinating long-term
             monitoring and evaluation activities.

                  Although the personnel assigned to these positions are
             crucial to the development and implementation of the program,
             overall success of this regional wetland rehabilitation process
             depends on the cooperation and involvement of federal, state, and
             local agencies; private industries; landowners, and"environmental
             groups. This multi-agency approach increases the available
             resources and funding opportunities, while including private
             industries, landowners, and environmental groups to provide
             corporate sponsorships, property access, and broad-based public
             support, respectively. Additionally, early involvement of parties
             interested or affected by rehabilitation efforts increases the
             probability of mediating any potential conflicting interests.
             Listed below are several agencies, divisions, and organizations
             that have contributed to the initial success of this program, or
             are slated to do so in the immediate future.

                  Division of Fish and Wildlife (DNREC) - Co-administrator of
             the program and responsible for developing water and vegetation
             management, wildlife enhancement, fisheries restoration, and
             mosquito abatement plans associated with restoration projects.
             This Division has, with the assistance of other agencies,
             conducted biological inventories and ecological evaluations of
             restoration sites, and developed and implemented water management
             and vegetation management plans at selected wetland sites. Fish
             and Wildlife has also lead or assisted in the design of proposed
             water control structures, and will assist in the supervision and
             installation of these structures. The submission of environmental
             assessments and state and federal permits for many of the projects
             will be undertaken by this Division. The Division has designated











             70% of one of its general fund positions to function as the NDWRP
             program manger. Additional Division personnel involved with this
             program function in program administration, scientific assessment,
             technical assistance, project management, and committee
             participation.

                  Division of Soil and Water Conservation (DNREC) - Co-
             administrator of the program and responsible for developing and
             implementing nonpoint source pollution prevention, erosion and
             sedimentation control, and upstream stormwater management plans.
             With the assistance of other agencies these plans will address
             both site-specific and watershed/basin-wide issues. The
             Division's future development and use of stormwater management
             utilities might also help advance the nonpoint source pollution
             prevention goals of the NDWRP. This Division is currently
             pursuing the formation of site-specific, self-taxation, landowner
             associations that would utilize existing state code to develop
             marsh management organizations. Soil and Water has helped
             coordinate Conservation District input and action. As
             administrator of the Delaware Coastal Management Program (DCMP),
             sponsored by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
             Division personnel are responsible for administering DCMP grants
             received by the NDWRP, developing coastal nonpoint source
             pollution control programs in upland areas adjacent to project
             sites, and reviewing wetland rehabilitation plans for consistency
             with the DCMP. Division personnel involved with this program
             function in program administration, project management, technical
             assistance, and steering committee participation. ,

                  Division of Air and Waste Management (DNREC) - Administrator
             and coordinator of wetlands remediation projects associated with
             Superfund sites, and of use of potential wetland rehabilitation
             monies received through enforcement of natural resource damage
             assessments. The Division has provided extensive information and
             guidance concerning contaminant issues associated with NDWRP
             restoration sites, and has assisted in contaminant sampling:
             Wetland rehabilitation efforts are being integrated with this
             Division's Christina River Basin Hazardous Waste Sites Restoration
             Project, which is developing a uniform approach for the
             investigation and remediation of hazardous waste sites within the
             Christina River watershed.

                  Division of Water Resources (DNREC)_ - Representatives have
             provided extensive guidance associated with wetlands permitting
             needs and procedures, and are currently supporting a site-specific
             wetland mitigation banking effort to promote wetland
             rehabilitation projects. NDWRP wetland rehabilitation activities
             will be integrated with several other programs being undertaken by
             this Division, including: the Whole Basin Planning approach to
             water resource protection; the National Pollutant Discharge
             Elimination System (NPDES), and efforts to address combined sewer
             overflow problems. The Division has assisted in ecological












                                                                                12

              evaluations of proposed restoration sites, especially through
              geographical information systems and water supply analysis, and
              has provided technical support in toxicological testing of
              sediment and water samples. Water Resources will also assist
              other agencies in addressing nonpoint and point source pollution
              issues and reviewing water and vegetation management plans.

                   Division of Parks and Recreation (DNREC) - Representatives
              have assisted in the development of recreation and environmental
              education plans; have provided guidance on developing conservation
              easement programs among landowners; and coordinated wetland
              recreation plans with the Delaware Coastal Heritage Greenway
              Program. The Division's Natural Heritage Inventory has conducted
              biotic composition and rare plant surveys in proposed restoration
              sites. The Natural Heritage Inventory is also funding a 3-year
              study of the heron colonies within the rehabilitation corridor.

                   Office of Information and Education (DNREC) - Representatives
              have organized press events, and published pamphlets, brochures,
              and articles promoting the NDWRP. Public involvement in several
              wetland rehabilitation sites has been initiated by the Office's
              Adopt-A-Wetland Program and their annual Christina River and
              Delaware Coastal Cleanups.

                   New Castle Conservation District (NCCD) - The District is
              assisting in all phases of various construction projects including
              design, hydrological modeling, developing bid packages and work
              plans, and the supervision of the construction and installation of
              water control structures. NCCD has assisted in the submission of
              wetland permits and grant applications, and in the development of
              promotional brochures. The District is also providing
              geographical information system support, assistance in local land-
              use issues, and in the development and implementation of
              stormwater management and nonpoint source pollution prevention
              plans. NCCD is undoubtedly one of the biggest contributors to the
              NDWRP in technical and promotional support, and site-specific
              implementation.

                   Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) - This agency
              owns several water control structures associated with wetland
              rehabilitation projects and, as such, has provided assistance in
              their maintenance, repair, and redesign in order to promote
              project success. This agency is currently modifying minor road
              construction plans and maintenance practices to promote wetland
              restoration, and will-assist in supervising the construction and
              installation of new water control structures. DelDOT is also a
              potential funding source through wetland mitigation associated
              with transportation projects.

                   U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) - This ag ency has
              provided guidance in restoration efforts as a regulatory agency in
              the wetlands permit process and as a Superfund Natural Resources











                                                                              13

             Damages Trustee. The agency has provided promotion and technical
             support through assistance with grant submission (via the Delaware
             Estuary Project) and,wildlife contaminant issues, respectively.
             FWS has provided funding for restoration-related ecological
             studies and has indicated potentially additional funding through
             its Partners for Wildlife Program.

                  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) - This agency has
             provided guidance in restoration efforts as a regulatory agency in
             the wetlands permit process and as a Superfund Natural Resources
             Damages Trustee.

                  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - This agency has
             provided guidance in restoration efforts as a regulatory agency in
             the wetlands permit process and through its remediation of
             Superfund sites. It is also a potential funding source through
             various grant programs, e.g., Section 319 for nonpoint source
             pollution reduction.

                  Army Corps of Engineers (COE) - This agency has provided
             guidance in restoration efforts as a regulatory agency in the
             wetlands permit process. COE might also provide technical and
             funding support for experimental dredging operations associated
             with wetland restoration projects.

                  U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) - This agency is
             assisting in developing a watershed-based approach to addressing
             nonpoint source pollution within the corridor. SCS,is identifying
             areas where new or improved stormwater retention, conservation,
             and best management practices can reduce pollutant loading into
             the wetland restoration sites. This agency is also assisting in
             modeling surface water recharge and storm runoff for the
             rehabilitation sites.

                  New Castle County Government - The County will provide input
             on wetland rehabilitation projects as they relate to county
             stormwater management practices and recreational facilities. The
             County is also a landowner of several proposed wetland restoration
             projects and their water control structures, and might provide
             financial assistance to help implement restoration activities.

                  Trustees of New Castle Common - The Trustees are landowners
             of several proposed wetland restoration projects within the New
             Castle city limits. They are very supportive of the program and
             have annually provided funding, operational support, and property
             access ever since preliminary rehabilitation efforts were
             initiated in 1987 on Broad Dyke and Gambacorta Marshes.

                  Delmarva Power - This public service utility is a landowner
             of several proposed wetland restoration projects. Delmarva Power
             is very supportive of the program and has provided funding,
             operational support, and property access on several projects. A











                                                                               14

             significant amount of their support has been through the Delmarva
             Power Sportsmen Club, which has assisted in controlled burns,
             experimental water level manipulations, and beneficial wildlife
             plantings.

                  Brandywine & Christina Rivers Task Force - This broadly
             represented and diverse group of citizens, government leaders,
             business interests, and environmental proponents was formed by
             gubernatorial executive order in 1992. Its purpose was to develop
             recommendations on what actions state and local governments could
             take to protect and enhance these waterways. A Wetlands and
             Wildlands Committee was established by the Task Force, separate
             from the NDWRP, to identify and protect high quality wetlands;
             restore damaged and destroyed wetlands; and to reduce nonpoint
             source pollution in these rivers by improving watershed planning
             and hydrology management. Currently, the Task Force is pursuing
             the development of a wildlife refuge and recreation area at Old
             Wilmington Marsh, a NDWRP-listed project. Because the objectives
             of the NDWRP and the Wetlands and Wildlands Committee of this task
             force are nearly identical, it is hoped that these efforts are
             able to be collaborative rather than duplicative. The Steering
             Committee suggests that the NDWRP be the vehicle through which the
             Brandywine & Christina Rivers Task Force accomplishes its wetlands
             rehabilitation goals.

                  Delaware Ducks Unlimited - The Delaware Chapter has provided
             promotional support to the program and is interested in providing
             funding support for specific wetland rehabilitation,projects.

                  Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Council - This international
             council of private industries has promoted corporate support for
             the NDWRP.

                  Various Private Landowners - Although not members of the
             steering committee, these private landowners are essential
             partners in many of the wetland rehabilitation projects. As
             property owners, their support of the program and input into the
             rehabilitation plans are required to/access, develop, implement,
             and maintain the restoration projects. In instances where there
             are multiple landowners of a wetland rehabilitation project, a
             landowner association can be formed to enable the proprietors to
             determine management decisions based on a majority vote. The
             formation of a landowner association can also provide a legal
             mechanism in which taxation within the association provides a
             source of funds for marsh management.

                   Although involvement and cooperation by these agencies are
             Amportant to the program, several interagency agreements or
             developing policies are particularly noteworthy. A policy being
             developed in concert with the NDWRP is the Delaware Divisions of
             Water Resources and Fish and Wildlife attempt to establish a
             Department position that allows for future wetland mitigation












                                                                               15

             credit (mitigation banking) for compensating for unavoidable
             wetlands loss in advance of development actions. Several basic
             elements of this policy have been proposed in the Delaware tidal
             wetlands comprehensive plan (DNREC 1994), and have been identified
             as a priority action project. This policy would differ from the
             Department's regular process of not pre-disposing wetland
             mitigation decisions on projects not completed or permitted, but
             would be consistent with views currently being supported by the
             Clinton Administration and being administered among natural
             resource agencies in other Mid-Atlantic states.

                  The benefits of this policy to the NDWRP are that it provides
             a mechanism and funding for the rehabilitation of the corridor by
             allowing developers and corporations to receive wetland mitigation
             credit for rehabilitation efforts conducted under the guidance of
             the program. An example of a proposed project that would benefit
             from this policy is the Artesian Marsh Rehabilitation. Artesian
             Marsh is a 136-acre tidal freshwater wetland whose property owner,
             the Artesian Water Company, is interested in assisting in its
             rehabilitation, but desires mitigation credit. Additionally, the
             Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) has expressed
             interest in wetlands mitigation at this site, because during its
             permitting process the Army Corps of Engineers identified this
             marsh as the preferred mitigation site for the wetlands lost by
             the proposed widening of Interstate 95. Establishing a wetland
             banking policy would allow these two parties to consolidate
             resources and funding, historically slated from fragmented wetland
             mitigation projects, into one large contiguous mitigation project
             that can more effectively replace lost wetland functions and
             values within the watershed. An additional benefit of advanced
             compensation for wetland loss is that it provides for greater
             certainty of successful mitigation, because mitigation is
             established before permits are issued.

                  Several Superfund remediation settlements are currently
             ongoing, and most involve remediation of wetlands or compensation
             for natural resource injuries that are wetland related. Because
             of the complexity of assessing resource injuries and developing
             remediation plans, a task force comprised of state and federal
             resource agencies was formed to assist in the remediation
             negotiations for one of the NDWRP sites, Army Creek Marsh. This
             task force, the Army Creek Superfund Natural Resources Damages
             Trustees, is comprised of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
             National Marine Fisheries Service, and the Delaware Divisions of
             Air and Waste Management and Fish and Wildlife. The task force
             has embraced the NDWRP, and is currently considering the program's
             regional rehabilitation strategy when assisting in the development
             of Superfund remediation plans and natural resource damages
             compensation. The next use of this task force approach to natural
             resources injury assessment and damages determination, which might
             not involve formation of an official trustee group, is in
             association with the DuPont Newport Superfund site. This












                                                                              16

             superfund site might affect several NDWRP sites. This working
             relationship being forged among the various agencies will provide
             significant funding and technical resources to the NDWRP, while
             providing an appropriate avenue for compensation of Superfund-
             related natural resources injuries.

                  The Division of Soil and Water Conservation is currently
             pursuing the formation of a landowner association at a proposed
             wetland rehabilitation site by creatively utilizing the 200 year-
             old Delaware Drainage Code. Chapter 41 of the Delaware Drainage
             Code has historically been used to manage water and correct
             drainage problems via tax ditch associations. However, at
             Thousand Acre Marsh, an attempt is being made to help landowners
             help themselves by utilizing a "tax ditch" organization to
             biologically and hydrologically improve the marsh and its
             management practices.

                  Historically, landowner disputes over water management
             practices have significantly degraded and hindered the improvement
             of Thousand Acre Marsh. Therefore, to resolve these disputes and
             rehabilitate the marsh, the formation of the Thousand Acre Tax
             Ditch Association was proposed to determine marsh management
             decisions and implement actions based on a landowner majority
             vote. The formation of a tax ditch association not only provides
             a forum for decision making, but it also provides a legal
             mechanism for taxation within the association by establishing a
             dedicated source of funding for marsh management activities.
             Additionally, as a legally binding organization, a tax ditch
             association is eligible to apply for wetland restoration funding
             from appropriate state and federal agencies. If this unique use
             of the Delaware Drainage Code is successful at Thousand Acre
             Marsh, DNREC anticipates using the same approach for similar marsh
             management associations at other proposed wetland rehabilitation
             sites with multiple landowners.





                            COMPONENTS OF THE REHABILITATION PLAN



                  An important element in any restoration effort is an
             appropriately detailed restoration plan, followed by the more
             difficult and essential task of actually implementing the planned
             actions. This plan provides a foundation from which all
             rehabilitation efforts are based. Without such a plan,
             rehabilitation efforts may take tangential courses that might not
             arrive at their targeted objectives. Although the plan should be
             a definitive outline focused on achieving specific rehabilitation
             objectives, it should also continue to evolve as new information
             is obtained. This plan should be of sufficient detail so that
             ambiguity during project implementation is minimized. of course,











                                                                               17

             the reality of implementing planned but untried or unproven
             procedures might lead to alterations of the site-specific project
             goals.

                  Wetland rehabilitation plans should be constructed around
             scientifically-based biological inventories and ecological
             evaluations of the site and its surrounding landscape. These
             ecological studies should be designed to obtain information on the
             degree and causes of wetlands dysfunctions, and provide baseline
             data on all resources that might be affected by rehabilitation
             efforts. This baseline information should provide historic and
             current perspectives of the site, and insight on its potential.
             Pertinent baseline information includes in part:

                   1)  Hydrologic characteristics - detailed information on
                       tidal and groundwater influences, runoff
                       characteristics, and basin dynamics.
                   2)  Water quality - parameters related to aquatic organisms
                       and state water quality standards.
                   3)  Contaminants - point source and nonpoint source
                       pollutants, and hazardous waste sites potentially
                       impacting the site or its proposed restoration plan.
                   4)  Fish communities - detailed analysis of present and
                       potential species composition and abundances with
                       emphasis on habitat requisites.
                   5)  Wildlife use - emphasis placed on waterbirds and aquatic
                       mammals including species composition, abundances, and
                       seasonal habitat requirements.            1,
                   6)  Threatened and endangered species, and sDecies of
                       special concern - identify listed fauna and floral
                       populations and their critical habitats for protection
                       of biological diversity values.
                   7)  Vegetation communities - determine species composition,
                       areal cover, productivity, biomass, and indices of
                       relative dominance and diversity.
                   8)  Mosquito production - species composition, abundance
                       indices, and previous control efforts.
                   9)  Land use - previous and present uses of the wetland site
                       and surrounding landscape.
                   10) Recreation and education opportunities and uses -
                       existing and potential opportunities and uses.
                   11) Geology and soil resources - physiographic provinces and
                       soil types.
                   12) Socioeconomic and cultural resources - potential impacts
                       of proposed rehabilitation plans to residents and
                       archeological sites.

             Whenever possible, these studies should be designed to collect
             quantitative data rather than anecdotal information. Properly
             collected quantitative data are more likely to address issues
             raised during regulatory reviews of restoration proposals.
             Additionally, the comparison of properly collected quantitative












                                                                              18

             baseline data with post-implementation data provides better
             objective criteria for evaluating the success of site-specific
             goals. However, because quantitative data are often expensive and
             labor-intensive to collect, often at the expense of alternate
             funding uses of perhaps more importance, it is occasionally
             necessary to settle for scientifically-based qualitative
             information.

                  The rehabilitation plan should clearly define the site-
             specific objectives. The nature of these objectives should be
             such that they not only rehabilitate a specific wetland, but they
             also benefit the entire corridor by addressing one or more of the
             regional objectives. Each site-specific objective should include
             action steps required to accomplish the goal. These action steps
             should be in enough detail to provide both implementing and
             regulatory personnel with a clear understanding of what is
             proposed to be conducted. These steps should also include
             approximate initiation and completion dates. All site-specific
             objectives should have measurable evaluative criteria to provide
             temporal measures of success. If resources permit, these criteria
             should be quantitative and comparable with measurements of
             baseline data.

                  A requisite to the long-term needs of this regional wetland
             rehabilitation strategy is development of site-specific operation,
             maintenance, and management plans (OMM plans). These plans might
             have participation arrangements ranging from voluntary agreements
             to enforceable policies. This component ofthe rehabilitation
             plan provides assurances that rehabilitation efforts will be
             implemented, maintained, managed, and modified as needed to
             accommodate site-specific and regional objectives, and to prevent
             the extenuation or reversal of restoration achievements. The OMM
             plan identifies the agencies or parties responsible for site-
             specific long-term rehabilitation needs. These responsibilities
             include performing and funding the maintenance, repair,
             replacement and inspection of various structures, e.g, water
             control, wildlife enhancement, recreation, and erosion and
             sedimentation control structures. Other responsibilities could
             include implementing and funding various operating and management
             practices, such as water and vegetation management plans;
             phragmites, mosquito, and nonpoint source pollution control
             programs; and emergency response to structure failures. The
             responsibilities of a particular agency or party will be
             documented through operation, maintenance, and management
             agreements. This documentation might occur in the form of
             voluntary or mandatory memorandums of agreement (MOA's) among
             governmental agencies, voluntary or legally-binding documents
             signed by landowners or associations (e.g., conservation or water
             management easements), or enforceable programs or policies. These
             signed agreements provide the mechanisms needed to ensure long-
             term rehabilitation success, with enforceable arrangements having
             more certainty than voluntary measures.












                                                                              19

                  The final component of the rehabilitation plan is a provision
             to actively involve the landowners and local environmental groups
             in the rehabilitation effort. Active involvement by the public
             not only promotes a increased awareness and understanding of
             wetland functions and values, but it also provides additional
             assurance of the long-term success of the project. Mechanisms to
             involve landowners include: providing opportunities for input
             into the rehabilitation process; developing water management and
             conservation easements; forming watershed associations; inclusion
             of landowner responsibility in the OMM plan; and developing
             biological monitoring projects. Environmental groups can also
             become advocates of a rehabilitation project through involvement
             in community service and biological monitoring projects, and the
             promotion of Departmental projects, e.g., Adopt-a-Wetland and
             Christina River Cleanup.





                             SYSTEMATIC R]KHABILITATION PROCEDURE


                  The NDWRP has developed a systematic procedure to facilitate
             the development and implementation of site-specific wetland
             rehabilitation plans. This process not only provides a framework
             for restoration planning and implementation, but it also promotes
             frequent input by landowners, Steering Committee members, adjunct
             committee members, and regulatory agencies. This framework also
             encourages utilizing the technical expertise of the rehabilitation
             team members and allocating task responsibilities to various
             members. It is important to the cohesion, credibility, and
             performance of the NDWRP effort that any proposed or new
             activities affecting the program be brought to the attention and
             review of the Steering Committee at the earliest possible time.
             NDWRP participants should keep other members of the Steering
             Committee fully informed about their activities on rehabilitation
             sites, and not undertake substantive activities without Steering
             Committee review and concurrence. Assignments of task
             responsibilities in the NDWRP effort should be guided by
             assessment of an agency's or individuals's official or traditional
             responsibilities, which usually represent the best and most
             appropriate source of knowledge, expertise, or experience about
             the topics or problems at hand.

                  The systematic rehabilitation procedure for site-specific
             projects is:

                   1)  Present proposed rehabilitation site and preliminary
                       project objectives to the Steering Committee. The
                       Steering Committee reviews the rehabilitation candidate,
                       and if approved, designates a site-specific project
                       manager.












                                                                               20

                   2)  Designate or initiate acquisition of funding for the
                       development and implementation of the rehabilitation
                       plan.
                   3)  Conduct tax map searches to identify landowners.
                   4)  Contact landowners to solicit involvement in the
                       rehabilitation project and acquire permission to conduct
                       biological inventories and ecological evaluations.
                   5)  Conduct biological inventories and ecological
                       evaluations of site.
                   6)  Formulate a draft rehabilitation plan and present to
                       Steering Committee for review and approval.
                       Rehabilitation plan should be outlined on a tracking
                       form, which identifies site-specific multi-use
                       objectives, action steps required, and evaluative-
                       criteria. This form provides a mechanism whereby
                       project development, implementation, and success can be
                       updated and assessed.
                   7)  Conduct additional biological inventories, ecological
                       evaluations, topographic surveys, hydrological studies,
                       and engineering designs as needed.
                   8)  Obtain input on the rehabilitation plan from adjunct
                       committee members and regulatory agencies via
                       presentations and site visits.
                   9)  Hold a public meeting with the landowners to identify
                       potential conflicts with the draft rehabilitation plan.
                  10)  Finalize the rehabilitation plan and present to
                       Steering Committee for review and approval.
                  11)  Prepare project specific environmental assessments and
                       permit applications.
                  12)  Establish community or environmental groups as advocates
                       of the rehabilitation project.
                  13)  Present final rehabilitation plan to landowners for
                       comment. This step is frequently required in the permit
                       process.
                  14)  Upon permit approval and acquisition of funding,
                       implement the rehabilitation plan and develop a final
                       work schedule.
                  15)  Monitor evaluative criteria to determine the success of
                       accomplishing site-specific multiple-use objectives.
                       Make adjustments/additions to rehabilitation plan to
                       better achieve these goals or accommodate additional
                       objectives.

                  .The chronology of achieving such benchmarks will undoubtedly
             deviate slightly among rehabilitation projects, as site-specific
             opportunities or problems arise. Several of these benchmarks can
             and should be initiated earlier in the process as opportunities
             present themselves, e.g., funding acquisition, landowner contacts,
             and obtaining biological inventories, hydrological studies, and
             ecological evaluations. Although minor changes in the chronology
             are acceptable, it is imperative to the overall success of the
             rehabilitation strategy that all the outline benchmarks are












                                                                              21

             achieved prior to plan implementation. This requirement of
             assuring that all pertinent benchmarks are addressed prevents
             projects from being implemented in a haphazard "shotgun approach".
             Such an approach is less likely to achieve regional objectives and
             more likely to promote negative feedback concerning the program.
             At the same time, the planning process must not take on a life of
             its own and become an excessively lengthy or costly procedure,
             which would also generate negative feedback.





                        SITE-SPECIFIC REMILITATION PROJECTS UPDATES


                  Currently, 31 wetland rehabilitation sites are identified
             within the highly degraded urban corridor along the Christina and
             the Delaware Rivers (Table 2). Rehabilitation efforts on 11 of
             these sites have significantly advanced beyond this preliminary
             identification phase (Fig. 3). Progress varies among these 11
             sites, ranging from the development of site-specific ecological
             evaluations, to landowner negotiations, to acquisition of funding,
             and implementation of the rehabilitation plan. Site-specific
             descriptions and tracking forms outlining the project goals,
             action steps needed, and evaluative criteria of several of these
             projects are presented in the appendices. Provided in the
             subsequent sections are updated progress reports for these 11
             ongoing projects.



             Broad Dyke Marsh

                  The administrative lead for this project is the Division of
             Fish and Wildlife with substantial technical and administrative
             support being provided by the New Castle Conservation District,
             particularly in the design and construction of the proposed water
             control structure., The Divisionof Air and Waste Management has
             provided extensive information concerning potential contaminant
             sources within the watershed and their likelihood of impacting the
             project. The Division of Parks and Recreation is coordinating the
             inclusion of portions of this marsh into the Delaware Coastal
             Heritage Greenway Program. other Divisions and agencies have also
             ,provided support.

                  Studies initiated in 1987 have determined that the
             successful, long-term restoration of the Broad Dyke Marsh is
             dependent upon replacing the existing or installing an additional
             water control structure (Delaware Mosquito Control Section 1988).
             This new structure must be a larger, more specialized structure
             that allows carefully controlled tidal exchanges while having the
             capacity to release significant stormwater input. It should also





            Table 2. Wetland sites proposed for rehabilitation under the          22
            Northern Delaware Wetland Rehabilitation Program (NDWRP).


               Site (n7-31)                                           Acreage


            Airport Marsh Wetland Complex                                139
            Army Creek Marsh                                             235
            Artesian Marsh                                               136
            Augustine Creek Wetland Complex                             1130
            Banning Park Marsh                                            84
            Broad Dyke Marsh                                             210
            Buttonwood Marsh                                             100
            Cherry Island                                                325+
            Christina Creek Marshes                                      225
            Churchman's Marsh                                            250
            The Delmarva Power and Light Impoundment                      81
            Dragon Run Marsh                                             615
            Everglades Marsh                                             289
            Gambacorta Marsh                                              41
            Glenville Marsh                                               45
            Hamburg Cove Marsh                                           202
            Holloway Terrace Marsh                                        46
            ICI Marsh                                                     30
            Luken's Marsh                                                215
            National Guard Marsh                                         170
            NeCastro Marsh                                               @29
            Newport Marsh                                                 44
            Nonesuch Creek   Basin                                       588
            Old Canal Marshes/Scott Run                                  542
            Old Wilmington Marsh                                         325+
            Pea Patch Island Marsh                                        90
            Red Lion Marsh                                               465
            Shellpot Creek Marsh                                         150+
            Silver Run/Augustine  Wildlife Complex                      2115
            South Wilmington Wetland Fragments                           200
            Thousand Acre Marsh                                          1288



             Total                                                    10,404+












                                                                              23












































             Fig. 3. Wetlands restoration sites currently being developed or
             implemented by the Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation
             Program (NDWRP).












                                                                               24

              operate in an automated fashion to eliminate the need for labor-
              intensive management and maintenance. Because most of the
              rehabilitation plans and management decisions regarding this
              proposed project are dependent on the hydrology of Broad Dyke
              Marsh being restored, rehabilitation efforts have focused on
              obtaining designs, funding, and permits for this new water control
              structure. Once this structure is in place, additional
              rehabilitation efforts will continue.

                  Complementing the extensive studies and management practices
              conducted in 1987-1989 (Delaware Mosquito Control Section 1988;
              1990), a biological inventory and ecological evaluation of the
              marsh was completed in November 1992 (Cole and Fabean 1992).
              Information obtained in these studies has assisted in the
              hydrologic and hydraulic modeling of the system. This modeling
              (Williams and Broome 1992) has led to the design and final
              selection of a $500,000 automated water control structure,
              containing a vertical lift gate and automatic water-level sensors,
              that allows daily tidal exchange and regulates marsh water levels.
              This structure will be installed adjacent to the existing
              structure, which will be maintained to increase outflow during
              heavy storm events. Rehabilitation and water management plans
              have also been developed (Appendix A), and are awaiting approval
              by the Steering Committee. The permit submission process will be
              initiated when these plans are approved.

                  Current ongoing management practices include an annual
              maintenance program to control phragmites through aerial
              applications of herbicide. An initial herbicide treatment of 112
              acres was conducted in the late 1980's. In 1993, 38 acres of
              persistent and regenerating stands were treated. Efforts are
              underway to conduct controlled burns on several of these
              persistent stands during the late winter of 1994. Additional
              ongoing management practices include daily monitoring of marsh
              water levels, annual surveys of wood duck production, seasonal
              inspections of mosquito breeding, and monitoring of floral and
              faunal communities. Permanent vegetation transects and water
              quality sampling stations will be established in the marsh during
              the summer of 1994 to provide a baseline for evaluative criteria.

                  Both landowner and community support for this project have
              been outstanding, with 90% of city of New Castle residents
              supporting it (Barnekov and Appel 1993). The largest landowner,
              the Trustees of New Castle Common, has provided significant
              funding for the project. Obtaining non-fifiancial support has also
              been successful. Two environmental groups from local high schools
              have adopted the marsh through DNREC's Adopt-A-Wetland Program.
              During the 1993 Delaware Coastal Cleanup, these environmental
              groups initiated a trash cleanup in the marsh. These groups are
              currently developing additional environmental education,
              ecological monitoring, and cleanup programs through the assistance
              of DNREC.












                                                                                  25

                   @pproval of the project by the appropriate regulatory
              agencies is anticipated in June 1994. A final version of the
              draft environmental assessment will be submitted in March 1994,
              with the appropriate permits. Several site visits and
              presentations have been attended by various regulatory agency
              personnel, and all feedback has been positive with several
              agencies providing helpful input regarding the development of the
              rehabilitation plan and the environmental assessment. Partial
              clearance for the project has been received by the State Historic
              Preservation Office. Currently, a draft operation and maintenance
              plan for the proposed water control structure has been developed.
              Participants in this plan include the Delaware Division of Fish
              and Wildlife, the New Castle County Public Works, the City of New
              Castle, the Trustees of New Castle Common, and the New Castle
              Immanuel Episcopal Church.

                   Funding support for the project has advanced slowly; however,
              sufficient funding is anticipated to initiate construction of the
              water control structure in the summer of 1994. Secured and
              pending funding sources for the structure include:

                Secured
                   EPA Section 319 Nonpoint Source Pollution Grant     $ 180,000
                   Trustees of New Castle Common                           105,000
                   State of Delaware, FY-93 Appropriation                   50,000
                                                                        $  335,000

                Pending
                   New Castle County Public Works Department            $  100,000
                   State of Delaware, FY-94 Appropriation                   50,000
                   Ducks Unlimited, Inc. (Delaware Chapter)                 40,000
                                                                        $  190,000




              Gambacorta Marsh

                   The administrative lead for this project is the Division of
              Fish and Wildlife. The New Castle Conservation District is
              assisting in the design of the proposed water control structure.
              The District has also taken the lead in addressing a sedimentation
              problem occurring in an adjacent lumber yard. Recent vegetation
              control and construction practices within this lumber yard have
              caused increased sedimentation of a portion of the marsh. The
              District is pursuing the installation of a water conveyance system
              with diversion berms, and subsequent revegetation of the area to
              prevent additional sedimentation from occurring. once the
              sedimentation is controlled, the silted-in area of the marsh will
              be excavated. Other divisions and agencies have also provided
              support. The Division of Soil and Water Conservation has compiled
              a comprehensive nonpoint source pollution control plan for the
              marsh. The Division of Air and Waste Management has provided











                                                                                26

              extensive information concerning potential contaminant sources in
              the watershed, particularly the marsh sediment, and their
              likelihood of impacting the project. The Division of Parks and
              Recreation is coordinating the inclusion of portions of this marsh
              into the Delaware Coastal Heritage Greenway Program.

                   The rehabilitation status of Gambacorta Marsh is that it is
              awaiting funding and permit review. A biological inventory and
              ecological evaluation of the marsh was completed in November 1992
              (Cole and Fabean 1992), and the rehabilitation  and water
              management plans (Appendix B) were approved by  the Steering
              Committee in April 1993.

                   The water management plan was implemented  in August 1993
              after the existing water control structure was  temporarily
              modified to allow daily tidal exchange. Since   the plan's
              implementation, water levels and salinity have  been monitored on a
              weekly basis. Additional water quality parameters will be
              monitored in the near future. Other ongoing management practices
              include an annual maintenance program to control phragmites
              through aerial application of herbicide. In 1993, 10 acres of
              persistent and regenerating stands were treated. This control
              plan, initiated in the late 19801s, has reduced the areal coverage
              of phragmites within the 'marsh by approximately 82%.   Efforts are
              underway to conduct controlled burns on several of these
              persistent stands during the late-winter of 1994. Annual surveys
              of wood duck production and weekly surveys of waterbird use are
              being conducted to determine the success of the wood duck nest
              boxes and the water management plan, respectively. 'Seasonal
              inspections of mosquito breeding, and monitoring of floral and
              faunal communities, are also being conducted. Five permanent
              vegetation transects were established in the marsh during August
              1993. These transects provide baseline data to evaluate and
              modify the water management plan and future wetland rehabilitation
              efforts.

                   Community support for this project has been outstanding as
              determined by the mostly positive responses from visitors
              utilizing the adjacent New Castle Scenic Walkway. Several walkway
              users were concerned about the seasonal draw downs; however, an
              interpretive sign will address these concerns and provide an
              understanding of the management goals of the marsh. Although
              participants of the 1993 Delaware Coastal Cleanup assisted in
              removing a significant amount of trash from the marsh, DNREC is
              still soliciting for a local environmental group to formally adopt
              the marsh through the Adopt-A-Wetland Program.

                   The primary reason for the delay in implementing the
              Gambacorta Marsh rehabilitation plan is that the landowner,
              Trustees of New Castle Common, is currently funding another
              project, Broad Dyke Marsh. The Trustees are understandably
              hesitant to fund or approve extensive rehabilitation efforts on











                                                                               27

             Gambacorta Marsh until the other wetland rehabilitation project is
             partially completed. However in September 1993, the Trustees
             approved portions of an interim rehabilitation proposal for the
             marsh. Within the framework of this proposal, the Trustees have
             provided funding for additional phragmites control work, the
             creation of scenic vistas along the Scenic Walkway, and the
             construction of interpretive signs along the Scenic Walkway. The
             phragmites control and clearing of vistas along the walkway were
             preformed by the Trustees and the Division of Fish and Wildlife.
             Additional assistance in the clearing of brush was obtained
             through prison labor from the Delaware State Department of
             Corrections. Construction of the interpretive signs is proposed
             in the spring of 1994 after the Trustees and the Division of Parks
             and.Recreation finalize the inclusion of the scenic walkway into
             the Delaware Coastal Heritage Greenway Program. These signs will
             be designed cooperatively among the Trustees and the Divisions of
             Fish and Wildlife and Parks and Recreation. The DuPont Company
             donated $5,000 to the Trustees to develop and construct these
             signs.

                  The only item of the interim proposal that was not approved
             by the Trustees was the construction of a 6-foot-high observation
             platform overlooking the marsh. This item was placed on hold
             because it was feared that the additional use of this structure
             might exacerbate a parking problem at the entrance of the Scenic
             Walkway. The Divisions of Fish and Wildlife and Air and Waste
             Management are currently assisting in developing a resolution to
             this parking problem through acquisition of property as part of
             the Army Creek Superfund Natural Resources Damages settlement.

                  An environmental assessment and permit applications will be
             submitted once funding for the new water control structure and
             final approval by the Trustees is received. Several site visits
             and presentations have been attended by various regulatory agency
             personnel, and all feedback has been positive with several
             agencies providing helpful input regarding the development of the
             rehabilitation plan. Existing and potential funding sources for
             this project include the Trustees of New Castle Common, Delaware
             Department of Transportation, Brosius-Eliason Lumber Company, and
             the DuPont Company.




             Thousand Acre Marsh

                  The administrative lead for this project is the Division of
             Soil and Water Conservation. The New Castle Conservation District
             has administered a contract to develop a 2-foot contour map of the
             marsh's 3,067-acre watershed. The Division of Parks and
             Recreation's Natural Heritage Inventory is currently conducting a
             biotic composition and natural community description of the marsh.
             Other Divisions and agencies have also provided support.












                                                                              28

                  This project was initiated by the Division of Fish and
             Wildlife in 1991 through a grant provided by the U.S. Fish and
             Wildlife Service. This grant provided the funding for completing
             a draft report on the general background, description, and
             management recommendations for Thousand Acre Marsh (Carter 1992a).
             Information obtained in this and subsequent studies have assisted
             in the development of rehabilitation and water management plans
             (Appendix C). These plans will be submitted to the appropriate
             regulatory agencies for permitting after reviewand approval by
             the Steering Committee.

                  Several site-specific marsh and watershed rehabilitation
             efforts are proposed for this marsh including: conducting an
             extensive phragmites control program; installing a new water
             control structure; utilizing innovative dredging technology to
             restore "wet island" habitats; restoring channels to improve marsh
             access and water circulation, and identifying areas within the
             watershed where conservation practices would improve surface water
             runoff quality. However, the implementation and funding of these
             rehabilitation efforts are conditioned on the formation of a
             landowner tax ditch association. This association would enable
             the 22 private landowners to determinemanagement Actions based on
             a majority vote, and provides for a legal mechanism in which
             taxation within the association provides a source of funds for
             marsh management. Several landowner meetings have been held (the
             most recent in July 1993) to provide detailed overviews of the
             marsh rehabilitation and tax ditch formation plans. These public
             meetings were preceded and followed by meetings with individual
             landowners to address specific concerns, questions, and needs. A
             petition to investigate the feasibility of the formation of the
             Thousand Acre Tax Ditch Association was signed by a majority of
             landowners (55%) in July 1992. The Superior Court of Delaware
             approved the formation of this association in March 1993. A final
             vote by the landowners whether to form the Thousand Acre Tax Ditch
             Association is expected in February 1994.

                  There appears to be a concern by some landowners regarding
             the prospect of allowing limited estuarine exchange with Thousand
             Acre Marsh. These concerns are in regard to potential changes in
             marsh salinity and vegetation composition, and fluctuating water
             levels. This sensitivity over tidal exchange was sufficient to
             prevent the Division of Fish and Wildlife from undertaking an U.S.
             Fish and wildlife supported estuarine fisheries habitat assessment
             of the marsh. Not reintegrating this large wetland area with the
             estuary would severely limit the number of regional multiple-use
             objectives achieved by the restoration plan. Limited tidal
             exchange would benefit water quality, fisheries use, control of
             pestiferous mosquito populations, and two large wading bird
             colonies within the corridor. Initiatives are now being made to
             convince landowners of the necessity and benefits of restoring
             limited estuarine exchange to the marsh.












                                                                                    29

                   Initiation of an environmental assessment and permit
              applications are pending formation of the Tax Ditch Association
              and its decision with regard to wetland rehabilitation activities.
              However, state and federal wetland permits have been received to
              construct 560 yards of rip-rap stabilization along an individual
              landowner's property, and to address an erosion problem along the
              intercoastal dike (Route 9). The rip-rap stabilization was
              completed in the summer of 1993 and the erosion problem along
              Route 9 will be addressed in January-February 1994. Additional
              ongoing management practices include the February 1992
              implementation of an interim water management plan, weekly
              monitoring of water levels and water quality (salinity,
              temperature,', dissolved oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus), and seasonal
              inspections of mosquito breeding.

                   Several site visits and presentations were attended by
              various regulatory agency personnel, and feedback was mostly
              positive. some concern was been raised regarding the funding and
              involvement by public agencies for the benefit of a private
              association; however, a position paper identifying the public
              benefit of this rehabilitation project is being developed.
              Additionally, the recent approval for the acquisition of 100 acres
              of this marsh by the Division of Fish and Wildlife should also
              enhance the public benefit of the proposed rehabilitation efforts.

                   Funding for this project has been received from the U.S. EPA
              Delaware Estuary Program Grant ($41,500), environmental
              reimbursement funds associated with the Presidente Rivera oil
              spill ($13,000), and other unspecified penalty monies ($17,000).
              The FY-94 DCMP Section 309 Enhancement Strategy for the NDWRP was
              redirected to provide funding for the establishment of a detailed
              nonpoint source pollution reduction plan and other wetland and
              watershed enhancement and rehabilitation projects at Thousand Acre
              Marsh. The Potential funding sources include the state bond bill,
              the Army Corps of Engineers, and funds derived from self-taxation
              by the Tax Ditch Association. The proposed Tax Ditch Association,
              as a legally binding organization, is also eligible to apply for
              wetland restoration funds from outside sources.



              Delmarva  Power and Light Impoundment (DPL Impoundment)

                   The  administrative lead for this project is the Division of
              Fish and Wildlife. The New Castle Conservation District has
              assisted  in developing watershed maps and addressing water supply
              issues.   The Division of Soil and Water Conservation has compiled
              a comprehensive no 'npoint source pollution control plan for the
              marsh. The Divisi  on of Air and Waste Management has provided
              extensive information concerning potential contaminant sources in
              the watershed and their likelihood of impacting the project, in
              particular a solid waste landfill within the proposed












                                                                              30

             rehabilitation area. other Divisions and agencies have also
             provided support.

                  A biological inventory and ecological evaluation of the marsh
             was completed in November 1992 (Cole and Fabean 1992), and a
             rehabilitation plan (Appendix D) was developed. Current ongoing
             management practices include a phragmites control program that was
             initiated in 1992. This program involves annual aerial
             applications of herbicide on phragmites stands followed by
             controlled burns the subsequent winter. A partially successful
             burn was conducted in March 1993, and 58 acres of persistent and
             regenerating stands were retreated with herbicide in October 1993.
             Additional management practices include an extensive topographic
             survey of the marsh and surrounding upland areas, seasonal
             inspections of mosquito breeding, hydrological manipulations of
             the existing water control structure, and monitoring of floral and
             faunal communities.


                  The two landowners of this wetland have differed in their
             response to the rehabilitation project. Delmarva Power has fully
             supported this project through both their Real Estate Department
             and Sportsmen Club. The Real Estate Department provided funding
             for phragmites spraying, and the Sportsmen Club provided
             assistance with the*controlled burns, hydrological manipulations,
             and trash removal during the 1993 Delaware Coastal Cleanup. Star
             Enterprises is supportive of the wetland rehabilitation
             initiative, but they are not interested in consenting to a long-
             term management agreement or providing any funding for the
             rehabilitation of the DPL Impoundment unless they can receive
             "environmental consideration" to be used as mitigation in an
             unrelated project. However, recent information indicates that
             Star Enterprises might reconsider consenting to a long-term
             management agreement in the near future.

                  The current rehabilitation status of the DPL Impoundment is
             that concerns regarding the feasibility of the rehabilitation
             effort need to be addressed before the Steering Committee approves
             the plan. one concern is that the proposed expansion of a sand
             and gravel extraction operation in the watershed might divert a
             significant amount of storm runoff away from the marsh and into
             another watershed, critically lessening the water supply of the
             marsh. This concern has recently been addressed by obtaining the
             contour maps and sedimentation control plans for the proposed
             extraction operation. These plans and maps indicate that the
             extraction operation will not significantly impact the water
             quality or supply for the proposed marsh. The other concern
             pertains to whether the integrity of the existing dike will
             support the proposed water levels. Efforts are currently underway
             to have a registered engineer examine the dike and rehabilitation
             proposal. An environmental assessment and permit applications
             will be submitted when the rehabilitation plan is approved by the
             Steering Committee; when funding for the new water control












                                                                                  31

             structure is obtained; and when Star Enterprises supports a long-
             term management agreement for their portion of the wetland.
             Existing or potential funding sources for this project are
             Delmarva Power and Star Enterprises.



             NeLw2ort Marsh

                  The administrative lead for this project is the Division of
             Fish and Wildlife; however, because this marsh has been
             potentially impacted by the E.I. DuPont Newport Superfund Site,
             the Division is coordinating this work with the Division of Air
             and Waste Management and the other DuPont Newport Superfund
             Natural Resources Trustees (U.S Fish and Wildlife Service,
             National Marine Fisheries Service). other Divisions and agencies
             have also provided support.

                  A biological inventory and ecological evaluation of the marsh
             was completed in November 1992 (Cole and Fabean 1992), and a draft
             rehabilitation plan was developed and will require approval by the
             Steering Committee prior to submission for permits. Management
             practices and further rehabilitation efforts on this marsh have
             been curtailed until decisions regarding the potential impacts and
             natural resource injuries associated with the Superfund site are
             resolved. A primary concern is that by rehabilitating the marsh
             prior to addressing the Superfund contaminant issues, we might be
             increasing the potential risk of contamination to wildlife and
             humans.    Management practices have been limited to topographic
             surveys of the marsh and surrounding upland areas, seasonal
             inspections of mosquito breeding, and monitoring of floral and
             faunal communities. The phragmites control program initiated in
             1992 was discontinued.

                   There has been considerable community support to rehabilitate
             this state-owned property. The City of Newport has expressed a
             desire to maximize the marsh's educational and recreational
             potential, and a local high school has requested adopting it
             through the DNREC Adopt-A-Wetland Program. This community support
             will be utilized once the rehabilitation plan is finalized and the
             permit process initiated, which are dependent on the Superfund
             issues being addressed. If it is determined that the Superfund
             site significantly impacted the wetland, then potential funding
             for this project might be obtained through the DuPont Newport
             Superfund Remediation Plan. If the wetland has not been
             significantly impacted by the Superfund site, then restoration
             funding might be obtained through the compensation for the
             Superfund natural resource injuries.












                                                                               32

             Artesian Marsh


                  The administrative lead for this project is the Division of
             Fish and Wildlife, with substantial technical and administrative
             support being received from other Divisions and agencies. The
             Division of Air and Waste Management has provided extensive
             information concerning potential contaminant sources in the
             watershed, technical assistance in sediment sampling for toxins,
             and administrative assistance in coordinating potential
             rehabilitation plans with the DuPont Newport Superfund Site. The
             Division of Water Resources is currently assisting in the
             development of a site-specific wetlands mitigation banking effort
             to promote this wetland rehabilitation project. This Division has
             also provided technical assistance in testing sediment samples.
             The New Castle Conservation District has provided technical
             assistance in conducting topographic surveys of the marsh and has
             provided information regarding floodplain ordinances in the
             watershed. Other Divisions and agencies have also provided
             support.

                  A biological inventory and ecological evaluation of the marsh
             was completed in September 1993 (Cole and Cole 1993), and a draft
             rehabilitation plan (Appendix E) is being developed for review and
             approval by the Steering Committee. Rehabilitation efforts for
             this wetland have been delayed, because the marsh might have been
             impacted by the DuPont Newport Superfund Site or several other
             potential contaminant sources in the watershed. This site has
             also been identified as a potential mitigation site for natural
             resource damages associated with the superfund site. Therefore,
             the Division is coordinating this restoration with the DuPont
             Newport Superfund Natural Resources Trustees (Division of Air and
             Waste Management, U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine
             Fisheries Service). Because of the concern for potential
             contaminants, sediment sampling of the marsh was conducted in June
             1993. This preliminary sampling identified high levels of zinc in
             the sediment; however, additional sampling is required for
             conclusive results. Rehabilitation plans will not proceed until
             this issue is addressed, because by rehabilitating the marsh prior
             to having contaminant issues addressed, we might be increasing the
             risk of exposing wildlife and humans to toxins. Current
             rehabilitation practices include conducting an extensive
             topographic survey of the marsh, surrounding upland areas, and
             adjacent flood plains; mapping and assessment of breaches in the
             existing dike; daily monitoring of water levels in the adjacent
             Christina River; seasonal inspections of mosquito breeding; and
             monitoring of floral and faunal communities.

                  The property owner of the marsh, Artesian Water Company, is
             interested in assisting in this rehabilitation, but desires
             mitigation credit for possible use on a proposed reservoir
             project. The DelDOT has also expressed interest in wetlands












                                                                               33

             mitigation at this site. During DelDOT's permitting process, the
             Army Corps of Engineers has identified this marsh as the preferred
             mitigation site for the wetlands lost by the proposed widening of
             Interstate 95. The Divisions of Fish and Wildlife and Water
             Resources are seeking a Departmental position that allows Artesian
             Water, and possibly DelDOT, to receive future mitigation credit
             for their support in this rehabilitation project. This policy
             would differ from the Department's regular process of not pre-
             disposing wetland mitigation decisions for projects not completed
             or permitted.

                  When the various contaminant, Superfund, and landowner issues
             are resolved, the rehabilitation plan, environmental assessment,
             and permit applications will be submitted to the Steering
             Committee and the appropriate regulatory agencies. Potential
             funding sources for this project are those previously mentioned,
             i.e., Artesian Water Company, DelDOT, and natural resource damages
             associated with the DuPont Newport Superfund Site. Another party
             interested in assisting DNREC in this project is the U.S. Fish &
             Wildlife Service, which has indicated that they would like to
             become involved through their private lands initiative, the
             Partners For Wildlife Program.



             Auggstine Creek Wetland CqMlex

                  The administrative lead for this project is the Division of
             Fish and Wildlife. The Division of Parks and Recreation's Natural
             Heritage Program has recently completed floristic composition
             studies and rare plant surveys of the marsh (Appendix F), and the
             New Castle Conservation District has assisted in developing
             watershed maps and sedimentation control plans. Other Divisions
             and agencies have also provided support.

                  A biological inventory and ecological evaluation of the marsh
             was completed in September 1993 (Cole and Cole 1993).
             Complementing these studies, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
             funded a estuarine fish habitat suitability evaluation for the
             marsh, designed and coordinated by the Division of Fish and
             Wildlife and preformed by a contractual environmental consulting
             firm (Environmental Consulting Services, Inc. 1993). A
             rehabilitation plan is being developed for approval by the
             Steering Committee. Current management practices include
             hydrological manipulations of the water control structure to fine
             tune and implement an interim water management plan. Hydrological
             manipulations and weekly water level and salinity monitoring were
             initiated in December 1992 in response to landowner reTjasts.
             Design specifications and installation procedures have been
             developed to install an automated water level recorder in the
             marsh during the summer of 1994.   A solution to a sedimentation
             and highway stabilization problem along the intercoastal dike











                                                                               34

             (Route 9) is currently being developed with the assistance of
             DelDOT and the New Castle Conservation District. Additional
             ongoing practices include conducting an extensive topographic
             survey of the marsh and surrounding upland areas, seasonal
             inspections of mosquito breeding, and monitoring of floral and
             faunal communities.

                  The Augustine Creek Wetland Complex is owned by 46 different
             landowners, with most of the property in private ownership (90%).
             Currently, the Division of Fish and Wildlife is working with these
             landowners to establish long-term conservation and water
             management easements for the complex. The formation of a
             watershed association similar to that proposed at Thousand Acre
             Marsh is another long-term management option being inv 'estigated
             for possible consideration. The three largest landowners,
             representing 42% (471 acres) of the wetland complex, have
             indicated a desire for a long-term management agreement. The
             largest landowner, Delaware Wildlands (236 acres, 21%), has
             provided funding for the short-term maintenance of the existing
             water control structure and the installation of wildlife ;
             enhancement structures. This conservation organizatio  'n also
             allows environmental groups to conduct educational tours through
             its Armstrong heronry, and has expressed a desire to contribute
             additional funding to rehabilitate the marsh.

                  A grant application for $240,894 has been submitted to the
             U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for its 1994 National C 'oasta,l
             Wetlands Conservation Grant. This grant would fund,,the
             construction and installation of an additional water control
             structure that would allow limited tidal exchanges, plus the
             treatment of approximately 300 acres of monotypic phragmite's
             stands. Last year a similar proposal for this project was.ranked
             #1 in the Northeast Region and #11 nationally. Unfortunately,
             only the top 10 proposals were funded. Preliminary feedback from
             the granting agency does not look favorable again this year, but a
             final funding decision has not yet been conveyed.. If funding is
             obtained for this project, emphasis will be placed on finalizing
             long-term management agreements and rehabilitation plans among the
             many landowners, and completing the environmental assessment and
             permit-applications for the appropriate regulatory agencies.
             Other potential funding sources for this project include Delaware
             Wildlands, DelDOT, Public Service Electric Gas, and the Federal
             Emergency Management Agency.



             Old Wilmincrton Marsh

                  The rehabilitation of this wetland is being co-administered
             by DNREC's Office of the Secretary and the Division of Soil and
             Water Conservation; however, they are coordinating all efforts
             with the Brandywine & Christina Rivers Task Force, the proponent













                                                                                                          35

                  of this project. DNREC has agreed to assume the role of
                  "facilitator" for this project, but it cannot assume management:
                  responsibilities. The NDWRP has had little direct involvement to
                  date with this project. The Division of Air and Waste Management.
                  is assisting in addressing potential hazardous waste issues at the
                  site by developing an environmental investigation strategy through
                  its Christina River Basin Hazardous Waste Sites Restoration
                  Project. The Division of Parks and Recreation is investigating
                  recreational opportunities at the site, and the New Castle
                  Conservation District is assisting in addressing stormwater
                  flooding and nonpoint source pollution problems. other Divisions',
                  and agencies have also provided support.

                         Before rehabilitation efforts can be further pursued, the
                  potential of hazardous wastes at this site must be addressed.
                  primary concern is that by restoring the marsh to the proposed,                       
                  wildlife refuge and public recreation area prior to addressing                     
                  these contaminant issues, we might be increasing the risk of
                  contamination to wildlife and humans. A Departmental strategy,to
                  conduct sediment analysis throughout the project area is currently                  being developed. As proposed, all DNREC Divisions would
                  contribute to the funding for this sediment testing. Once the
                  contaminant issues are addressed and if it is determined that the                          
                  wetland rehabilitation effort should go forward, emphasis will be
                  placed on developing a biological inventory and ecological
                  evaluation of the marsh. Information obtained from these studies
                  will be used in the development of rehabilitation plans, which
                  will be submitted to the appropriate regulatory agencies for
                  permits once approved by the Steering Committee.

                                                                                                             
                         The City of Wilmington and the Brandywine &                  Christina River
                  Task Force have been very supportive of the project. Land0wner
                  support has also been positive; however, once sediment testing
                  occurs this may change. Two landowners, Conrail and New Castle
                  County, have indicated a desire to donate or lease the land to
                  DNREC. However, DNREC will not accept any property suspected
                  containing hazardous wastes. The DCMP Section 309 Enhancement
                  Strategy has redirected funding for the establishment of a
                  detailed nonpoint source pollution reduction plan, plus other                 wetland and watershed enhancement and rehabilitation projects at
                  Old Wilmington Marsh. Other potential funding sources for this
                  project include the landowners of the marsh.



                  Army Creek Marsh

                         The wetlands of this project, being rehabilitated under the
                  direct guidance of the Army Creek Superfund Project; therefore,
                  the rehabilitation procedure for this project will differ from
                  those outlined in this planning document.                   The administrative
 











                                                                              36

             lead in preparing the wetland restoration plan is the Army Creek
             Superfund Natural Resources Damages Trustees comprised of the
             following agencies: Division of Fish and Wildlife, Division of
             Air and Waste Management, U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, and
             National Marine Fisheries Service. The Environmental Protection
             Agency (EPA) and the Steering Committee will review the final
             rehabilitation plan, but approval is only required among the
             Trustees. The permitting process might differ in that it is built
             into the Superfund guidelines; however, the appropriate regulatory
             agencies will be provided an opportunity to comment. The Division
             of Parks and Recreation is assisting the Trustees in the
             acquisition of upland areas as compensation for natural resource
             injuries, and in gaining marsh landowner cooperation to undertake
             wetlands restoration. The New Castle conservation District will
             assist in the preliminary assessment and design of the proposed
             water control structure, and the development of an operation,
             maintenance, and management plan for the structure. The
             Department of Transportation is coordinating its proposed
             construction plans of Route 9 with this wetland rehabilitation
             project. other Divisions and agencies have also provided support.

                  A biological inventory and ecological evaluation of the
             wetland complex was completed in November 1992 (Cole and Fabean
             1992). Based on these and other studies associated with the
             Superfund site remediation, a final wetlands rehabilitation plan
             and its environmental assessment will be prepared and presented to
             the Steering Committee and the EPA in December 1994. Once the
             rehabilitation plan is completed, the Army Creek Superfund Natural
             Resources Damages Trustees will implement the plan. Formal
             contacts obtaining landowner support for the marsh restoration are
             currently being initiated. It is anticipated that community
             support for this project will develop following the proposed
             August 1994 public presentation of the rehabilitation plan.
             Funding for this project has been obtained through a mitigation
             settlement for natural resource damages associated with the Army
             Creek Superfund Site.



             Airport-Marsh Wetland Complex

                  The administrative lead for this project is the Division of
             Fish and Wildlife. The Division of Air and Waste Management has
             provided extensive information concerning potential contaminant
             sources in the watershed, and administrative assistance in
             coordinating rehabilitation plans with the DuPont Newport
             Superfund Site. Other Divisions and agencies have also provided
             support.

                  A biological inventory and ecological evaluation of the
             wetland complex was completed in September 1993 (Cole and Cole
             1993), and a draft rehabilitation plan is being developed for












                                                                                37

             approval by the Steering Committee prior to submission for
             permits. Rehabilitation efforts for this wetland complex have
             been delayed, because the complex might have been impacted by the
             DuPont Newport Superfund Site or several other potential
             contaminant sources in the watershed. This site has also been
             identified as a potential compensation site for natural resource
             injuries associated with the Superfund site. Therefore, the
             Division is coordinating this restoration with the DuPont Newport
             Superfund Natural Resources Trustees (Division of Air and Waste
             Management, U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine
             Fisheries Service). Rehabilitation practices have been limited to
             inspections of the existing water control structure, seasonal
             inspections of mosquito breeding, monitoring of floral and faunal
             communities, and the aerial application of herbicide on 16 acres
             of phragmites in 1993.

                  The development of community and landowner support for this
             project were only recently initiated; however, the three largest
             landowners (Delaware Department of Transportation, New Castle
             County, Delmarva Power) are supportive of the project. Several
             private landowners of small sections of the wetland complex have
             also indicated their support. The Delaware Trappers Association
             has unofficially adopted this wetland area. This Association has
             conducted annual trash cleanups of the wetland complex and has
             posted "No Dumping" signs in an attempt to curb this continuing
             problem. A potential funding source for this project is the
             pending mitigation settlement for natural resource injuries
             associated with the DuPont Newport Superfund Site.




             ICI Marsh

                   The administrative lead for this project is the Division of
             Fish and Wildlife. Although an enhancement report of the area was
             completed in 1991 by the Division and the Wildlife Habitat
             Enhancement Council, the formal rehabilitation process of this
             marsh has only been recently initiated. The landowner, ICI
             Specialty Chemicals, wants to restore this degraded marsh to
             encourage wildlife use, provide an aesthetic recreational area* for
             its employees, and promote good public relations by being
             responsible land stewards.    The Delaware Nature Society has also
             expressed support for this project and has attended site visits.
             Ecological evaluations have been limited to site visits and
             historical review of past practices within the marsh. Based on
             this information, the Division has recommended that water and
             sediment samples of the two lagoons at the site be tested for
             contaminants prior to any restoration efforts being undertaken.
             Funding for this project and the contaminant testing might be
             obtained from ICI Specialty Chemicals.












                                                                               38


                        PROJECT BUX)MRY AND ASSESSMENT OF FUTU   EEEDS


                  The Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation Program like
              many other large multi-agency initiatives was characteristically
              "slow out of the starting blocks" in terms of achieving
              benchmarks. This initial torpor was compounded by a change of
              personnel both within the program and the Department overseeing
              it. However, once this weaning period was completed, which
              involved the program being stretched in many different directions
              (some opposing), the program could better focus on addressing the
              tasks and objectives it was intended to tackle. After 1.3 years
              of implementation, the program has accomplished almost all of the
              objectives it proposed during the first 2 years of DCMP funding,
              namely to develop a planning and implementation document for a
              regional, multi-objective strategy to rehabilitate degraded tidal
              wetlands along the two urban river corridors.

                  The initial step required in developing this "regional"
              strategy was to define the focus area of the program, i.e.,
              identify the sites proposed for rehabilitation and establish the
              initial boundaries of the corridors. Much of this work was
              completed prior to the DCMP granting period (Carter 1991a);
              however, this list of potential wetland rehabilitation sites
              (Table 2) has been and will continue to be updated, refined, and
              expanded as the program advances. A map (Fig. 3) identifying the
              proposed wetland rehabilitation sites will be periodically
              updated, identifying both primary target sites and successfully
              restored projects.

                  Enormous effort was expended in developing a Steering
              Committee and an administrative organization for the program that
              maximized multi-agency resources and technical expertise, while
              striving to minimize "turf battles", outside agendas, and biased
              viewpoints. Although initially an arduous task, a framework was
              developed that promoted a tiered organizational approach. After
              several attempts to organize and convene a steering committee
              comprised of all Department and outside agency representatives,
              two items became apparent: 1) the technical expertise and
              resources that each agency's representatives provided were
              essential to the program; and 2) convening a large steering
              committee on a monthly basis was logistically impractical,
              extremely inefficient, and a burden on agency personnel whom were
              only periodically involved in the program. Therefore, a two-
              tiered approach was established whereby agency representatives
              other than DNREC and NCCD staff were designated adjunct committee
              status and were not requested to convene at monthly Steering
              Committee meetings (Table 1). However, these adjunct committee
              members were frequently included in the planning and evaluation
              process, specifically during permit review, funding requests, or
              rehabilitation plan review. This tiered approach was also adopted
              to maximize Departmental resources and technical expertise within












                                                                              39

             the program's personnel organization. The tier approach is one in
             which two Division co-administrators coordinate inter- and intra-
             agency participation through the NDWRP program manager, who
             coordinates the overall program goals through site-specific
             project managers who are responsible for coordinating activities
             associated with a specific wetland rehabilitation project.

                   Once the Steering Committee was organized, its initial task
             was in developing program objectives. These objectives were
             selected based on a regional perspective, whereby benefits of
             individual rehabilitation projects could be maximized across an
             entire corridor. These objectives also had to be multiple-use in
             nature, so that in most cases objectives complemented each other
             or at the very least did not compromise one another. And finally,
             all objectives had to be capable of developing measurable
             evaluative criteria in order to provide temporal measures of
             success.


                  Biotic inventories and ecological evaluations of 9 proposed
             wetland rehabilitation sites were completed during PY-91 (Cole and
             Fabean 1992) and FY-92 (Cole and Cole 1993). These evaluations
             and subsequent studies provided background information and
             qualitative and quantitative data required to develop detailed
             rehabilitation plans. These rehabilitation plans, although site-
             specific, are developed under a corridor perspective, with
             emphasis placed on achieving as many of the 11 regional multi-use
             objectives as possible. Once the rehabilitation strategy is
             developed, measurable evaluative criteria will be established for
             each specific objective in order to provide temporal measurements
             of success. A prerequisite to the long-term success of the
             rehabilitation effort is the inclusion of operation, maintenance,
             and management agreements in the rehabilitation plan. These
             voluntary or enforceable agreements identify the responsibilities
             of various agencies or parties in the rehabilitation process.
             Without these operation, maintenance, and management agreements,
             rehabilitation efforts might not be implemented, and those
             objectives that are achieved could simply revert to their
             previously degraded conditions.

                  Rehabilitation plans are maintained and updated on a
             centralized tracking system. Each site-specific rehabilitation
             plan provides information on all aspects of the project, ranging
             from permit and funding status to project needs and completion
             dates. The rehabilitation plan is outlined to emphasize regional
             objectives, and is easily updated throughout the project's
             development and implementation. Committee members and regulatory
             agencies have found these trackable rehabilitation plans extremely
             beneficial in providing a quick, detailed perspective of the
             project prior to completion of environmental assessments and
             permit applications. Addendums to the trackable rehabilitation
             plans include maps, site descriptions, water management plans, and
             structure designs.












                                                                               40

                  Essential to the overall success of this rehabilitation
             process is the cooperation and involvement of federal, state, and
             local agencies; private industries; landowners, and private
             environmental groups. Cooperation by governmental agencies has
             included technical assistance, access to Departmental resources,
             and funding support (Table 3). Many of these governmental
             agencies were previously active or familiar with this wetlands
             rehabilitation initiative, through their assistance with the
             program's development for the preliminary rehabilitation efforts
             initiated at Broad Dyke Marsh in 1987.

                  The NDWRP has also received substantial support from the
             private sector. Private funding support has been received from
             several industries and organizations including the Trustees of New
             Castle Common, Delmarva Power, Ciba-Geigy, Brand Mid-Atlantic, and
             DuPont (Table 3). Additional private support has been received in
             the form of program promotional activities, landowner access, and
             environmental fines and settlements. Private landowner
             participation in this program has been outstanding, with over 86%
             of those solicited allowing property access and supporting both
             the program and site-specific project objectives.

                  Public support for the program has been received from several
             environmental groups who became involved in the project through
             several of DNREC's outreach programs, e.g., Adopt-A-Wetland,
             Christina River Cleanup, Delaware Coastal Cleanup. The Adopt-A-
             Wetland Program has been the most successful method of getting
             environmental groups involved, with several groups adopting
             rehabilitation sites and others currently in the process. The
             Adopt-A-Wetland Program provides environmental groups an
             opportunity to become actively involved in the rehabilitation and
             protection of wetland areas by assisting in various activities,
             such as trash removal, wood duck box installation and maintenance,
             establishing and maintaining interpretative trails, and conducting
             biological inventories. Although most of the public'support for
             this program has been from local groups, several state-wide and
             national organizations, such as The Delaware Nature Society and
             Delaware Ducks Unlimited, have indicated their support.

                  Additional support from both the private and public sectors
             is anticipated once the NDWRP brochure (Appendix G), published in
             February 1994, is widely distributed. This color, tri-folded
             brochure, designed to be utilized for public outreach and program
             fund-raising, provides an overview of the program in an easy to
             read format. The brochure identifies program goals, proposed and
             current rehabilitation sites, restoration methods, and benefits of
             wetland restoration. Periodic updates of the brochure will be
             accomplished with inserts identifying, new project sites, funding
             sources, and details on project successes.

                  Although the NDWRP planning and implementation document, with
             its site reports, and an outreach brochure have been completed,











                                                                                41

           Table 3. Secured and pending funding sources for the Northern
           Delaware Wetland Rehabilitation Program (NDWRP).


              Funding source                                             Amount


           Secured
              Army Creek Superfund Natural Resources Damages           $ 600,000
              Ciba-Geigy                                                 310,000
              EPA Section 319 Non-Point Source Pollution Grant           180,000
              DCMP Section 309 Grant (FY-92 and FY-93)                   128,000
              Trustees of New Castle Commons                             113,700
              Brand Mid-Atlantic                                         100,000
              State Bond Bill, FY-93 Appropriation                        50,000
              EPA Delaware Estuary Program Grant                          41,500
              Unspecified Fine Monies                                     17,000
              Presidente Rivera Oil Spill Fine Monies                     13,000
              Division of Fish & Wildlife                                  8,160
              DuPont                                                       5,000
              Delmarva Power                                               4,926
              U.S. Fish and Wildlife  Service Mini-Grants (2)              91000
              Total                                                     11580,286


           Pending'
              National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant             $ 240,894
              New Castle County Public Works Department                  100,000
              State Bond Bill, FY-94 Appropriation                        50,000
              Ducks Unlimited                                             40,000
               Total                                                     430,894


            'This list is comprised on only those pending sources for    which
           funding amounts have been specified. Other potential funding
           sources of unspecified amounts are not included.











                                                                              42

             several important tasks need to be completed. In the next year
             @mphasis will be placed on addressing nonpoint source pollution
             issues within the corridor, in conjunction with efforts to
             implement Section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Management Act.
             Detailed maps depicting nonpoint source pollution sources within
             the watersheds of all wetland restoration sites need to be
             generated. These maps supplemented with aerial photos, soil maps,
             and additional information will identify areas where stormwater
             detention/retention, conservation, and best management practices
             can reduce pollutant loading. The development and implementation
             of site-specific nonpoint source pollution reduction plans
             supported by the DCMP, for both an urban and a rural wetland
             rehabilitation site are also anticipated next year, to demonstrate
             the utility of this watershed-based approach.

                  Essential to maintaining the NDWRP's initial success is the
             continued emphasis on actually implementing the regional wetland
             rehabilitation strategy within the corridor, adhering to the
             planning document whenever possible. In the next and subsequent
             years, rehabilitation plans for additional sites need to be
             developed; funding, rehabilitation plan implementation, and public
             outreach efforts must continue; and completed projects must be
             evaluated in regards to their successes and failures. only then
             can the rehabilitative success of the Christina/Delaware Rivers
             Urban Wetland Corridor be determined. Until then, this document
             serves as the plan for the long-term rehabilitation needs of the
             tidal wetlands and related aquatic habitats in Northern Delaware,
             from which future coastal and wetland rehabilitation programs can
             be developed.












                                                                              43


                                      LITERATURE CITED



             BARNEKOV, T.K., and E. APPEL. 1993. Survey of Households: city
                of New Castle. Del. Public Adm. Inst., Coll. Urban Affairs
                Public Policy, Univ. Delaware, Newark. 102pp.

             CARTER, D. 1991. The Christina and Delaware Rivers corridor: an
                opportunity for the restoration of important wetland habitat.
                Del. Ducks Unlimited Newsletter. Spring:33-34.

                     1991a. Christina and Delaware Rivers Wetland Corridor.
                Unpublished. Del. Dep. Nat. Resour. Environ. Control, Dover.

             - . 1992. The Christina/Delaware Rivers Wetland Corridor
                Rehabilitation Project. Unpublished. Del. Dep. Nat. Resour.
                Environ. Control, Dover. 6pp.

                             Thousand Acres Marsh: general background, area
                de;c 1992a.
                    ription, and management recommendations and alternatives.
                Del. Dep. Nat. Resour. Environ. Control, Dover. 119pp.

             CHAMBERLAIN, E.B. 1951. A survey of the marshes of Delaware.
                Final Rep. Pittman-Robertson Proj., Del. Board Game and Fish
                Comm., Dover, 76pp.

             COLE, R.V., and T. COLE. 1993. The Northern Delaware Wetlands
                Rehabilitation Program: a biotic inventory and environmental
                evaluation of four candidate wetland restoration sites. Del.
                Dep. Nat. Resour. Environ. Control, Dover. 75pp.

                  , and T. FABEAN. 1992. The northern Delaware wetlands
                rehabilitation program: a biotic inventory and environmental
                evaluation of five candidate wetland restoration sites. Del.
                Dep. Nat. Resour. Environ. Control, Dover. 154pp.

             DNREC (Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental
                Control). 1994. Comprehensive conservation and management
                plan for Delaware's tidal wetlands. Del. Dep. Nat. Resour.
                Environ. Control, Dover. 288pp.

             DELAWARE MOSQUITO CONTROL SECTION. 1988. Broad Dyke Restoration
                Project: first year annual report. Unpublished. Del. Dep.
                Nat. Resour. Environ. Control, Dover. 52pp.

                     1990. Broad Dyke Restoration Project: second year annual
                report. Unpublished. Del. Dep. Nat. Resour. Environ. Control,
                Dover. 13pp and appendices.












                                                                              44

             ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. 1993. Fish habitat
                suitability evaluation of Augustine Creek Marsh for fishes of
                the lower Delaware River. Prepared for Del. Dep. Nat. Resour.
                Environ. Control by Environmental Consulting Services, Inc.,
                Middletown, Delaware. 11pp. and appendices.

             HARDISKY, M.A. and V. KLEMAS. 1983. Tidal wetlands natural and
                human-made changes from 1973 to 1979 in Delaware: mapping
                techniques and results. Environ Manage. 7:1-6.

             KREAMER, G. 1993. Needs assessment for Delaware aquatic
                resources education. Unpublished. Del. Div. Fish Wildl.,
                Dover. 7pp.

             TINER, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and
                Wildl. Serv., Natl. Wetlands Inventory, Newton Corner, MA and
                Del. Dep. Nat. Resour. Environ. Control, Wetlands Sect., Dover,
                Coop. Publ. 77pp.

             WILLIAMS and BROOME, INC. 1992. Preliminary design report for
                Broad Dyke Marsh control works project. Prepared for,New
                Castle Conserv. Dist. by Williams and Broome, Inc., Newark,
                Delaware. 32pp. and appendices.

             WESLAGER, C.A. 1947. Delaware's forgotten river: the story of
                the Christina. Hambleton Co., Inc., Wilmington, Del. 266pp.







                           APPENDIX A















                 BROAD DYKE MARSH
               REHABILITATION PLAN


                  ........................ .......
























                    Northern Delaware Wetlands
                      Rehabilitation Program











                                     BROAD DYKE MUME




                  A 210-acre freshwater tidal wetland located north of the city

          of New Castle along the Delaware River. The marsh is surrounded on 3

          sides by residential and commercial developments and on the east side

          is separated from the Delaware River by a dike containing a water

          control structure. This wetland is comprised of 160 acres of

          estuarine marsh (76%), 50 acres of palustrine deciduous forest (24%),

          and has an 1811-acre watershed primarily consisting of residential

          and urban areas. Property owners   are the Trustees of New Castle

          Common and the New Castle Immanuel Episcopal Church.

                  This marsh was once a lush mosaic of rushes, sedges, cattails,

          and smartweeds; and contained a high diversity of waterbirds and

          other wildlife. In the mid-1600's the marsh was diked and drained to

          accommodate agriculture and settlement of adjacent upland areas.

          These practices have continued to the present resulting in 53% of the

          marsh being dominated by the nuisance plant phragmites; a dramatic

          decrease in the diversity of fish, wildlife, and plant species;

          reduced wetland and water quality, and an increase in the potential

          for pestiferous mosquito breeding.

                  Over the past two decades the water management plan for Broad

          Dyke Marsh has essentially had a single purpose: prevent flooding of

          the basins peripheral properties, from Delaware River water entering

          on high tides or from upland storm runoff accumulating in the marsh.

          This plan involved the installation of a concrete sluice comprised of

          two 48-inch flap gates on the river side and riser board channels on

          the marsh side. This water control structure is designed to allow










          one-way flow out of the marsh, thereby allowing storm runoff to exit

          the marsh while preventing river water from inundating the marsh

          during tidal events. However because of the increase in upland

          runoff, caused by increased development in the watershed, and the

          elevation of the marsh surface relative to the Delaware River, the

          existing structure is inadequate to handle storm runoff from severe

          rain events. This flooding problem is periodically compounded when

          individuals tamper with the flap gates by chocking them open and

          allowing river tides to flood the marsh.

                 Extensive baseline studies and ecological assessments have

          been conducted on Broad Dyke Marsh since 1987, and have led to the

          development of preliminary water management and marsh rehabilitation

          plans. Management practices initiated in 1987 have fine tuned these

          plans and have partially restored the marsh. These practices include

          experimental water level manipulations, phragmites control programs,
          installation of wood duck boxes, and experimental plan@ing of

          beneficial plant species. Although these efforts have indicated that

          a positive restoration of Broad Dyke can be achieved, the successful,

          long-term restoration of the marsh is dependent upon replacing the

          existing water control structure. This new structure must be a

          larger, more specialized structure that allows tidal exchange while

          having the capacity to handle significant stormwater input, yet

          operates in an automated fashion to eliminate the need for labor-

          intensive management and maintenance.

                 Besides the obvious ecological value of this marsh, its

          proximity within a mile of seven schools makes it an ideal site for

          environmental eduction opportunities.






    Broad Dyke Marsh                                                                         E S(@N               RM'
   New Castle County, Delaware
                                                   X,
                                                                                                                                   Opt   0
                                                                                                                                       "p;
             LOCATOR MAP
                                                                                                                                                                                 K






                                             S          KTON










   M     Open Water

         Beaches, Bars and Mudflats,
         Estuarine Emergent and                                                                    NEW CASTLE MIDDL SCHOOL
         Estuarine Emergentl'Beach/Mudflat
         Palustrine Forested,
         Palustrine Forested/Scrub Shrub an I
         Palustrine ForesbedlEmergent




                   C-dy cars.-Ilm. U7I.9tWftd                                                        V  //,X@













                     NORTHERN DELAWARE WETLANDS REHABILITATION PROGRAM


                                REHABILITATION TRACKING FORK




            WETLAND PROJECT: BROAD DYKE MARSH            UPDATED: 5 JANUARY 93

                       PROJECT MANAGER: Rob Hossler, Fish & Wildlife


           PROJECT COMPLETIOH DATE! June 1998


           REPORT STATUS:   1) Environmental Evaluation - Completed February
                               1993.
                            2) Water Management Plan - Completed 21 April 1993.
                            3) Operation, Maintenance, and Management Plan -
                               Draft completed 15 November 1993.

           PERMIT STATUS:   1) COE 404 Permit - not initiated.
                            2) State Type II Permit - not initiated.
                            3) Subaqueous Lands Permit    not required.
                            4) Environmental Assessment    Draft completed 15
                               November 1993.
                            5) Pre-proposal presented to Joint Permit Processing
                               Committee on 18 February 1993. A site visit was
                               conducted on 12 May 1993.

           FUNDING STATUS: 1)  Secured -                           I
                               a. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Grant -
           $80,000 for a new water control structure. Requires a $300,000 match
           in n'on-federal nor non-DNREC funds and must be encumbered by 15
           January 1994.       b. State of Delaware - $50,000 FY-93 bond bill.
                               c. @rustees of New Castle Common - $100,000 firm
           commitment in 1992 for water control structure. Provided $5,000 for
           hydrologic and hydraulic modeling of proposed water control structures
           and, $6,600 over last 3 years for phragmites control.

                            2) Pending -
                               a. EPA-Section 319 Non-Point Source Pollution
           Guidelines - $180,000 grant application for water control structure.
           Decision expected 7 January 1994.
                               b. Ducks Unlimited - $40,000 considered for water
           control structure.  c. New Castle County - Interested in providing
           funding for the water control structure if their operation and
           maintenance responsibilities are reduced.

           LANDOWNERS: Trustees of New Castle Common (Trustees) - own 162 acres
           (77%) of the marsh and have consented to a long-term management
           agreement for the marsh. The water control structure was installed in












          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                     2

          1975 by New Castle County Public Works; however, the responsibility
          for the maintenance and operation of this structure is unclear. The
          Trustees might provide assistance in the operation and maintenance of
          the water control structures; additional phragmites control and
          wildlife plantings; and installation of the boardwalks, elevated
          observation platform, asphalt trail, or wildlife enhancement
          structures,  New Castle Immanuel Episcopal Church - owns 48 acres
          (23%) of the marsh and have consented to a long-term management
          agreement for the marsh.

          PARTICIPATING PARTNERS: Trustees of New Castle Common, New Castle
          Immanuel Episcopal Church, DNREC, New Castle Conservation District,
          National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, New Castle
          Public Works.

          PUBLIC RELATIONS 1) Needs - Involvement of nearby communities in
          certain aspects of the rehabilitation project.
                           2) Actions -
                              a) Environmental Groups - The McKean High School
          and New Castle Middle School have adopted, through DNREC's Adopt-A-
          Wetland program, the western and a portion of the middle basin,
          respectively. Additional groups are being solicited for the remaining
          portions of the marsh. These groups initiated a trash cleanup in this
          marsh during the 2 October 1993 Delaware Coastal Cleanup. A New
          Castle resident installed and is maintaining 8 wood duck boxes as part
          of a community service project.
                               b) Adjacent Landowners - A public presentation,
          on 13 October 1992, provided information on the tentative management
          plans for the proposed rehabilitations of Broad Dyke Marsh. Once the
          rehabilitation plan is approved and funding acquired, adjacent
          landowners will be notified and asked to comment on the plan at a
          public meeting. These comments will be incorporated into the
          environmental assessment prior to its submission to permitting
          agencies.




                       REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE WATER QUALITY



          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Improve water quality of both the marsh and
          river through daily tidal exchange. Tidal exchange will provide
          nutrient and organismic exchange between the water bodies, and
          increase the volume of water exposed to wetland filtering and nutrient
          uptake benefits.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT:. The existing water control structure has
          essentially a single purpose - prevent the flooding of peripheral













          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                       3

          proRerties - by allowing one way flow of storm runoff out of the
          marsh, while preventing tidal inundation. These practices essentially
          drain this former tidal marsh, causing water quality to degrade to
          levels that are detrimental to most aquatic life during the dry
          season, while increasing the potential for pestiferous mosquito
          breeding.
               Experimental water level manipulations conducted in 1988,
          determined that daily tidal exchange with the existing structure could
          only occur on a limited basis without drastically increasing the
          potential of flooding peripheral properties. In order to reduce     this
          flooding potential, constant monitoring along with labor intensive and
          time consuming adjustments of the structure were required prior to and
          following every heavy rain event or unusually high tide.
          Additionally, these manipulations required that one flap gate be
          chained open, which has been shown to create undue stress on the gate,
          occasionally damaging it.

          Hazardous Wastes and Toxins - Four potential hazardous waste sites
          were identified in the vicinity of Broad Dyke Marsh. In 1988 a
          federal Superfund remedial investigation of the Witco site, located
          approximately 400 feet from the wetland, detected Tris(2-
          chloropropyl)phosphate in marsh sediments and surface water. Although
          caused by a large spill in 1977, the concentrations of trisphosphate
          were considered too low to have significant biological impact.
               During this investigation, Trichloroethylene (TCE) was detected
          in groundwater at the site and in one sediment sample. The presence
          of TCE, which was not associated with operations at Witco, has
          resulted in a remedial investigation of the Castle Ford facilities.
          Waste solvent and paint disposal from the body shop, located
          approximately 500 feet from the wetland, have contaminated soils and
          groundwater. The impact on the marsh has not been determined;
          however, results from initial sampling might be available in the near
          future. Although the direction of flow of the aquifer in this area is
          towards the marsh, significant impact is not expected because there
          was never a large, permanent contaminant source, i.e., underground
          tank, and continued disposal has ceased. Therefore, impacts to the
          marsh should be diminishing as the remaining TCE degrades. Another
          potential source of TCE is the Knotts bus facility, located just south
          of Castle Ford and approximately 600 feet from the marsh. The
          .investigation of Castle Ford should also provide information on this
          site.
               The fourth potential hazardou's waste site is Chicago Bridge &
          Iron, located approximately 1100 feet from the wetland and will be
          investigated in 1994 This facility used pickle liquor, lowering the
          pH of ground water. However because of the direction of flow of the
          aquifer in this area, potential contaminants from this site are not
          expected to impact Broad Dyke Marsh.
               The DNREC Technical Services Section conducted tissue assays for
          heavy metals and pesticides of brown bullheads (n = 5) captured in
          Broad Dyke Marsh in September 1989. Results indicated that the toxins
          tested for were either found below state and federal action levels or
          were undetectable.













          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                      4

          Non-point Source Pollution - Non-point source pollution enters the
          marsh from adjacent road runoff, storm  sewer outflow from the
          surrounding residential and commercial developments, and a drainage
          ditch from an industrial park located approximately 0.9-mile north of
          the marsh. The specific types and severity of these pollutants has
          yet to be quantified. Because of the multiple sources of non-point
          source pollution, education and mass media programs directed to
          residents and facility managers that address best management practices
          appear to be a solution.

          CURRENT STATUS: Water quality sampling and elevation surveys of the
          basin have been completed. The New Castle Conservation District has
          determined the watershed of the marsh and its corresponding land uses.
          Based on detailed hydrologic and hydraulic modeling of the basin and
          the proposed new water control structure, respectively, limited tidal
          exchange as proposed with the water management plan will allow an
          exchange equivalent to approximately 10.4% (8.8 acre-feet) of the
          marsh basin during each tidal cycle.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Installation of the proposed water control
          structure.
                                COMPLETION DATE: February 1995

          BITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Obtain comparable measurements of
          water quality and assessments of volume exchange.





              REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE WETLAND HABITATS FOR WILDLIFE




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJ2CTIVEz Improve wetland habitats by adhering to a
          water management plan involving daily tidal exchange and periodic
          water level manipulations; installing wildlife enhancement structures,
          and conducting beneficial plantings for wildlife. Adherence to a
          water management plan should improve habitats for wetland wildlife,
          especially aquatic mammals, waterfowl, and other waterbirds, by both
          adjusting the water level to accommodate the seasonal needs of these
           pecies and allowing this level to fluctuate on a daily basis through
          limited tidal exchange. These management practices should increase
          tShe number, species, and reproductive success of wildlife using the
          marsh.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: Experimental water level manipulations
          conducted by the Division of Fish and Wildlife (Division) in 1988
          combined with a extensive phragmites control program conducted between
          1986-1992 have increased the vegetation diversity of the marsh by 2.3%
          (Simpson's Index) and improved it for wildlife. Since the water
          manipulations were curtailed in 1991, one flap gate has been damaged
          allowing a minimal amount of tidal exchange to occur. However, this












          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                      5

          minimal tidal exchange has protracted the marsh from degrading back to
          its pre-manipulation state.
               The installation of 30 wood duck nesting boxes between 1989-1991
          @nd the planting of beneficial plant species have also attempted to
          increase the diversity of the marsh and improve it for wildlife.
          Nesting success in the duck boxes was excellent in 1992, with 84% of
          the boxes indicating evidence of successful wood duck nesting. During
          avian surveys conducted in the spring and fall of 1988, 19 species of
          waterbirds or raptors were recorded for a combined total of 479 birds
          and an average of 53.2 birds/survey. A total of 12 species of fish
          are known to utilize the marsh. The planting of beneficial plant
          species; however, had limited success. The 500 lbs. of barnyard grass
          aerially dispersed in 1988 successfully germinated, but no natural
          reseeding occurred in subsequent years. The 25 lbs. of wild rice sown
          by hand in 1989 never germinated.

          CURRENT STATUS: Biological and elevational surveys have been
          completed and a detailed water management plan has been developed.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Implementation of a water management plan
          after installation of the proposed water control structure. Daily
          tidal exchange will promote tidal flushing and organismic exchange,
          especially fish populations. This plan is subject to adjustment and
          change based on the availability of additional information, climatic
          conditions, and in order to better achieve all anticipated benefits
          and regional objectives. Water levels are currently monitored via a
          float-operated recorder, and would continue to be after implementation
          of the proposed plan.    Daily tidal exchange will only occur as long
          as it is consistent with water level goals and the proposed reduction
          in peripheral property flooding.
                                COMPLETION DATE: Implemented following
          installation of water control structure (January 1995).

                                2) Evaluation of the reproductive success of
          wood ducks in the existing nest boxes, with emphasis placed on the
          occurrence of dump nesting. This evaluation will help determine where
          additional boxes, if any, should be installed to improve reproductive
          success of this species.
                                COMPLETION DATE: March 1995

                                3) Install wood duck, goose, mallard, and
          osprey nesting structures. The number and location of these
          enhancement structures will be determined based on success of existing
          structures, and available of suitable microhabitats. Support in
          installation of wildlife enhancement structures might be available
          from the Trustees and/or private groups.
                                COMPLETION DATE: March 1996

                                4) Seeding of wild rice, and planting of river
          bulrush and sweet flag rootstocks during periodic draw-downs. The
          quantity planted will depend on the amount of suitable habitat
          available following implementation of the water management plan.













          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                      6

          Financial support to purchase the seed might be.available from the
          Trustees and/or private groups.
                                COMPLETION DATE: November 1995


          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: The success of the water
          management plan will be based on comparable surveys of waterbirds and
          fish utilizing the marsh, and of permanent vegetation transects
          established in the marsh during the summer of 1994. Success of
          wildlife enhancement structures will be based on the reproductive
          success of wildlife utilizing them. Success of beneficial wildlife
          plantings will be based on successful regeneration of the species, and
          their use by wildlife.





                 REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: UNDESIRABLE PLANT SPECIES CONTROL




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Reduce the area covered by monotypic stands
          of phragmites and increase the area covered by desirable emergent
          vegetation. The percent cover of phragmites will be reduced to less
          than 5% (11 acres). Phragmites cover will be confined to upland areas
          and the wetland/upland fringe.
          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: Previously, approximately 53% (112 acres) of
          the marsh was dominated by large monotypic stands of phragmites;
          however, treatments of aerially-applied herbicide during the late
          1980's and early 1990's have reduced the percentage of phragmites
          cover to 18% (38 acres). A controlled burn was conducted in February
          1990; however, due to wet conditions it had limited success.

          CURRENT STATUS: A follow-up application of herbicide was applied on
          38 acres of phragmites on 30 September 1993. Funding provided by
          Trustees of New Castle Common ($1,900).

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Apply herbicide (glyphosate) periodically on
          monotypic stands of phragmites.
                                COMPLETION DATE: Annually as needed in early
          Fall.

                                2) Controlled burning of phragmites (where
          feasible) or other removal method of the standing dead canes will be
          conducted following application of herbicide. Controlled burning
          provides several additional benefits in controlling phragmites
          including: exposing regenerating canes to the second year treatment
          of herbicide, reducing gas exchange to surviving root stalks,
          stimulating the release of nutrients for other plant species, exposing
          the soil to sunlight, and Stimulate the germination of desirable
          species in the existing seed bank.
                                COMPLETION DATE: In late winter, following the
          application of herbicide.













          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                      7

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Success determined by the
          reduction of monotypic stands of phragmites.





             REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: INCREASE SRALLOW WATER HABITAT DIVERSITY




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Increase the percentage and diversity of
          open water and desirable emergent vegetation habitats. The percent
          cover of open water and desirable emergent vegetation habitats will
          range from 19-38% (40-80 acres) and 38-57% (40-120 acres),
          respectively. Shallow water habitats will include numerous shallow
          ponds, ditches, and flats.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: Currently only 9% (19 acres) of the marsh
          consistently retains open water habitat interspersed with desirable
          emergent vegetation; however, following the implementation of the
          water management plan this percentage might change.

          CURRENT STATUS: Except for elevational and environmental surveys no
          work has been conducted in the marsh.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Reevaluate the diversity of shallow water
          habitats and the percentage of open water habitats following
          implementation of the water management plan. In the event an increase
          in this diversity or percentage is desired, a proposal'to increase
          shallow water habitat diversity will be submitted either under the
          Division's existing Open Marsh Water Management permit or through a
          separate permit.      COMPLETION DATE: October 1995 and annually
          thereafter.

                                2) Excavation of sediment laden ditches and
          ponds, and potentially the formation of a few new ditches, ponds, and
          island habitats. New ponds will have tapered sides and most ponds and
          all ditches will be shallow <18 inches in depth. Several ponds will
          have sections excavated >18 inches in depth to provide habitat for
          fish during droughts and draw-downs. Islands for waterfowl nesting
          will be created by accumulation of construction spoil. Excavations
          will be conducted using Division of Fish and Wildlife personnel and
          equipment.
                                COMPLETION DATE: Dependent on annual
          evaluations of existing of shallow water habitat diversity and
          percentage of open water habitats.

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: -success based on the diversity of
          shallow habitats and the percentage of open water habitat.












          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                      8





           REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: INCREASE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Improve environmental education
          opportunities for both general public and school groups by
          constructing two boardwalks with interpretive signs, an observation
          platform, and 700 feet of asphalt trail.
               An approximately 1000-foot boardwalk would be constructed between
          the marsh/upland interface along the southwest side of the marsh,
          behind the New Castle Junior High,School. At the southeast terminus
          of the boardwalk, a 12x12-gazebo with an open roof and 3 benches is
          proposed. Access to the boardwalk would be via a ramp located
          adjacent to the abandoned railroad bed/tressel, and proposed nature
          and greenway trails behind the New Castle Junior High School.
               An additional 800-foot boardwalk is proposed at the east end of
          the marsh adjacent to the intercoastal dike along the Delaware River.
          This proposed boardwalk would descend from the dike via switching
          ramps. The boardwalk would extend northwest into the marsh
          approximately 300 feet, and then curve back towards the dike forming a
          half circle. At mid-length of the boardwalk, the deck would be
          widened to provide a scenic viewing area with two benches. To provide
          access to this boardwalk, approximately 1100 feet of the dike would
          have to be resurfaced with an asphalt walkway. This trail and
          boardwalk would provide a looped extension to the New Castle-
          Dobbinsville Scenic Walkway.
               The boardwalks would be wooden, approximately 5-fo"ot wide, built
          on pilings at an elevation 4 feet above the maximum managed water
          level (4.0 feet NGVD), and have handicap access incorporated where
          feasible. Interpretive signs would be located along the boardwalks,
          and paved walkway.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: There is no known organized or formal
          environmental education being conducted at the marsh; even though,
          there are seven schools located within I mile of the marsh.

          CURRENT STATUS: A presentation and field trip explaining the Broad
          Dyke Marsh Rehabilitation Project was presented to the New Castle
          Middle School's Science Department on 22 November 1993 and 7 December
          1993, respectively. Preliminary designs for the boardwalks,
          observation platform, and access trails were completed 15 November
          1993.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Develop final designs and construct the
          boardwalks, observation platform, interpretive signs, and access
          trails
                                COMPLETION DATE: September 1997

                             2) Promote the use of the marsh and its
          interpretive trail through organized events, press releases, and by













          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                       9


          direct contact with school districts.
                             COMPLETION DATE: April 1998

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Improvements in environmental
          education would be determined by surveys of public and school groups
          utilizing the facilities.





              REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE RECREATION AND AEST  HETIC VALUES




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Improve recreational opportunities an  d the
          aesthetic value of the marsh by creating vistas (clearing phragmites
          and dense shrub cover) along the dike between the river and the marsh,
          and constructing a public canoe launch. These improvements would be
          in addition to constructing two boardwalks with interpretive signs, an
          observation platform, and 700 feet of asphalt trail.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT:. Recreational activities in Broad Dyke Marsh
          include limited amounts of nature watching, crabbing, trapping, and
          fishing. The location of the marsh behind the New Castle Middle
          School and among several developments makes it an attractive area for
          children and adolescents, as indicated by the presence of numerous
          bike paths, play forts, and socializing areas. An existing access
          road provides limited boat access to the center of the,@marsh.

          CURRENT STATUS: A 1993 University of Delaware survey of New Castle
          households found that 90% of the respondents indicated that the marsh
          should be restored as a normal freshwater marsh - completed 26 April
          1993. Preliminary designs for the canoe launch have been completed 15
          November 1993.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Create vistas of the marsh along the
          proposed extension of the Scenic Walkway by clearing brush and
          phragmites along the dike between the river and the marsh. The
          Trustees or the City of New Castle might provide assistance in
          maintaining these clearings.
                                COMPLETION DATE:     February 1995 - with annual
          maintenance as needed.

                                2) Refurbish the existing access road into a
          public canoe launch. Financial assistance might be provided by
          Wallop-Breaux funds, the Trustees, or the City of New Castle.
                                COMPLETION DATE: 4 April 1995

                                3) Determine the overall opinion of visitors
          utilizing the recreation facilities in regards to recreational and
          aesthetic value of the marsh.
                                COMPLETION DATE: June 1998












          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                    10

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Improvements in the recreational
          opportunities and aesthetic value of the marsh will be determined
          through surveys of the use of recreational facilities, and visitor
          responses to questionnaires regarding the marsh's aesthetic and
          recreational value.





                     REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: REDUCE STORKWATER FLOODING




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Reduce the stormwater flooding of peripheral
          properties by increasing the outflow potential and having it occur
          through timely releases. The scouring action associated with daily
          tidal exchange will also potentially reduce flooding by maintaining a
          channel on both the marsh and the riverside of the structure. This
          daily channel maintenance will eliminate the problem of sediment
          accumulating in front of the flap gates during periods of drought,
          which previously prevented them from opening sufficiently to allow
          storm runoff to leave the marsh.


          OTATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: Due to the relative elevations of the marsh
          surface verses the mean river level, which has risen 0.5 ft over the
          last 60 years, discharge of water out of the marsh can only occur for
          about 4 hours out of every 12-5-hour tide cycle. Because of this
          limited interval of discharge from the marsh, heavy rain events with
          associated upstream runoff, which has increased with increased
          development of upland area, elevates marsh water levels above
          desirable levels occasionally causing flooding of peripheral
          properties. This potential for flooding is compounded by both the
          short concentration time of runoff into the basin (10 hours) and the
          restriction in flow caused by the conduits under the abandoned
          railroad embankment and the active railroad bridge. An additional
          factor contributing to elevating water levels to undesirable levels,
          is when individuals tamper with the flap gates by chocking them open
          and allowing river tides to flood the marsh.

          CURRENT STATUS: Detailed hydrologic and hydraulic modeling of the
          @aarsh and evaluations of six potential water control structures,
          including the existing structure, were completed 20 November 1992.
          Based on this and supplemental information the District, Division, and
          Trustees selected the scheme that involved the construction of a 8x3-
          foot box culvert adjacent to the existing water control structure.
          This new structure would have an automatically controlled vertical
          lift gate activated by sensors recording both the river and the marsh
          water levels. These sensors would relay water levels back to a -
          programmable logic controller, which would then make the decision to
          either open or close the sluice gate based on selected target settings
          and logic scenarios. In the event of a system malfunction or power
          failure, the structure would be equipped with a system that would send












          BROAD DYKE MARSH

          an alarm signal to the New Castle Police Station via telephone
          service, and automatically cause the vertical lift gate to close.
          Additionally by maintaining the two existing flap gates, if a
          malfunction were to occur, outflow from the marsh would still occur as
          with the existing system.
               The additional water control structure should increase the
          outflow potential by approximately 95%, and theoretically reduce the
          overall probability and duration of flooding of most peripheral
          properties by approximately 60%. However because of the limited
          interval of discharge from the marsh, due to its elevation relative to
          the river, flooding of peripheral properties may still occur,
          especially to the commercial car-repair garage. Although under a
          worst case scenario, in which the marsh is at full pool ( 0.0 ft NGVD)
          and the maximum 6.25 hours of greatest stormwater concentration into
          the marsh coincides with a 6.25-hour flood tide, the duration of
          flooding of a 100-year storm would be reduced from 5.3 to 2.3 days.
          This worst case scenario would be similar to that occurring during a
          northeaster, in which significant precipitation occurs and an easterly
          wind keeps the tide high for a prolonged period of time, thus
          preventing outflow from the marsh. Additionally, under this worst
          case scenario flooding of peripheral properties other than the
          commercial car-repair garage, would require a 134-year storm event, an
          increase of 5% over the existing structure. This storm event would
          bring water levels to 3.0 ft NGVD, the maximum tolerable water level
          by all landowners other than the owner of the commercial car-repair
          garage. This water level would inundate halfway across the backyard
          of the lowest-lying house within the basin.
                Implementation of the proposed water management plan would
          increase the average water level in the marsh by 0.5 feet (0.6 to 1.1
          feet NGVD); however, it would not significantly increase the
          probability of flooding peripheral properties. This lack of increase
          in flooding is because the maximum water management level (0.0 ft
          NGVD) would only occupy 12.7% of the volume of the marsh, as
          determined at the maximum tolerable water level (3.0 ft NGVD).

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Monitor the impact of the proposed new water
          control structure and water level manipulations, on the flooding of
          peripheral properties, and make appropriate adjustments to the water
          management plan.       COMPLETION DATE: Continuous, following the
          installation of the new water control structure.

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Evaluations based on comparable
          measurements of flooding severity, periodicity, and duration.





          SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: 1) Restore and improve spawning, nursery, and
          feeding sites for anadromous, estuarine, and riverine fishes.












          BROAD DYKE MARSH                                                     12

                                 2) Protect and enhance existing populations
          and critical habitats of threatened and endangered species and other
          species of concern. The Natural Heritage Inventory has documented the
          presence of several State Species of Special concern (Sl) in Broad
          Dyke Marsh: purple-stemmed swamp beggar's-tick (Bidens connata),
          Engelmann umbrella-sedge (Cyperus efigelmannii), redroot galingale
          (Cyl2erus erythrorhizos), and an arrowhead (Sagittaria calycina).

                                 3) Control pestiferous mosquito populations by
          water management where practical, thereby enhancing biological control
          via predacious fish and reducing the amount of chemical insecticides
          required.











                          BROAD DYKE MARSH - WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN'





           DATE         MANIPULATION        ELEVATION (NGVD)         RATIONALE
                        (Pool level
                       at low tide)


        1 March        Reduce pool     -1.3 ft - All flats     Promotes maximum
        30 April       level to 0%,    are exposed and         flushing of accumulated
                       but allow       approximately 16        overwinter detritus and
                       maximum tidal   inches are              sediment, while
                               b,c
                       exchange        maintained   in the     permitting anadromous
                                       ditches.                fish exchange and
                                                               regrowth of emergent
                                                               plant species.


        1-30 May       Increase pool   -0.8 ft - Inundates     Increases pool level
                       level to 50%    52% of the flats at     for waterfowl without
                       allowing        an average depth of     inundating nesting
                       limited tidal   2.6 inches with         areas, while permitting
                       exchange.       tidal fluctuations      anadromous fish use and
                                       of + 0.4 ft.            regrowth of emergents.


        I June- 31     Increase        -0.5 ft - Inundates     Provides habitat for
        July           pool level to   65% of the flats at     waterfowl brood
                       75% allowing    an average depth of     rearing; increases
                       limited tidal   4.3 inches with         invertebrate
                       exchange.       tidal fluctuations      populations; encourages
                                       of + 0.4 ft.            SAV growth; and
                                                               provides shallow mud
                                                               flats for waterbirds.


        I Aug.    15   Decrease pool   -0.8 ft - Inundates     Exposes mud flats for
        Oct.           level to 50%    52% of the flats at     migrating shorebirds;
                       allowing        an average depth of     promotes regrowth of
                       limited tidal   2.6 inches with         late season annual
                       exchange.       tidal fluctuations      plant species; and
                                       of + 0.4 ft.            increases exchange of
                                                               estuarine fish species,
                                                               particularly for egress
                                                               following the nursery
                                                               season.


        15 Oct. -      Increase pool   -0.2 ft - Inundates     Provides habitat for
        28 Feb.        level to 100%   96% of the flats at     waterbirds, waterfowl,
                       allowing        an average depth of     muskrats, and
                       limited tidal   7.3 inches with         overwintering fish
                       exchange.       tidal fluctuations      species.
                                       of ï¿½ 0.2 ftd.











       aWater management plan is subject to adjustments and change based on the
      availability of additional information, climatic conditions, and in order to
      better achieve all regional objectives.
       bMaximum tidal exchange is equivalent to the maximum volume (not to exceed
      0. 0 ft. NGVD) that allows the water level to recede to the 0% pool level
      during an average tidal cycle.

       cTentatively a drawdown to the 0% pool level, with limited tidal exchange
      during each tidal cycle, will occur every 3 years to solidify the flats and
      promote the revegetation of emergent plant species.
       dThis maximum water management level (0. 0 ft. NGVD) will occupy approximately
      12.7% of the capacity of the marsh if capacity is the maximum tolerable water
      level (3.0 ft NGVD).





      Propooed Ve3rtlcal Lif t Gate                                                          9:13

                                                         IIv-                                              A




                                                                                         ...........
                                 RIve3r Viev                                      04   low    Noon

                                                         A
                                                         71
                                                                                                          tj







                stde Vlev




                                                P VC VE A/ 7 101tO C-:5
                                               OAJ
                   L--------- --i


                                     Fr         @X      W1,05 ARCCASr     CONC-,  CULVER7'
                                                           u
  MARSH IAIZ-fr
                                     WOOD 0/4 Es




                                 PROPOSED BROAD DYKE MARSH WATER CONTROL STRUCTURE







                                                APPENDIX B

























                                                                                 .....................
                                        .............               ....... ........
                                                                         ...................


                              GA.MBACORTA MARSH
                           REBABILITA TION PLAN
















                                    Northern Delaware Wetlands
                                         Rehabilitation Program .













                                     GAN33ACORTA MAMBE




                 A 41-acre tidal freshwater wetland located within the New

          Castle city limits and currently owned by the Trustees of New Castle

          Common. The marsh is bordered on the south by the New Castle-

          Dobbinsville Scenic Walkway paralleling the Delaware River, and

          surrounded by urban and commercial development on the other sides.

          The marsh's watershed encompasses 257.7 acres comprised of 143.7

          (56*) and 114 (44%) acres of urban and non-urban land uses,

          respectively. This former tidal wetland was a hazardous waste

          disposal site having been drained and then filled with industrial

          waste from Deemer Steel, the Abex Corp., and Wilmington Fibre Co. In

          the mid 19801s, the waste was removed, the landfill capped, and a

          system of monitoring wells installed. Investigations of the landfill

          and monitoring wells have indicated that the landfill was
          successfully capped and no impacts to groundwater are occurring.

                 The existing water control structure traverses under the

          Scenic walkway and consists of a tide gate with a single 42-inch flap

          gate that allows one-way flow of water out of the marsh. A sluice

          gate structure containing riser boards maintains water levels. The

          structure was constructed by the Delaware Department of

          Transportation (DelDot) in 1953, and records indicate it is located

          on public lands and maintained by DelDot. However, the City of New

          Castle conducts regular inspections of the structure and preforms

          minor maintenance. In 1989, the New Castle Conservation District

          repaired the sluice gate structure and attached protective grates to

          prevent tampering of the riser boards. The structure has been










          temporarily modified to allow daily tidal exchange; however, the

          volume of exchange is limited.

                 The marsh was dominated (90%) by large monotypic stands of

          phragmites; however, Open Marsh Water Management practices (OMWM)

          conducted by the Division of Fish and Wildlife in the early 1980's,

          followed by installation of wood duck nesting boxes and phragmites

          control in the late 1980's and early 1990's, have increased the

          habitat and vegetative diversity of the marsh and improved it for

          wildlife. The improvements to the marsh combined with its proximity

          to the heavily used scenic walkway make it an ideal location to

          facilitate the exposure of wetlands values and their associated

          wildlife to the public.

                 Vegetation control and construction practices at a lumber

          yard, located on the east side of the marsh, have recently caused

          increased sedimentation of the adjacent marsh area. Additional non-

          point source pollutants might be conveyed into the marsh through a

          series of six ditches that drain into the marsh. These ditches

          receive storm runoff from adjacent upland areas and Route 9.










     Gambacorta Marsh
    New Castle County, Delaware                                                 CIT                   F NEW                             TL



             LOCATOR MAP





























        Open Water

        Beachm Bars and Mudflats

        Estuarine Emergent and
        Eauarine EmergendBeach/Mudflat


                                                                                                Al






                                                                                                                iS
                                                                                                                           IM         M'












                     NORTHERN DELAWARE WETLANDS REHABILITATION PROGRAM


                               REHABILITATION TRACKING FORM




            WETLAND PROJECT: GAMBACORTA MARSH            UPDATED: 6 JANUARY 94

                      PROJECT MANAGER: Rob Hossler, Fish & Wildlife


          PROJECT COMPLETION DATE:   July 1997


          REPORT STATUS:   1) Environmental Evaluation - Completed 13 November
                              1992.
                           2) Water Management Plan - Completed 26 March 1992
                              and implemented 9 August 1993.
                           3) Operational Management Plan - not initiated.

          PERMIT STATUS:   1) COE 404 Permit - not initiated.
                           2) State Type II Permit - not initiated.
                           3) Subaqueous Lands Permit    not required.
                           4) Environmental Assessment    not initiated.

          FUNDING STATUS:  1) Secured -
                              a. Trustees of New Castle Common - $1,700 provided
          over last 3 years for phragmites control.
                              b. DuPont Co. - $5,000 donated to the Trustees of
          New Castle Common for installation of interpretive signs along scenic
          walkway.

                           2) Pending
                              a. Trustees of New Castle Common      Interested in
          providing additional funding to this project; however, this funding is
          most likely encumbered until rehabilitation efforts at Broad Dyke
          Marsh are implemented.
                              b. Brosius-Eliason Co. - interested in partially
          funding the excavation of the silted in area behind their lumber yard.

                              c. Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT)
            constructed the structure and might provide partial funding for the
          new structure.


          LANDOWNERS: Trustees of New Castle Common (Trustees) - own the marsh
          and have consented to a long-term management agreement for the marsh.
          The water control structure was constructed by DelDOT and is listed as
          being on public land. Operation and maintenance of this structure has
          been a joint effort between the City of New Castle, the Trustees, the
          New Castle Conservation District (NCCD), and the Division of Fish and
          Wildlife. Prior to implementation of this project, the marsh's water
          level was being managed by a local muskrat trapper under verbal
          agreement with the City of New Castle. The Trustees and the City of
          New Castle might provide assistance in the operation and maintenance













          GAMBACORTA MARSH                                                     2

          of the water control structure; additional phragmites control and
          scenic vista clearing; and installation of the elevated observation
          platform, wildlife enhancement structures, and wildlife plantings.

          PARTICIPATING PARTNERS: Trustees of New Castle Common, City of New
          Castle. Brosius-Eliason Co.,DNREC, New Castle Conservation District,
          DelDOT.

          PUBLIC RELATIONS: 1) Needs - Involvement of nearby communities in
          certain aspects of the rehabilitation project.
                            2) Actions -
                              a) Environmental Groups - Currently an
          environmental group is considering being a sponsor for this marsh
          through DNREC's Adopt-A-Wetland Program. A trash cleanup in this
          marsh was initiated by several participants of the 2 October 1993
          Delaware Coastal Cleanup. A New Castle resident installed and is
          maintaining 12 wood duck boxes as part of a community service project.
                              b) Public Rresentations - Gambacorta marsh was the
          site of Governor Castle's 28 October 1992 announcement of the Northern
          Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation Project. A public presentation, on
          13 October 1992, provided information on the tentative management
          plans for the proposed rehabilitation of Gambacorta Marsh.




                       REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE WATER QUALITY



          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Improve water quality of both the marsh and
          river through daily tidal exchange, and by reducing the transportation
          of potential upland pollutants conveyed into the wetland by stormwater
          runoff. Tidal exchange will provide nutrient and organismic exchange
          between the water bodies, and increase the volume of water exposed to
          wetland filtering benefits and nutrient uptake.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: The existing water control structure has
          essentially a single purpose - Prevent the flooding of peripheral
          properties - by allowing one way flow of storm runoff,out of the
          marsh, while preventing tidal inundation. These practices essentially
          drained this former tidal marsh, causing water quality to degrade
          while increasing the potential for pestiferous mosquito breeding. The
          structure has been temporarily modified to allow daily tidal exchange;
          however, the volume of exchange is limited. Additionally, the portion
          of the existing outlet pipe that extends into the river is degraded
          and in need of repair or replacement.
          Hazardous Wastes and Toxins @-'Four potential hazardous waste sites
          were identified in the vicinity of Gambacorta Marsh. The marsh itself
          was a hazardous waste disposal site having been drained and then
          filled with industrial waste from Deemer Steel, the Abex Corp., and










          GAMBACORTA-MARSH                                                      3

          Wilmington Fibre Co. In the mid-1980's, the waste was removed from
          the marsh, the landfill capped, and a system of monitoring wells
          installed. Investigations of the landfill and monitoring wells have
          indicated that the landfill was successfully capped and no impacts to
          groundwater are occurring. Tidal exchange is not expected to impact
          the landfill due to the extensive layer of 6-inch rip-rap, overlaying
          stone choked with sand and gravel, along the marsh border. However,
          continued monitoring of this site should continue once tidal exchange
          is increased.
               In 1987, an investigation of the Deemer Steel facility, located
          approximately 1000 feet north of the wetland, identified elevated
          levels of lead in the drainage channel that bisects this facility and
          drains into the marsh. Elevated levels of lead were also found in
          marsh sediments; however, the levels at both sites were not considered
          a significant threat to human health or the environment.
          Additionally, these contaminants could have been transported by
          stormwater from areas further upstream of the Deemer facility.
               A portion of the New Castle Gas Co. coal gassification plant was
          located in the north end of the marsh, evident by the brick silo
          located in the center of the marsh (Boo-Boo Island). This plant
          operated from the 1850's to about 1914, and during this time frame
          waste coal tar could have been disposed in the marsh. Because this
          compound does not move rapidly through groundwater, it is possible
          that some of this material remains in the marsh. However, 80 years of
          sediment deposition (potentially 30 inches) probably limits the
          availability of this material to vegetation and benthic organisms.
          Nevertheless, sampling for the presence of coal tar compounds should
          be conducted prior to disturbing the sediment within the marsh.
               Recent vegetation control and construction practices within a
          section of the Brosius-Eliason Co. lumber yard have caused increased
          sedimentation of a portion of the marsh. This section of the lumber
          yard has historically and continues to be a primary storage area of
          treated lumber. Treated lumber is frequently preserved with heavy
          metals, which when exposed to elements might be released into the
          substrate and then washed into the marsh by the increased erosion and
          sedimentation occurring in the area. This potential is evident by the
          large quantity of lumber treatment tags found along the marsh/upland
          edge. Prior to excavating sediment from this area, some sampling
          should be conducted in order to assess whether any sediment-bound
          contaminants will be introduced into the marsh.

          Non-point Source Pollution - Non-point source pollution enters the
          marsh via six drainage ditches, of which only two drain upland areas
          of significant acreage. of the other four, three receive road runoff
          from Route 9, and the other drains a small commercial area near the
          adjacent lumber yard. The specific types and severity of these
          pollutants has yet to be quantified.

          CURRENT STATUS: Water quality sampli.nag and elevation surveys have
          been completed and the New Castle Conservation District has determined
          the watershed of the marsh and its corresponding land uses. Drainage
          ditches have been identified and mapped, but no practices or systems












          GAMBACORTA MARSH                                                     4

          @or reducing potential non-point source pollution have been
          implemented.


          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Conduct a preliminary hydrological study of
          the marsh and the two large ditches draining into it.
                                COMPLETION DATE: March 1995

                                2) Modeling and engineering design to evaluate
          the following water control structures: a) a self-regulating tide
          gate controlled by floats that automatically opens and closes the gate
          depending on river water levels; b) an automated electro-mechanical
          vertical lift gate with sensors; and c) any other appropriate
          structure. The selection of a structure will be based on several
          factors including: ability of achieving regional objectives, volume
          of tidal exchange, cost, ability to be retrofitted to existing
          structure, versatility in manipulating water levels, storm release
          potential, and operation and maintenance requirements.
                                COMPLETION DATE: June 1995


                                3) Installation of the selected water control
          structure and replacement of the outlet pipe.
                                COMPLETION DATE: June 1996

                                4) Establish check dams or wetland vegetation
          (preferably cattail) in the two existing drainage ditches to increase
          water retention and pollutant filtering, if applicable.
                                COMPLETION DATE: August 1995     1,

                                5) Sample silted in area of marsh behind lumber
          yard for heavy metals associated with treated lumber.
                                COMPLETION DATE: June 1994


                                6) Excavate the silted in area of the marsh
          behind the lumber yard, and prevent additional sedimentation from
          occurring by establishing a water conveyance system and a diversion
          berm in the cleared portion of the lumber yard. Revegetate cleared
          @reas with birds-foot trefoil or lathco flat pea. The lumber yard has
          indicted that it is interested in assisting in this effort.
                                COMPLETION DATE: August 1994

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Obtain comparable measurements of
          water quality within the marsh and downstream of the ditches, and
          assessments of volume exchange.













          GAMBACORTA MARSH                                                        5




              REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE WETLAND HABITATS FOR WILDLIFE




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Improve wetland habitats by adhering to a
          water management plan involving daily tidal exchange and periodic
          water level manipulations, installing wildlife enhancement structures,
          and conducting beneficial plantings for wildlife. Adherence to a
          water management plan should improve habitats for wetland wildlife,
          especially aquatic mammals, waterfowl and other waterbirds, by both
          adjusting the water level to accommodate the seasonal needs of these
          species and allowing this level to fluctuate on a daily basis through
          limited tidal exchange. These management practices should incr   .ease
          the number, species, and reproductive success of wildlife using the
          -marsh.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT:. Open Marsh Water Management (OMWM) practices
          conducted by the Division of Fish and Wildlife in the mid 1980's,
          followed by phragmites control in the late 1980's and early 1990's,
          and installation of 12 wood duck nesting boxes in 1991 have increased
          the habitat diversity of the marsh and improved it for wildlife.
          Nesting success in the duck boxes was good in 1992, with 64% of the
          boxes indicating evidence of successful wood duck nesting. Wetland
          habitats were also improved by the 1989 repair of the sluice
          structure, which raised water levels within the marsh. During avian
          surveys conducted in 1991-1992, 14 species of waterbirds were recorded
          for a combined total of 178 birds and an average of 35."6 birds/survey.
          Reproductive success of Canada geese and common gallinules have also
          been documented in the marsh. A total of 12 species of fish are known
          to utilize the marsh.

          CURRENT STATUS:    A detailed water management plan was implemented 9
          August 1993. The implementation of this plan was possible by
          temporarily modifying the water control structure to. allow limited
          daily tidal exchange, and installing new riser boards to provide
          greater flexibility in manipulating water levels. Daily tidal
          exchange will promote tidal flushing and organismic exchange,
          especially fish populations. This plan is subject to adjustment and
          change based on the availability of additional information, climatic
          conditions, and in order to better achieve all anticipated benefits
          and regional objectives. Biological and elevational surveys have been
          completed. Supplemental studies include weekly avian abundance and
          diversity surveys, and weekly monitoring of water and salinity levels.
          In August 1993, 5 permanent vegetation transects were established in
          the marsh. The vegetation on these transects will be periodically
          reassessed to evaluate the success of the-water management plan and
          other rehabilitation efforts.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Evaluation of the reproductive success of
          wood ducks in the existing nest boxes, with emphasis placed on the













          GAMBACORTA MARSH                                                      6

          occurrence of dump nesting. This evaluation will help determine where
          additional boxes, if any, should be installed to improve reproductive
          success of this species.
                                COMPLETION DATE: March 1995

                                2) Install wood duck, goose, mall  ard,
          passerine, and squirrel nesting structures. The number and location
          of these enhancement structures will be determined based on success of
          existing structures, and the availability of  suitable microhabitats.
          Support in installation of wildlife enhancement structures might be
          available from the Trustees and/or private groups.
                                COMPLETION DATE: March 1996

                                3) Seeding of wild rice, and planting of big-
          leaved arrowhead tubers and river bulrush rootstocks during periodic
          draw-downs. The quantity planted will depend on the amount of
          suitable habitat available. Financial support to purchase the seed
          might be available from the Trustees and/or private groups.
                                COMPLETION DATE: November 1995


          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: The success of the water
          management plan will be based on comparable surveys of waterbirds and
          fish utilizing the marsh, and the permanent vegetation transects
          established in the marsh during the summer of 1993. Success of
          wildlife enhancement structures will be based on the reproductive
          success of wildlife utilizing them. Success of beneficial wildlife
          plantings will be based on successful regeneration of the species, and
          their use by wildlife.





                 REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: UNDESIRABLE PLANT SPECIES   CONTROL




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Reduce the area covered by monotypic stands
          of phragmites and increase the area covered by desirable emergent
          vegetation. The percent cover of phragmites will be reduced to less
          than 5% (2-acres). Phragmites cover will be confined to upland areas
          and the wetland/upland fringe.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT:. Previously, approximately 90% (37 acres) of
          the marsh was dominated by large monotypic stands of phragmites;
          however, treatments of aerially-applied herbicide during the late
          1980's and early 1990's have reduced the percentage of phragmites
          cover to 17% (7 acres).

          CURRENT STATUS: A follow-up application of herbicide was applied on 7
          acres of phragmites on 30 September 1993. Funding provided by
          Trustees of New Castle Common ($500).












           GAMBACORTA MARSH                                                            7

           ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Apply herbicide (glyphosate) periodically on
           monotypic stands of phragmites.
                                   COMPLETION DATE: Annually as needed in early
           Fall.                   2) Controlled burning of phragmites (where
           feasible) or other removal method of the standing dead canes will be
           conducted following application of herbicide. Controlled burning
           suppresses phragmites through several methods including: exposing
           regenerating canes to the second year treatment of herbicide, reducing
           gas exchange to surviving root stalks, stimulating the release of
           nutrients for other competing plant species, exposing the soil to
           sunlight, and stimulating germination of desirable species in the
           existing seed bank.     COMPLETION DATE: In late winter, following the
           application of herbicide.

           SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Success determined by the
           reduction of monotypic stands of phragmites.





              REGIONAL OBJECTIVE:- INCREASE SHALLOW WATER HABITAT DIVERSITY




           SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Increase the percentage and diversity of
           open water and desirable emergent vegetation habitats.' The percent
           cover of open water and desirable emergent vegetation habitats will
           range from 22-44% (9-18 acres) and 44-66% (18-27 acres), respectively.
           Shallow water habitats will include numerous shallow ponds, ditches,
           and flats.

           STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: Open Marsh Water Management practices
           conducted in the early 1980's increased the percentage and diversity
           of open water habitats; however, several of the ponds and smaller
           ditches have silted in. Currently only 15.4% (6.3 acres) of the Marsh
           consistently retains open water habitat interspersed with desirable
           emergent vegetation; however, following the implementation of the
           water management plan this percentage might change.

           CURRENT STATUS: Except for contour and environmental surveys no work
           has been conducted in the marsh.

           ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Reevaluate the diversity of shallow water
           habitats and the percentage of open water habitats following
           implementation of the water management plan. In the event an increase
           in this diversity or percentage is desired, a proposal to increase
           shallow water habitat diversity will be submitted either under the
           Division's existing Open Marsh Water Management permit or through a
           separate permit.












          GAMBACORTA MARSH                                                     8


                                COMPLETION DATE: June 1997 and annually
          thereafter.

                                2) Sample the proposed excavation sites for the
          presence of coal tar compounds.
                                COMPLETION DATE: July 1997

                                3) Excavation of sediment laden ditches and
          ponds, and potentially the formation of a few new ditches, ponds, and
          island habitats. New ponds will have tapered sides and most ponds and
          all ditches will be shallow, :@18 inches in depth. Several ponds will
          have sections excavated >18 inches in depth to provide habitat for
          fish during droughts and draw-downs. Islands for waterfowl nesting
          will be created by accumulation of construction spoil. Excavations
          will be conducted using Division of Fish and Wildlife personnel and
          equipment.
                                COMPLETION DATE: Dependent on annual
          evaluations of existing shallow water habitat diversity and percentage
          of open water habitats.

          BITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Success based on the diversity of
          shallow habitats and the percentage of open water habitat.





              REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE RECREATION AND AESTHETIC VALUES




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Improve recreational opportunities and the
          aesthetic value of the marsh by creating vistas (clearing phragmites
          and dense shrub cover), constructing a 6-foot-high observation
          platform, and constructing interpretative signs along the New Castle-
          Dobbinsville Scenic Walkway.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: The Scenic Walkway receives  a considerable
          amount of visitor use; however, scenic vistas of the adjacent marsh
          and its wildlife are limited to a few small openings through the
          phragmites and dense brush between the walkway and the marsh.

          CURRENT STATUS: Implementation of the water management plan and other
          rehabilitation efforts in the marsh have recently generated interest
          in the marsh and its management plan. In response to this interest
          the Division of Fish and Wildlife proposed the previously mentioned
          rehabilitation plans to the Trustees. Vistas of the marsh along the
          Scenic Walkway were created in 1993 by the Trustees with assistance
          from the Division of Fish and Wildlife and the State Department of
          Corrections. In mid-September, Division employees sprayed upland
          vegetation with herbicide using a vehicle-mounted power sprayer. In
          October, prison labor removed the dead vegetation.












          GAMBACORTA.MARSH                                                       9

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Determine the overall opinion of visitors
          utilizing the walkway, in regards to the aesthetic and recreational
          values of the marsh both prior to and after the implementation of the
          marsh rehabilitation plan.
                                 COMPLETION DATE: September 1994

                                 2) Maintain vistas of the marsh along the
          Scenic Walkway by clearing brush and phragmites. The Trustees and the
          State Department of Corrections has provided assistance in this
          effort.
                                 COMPLETION DATE:   Annual maintenance as needed.

                                 3) Construct interpretive signs along the
          Scenic Walkway providing a mechanism to environmentally educate users
          about the marsh and the river. The Trustees are funding this project
          through a donation from the DuPont Co.
                                 COMPLETION DATE:   April 1994.

                                 4) Construct an observation platform along the
          Scenic Walkway, overlooking the marsh. Assistance in the construction
          of the platform might be provided by the Trustees; however prior to
          its construction, a parking problem along the Scenic Walkway needs to
          be addressed.
                                 COMPLETION DATE: April 1995

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Improvements in the recreational
          opportunities and aesthetic value of the marsh will be determined
          through surveys of the observation tower's use, and visitor responses
          to questionnaires regarding the marsh's aesthetic and recreational
          value.






                     REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: REDUCE STORKWATER FLOODING




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Reduce stormwater flooding of Route 9 by
          maintaining the drainage ditches entering into the marsh and
          monitoring the impact of the water management plan on them.
          Stormwater flooding of Route 9 should be eliminated, except following
          unusually heavy rain events.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: A drainage ditch near the intersection of
          Route 9 and Washington Street becomes choked with vegetation, trash,
          and sediment; thereby, impeding stormwater runoff and causing flooding
          of Route 9 following heavy rain events.

          CURRENT STATUS: The drainage ditch was cleared in March 1992 and
          inspected in November 1992.












          GAMBACORTA MARSH                                                    10

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Periodic inspections and clearing of
          drainage ditches entering the marsh. Clearing will be conducted by
          Division of Fish and Wildlife personnel and equipment.
                                COMPLETION DATE: Inspections will be seasonal,
          while clearing will be on an as needed basis.

                                2) Monitor the impact of tide gate
          manipulations, tidal exchange, and installation of check dams on
          stormwater surge, making appropriate adjustments as necessary.
                                COMPLETION DATE: ongoing and coinciding with
          water manipulations.

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Evaluations based on comparable
          measurements of flooding severity, periodicity, and duration.





          SECONDARY OBJECTIVES.: 1) Restore and improve spawning, nursery, and
          feeding sites for anadromous, estuarine, and riverine fishes.

                                 2) Protect and enhance existing populations
          and critical habitats of threatened and endangered species and other
          species of concern. The Natural Heritage Inventory has documented the
          presence of the Engelmann umbrella-sedge (Cyperus engelmannii), a S1
          State Species of Special Concern, in Gambacorta Marsh.
                                 3) Control pestiferous mosquito populations by
          water management where practical, thereby enhancing biological control
          via predacious fish and reducing the amount of chemical insecticides
          required.
                                 4) Increase environmental education
          opportunities for both general public and school groups.











                         GAMBACORTA MARSH - WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN'





           DATE         MANIPULATION        ELEVATION (NGVD)        RATIONALE
                       (Pool level
                       at low tide)


       1 March        Reduce pool      0.75 ft - All flats     Promotes maximum
       15 April       level to 0%,     are exposed and         flushing of accumulated
                      but allow        approximately 2 and     overwinter detritus and
                      maximum tidal    11 inches are           sediment, while
                               b,c
                      exchange         maintained in the       permitting anadromous
                                       ponds and ditches,      fish exchange and
                                       respectively.           regrowth of emergent
                                                               plants species.


       16-30 April    Increase pool    1.15 ft - Inundates     Concentrates
                      level to 25%     27% of the flats at     invertebrates and
                      allowing         an average depth of     exposes mud flats for
                      limited tidal    2.5 inches.             waterfowl and
                      exchange.                                shorebirds,
                                                               respectively, while
                                                               permitting anadromous
                                                               fish use and regrowth
                                                               of emergents plants.


       1-30 May       Increase pool 1.41 ft - Inundates        Increases pool level
                      level to 50%     45% of the flats at     for waterfowl without
                      allowing         an average depth of     inundating nesting
                      limited tidal    4.5 inches.             areas, while permitting
                      exchange.                                anadromous fish use and
                                                               regrowth of emergents.


       1 June- 31     Increase         1.83 ft - Inundates     Provides habitat for
       July           pool level to    72% of the flats at     waterfowl brood
                      75% allowing     an average depth of     rearing; increases
                      limited tidal    7.7 inches.             invertebrate
                      'exchange.                               populations; encourages
                                                               SAV growth; and
                                                               provides shallow mud
                                                               flats for waterbirds.











        1 Aug.   15   Decrease pool 1.41 ft        Inundates   Exposes mud flats for
        Oct.          level to 50%     45% of the flats at     migrating shorebirds;
                      allowing         an average depth of     promotes regrowth of
                      limited tidal    4.5 inches.             late season annual
                      exchange.                                plant species; and
                                                               increases exchange of
                                                               estuarine fish species,
                                                               particularly for egress
                                                               following the nursery
                                                               season.


        15 Oct. -     Increase pool    2.33 ft - Inundates     Provides habitat for
        28 Feb.       level to 100%    100% of the             waterbirds, waterfowl,
                      allowing         existing flats at       muskrats and
                      limited tidal    an average depth of     overwintering fish
                      exchange.        11 inches               species.



        aWater management plan is subject to      adjustments and change based on the
       availability of additional information, climatic conditions, and in order to
       better achieve all regional objectives.
        bMaximun tidal exchange is equivalent to the maximum volume (not to exceed
       the level that causes peripheral flooding of adjacent properties) that allows
       the water level to recede to the 0% pool level during an average tidal cycle.

         CTentatively a drawdown to the 0% pool level, with limited tidal exchange
       during each tidal cycle, will occur every 3 years to solidify the flats and
       promote the revegetation of emergent plant species.







                                   APPENDIX C
























                         .....................


                   THO USXfND ACRE MARSH
                    REHABILITA TION PLAN
















                          Northern Delaware Wetlands
                              Rehabilitation Program














                      Northern Delaware Wetlands Rehabilitation Project






                         Thousand Acre Marsh Watershed Protection
                             and Wetland Rehabilitation Project




                                Preliminary Tracking Form












                                       Contacts:

                         David Carter and Elaine A. Logothetis

                          Delaware Coastal Management Program
                         Division of Soil & Water Conservation
                       Delaware Department of Natural Resources
                                & Environmental Control


















                                                                                                                                                             ..............
                           ...... .....                                                 ...........          ........
                                                                                        ............ .. ... ...... .                                         . . ......... ........
                                     ....... ....... ....           ...........                                           .. .....
                                                                                                                                        . ........           ...
                                     ..... ......... ...                                                                                                     :
                           ...........                                                                                                     .....             ...

                                                                                                          ..... ........... ....... . ..... .
                                                                                                                                                             ............................

                                                                                                                                                             ....... .............
                                                                        Thousand.....Acre:::.                                       . . ..........           ..... .. ...........
                                                                                                                                    . ..........             -...-
                                                                                                                                        .. ..... ........    . . .......
                                                                                                                 . ..... ..... .. .. ..... .
                                                                                                                                                             ..........
                                                                                                                                                             ............
                           ........                                                                           ...                     ..                     .........
                                                                                                               .. ..... . .. . ..
                                                                                                                                                             ..............
                                                                                                     ar.   er @@..iDSWC/lD@@..:...,...@@@@@.......@,@,@..,.,.@......
                                                                                                                                                             ..........
                               rpjed&@:.Coor             @=atozs::::           Dav:L        B     C      t
                                                                                                                                                             ......................
                                                                                                                                                             ..........
                                                                                                                                         /!DC
                                                                               Elaine..W.: Logotheti,                              . :                       ......
                                                                                                                 .............
                                                                                                                                . ............ .....

                                                                                                                                          ...............    -... .. ...........
                                                           @[email protected]         12:    :4.994.                                                                ............
                                                                                                                                                             ....................... .
                                                                                                                                                             . ........ ... ............
                                                                                                                                         ............
                                                                                                                                           ..........
                           .. . ... ...........                                                              .. .....
                                                                                                                                        ................. .....
                                                                                                                             ..........                      . . .... . .. ......... ...
                                                                                                                         ... ........... ....                ....... ...... .. ..... ..
                                                                                                                                                             ... .......
                                                                                                                            ............                     . . .....
                                                                 . ........ ..                                          .. .......... .. .....               -__ .....
                                                                                                                                                             ...........
                                                              ..........
                                                                                                                                    ......... . . .......





                                                             . .. ..............
                                                      . . ... . ..................
                                                             . .. ........... ....




                        A. Pxoject Desaription

                                   The proposed management scheme for the Thousand Acre Marsh
                        is a comprehensive watershed approach to the management of
                        wetlands. This project the first of its kind in Delaware and its
                        success may serve as a prototype for future marsh management. By
                        novelly incorporating Delaware's Tax Ditch Program as the essence
                        of management, long term funds, managers and maintenance is
                        secured. In the absence of the Tax Ditch Organization, the
                        future of the marsh, adjacent and regional resources are in
                        jeopardy.
                                   The Thousand Acre Marsh Project is an ecosystem based,
                        comprehensive watershed restoration, protection, and management
                        project that shall involve numerous governmental agencies and 22
                        private landowners. The project intends to coordinate numerous
                        proven water quality improvement technologies, land protection
                        approaches, wildlife management techniques, wetland management
                        techniques, and habitat restoration techniques to improve and
                        protect the 3,067 acre watershed (see project organization and
                        flow chart). More importantly, the project will creatively use
                        Delaware's Drainage Code (7 Delaware Code, Chapter 41) to ensure
                        a coordinated long term commitment from landowners through a
                        legally binding watershed plan and a dedicated funding source to
                        ensure long term success.

                                   The project plans to utilize upgraded technologies for
                        dredging and dredge material placement for the purposes of marsh
                        restoration and creation. This procedure will utilize as much as
                        160,000 cubic yards of dredge material removed during the
                        restoration of in-basin tidal creeks. This material will be used
                        in a beneficial manner for the restoration of wetlands via the
                        creation
                                            of "wet islands" in open water areas and for the
                        enhancement of several areas of deteriorated emergent marsh.


                                                                                             2









             These areas were locations of historic emergent wetlands which
             have been lost due to sediment deprivation from tidal exclusion
             (impounding), land subsidence due to approximately 150 years of
             drainage, and inadequate water management.

                  This project is expected to improve water quality, restore
             approximately 25,000 linear feet of tidal streams, create 34
             acres of "wet island", emergent wetland area in the former
             location of the wetlands, and re-invigorate 25 acres of
             threatened emergent wetland by the replenishment of low level
             marsh with thin layered dredged material. The construction phase
             of this project is expected to last approximately one year.

                  Methods and technologies to be tested and upgraded include:
             1) comprehensive watershed management approaches which will
             require extensive interagency and private sector coordination; 2)
             wetland restoration technology; 3) dredge operations for the
             restoration and enhancement of wetlands; 4) thin layer
             application of dredged material; and 5) innovative approaches for
             coordination of private lands management.


             B. Project Benchmark Dates

                  1.) Meet with Tax Ditch Commissioners                      4/30/93
                                                                         (completed)
                  2.)  Survey water level benchmarks                          5/5/93
                                                                         (completed)
                  3.)  Site visit with Natural Heritage Staff                 6/4/93
                                                                         (completed)
                  4.)  MOA with Natural Heritage Staff                        6/8/93
                                                                           (executed)
                  5.)  Begin weekly water quality monitoring for              6/4/93
                       temperature, salinity, DO, nitrogen, &              (executed)
                       phosphorus)

                  6.)  Watershed Topography mapping                          6/14/93
                                                                         (completed)
                  7.)  Joint Permitting Committee Meeting                    6/17/93
                                                                         (completed)
                  8.)  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                       .(Presentation to Design and                          6/29/93
                       Planning Branches)                                (completed)

                  9.)  Site visit by DSWC administrative staff                7/1/93
                       regarding project planning and management         (completed)

                  10.) Tax Ditch organization Meeting                        7/29/93
                       with all Landowners                               (completed)

                  11.) JPPC meeting regarding Rte. (Shoreline                11/18/93
                       Stabilization Project                             (completed)

                                                 3









                 12.) Site visit with JPPC to assess proposed                 12/3/93
                       permit required projects                         (completed)


                 13.)  Open Space Council approved of approximately
                       100A of Warren tract for purchase of public            12/7/93
                       lands                                            (completed)

                 14.)  Tax Ditch Referendum                             February 94

                 15.)  Initiate permit process for Aquatic              December 93
                       Rehabilitation activities                        (continuous)

             C. ReWrt Status

                 1.)  Draft Report - Thousand Acre Marsh: General
                      Background, Description, and Management
                      Recommendations and Alternatives (pgs. 119)
                      * Completed February 1992.

                 2.)  Final Tax Ditch Commissioners Report
                      e Final Report - expected January 31, 1994

                 3.)  Natural Heritage Inventory Biotic Composition
                      and Natural Community Description
                      e January 15, 1994

                 4.   Non-Point Source Pollution Assessment and
                      Recommendation Report
                      e expected September 30, 1994

             D. Permit Status

                 1.) State of Delaware Subaqueous Lands Permit for the
                      construction of 560 cubic yards of rip-rap stabilization
                      and 50 cubic yards associated fill on Selby tract.

                      Permit No. SP-0302/92
                      Issued April 22, 1993

                 2.)  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit for the
                      construction of 560 cubic yards of rip-rap stabilization
                      and 50 cubic yards associated fill on Selby tract.

                      Permit No. CENAP-OP-R-199200588-36 (NP13)
                      Issued March 26, 1993

                 3.)  Permit type under review of DNREC Wetland Branch and U.S.
                      ACE for Delaware Rte. 9 Shoreline Stabilization Project
                      via DelDOT.

                 4.)  No other permit needs have been definitively identified

                                                 4









                    at this time. Initiation of permit activities is pending
                    landowner decisions with regards to the extent of wetland
                    dependent activities to be undertaken as part of the
                    project. Permits effort will be initiated as needed.
                        Completion time for permits and Environmental
                        Assessments between 3-5 months.

               5.)  Joint Permit Processing Committee received project scope
                    (June 17, 1993). Suggested to apply for one permit that
                    included all project activities.


           E. Funding

                1.) Secured
                     a. Environmental Fines
                       . Presidente Rivera                 $ 13,000 (expended)
                       . Other Penalties
                            Unspecified Source             $ 17,000 (expended)
                            NPS Encumbered Account         $100,0001
                     b. DCMP Section 309 Grant
                        (Oct. 1993 - Sept. 1994)           $ 64,000'
                     c. U.S. EPA Delaware Estuary
                        Program Grant                      $ 41,500
                     d. DelDOT Shoreline Stabilization
                        Project                            $ 50,000
                     e. Land Protection (Warren Tract)     $390,000

                 2.) Non-Secured
                     a. State General Funds for Dredging
                     b. Additional Fines Monies
                     c. Additional Federal & State Grants
                     d. Tax Ditch Fees

                 3.) Cost-Share Programs
                     a. Phracrmites control
                     b. BMPs for aglands (NCCD, ASCS, SCS)

                       only a portion of this amount is available for
                        Thousand Acre Marsh



           F. Landowners

                Property ownership is distributed amongst 22 owners of 19
           separate parcels of land. Historic landowner disputes over marsh
           management have significantly hindered wetland management. In
           order to resolve long standing conflicts, a Tax Ditch Association
           has been proposed to ensure one voice in management decisions and
           to provide a dedicated source of funds for long term marsh
           management and maintenance. If this organization is approved via


                                            5









           landowner votes and superior court concurrence, decisions of this
           association will be legally binding and enforceable. Note that
           in Deceember 1993, the Open Space Council approved the purchase
           of approximately 100 acres on the Warren tract for public land.





           G. Project Participants

                9  Landowners (Proposed Tax Ditch Association)
                *  New Castle Conservation District
                9  USDA Soil Conservation Service
                *  Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
                   Environmental Control
                   ï¿½ Division of Soil & Water Conservation
                   . Division of Parks & Recreation
                   ï¿½ Division of Fish & Wildlife
                   ï¿½ Division of Water Resources
                9  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                   . ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                9  Delaware Department of Transportation (Del DOT)
                0  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Design and Planning Branches
                *  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

           H. Other Potential Paz-ticipants

                e  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                o  NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
                *  Delaware Department of Agriculture
                e  University of Delaware,,Department of Agriculture
                   Cooperative Extension Service
                9  New Castle County








                                         .. ........ ........ .........
                           . .........
                                                    ... .................... -...
                                                                ................
                                                       .............
                      mprova          a 2          .............................. .................
            ..-Gb                      I ty'...I.-
                                                         ....... . . .. ....... .


           A. Condition Prioz- to Project

               There is limited quantitative data  of water quality., however,
           qualitative information has identified  algae and phytoplankton
           blooms, and fish kills which are indicative of excess nutrients
           and other water quality problems.

               Although some past efforts have been made to develop
           Agricultural Conservation and Management Plans for aglands within


                                           6









           the watershed, a coordinated and concentrated watershed approach
           was not apparent. Many agland areas are still in need of
           conservation plans or plan updates. This will require
           significant technical assistance to local farmers as well as a
           source of funds for plan implementation.

               In addition, potential conversion of watershed uplands from
           aglands to residential land use exists. This land-use change may
           potentially increase toxic inputs from urban sources as well as
           nutrient loadings from a high concentration of on-site septic
           systems. It may also affect watershed hydrology.


           B. Site Spgcific Objective 1.1

                          Reduce pollutant loadings fz-om watershed area
                          surface water z=off.

             1.) Tasks Reguired to Meet Objective I.1:

               a. Develop and inventory all agricultural lands in the
                  watershed, a listing of any lands covered by SCS,
                  Conservation District, or ASCS Agricultural Conservation
                  and Management Plans. Conduct an assessment of all plans
                  identified. This will determine the level of compliance
                  with plans and develop a list of those areas in which
                  efforts should be directed to develop additional plans.

               b. Identify specific locations where implementation of
                  conservation practices would improve surface water runoff
                  quality. This may include potential locations,for grassed
                  waterways, manure management sheds, buffer strips,
                  integrated crop management areas, nutrient management
                  areas, etc. An estimate of implementation costs will also
                  be included for each site specific conservation measure or
                  best 'management practice (BMP) identified.

               c. Conduct an assessment of the NPS impacts of the planned
                  residential development on the former Port Penn Hunting
                  Club property. Identify any additional management
                  measures which could reduce these impacts (eg. vegetated
                  roadside ditches instead of curbs, wet stormwater
                  retention basin, etc.).

               d. Develop a detailed map of the watershed's drainage system.

               e. Generate an estimate of the surface water recharge
                  potential for Thousand Acre Marsh in an average year, wet
                  year, and drought year. (SCS TR55 or AGNPS continuous
                  simulation/unit hydrograph approach).

               f. Identify land-use and land-cover types.

                                           7










               g. Conduct detailed mathematical model of runoff quality
                  with an emphasis on nutrients and sediments to simulate
                  the impact of various conservation practice scenarios on
                  water quality. The model will utilize Agricultural
                  Nonpoint Source Pollution Model (AGNPS) for priority
                  agricultural watershed areas.

               h. Develop a two foot contour map 'of watershed area to
                  improve accuracy of watershed modelling for NPS.

             2.) Current Status of Objective I.1

                 a. A 2 foot contour map of the watershed has been conducted
                   under a contract administered by the New Castle
                   Conservation District. The map is available in both hard
                   copy and digital (DWG Format) form.

                   Status: Completed
                   Cost:   $ 21,000

               b. Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment Project encompassing
                  all other tasks under Objective I.1 will be initiated.

                   Status: October 1, 1993
                   Completion Date: September 30, 1994
                   Cost: Approximately $ 30,000 (secured)

               c. Perform weekly gross water quality analysis by DSWC staff.

                   Status: continuous
                   Cost: DSWC In-Kind Staff Time

               d. Conduct hydrologic analysis of marsh and tidegates.
                   Initial analysis completed by DSWC Engineer

                   Cost: Engineering Staff Time
                          DSWC In-Kind Services

               e. Initiate study to assess the phosphorus loadings from,
                  agriculutral lands. DSWC responsible for sample
                  collection and UofDE and SCS conduct analysis.

                   status: Started 12/20/93, thwarted by weather
                          conditions will continue once ground thaws
                   Cost: DSWC Staff Time
                          $7.00/sample






                                           8









           C. Site SR@cific Objective 1.2

                          Improvements of vaterbody vater quality through
                          the implementation of any applicable measure at
                          receiving vater end of vatershed.

             1.) Tasks Recruired to Meet Objective 1.2

               a. Evaluate various options for structural improvement to
                  enable desired water management.

               b. Install new or retrofit existing tide gate with
                  alternative structure that will enable increase water
                  management flexibility and limited tidal flushing.
                  * Possible renovation of the historic flow direction and
                   tidal prism via installation of a tide gate structure
                   between the marsh and C-D canal.
                  e Increase water management flexibility via retrofit of
                   existing structure.

               c. Permit tidal exchange of impoundment with estuarine waters
                  during low salinity seasons of year (Spring).

                 1. Provide for dilution of nutrients in marsh basin with
                   tidal waters in a reach of Delaware River that is not
                   significantly impaired by nutrient concentrations (1992
                   305(b) Water Quality Inventory Reports).
                2. Improve dissolved oxygen concentrations through the
                   increase in water mixing and circulation, and addition
                   of more oxygenated estuarine waters.

            2.) Current Status of Objective 1.2

                    Status: Pending formation of Tax Ditch Association
                    Cost:   Unknown - Pending Engineering and Design
                             (Estimate $ 15,000 - $ 125,000 dependent upon
                            structure)

          D. Site SRgcific Objective II.1

                         Implement a consistent approach to vatex-
                         management at the Thousand Acre Marsh.

            1.0 Tasks Reguired to Meet Objective II.1

               a. Include water management schedule in Final Tax Ditch
                  Commissioners Report to provide the mechanism for
                  mandatory compliance.

               b. Establish a Tax Ditch Association by landowner majority
                  vote to ensure one voice in management decisions and to
                  provide a legal mechanism for taxation. The dedicated

                                          9









                                       source of funds will cover a part of initial project costs

                                       and long term maintenance of the water control
                                       structure, channel maintenance, and Phracrmites control.

                                 c.    Assist landowners in the coordination and implementation
                                       of an interim water management plan.

                            2.) Current Status of Oblect II.1

                                 a. Tax Ditch Association
                                       ï¿½  Petition filed in Superior Court - July 14, 1992
                                       ï¿½  Superior Court order that the Tax Ditch commissioners
                                          Review Plan in accordance with Chapter 41, Title 7,
                                          Delaware Code 1953, as amended.
                                          - Issued March 12, 1993
                                       ï¿½  Tax Ditch Commissioners Review
                                              Initiated May 3, 1993
                                       ï¿½  Interim Landowner Meeting - July 29,. 1993
                                       .  Landowner Vote on Tax Ditch - Early Fall 1993

                                              Cost: DCMP Grant Staff and State Drainage
                                                           Program Staff Time

                                b. Assist Landowners with Interim Water Management Regime
                                       ï¿½ Currently carried out by landowners in accordance with
                                          March 1993 to February 1994 water management schedule.
                                          Technical assistance provided by David Carter and Elaine
                                          Logothetis.

                                              Cost: DSWC Staff Time



                                                                                                                    . ... .. ............ .    ...........
                                                        . ........... ........               ........
                                                                                                                                       . . ............

                                                                                                                                                  .............. ..........
                                          . .. .........                                        1. a     ..-We        2:1&1 @4
                            ............ .. ......
                                                                                                                                              ............      ........
                                                         I                       t* H
                                    .. ...........
                         ......... ..... .. .. . .....


                        A. Condition Prior to Project

                                  Thousand Acre Marsh is a low level impoundment                                                         with       water
                        levels regulated via tide restricting flapper gates                                                              and an inland
                        riser board weir. This type of structure provides very limited
                        flexibility for wetlands water management and has been the
                        subject of long standing contention amongst the numerous marsh
                        property owners.

                                  Due to the combined effects of natural processes and
                        inconsistent management efforts, the wetland area has
                        experienced a general decline in habitat quality for
                        approximately two decades. Evolution of the marsh area has been
                        toward a shallow, sediment laden, open water area; devoid of
                        vegetation important for waterfowl, waterbirds, muskrats, and
                        most other wetland wildlife species.


                                                                                            10









            B. Site Spgcific Objective III.1

                            Improve Vegetative Diversity

              1.) Tasks Reguired to Meet oblective III.1:

                a.  Eradicate Phracmites with basin wide spray program
                    followed by out-year maintenance spray program. For
                    long term control, implement a low level (acreage) annual
                    treatment program for spot treatment of areas of
                    Phragmites re-invasion.

                b.  Implement a consistent water management plan to
                    encourage recovery of emergent vegetation in open water
                    areas.


                c.  Vegetation planting should not be necessary due to
                    natural seed bed, however some supplemental plantings may
                    be initiated in designated areas, such as; erodible
                    soils, island creation sites, exposed sediments, buffer
                    strips, and reclamation sites.

                       Cost: Unknown (will be included with dredge operation
                             budget)

              2.) Current Status of Objective III.1

                a. Phragmites control - Pending approval of Tax Ditch for
                    basin wide treatment.

                       Cost: Year 1   400 acres @ $ 60.00 = $24,000.00@
                             Year 11 400 acres @ $ 38.00 = $15,200.00

                                                              ----------
                                                    Total = $39,200.0'
                             Annual out-year maintenance
                                       35 acres @ $102.90 = $ 3,600.00

                b. Water Management

                    1. Pending approval of Tax Ditch Association - cost
                       analysis for implementation.
                       Cost: $500.00 - $1000.00 /year (Proposed Tax Ditch
                             Association annual fees)

                    2. Following schedule of interim water management regime
                       for 1993 - 1994 seasons with landowner and interagency
                       coordination.






                                              11









            C. Site Spgcific Objective IIX.2

                           Shoreline stabilization and vetland in-basin
                           erosion control

              1.) Tasks to Meet Site Specific Objective 111.2

                a. Vegetative losses have been a result of exposure to the
                   open water marsh. This direct exposure has subjected the
                   @horelines to harsh winds and wave action. Utilize
                   innovative dredging technologies to restore "wet island"
                   emergent wetland that will reduce wind fetch and dissipate
                   wave energy.

                b. Coordinate with Del DOT for a shoreline stabilization
                   using fabric and rip rap to prevent over flow erosion of
                   Route 9 embankment during coastal storms.

                c. Environmentally sensitive bioengineering techniques have
                   been proposed; such as the natural fibre logs (Bio-LogsR)
                   and vegetative plantings in areas of severe shoreline
                   erosion.

              2.) Current Status of Objective 111.2

                  All tasks pending approval of Tax Ditch Association.


           D .Site S2gcific Objective IXX.2

                           Conduct In-Basin channelization vith Cookie Cutter
                           for improved vater circulation and marsh access.

              1.) Tasks to Meet Objective 111.3

                a. Limited channel restoration may  be accomplished with the
                   U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,  and/or Pennsylvania
                   Department of Fish and Game Cookie Cutter. The equipment
                   has been designed for shallow depths and a channel width
                   of eight feet.

                b. For channel maintenance, Cookie Cutter channelization may
                   be periodically required. Regular maintenance funds
                   may be procured from the Tax Ditch program.

                      Cost: Maximum of $15,000.00

              2.) Current Status of Objective 111.3

                  Pending approval of Tax Ditch Association



                                            12









                        E. Site SRgcific Objective XXX.4

                                                         Restore emergent vegetation and tidal stream size
                                                         and depths to pre-1940s characteristics.

                             1.) Tasks to                Meet Site Obiective 111.4

                                 a. Dredging feasibility analysis, Environmental Assessment
                                       and cost analysis.

                                 b.    Conduct sediment analysis, for physical characteristics
                                       and for any potential pollutants of concern.

                                 c.    Restore tidal creeks via relatively new, innovative and
                                       beneficial dredging techniques. At a minimum, create 34
                                       acres of "wet island" and emergent low marsh, and
                                       reinvigorate 25 acres of threatened marsh via thin layer
                                       of dredged material.

                                 d.    Monitor during and after dredging operations.

                                 e.    Implement limited tidal flushing as part of water
                                       management plan.

                             2.) Current Status of Objective 111.4

                                 a. Pending approval of Tax Ditch Organization
                                       * Met with DSWC Staff, Joint Permit Processing
                                            Committee, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with regards
                                            to feasibility, permits and procurement of funds.
                                       * Cost analysis

                                              Cost: Pending Design



                                                                                                                                                           ...................
                                                                                                                                                         ... .. ..........
                                                                                                   ........ ..... ..    ................ ...... .. ...... ... ....... .....  ...................,
                             ...... .... ..... ..... ..                                                                                   ........     ......... .. .
                                                                                                                       ...............
                                                                                                  esources
                                                XV40.           prove:: WildlIf                 R                        ... ...
                                                                                                                                                   ............. .
                                                                                                                                   ...... ......


                        A. Site Spgcific Objective IV.1

                                                         improve species diversity and protection of
                                                         organisms utilizing watershed

                             1.) Tasks to                meet site specific objective IV.1

                                 a. Implement previously outlined Wetland Management and
                                       Aquatic Habitat Rehabilitation activities.

                                 b.    Encourage landowner participation on this level.
                                       Basic wildlife management practices allow for the
                                       landowner to becore actively involved in the watershed


                                                                                            13









                  management plan. Tools such as those listed below,
                  stimulate the landowners to reap the rewards of their own
                  management in consumptive and non-consumptive uses and may
                  foster stewardship and land protection for future
                  generations.

                  List of potential conservation practices:
                     1. install nest structures (i.e. wood duck and bluebird
                        boxes)
                     2. permit only ethical hunting practices
                     3. leave snags
                     4. create or widen buffer and/or riparian zones
                     5. harvest 90% crop and leave lot as wildlife food
                     6. encourage designation of sites as refuge or natural
                        areas on and/or amongst property boundaries.

             2.) Current Status of Objective IV.1

               a. SCS and NCCD have worked in the past with some property
                  owners on agricultural conservation planning.


                           . .... .....
                         Goal,::
                                                          . .. .. . . .....


           A. Site Spgcific Objective V.1

                          Preserve and protect as much undeveloped land in
                          the vatershed as possible.

             1.) Tasks to meet Site Specific Objective V.1

               a. Coordinate with Open Space Council for easements,
                  development rights, deed restrictions, land trusts,
                  natural area protection and acquisition.

               b. Coordinate with DP&R for natural areas protection.

               c. Inquire with DE Department of Agriculture for
                  applicability and/or availability of participation with
                  the federal Farmland Preservation Program.

               2.) Current Status of Objective V.1

                   Open Space Council approved the purchase of approximately
                   100 acres of palustrine forest on the Warren tract for
                   public lands.

                   Other land protection efforts at this time are
                   confidential.

            DCW110MA.TM





                                          14




      m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m



    Thousand Acre Nbrsh
   New Castle County, Delaware






         LOCATOR MAP











                                                                                               HR I RIP,


                                                                                             R
                                                                                               T
                                                                                             10,







                                                                                            ,gg.


       MTIOKAL WEnMDS INVENTORY.


       Open Water
       Bm&.m Bam md MmMab                                                                                       40:q

          arine
       Eftsbm'jine ===WIldflat
       bamne an& Mumb md                                                                     "P.
       Estuarine Scrub %trub/anergent
       PhJushine Enwgeryt and
       Nusbine ErnergeWopen Water
       PWLWAne Foreited,
       Pau5bine F res;tedraub Shrub and
       P20ine FoorertedlEmergerd
       Pa uOin 5= %mb and
       Pa:tlMne 5crub
             e   61shm&lEmergmt                                                                 g
                                                                                                U.






            N@ C.M1. C-LI. nbmd







                                          APPENDIX D























                    ..... ...........
                                        ..........                ........        ...........


                  DEL"VA POWER &                                              HT:::::
                                 IMPOUNDMENT
                        REHABILITATION PLAN


                                                   .......... ......... ......... ..... ... ...... .................... .... .......























                               Northern Delaware Wetlands
                                   Rehabilitation Program











                           DELNRRVIL POWER AND LTGNT IMPOUNDMMT




                    An 81-acre impoundment located at Hamburg Cove on the

          Delaware River, 2 miles northwest of Pea Patch Island. The site was

          a former tidal wetland that was diked and filled with dredge spoil in

          the 19501s. The spoil increased the elevation of the marsh above sea

          level by approximately 14 ft, eliminating tidal influence. In the

          1970's this area was used as a mitigation site for compensation of

          another dredge disposal site by the Getty Oil Refinery. Mitigation

          involved creating several shallow ponds and installing a water

          control structure. In 1973, a 500 kv power line was constructed

          across the marsh, and an 1100-foot culvert pipe was installed to

          divert storm runoff from the marsh and into an adjacent watershed.

          Current landowners are Delmarva Power and Star Enterprises. A

          portion of the marsh is currently used by the Delmarva Power

          Sportsmen's Club for recreational hunting.

                    The existing water control structure is over 40 years-old

          and nonfunctional in terms of maintaining, increasing, or

          manipulating water levels. This inability of the structure to retain

          water combined with the fact that the marsh's only hydrologic input

          is rainfall, have contributed to the marsh becoming dominated by a

          monotypic stand of phragmites. Currently, 3 small shallow

          depressions (totaling 3.5 acres) consistently retain water, 2 only

          seasonally. Two degraded ponds (7.8 acres combined) adjacent to the

          marsh receive a significant amount of the storm runoff from the

          marsh's watershed. These ponds provide limited hydrologic input to

          the marsh, but they and can be utilized to create a stair-step









          reservoir system between the ponds and the marsh, thereby benefiting

          all three waterbodies. A sand and gravel extraction operation within

          the marsh's watershed has been identified as potentially impacting

          the marsh's water quality and supply. Over the last 4 years,

          pestiferous mosquito breeding in this marsh hasbeen sufficient to

          warrant an average of 1.25 aerial applications of insecticide per

          year.

                The marsh is a potentially important area for wildlife. It is

          in close proximity to the Pea Patch Heronry, the largest wading bird

          colony on the Atlantic Coast north of Florida, and Hamburg Cove, an

          important area for migrat ing black ducks. The juxtaposition of the

          marsh among primarily agriculture lands the adjacent to 2 ponds

          inhabited by a beaver colony increases this value. Delaware's only

          consistently successful osprey nest in the upper Delaware River is

          located on one of the 500 kv power line towers within 1 mile of the

          marsh.









         The Delmarva Power
       and Light Impoundment
   New Castle County, Delaware





           LOCATOR M4P


                                                             SAND AND GRAVEL PIT





























        DF&L ImpmMment


        NATION& WETIANDS INVENTORY:
   IM   Open Water                                                             REt LION CREEK

        Pakstrine EmerWt and
        Pallibizirle Enoersent(open Water
        Pakstrine Scrub Shrub and
        Pakistrine Scrub/Shruhimergent











                     NORTHERN DELAWARE WETLANDS REHABILITATION PROGRAM


                               REHABILITATION TRACKING FORM




           WETLAND PROJECT: D.P. & L. IMPOUNDKM          UPDATED: 26 JANUARY 94

                      PROJECT MANAGER: Rob Hossler, Fish & Wildlife


          PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: 31 MAY 1995



          REPORT STATUS:    1) Environmental Evaluation - Completed 18 November
                               1992.
                            2) Water Management Plan - not initiated, dependent
                               on water control structure design.
                            3) Operation, Maintenance and Management Plan     not
                               initiated.

          PERMIT STATUS:    1) COE 404 Permit - not initiated.
                            2) State Type II Permit - not initiated.
                            3) Subaqueous Lands Permit - not required.
                            4) Environmental Assessment - not initiated.

          FUNDING STATUS:   1) Secured -
                               a. Delmarva Power - $4,926 provided over last 2
          years for phragmites control.
                               b. Delmarva Power Sportsmen's Qub - Donated an
          unknown amount to the Delaware City Fire Department for their
          assistance with the 1993 controlled burn.
                               c. Rivision of Fish and Wildlife - $1,260 provided
          over last 2 years for phragmites control.

                            2) Pending -
                               a. Delmarva Power - Potentially interested in
          providing additional funding to this project.
                               b..Delmarva Power Sportsmen's Club - interested in
          providing additional funding to this project.
                               c. Star EnterRrise - A potential funding source.

          LANDOWNERS: Delmarva Power (Delmarva)- owns 57 acres (70%) of the
          marsh including the water control structure. The property is
          currently used by the Delmarva Power Sportsmen's Club (Sportsmen's
          Club) for recreational hunting. Both Delmarva and the Sportsmen's
          Club have consented to a long-term management agreement and Delmarva
          has issued an access permit to conduct biological surveys. Delmarva
          might provide assistance in the installation of the proposed water
          control structure, and additional phragmites control efforts. The
          Sportsmen's Club is interested in assisting with the installation of
          the proposed water control and wildlife enhancement structures; the
          operation and maintenance of these structures; and additional
          phragmites control and wildlife plantings.












          D.P. & L. IMPOUNDMENT                                                 2


               Delmarva Power has identified a 2.1-acre solid waste landfill
          within the proposed rehabilitation area. This fly ash and sludge
          landfill was capped in 1982, and in accordance with state regulations
          has been maintained with vegetative cover and monitored with wells for
          5 years. Well abandonment was conducted in the winter of 1993.
          Delmarva Power has requested that the landfill not be inundated with
          water or physically disturbed by construction,.i.e.,,ditch or pond
          construction. This request should not significantly affect
          rehabilitation efforts because the landfill cap is approximately 4
          feet above existing water levels. The landfill is currently vegetated
          with a mix of phragmites and old field species; however, phragmites
          control practices and reseeding of upland plant species can
          rehabilitate this area into a more desirable habitat type. The
          proposed rehabilitation plan does not pose a threat to releasing any
          potential contaminants from this landfill.

                       Star Enterprises (Star) - owns 24 acres (30%) of the
          marsh, including the two ponds proposed as water supply reservoirs.
          The property's trapping rights are currently leased to a local
          resident. Although Star considers the project worthwhile, they are
          not interested in consenting to a long-term management agreement or
          providing any funding for rehabilitation unless they can receive
          "environmental consideration" to be used against their proposed future
          dredge disposal sites.. However, recent information indicates that
          @tar might reconsider consenting to a long-term management agreement
          in the neat future.

          PARTICIPATING PARTNERS: Delmarva Power, Delmarva Power Sportsmen's
          Club, DNREC, and New Castle Conservation District.    1,

          PUBLIC RELATIONS 1) Needs - Inclusion of Star Enterprises as a
          participating partner in the project.
                            2) Actions -
                               a) Environmental Groups - The Sportsmen's Club
          has assisted in controlled burns and temporary modification of the
          existing water control structure. The Sportsmen's Club is also
          enhancing adjacent upland areas by conducting wildlife habitat
          improvements, i.e., border cuttings, beneficial plantings, and the
          creation of clearings. The Sportsmen's Group participated in the 2
          October 1993 Delaware Coastal Cleanup.
                               b) Landowners   Consultations with Star are
          ongoing.





               REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE WETLAND HABITATS FOR WILDLIFE




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE% Improve wetland habitats by increasing
          habitat diversity, installing wildlife enhancement structures, and











          D.P. & L. IMPOUNDMENT                                                3

          adhering to a water management plan involving periodic water level
          manipulations. The increase in habitat diversity will be accomplished
          by increasing the percentage of open water and desirable emergent
          vegetation habitats to-21-42% (17-34 acres) and 42-63%@(34-51 acres),
          respectively. Adherence to a water management plan should improve
          habitats for wetland wildlife, especially aquatic mammals, waterfowl
          and other waterbirds, by adjusting the water level to accommodate
          @heir seasonal needs when possible. These management practices should
          increase the number, species, and reproductive success of wildlife
          using the marsh.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: Habitat types of the marsh are comprised of
          the following approximate percentages: 81% (65 acres) monotypic
          stands of phragmites, 4% (3.5 acres) open water habitat interspersed
          with desirable emergent vegetation, 15% (12.5 acres) upland habitats.
          During avian surveys conducted in 1991-1992, 17 species of waterbirds
          and raptors were recorded for a combined total of 67 birds and an
          average of 13.4 birds/survey. The only known waterbirds or raptors
          nesting in the marsh or the adjacent area were a pair of osprey and a
          pair of Canada geese.
               The existing water control structure, consisting of 5, 30-inch-
          diameter outlet pipes, is nonfunctional in terms of maintaining,
          increasing, or manipulating water levels. Additionally, a 1100-foot
          culvert pipe diverts a significant,amount of storm runoff from the
          marsh and into an adjacent watershed. These two structures
          essentially limit the amount of water in the marsh, thereby decreasing
          habitat diversity by promoting dominant monotypic stands of
          phragmites.

          CURRENT STATUS: Biological and initial contour surveys have been
          completed. Additional elevation surveys are currently being conducted
          of surrounding upland and agricultural lands to determine the maximum
          allowable water level. Temporary modifications have been made to the
          existing water control structure to slightly increase the water level
          in the marsh. These modifications have included sealing several of
          the outlet pipes with expandable foam epoxy donated by,Delmarva Power.
          Contour maps and sedimentation control plans for the sand and gravel
          extraction operation within the marsh's watershed have been obtained.
          These plans and maps indicate that the extraction operation will not
          significantly impact the water quality or supply for the proposed
          marsh. Land use mapping of the watershed has been completed.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Completion of elevation surveys to determine
          the maximum and minimum allowable water levels and water supply
          requirements.         COMPLETION DATE: March 1994.

                                2) Evaluate the structural integrity of the
          existing dikes for use as an impoundment through consultation with a
          registered civil engineer.
                                COMPLETION DATE: April 1994.












           D.P. & L. IMPOUNDMENT                                                      4

                                  3) Monitor the sedimentation and erosion
           control practices, and the reestablishment of contours conducted by
           the extraction operation. Promote best management practices where
           current techniques are inadequate.
                                  COMPLETION DATE: April 1994.

                                  4) obstruct the culvert that is diverting storm
           runoff from the marsh. COMPLETION DATE: May 1994.

                                  5) Remove existing nonfunctional water control
           structure by removing all above ground structures, and then sealing
           the remaining pipes with expandable foam epoxy.
                                  COMPLETION DATE: October 1994

                                  6) Install a 48-inch stop-log structure
           connected to a 2-foot-diameter, aluminum outflow pipe that traverses
           through the dike. Install a riprap spillway at the outflow (river
           side). Set riser boards from the minimum to the maximum allowable
           water levels. Riser boards will be initially set at the maximum
           allowable level in order to assist in the control of phragmites and to
           determine an approximate 100% pool level, based on "average"
           hydrologic inputs and outputs. Periodic manipulations of the water
           level to improve regional objectives will be made as needed after
           estimates of the approximate 100% pool level are determined. Delmarva
           might provide assistance in the installation of the structure.
                                  COMPLETION DATE: October 1994

                                  7) Install two water control st@uctures and an
           emergency spillway in  the dikes of the two adjacent ponds creating a
           stair-step reservoir system between the ponds and the marsh. This
           stair-step system would allow greater flexibility in manipulating
           water levels in both the marsh and the ponds, and would allow
           beneficial draw downs of the ponds, thus promoting submerged and
           emergent aquatic vegetation growth. The water control structures
           would be 48-inch, stop-log structures connected to a 2-foot-diameter
           aluminum outflow pipe. A 20-foot-wide grassed emergency spillway
            ould be constructed in the dike between the two ponds.
                                  COMPLETION DATE: April 1995

                                  8) Install wood duck and passerine nesting
           boxes, and goose and osprey nesting platforms. The number and location
           of these enhancement structures will be determined based on the
           approximate 100% pool level. Support in installation of wildlife
           enhancement structures is anticipated from the employee sportsmen
           club.                  COMPLETION DATE: March 1995

           SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: The success of the proposed
           habitat improvements will be based on comparable surveys of waterbirds
           utilizing the marsh, and of permanent vegetation transects established
           in the marsh during the summer of 1994. Success of wildlife












          D.P. & L. IMPOUNDMENT                                                5

          enhancement structures will be based on the reproductive success of
          wildlife utilizing them.





                 REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: UNDESIRABLE PLANT SPECIES CONTROL




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Reduce the area covered by monotypic stands
          of phragmites and increase emergent vegetation diversity. The percent
          cover of phragmites will be reduced to less than 5% (4 acres).
          Phragmites cover will be confined to upland areas and the
          upland/wetland fringe.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT:. The marsh is a large monoculture of
          phragmites, characteristic of sites that were disturbed by the
          disposal of dredge spoil. Approximately 81% (65 acres) of'the marsh
          is covered by this single species.

          CURRENT STATUS: An initial application of herbicide was applied on 52
          acres (80%) of phragmites on 30 September 1992. This application was
          followed by a controlled burn in March 1993. A second application of
          herbicide was applied on 13 acres of untreated phragmites, and 50
          acres of regenerating phragmites on 30 September 1993. Funding was
          provided by Delmarva Power ($4,926) and the Division of Fish and
          Wildlife ($1,260).


          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Apply herbicide (glyphosate) periodically on
          monotypic stands of phragmites.
                                COMPLETION DATE: Annually as needed in early
          Fall.

                                2) Controlled burning of phragmites (where
          feasible) or other removal method of the standing dead canes will be
          conducted following application of herbicide. Controlled burning
          suppresses phragmites through several methods including: exposing
          regenerating canes to the second year treatment of herbicide, reducing
          gas exchange to surviving root stalks, stimulating the release of
          nutrients for other competing plant species, exposing the soil to
          sunlight, and stimulating germination of desirable species in the
          existing seed bank.
                                COMPLETION DATE: In late winter, following the
          application of herbicide.

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Success determined by the
          reduction of monotypic stands of phragmites.












          D.P. & L. IMPOUNDMENT                                                6




             REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: INCREASE SHALLOW WATER HABITAT DIVERSITY



          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Increase the percentage and diversity of
          open water and desirable emergent vegetation habitats. The percent
          cover of open water and desirable emergent vegetation habitats will
          range from 21-42% (17-34 acres) and 42-63% (34-51 acres),
          respectively. Shallow water habitats will include numerous shallow
          ponds, ditches, and flats.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: Only 4% (3.5 acres) of the marsh
          consistently retains open water habitat interspersed with desirable
          emergent vegetation. This shallow water habitat is comprised of 3
          small ponds. Approximately 81% (65 acres) of the marsh is covered by
          a monoculture of phragmites.

          CURRENT STATUS: Except for contour and environmental surveys, no
          habitat diversity-related work has been conducted in the marsh.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Evaluate the necessity of testing sediments
          for,potential contaminants prior to excavating ditches and ponds.
                                COMPLETION DATE: July 1994.

                                2) Design a system of interconnecting ditches
          and ponds with interspersed island habitats. Ponds will have tapered
          sides and most ponds and all ditches will be shallow <18 inches in
          depth. Several ponds will have sections excavated >18 inches in depth
          to provide habitat for fish during droughts and draw-downs. Islands
          for waterfowl nesting will be created by accumulation of construction
          spoil. The proposal to increase the shallow water habitat diversity
          will be submitted either under the Division's existing Open Marsh
          Water Management permit or through a separate permit.
                                COMPLETION DATE: November 199 4.

                                3) If necessary, sample the proposed excavation
          sites for the presence of contaminants.
                                COMPLETION DATE: Might not be required.

                                4) Excavate ditches and ponds, and construct
          island habitat using Division of Fish and Wildlife personnel and
          equipment.
                               COMPLETION DATE: March 1995, depending on
          sediment sampling requirement.

          BITE BPECIVIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Success based on the diversity of
          shallow habitats and the percentage of open water habitat.












          D.P. & L. IMPOUNDMENT                                                 7




                          REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: MOSQUITO CONTROL



          BITE OPECIPIC OBJECTIVE:   Reduce pestiferous mosquito populations by
          establishing predacious fish populations. Mosquito populations are
          anticipated to be reduced to <1 larvae/dipping unit, based on periodic
          inspections for breeding activity.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: Rain events cause the flooding of previously
          exposed oviposition sites and promote mosquito breeding. However, the
          marsh currently has a limited amount of area inundated with sufficient
          depths or durations of water to support predacious fish. During the
          previous 4 years, pestiferous mosquito breeding averaged 3.4
          larvae/dipping unit and was sufficient to warrant an average of 1.25
          aerial applications of insecticide per year, totaling 47 lbs of
          pesticide product.

          CURRENT STATUS: Except for the collection of environmental data and
          conducting routine mosquito control pratices, no work has been
          conducted in this marsh.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Stocking of ponds and ditches with
          predacious mosquito fish (Gambusia holbrooki) at a rate of 500
          fish/acre. Fish will be obtained from Division of Fish and Wildlife
          ponds and previously stocked areas.
                                COMPLETION DATE: May 1995

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Success of biological mosquito
          control programs will be based on comparable indices of mosquito
          breeding.



          SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: 1) Improve water quality by wetland filtering,
          especially non-point source pollution from adjacent agricultural
          fields, and gravel extraction areas.

                                 2) Protect and enhance existing populations
          and critical habitats of threatened and endangered species and other
          species of concern. Emphasis will be placed on enhancing the site for
          foraging use by the Pea Patch Island wader colony.







                           APPENDIX E
















                    ..,4RTESI" MARSH
               REHABILITA TION PLAN














                    Northern Delaware Wetlands
                       Rehabilitation Program












                                        ARTEST" MAR K




                 An 134-acre tidal freshwater marsh located south of Churchman's

            Marsh, along Interstate 95 in Stanton. The marsh is bordered by the

            interstate to the north, by the Christina River on the south and east,

            and by an office complex to the west. In the southwest corner of the

            marsh, the Division of Fish and Wildlife maintains the Churchman's

            Boat Ramp facility. The marsh is currently owned by the Artesian

            Water Company and is leased for cattle grazing.

                 This formerly productive marsh was contiguous with Churchman's

            Marsh, and was considered an important area for migrating waterfowl.

            However in the 19601s, Artesian marsh was diked and used as a dredge

            disposal site during the construction of 1-95. This accumulation of

            dredge spoil raised  the elevation of the marsh by approximately 3.5

            feet, above the average high tide of the Christina River.

            Characteristic of sites that were diked and filled With dredge spoil,

            the marsh became a large monoculture of phragmites. This percentage

            of phragmites was reduced by the grazing of cattle and the restoration

            oflimited tidal exchange through several breaches in the dike.

            Currently the marsh is comprised of: 39% monotypic stands of

            phragmites, 32% cattle grazed rushes, 17% forested willows, 5% cattail

            stands, 4% upland areas, and 3% other wetland emergent plants.

                 The marsh still retains its floodplain values by accepting

            floodwater during storm surges and unusually high tides. However,

            this periodic flooding promotes pestiferous mosquito breeding by

            inundating previously exposed oviposition sites. This mosquito

            breeding problem is compounded by the grazing of cattle in the area.









            The cattle create small depressions (hoof prints) throughout the

            marsh, which retain a high nutrient content (manure) and act as

            breeding pockets for mosquitos. In 1992, pestiferous mosquito

            breeding in this marsh was sufficient to warrant 7 aerial applications

            of insecticide, totaling 3,875 lbs of pesticide product. Another

            potential problem with this marsh is its proximity to several

            Superfund or other state-listed hazardous wastes sites.

                 The juxtaposition of this marsh to 1-95, the boat ramp facility,

            and among several residential neighborhoods presents a ideal situation

            to increase the recreational and educational benefits of a wetland.

            Additionally, the tremendous wildlife value that the adjacent

            Churchman's marsh currently and historically has had, indicates the

            wildlife potential for a rehabilitated Artesian Marsh



      M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M





         Mesian Marsh
   New Castle Gc)unty, Delaware





             LOCATOR MW
                                                                                   CHURCHMANS
                                                                                   MARSH






                                                                                                                                                                FRI.



                                                                                                                                                                             T








         Estuarine Emergent and
         Estuarine Emergent/Readti/Mudiflat



                                                                                                                                 it









                                                                                  CHURCHMANS                oi I   it               a
                                                                                  BOAT                               'ji  Ii,
                                                                                  RAMP












                     NORTHERN DELAWARE WETLANDS REHABILITATION PROGRAM


                                 REHABILITATION TRACKING FORM




            WETLAND PROJECT: ARTESIAN MARSH              UPDATED: 26 JANUARY 94

                       PROJECT MANAGER: Rob Hossler, Fish & Wildlife


           PROJECT COMPLETION DATE:    March 1998


           REPORT STATUS:   1)  Environmental Description - Completed September
                                1993.
                            2)  Water Management Plan - not initiated.
                            3)  Operation, Maintenance, and Management Plan - not
                                initiated.

           PERMIT STATUS:   1)  COE 404 Permit - not initiated.
                            2)  State Type II Permit - not initiated.
                            3)  Subaqueous Lands Permit    not required.
                            4)  Environmental Assessment    not initiated.


           FUNDING STATUS:  1)  Secured - Ciba-Geigy - contributed $310,000
           towards tidal wetlands rehabilitation in Christina River basin, a
           portion of which will be used on Artesian Marsh.
                            2) Pending -
                                a. Artesian Water Company - Interested in
           providing funding to this project.
                                b. Delaware Department of Transportation
           (DelDOT) - Potentially interested in funding this project as
           mitigation for the proposed expansion of Interstate 95.
                                c. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Interested in
           funding this project through their Partners for Wildlife Program.
                                d. DuPont Company - Potential funding source
           through mitigation of natural resource damages associated with the
           DuPont Newport Superfund Site.

           LANDOWNERS: Artesian Water CoMpany (Artesian) - owns the marsh and is
           interested in assisting in its rehabilitation and long-term
           management, but desires mitigation credit for possible use on the
           proposed Churchman's Reservoir Project or other appropriate projects.
           The property is currently leased for cattle grazing; however, Artesian
           has indicated that this practice might not be continued in 1994. The
           Division of Fish and Wildlife maintains the Churchman's Boat Ramp,
           located adjacent to this marsh on the Christina River.

           PARTICIPATING PARTNERS: Artesian W"-ter Company, DNREC, New Castle
           Conservation District, and New Castle County.













          ARTESIAN MARSH                                                        2


          PUBLIC RELATIONS: 1) Needs
                               a) Landowners    Development of a mitigation
          policy that provides for the establishment of future wetland
          mitigation credit (mitigation banking).
                               b) Environmental Groups - Involvement of nearby
          communities in certain aspects of the rehabilitation project.
                            2) Actions -
                               a) Landowners - A departmental policy is being
          developed that allows for the establishment of future wetland
          mitigation credit (mitigation banking). Artesian Marsh is being
          proposed as the experimental prototype for this policy.
                               b) Environmental Groups - The Churchman's Boat
          Ramp has been a staging area for the annual Christina River Cleanup,
          co-sponsored by Artesian Water Company.





               REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE WETLAND HABITATS FOR WILDLIFE




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Improve wetland habitats by increasing
          habitat diversity, installing wildlife enhancement structures, and
          adhering to a water management plan involving daily tidal exchange and
          periodic water level manipulations. The increase in habitat diversity
          will be accomplished by increasing the percentage of open water and
          desirable emergent vegetation habitats to 19-37% (25-50 acres) and 37-
          55% (25-74 acres), respectively. Adherence to a water management plan
          should improve habitats for wetland wildlife, especially aquatic
          mammals, waterfowl and other waterbirds, by adjusting the water level
          to accommodate their seasonal needs when possible. These management
          practices should increase the number, species, and reproductive
          success of wildlife using the marsh.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT:  Habitat types of the marsh are comprised of
          the following approximate percentages: 39% (52 acres) monotypic
          stands of phragmites, 32%  (43 acres) of rushes, 17% (23 acres) of
          willow, 5% (7 acres) cattails, 4% (5 acres) upland , and 3% (4 acres)
          of other emergent plants.  During avian surveys conducted in 1993, 2
          species of waterbirds were recorded for a combined total of 4 birds
          and an average of 2.0 birds/survey. Aerial waterfowl surveys of the
          adjacent Churchman's Marsh have recorded 81.7 birds/survey indicating
          the rehabilitation potential for Artesian Marsh.
               The area was a former freshwater tidal marsh which was diked and
          used as a dredge disposal site during the construction of 1-95 in the
          19601s. Tidal exchange occurs in this marsh through 10 breaches in
          the dike along the Christina River, but this exchange is limited as
          the accumulation of spoil has raised the marsh elevation approximately
          0.1 feet (4.4 feet NGVD) above average high tide (4.3 feet NGVD).
          Approximately 7% (9 acres) of the marsh is exposed to daily tidal
          flushing. Although the marsh is above average high tide, it still












          ARTESIAN MARSH                                                         3

          retains its floodplain values by@accepting floodwater during storm
          surges and unusually high tides.


          Hazardous Wastes and Toxins - This marsh and the spoil deposited in it
          during the 1960's might have been impacted by the E.I. DuPont Newport
          Superfund Site, located approximately 1.3 miles downstream, or several
          other potential contaminant sources in the watershed. Because of this
          concern, 2 sediment samples of the marsh was collected in June 1993
          and analyzed for potential contaminants. This preliminary sampling
          identified levels of zinc in the sediment 2.0 to 4.6 times higher than
          concentrations at which adverse biological effects are frequently or
          always observed among most species (Long and Morgan 1991). However,
          in order to obtain conclusive results, additional sampling is
          required.

          Non-Roint Source Pollution - Non-point source pollution entering the
          marsh is limited to storm runoff from an office complex. Road runoff
          from the adjacent interstate is diverted away from the marsh via a
          borrow ditch.

          CURRENT STATUS: Ecological evaluations, including extensive contour
          and vegetation surveys have been conducted. A water level recording
          device has been established at the adjacent Churchman's Boat Ramp to
          chart hydrological data. Sediment sampling has revealed questionable
          zinc levels, requiring additional sampling prior to entertaining any
          sediment disturbing activities.
          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Additional contaminant sampling is required,
          including water samples and acid volatile sulfide sediment testing to
          determine dissolved zinc concentrations and zinc bioavailability,
          respectively.          COMPLETION DATE: August 1994.

                                 2) Conduct modeling (HEC II) to determine the
          impact of moving spoil and impounding the marsh on the floodplain.
          Assistance might be obtained from the New Castle County Planning
          Department.
                                 COMPLETION DATE: September 1994.

                                 3) Conduct modeling and engineering designs to
          predict the hydrology  and hydraulics of the proposed impoundment and
          water control structures, respectively.
                                 COMPLETION DATE: August 1995.

                                 4) Plug the 10 breaches in the dike, two with
          48-inch-diameter Delaware rice trunk water control structures, and two
          with sheet metal weirs and 20-foot-wide riprap emergency spillways.
          These weirs and spillways will be designed to accept and release storm
          surges and unusually high tides.
                                 COMPLETION DATE: June 1996.












          ARTESIAN MARSH                                                          4

                                 S) scrape approximately 93,702 yds3 of sediment
          from 88 acres of the marsh, to an average elevation of 3.8 feet NGVD
          (0.5 feet below average high tide). The Delaware Department of
          Transportation (DelDOT) might be interested in assisting with this
          excavating.            COMPLETION DATE: October 1996.

                                 6) Install wood duck, goose, mallard, osprey,,
          squirrel, bat, and passerine nesting structures. The number and
          location of these enhancement structures will be determined based on
          the availability of suitable microhabitats. Support in installation
          of wildlife enhancement structures might be available from local
          school groups and the private sector.
                                 COMPLETION DATE: March 1997

                                 7) Conduct plantings of beneficial species for
          wildlife during periodic draw-downs. The quantity planted will depend
          on the amount of suitable habitat available. Support in installation
          of wildlife enhancement structures might be available from local
          school groups and the private sector.
                                 COMPLETION DATE: October 1997

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: The success of the proposed
          habitat improvements will be based on comparable surveys of waterbirds
          utilizing the marsh, and of permanent vegetation transects established
          in the marsh. Success of wildlife enhancement structures will be
          based on the reproductivesuccess of wildlife utilizing them.





                 REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: UNDESIRABLE PLANT SPECIES CONTROL




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Reduce the area covered by monotypic stands
          of phragmites and increase emergent vegetation diversity. The percent
          cover of phragmites will be reduced to less than 5% (6 acres).
          Phragmites cover will be confined to upland areas and the
          upland/wetland fringe.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT:. The marsh contains a large monoculture of
          phragmites, characteristic of sites that were disturbed by the
          disposal of dredge spoil. Approximately 39% (52 acres) of the marsh
          is covered by this single species. Cattle grazing during 7 months of
          each year has prevented this species from dominating a larger portion
          of the marsh.

          CURRENT STATUS: No phragmites control efforts have occurred at this
          site.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Apply herbicide (glyphosate) periodically on












          ARTESIAN MARSH                                                         5
          monotypic stands of phragmites.  COMPLETION DATE: Annually as needed
          in early Fall with the first anticipated application occurring
          September 1997.


                                 2) Controlled burning of phragmites (where
          feasible) or other removal method of the standing dead canes will be
          conducted following application of herbicide. Controlled burning
          suppresses phragmites through several methods including: exposing
          regenerating canes to the second year treatment of herbicide, reducing
          gas exchange to surviving root stalks, stimulating the release of
          nutrients for other competing plant species, exposing the soil to
          sunlight, and stimulating germination of desirable species in the
          existing seed bank.              COMPLETION DATE: in late winter,
          following the application of herbicide.

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Success determined by the
          reduction of monotypic stands of phragmites.




              REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: INCREASE SHALLOW WATER HABITAT DIVERSITY



          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Increase the percentage and diversity of
          open water and desirable emergent vegetation habitats. The percent
          cover of open water and desirable emergent vegetation habitats will
          range from 19-37% (25-50 acres) and 37-55% (25-74 acres),
          respectively. Shallow water habitats will include numerous shallow
          ponds, ditches, and flats.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: No portion of the marsh consistently
          maintains open water habitat and only 7% (9 acres) is dominated by
          desirable emergent vegetation. Approximately 39% (52 acres) of the
          marsh is covered by a monoculture of phragmites.

          CURRENT STATUS: Except for extensive contour and environmental
          surveys, no habitat diversity-related work has been conducted in the
          marsh.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED:    1) Design a system of interconnecting ditches
          and ponds.with interspersed island habitats. Ponds will have tapered
          sides and most ponds and all ditches will be shallow, @@18 inches in
          depth. Several ponds will have sections excavated >18 inches in depth
          to provide habitat for fish during droughts and draw-downs. Islands
          for waterfowl nesting will be created by accumulation of construction
          spoil. The proposal to increase the shallow water habitat diversity
          will be submitted either under the Division's existing Open Marsh












          ARTESIAN MARSH                                                        6

          Water Management permit or through a separate permit.
                                COMPLETION DATE: November 1996.

                                2) Excavate ditches and ponds, and construct
          island habitat using Division of Fish and Wildlife personnel and
          equipment.
                                COMPLETION DATE: March 1997.

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Success based on the diversity of
          shallow habitats and the percentage of open water habitat.





              REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE RECREATION AND AESTHETIC VALUES




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Improve recreational opportunities and the
          aesthetic value of the marsh by constructing a greenway trail from the
          Division of Fish and Wildlife boat ramp, along the dike and then
          looping back along a raised walkway paralleling 1-95. Additionally,
          along this trail a blind will be constructed to be used for
          photography and as a dog retrieving training area.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: Recreational use of Artesian Marsh are
          limited to a few fisherman who fish the Christina River from the dike
          and from boats launched from the adjacent ramp, and a local trapper
          who pursues muskrats in the marsh's tidal guts.

          CURRENT STATUS: No recreation-related work has been conducted for
          this project.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Construct a circular greenway around the
          perimeter of the marsh. This construction would include clearing and
          grading a trail from the Division of Fish and Wildlife boat ramp along
          the existing dike. The spoil scraped off the marsh to form the
          impoundment would be used to create a 10-foot-high, 62-foot-wide,
          elevated walkway paralleling 1-95 and connecting to the existing dike.
          A trail would also need to be cleared and graded along the upland area
          on the west side of the marsh to connect the Division of Fish and
          Wildlife boat ramp with the raised walkway.
                                COMPLETION DATE:   May 1997.

                                2) Construct a blind along the trail to be used
          for photography and as a dog retrieving training area.
                                COMPLETION DATE:   July 1997.

                                3) Determine the overall opinion of visitors
          utilizing the recreation facilities, in regards to the aesthetic and
          @ecreational values of the marsh both prior to and after the
          implementation of the rehabilitation plan.












          ARTESIAN MARSH                                                         7


                                 COMPLETION DATE: September 1997.

                                 4) In order to accommodate the anticipated
          increase in visitor use, establish portable toilet facilities and
          enlarge the parking facilities at the Division of Fish and Wildlife
          Churchman's Boat Ramp.
                                 COMPLETION DATE: March 1998.

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Improvements in the recreational
          opportunities and aesthetic value of the marsh will be determined
          through surveys of the use of recreational facilities, and visitor
          responses to questionnaires regarding the marsh's aesthetic and
          recreational value.






           REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: INCREASE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES




          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Improve environmental education
          opportunities for both general public and school groups by
          constructing an environmental interpretative trail along the marsh's
          proposed greenway.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT: There is no known organized or formal
          environmental education being conducted at the marsh; eyen though,
          there are seven schools located within 2 miles of the marsh.


          CURRENT STATUS: No education-related work has been conducted for this
          project.

          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Develop final designs and construct the
          interpretive signs.    COMPLETION DATE: July 1997

                                 2) Promote the use of the marsh and its
          interpretive trail through organized events, press releases, and by
          direct contact with school districts.
                                 COMPLETION DATE: August 1997

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Improvements in environmental
          education would be determined by surveys of public and school groups
          utilizing the facilities.












          ARTESIAN MARSH                                                       8




                     REGIONAL OBJECTIVE: REDUCE MOSQUITO BREEDING



          BITE 82ECIFIC OBJECTIVE: Reduce pestiferous mosquito populations by
          reducing potential breeding sites, and by establishing predacious fish
          populations. Mosquito populations are anticipated to be reduced to <1
          larvae/dipping unit, based on periodic inspections for breeding
          activity.

          STATUS PRIOR TO PROJECT:. Rain events and unusually high tides cause
          the flooding of previously exposed oviposition sites, and promote
          mosquito breeding. However, the marsh currently has a limited amount
          of area inundated to sufficient depths or durations to support
          predacious fish. This mosquito breeding problem is compounded by the
          grazing of cattle in the area. The cattle create small depressions
          (hoof prints) throughout the marsh, which retain a high nutrient
          content (manure) and act as breeding pockets for mosquitos. In 1992,
          pestiferous mosquito breeding averaged 1.74 larvae/dipping unit and
          was sufficient to warrant 7 aerial applications of insecticide,
          totaling 3,875 lbs of pesticide product.

          CURRENT STATUS: Except for collecting of environmental data and
          conducting routine mosquito control practices, no work has been
          conducted in this marsh.
          ACTION STEPS NEEDED: 1) Discontinue the grazing of ca"ttle in the
          marsh.
                                COMPLETION DATE: April 1994.

                                2) Stock ponds and ditches with predacious
          mosquito fish (Gambusia holbrooki) at a rate of 500 fish/acre. Fish
          will be obtained from Division of Fish and Wildlife ponds and
          previously stocked areas.
                                COMPLETION DATE: May 1997.

          SITE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE EVALUATION: Success of biological mosquito
          control programs will be based on comparable indices of mosquito
          breeding.




          SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: 1) Restore and improve spawning, nursery, and
          feeding sites for anadromous, estuarine, and riverine fishes.

                                 2) Protect and enhance existing populations
          and critical habitats of threatened and endangered species and other
          species of concern.











          ARTESIAN MARSH                                                      9

                                 3) Improve water quality of both the marsh and
          the river through increased wetland filtering and nutrient uptake.





         Dept. of Natural Resources & Environmental Control
         Division of Fish & Wildlife
         Richardson/Robbins Building
         P.O. Box 1401
         Dover, Delaware 19903

         Official Business, Penalty For Private Use $300.













                                                                                                                                                  rn
                                                                                                                                                  M
























                                    AUGUSTINE CREEK MARSH
                   BIOTIC INVENTORY AND NATURAL COMMUNITY EVALUATION


                                   Delaware Natural Heritage Inventory
                                     Division of Parks and Recreation
                         Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
                                           Dover, Delaware

                                            February 1994
























                                     AUGUSTINE CREEK MARSH
                    BIOTIC INVENTORY AND NATURAL COMMUNITY EVALUATION


                                    Delaware Natural Heritage Inventory
                                     Division of Parks and Recreation
                          Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
                                            Dover, Delaware

                                             February 1994










                                                         EVMODUCTION


                 A biological inventory of Augustine Creek Marsh, New Castle County, Delaware was conducted
                 in 1993 by the Delaware Natural Heritage Inventory. This survey was requested and funded by
                 the Division of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control,
                 to assess the biological components of the marsh so that data collected can be considered in
                 future management plans.

                 Augustine Creek Marsh is used extensively for public and private recreation, especially hunting
                 and fishing. A portion of the area is owned and managed by Delaware Wildlands that includes
                 some of the more diverse sections of the Augustine Creek Marsh, as well as an active great blue
                 heron colony.

                 The Augustine Creek Marsh is located south of the town of Port Penn and is bounded on the
                 north by the St. George's-Port Penn Road, and on the east by the Delaware River. The southern
                 boundary is Route 423 (McDonough Road) and the western boundary is Route 420 (Port Penn-
                 Boyd's Comer Road).

                 Objectives:

                 (1) To determine and map the gross biotic composition of the marsh based on dominant
                     vegetation present.

                 (2) To undertake an inventory for rare plant species (species of special concern).

                 (3) To undertake a cursory inventory of the marsh for rare animals.


                                                            METHODS


                 During the months of August, September and October 1993, several random field surveys were
                 made of the Augustine Creek Marsh. It was expected that much of the survey work would be
                 done by boat, however water levels in August were generally too low for this survey method
                 to be practical. At this time, several surveys were conducted on foot, and access to the marsh
                 was from the adjacent uplands. In October, water levels were higher and surveys were
                 accomplished almost entirely by boat.

                 Individual survey sites are assigned a letter, from A to F (see Appendix III, page 13). Natural
                 communities were characterized at observation points within individual survey sites (each
                 observation point is assigned a number, see Appendix III, page 13). At each observation point,
                 data were taken on plant species composition and relative abundance. Dominant species were
                 also noted. Plants that could not be identified in the field to the species level, were collected and
                 identified in the lab. Uncertain species identification are indicated on the data sheets (and on the
                 species list) by an sp. after the genus name.








                After data were compiled, the dominant vegetation types were determined and mapped (see
                Appendix III, page 13), using survey data and through a review of 1988 color infi-ared aerial
                photography. In addition, location maps for plant species of special concern are included (see
                Appendix III, page 13). Surveys for rare species were incomplete, as staff time was limited.
                Future inventory work may reveal the presence of additional rare species.


                                                           RESULTS


                The vegetation in the eastern section of the marsh is dominated by dense, monospecific stands
                of Phragmites australis. From the start of the survey in August, until approximately early
                October, water levels were relatively low, water temperatures were high, and algal blooms were
                common. In some portions of the eastern section there is a narrow fringe of emergent vegetation,
                which includes: Peltandra virginica, Pontederia cordata, Echinochloa waltefi, and other
                common brackish-to-fresh water emergent species.

                As one moves west (upstream), emergent plant species become more abundant. Dominant
                emergent vegetation includes: Echinochloa walteii, Polygonuin lapathifoliwn, Peltandra
                virginica, and Hibiscus moscheutos. Nuphar lutea and Ludwigia palustfis are also found in
                abundance within this area.


                Overall species diversity appears to be low in the Augustine Creek Marsh (see Appendix 1, page
                10 for a list of plant species associated with the Augustine Creek Marsh). Sixty eight species of
                vascular plants were identified, which is rather low for a fresh to brackish, emergent wetland.-
                Eight alien species of plants were also identified, indicating an environment that is somewhat
                stressed.


                The establishment of the invasive plant species Phragmites australis is a serious problem
                throughout the marsh. The alien Lythrwn salicaria (purple loosestrife) is also quiet abundant.
                Phragmites and purple loosestrife are displacing many of the emergent plant species of the
                wetland, and control methods should be undertaken to help restore biodiversity to the marsh.

                Only two State rare plant species were found during this survey (see Appendix III, page 13):
                Polygon= densiflonan (dense Rower knotweed S1, extremely rare, 5 or fewer occurrences in
                the state) and Spartina pectinata (slough cordgrass SI). A more intensive search of the marsh,
                particularly along the upper reaches of the tributaries, over an entire growing season, may prove
                to be more productive.

                Overall habitat quality of the Augustine Creek Marsh was subjectively assessed as ranging from
                poor to good.

                Augustine Creek Marsh was found to be heavily used by wading birds, shore birds, raptors,
                waterfowl, etc. over the entire season (see Appendix II, page 12 for bird species observed at
                Augustine Creek Marsh).


                                                                2










                                               SURVEY SITE DESCRIMONS


                The following information contains brief descriptions and locations of survey sites (A through
                F, see Appendix M, page 13). Natural communities are described, and community scientific and
                common names are given.

                AREA A


                This.rather small survey site is along the shoreline of the Delaware River. To reach this site,
                proceed south on Route 9 from the village of Port Penn. Just past Augustine Beach, where
                Route 9 curves to the right, there is a pull-off between the road and the river. The Observation
                Point is at the shore where the path from the parking area ends. This site appears to be a
                popular fishing spot.

                The shoreline consists of a sandy substrate with some rip-rap material throughout.

                Observation 1: Spaidna aftern#bm shoreline (cord grass shoreline). This point is a narrow
                fringe of vegetation ranging from several emergent species at the rivers edge, to shrubs and trees
                at the road. The dominant woody species is Bacchalis halimifiblia, while the dominant
                herbaceous species are Spartina aftemiflora and Phragmites australis. This community is
                subjected to tidal fluctuations and erosion along the exposed shoreline. Negative impacts from
                recreational use includes trash disposal and trampling.

                Species of Special Concern:                                                                       -

                Spartina pectinata (Sl) - A clump of plants, approximately 5 meters by 3 meters, with ca 50
                culms. To date, this is the only known site for this species in the state of Delaware.

                AREA B


                This area includes the shoreline of the eastern end of the Augustine Creek, west of Route 9. This
                area was surveyed by canoe, but since water levels were very low, only a portion could be
                explored from the water. The shoreline generally consists of a narrow fringe of emergent
                plants, which includes: Peltandra virginica, Leersia oryzoides, Echinochloa walteli, and
                Potygonwn species. Just above the emergent zone the communities vary, with the dominant
                plants being either Phragmites australis or Hibiscus moscheutos. Woody vegetation varies in
                dominance, between Diospyros virginiana, Vibumwn dentatum., Comus sp., and Rhus copallina.

                Observation 1: Phmgmifes austmUs brackish shoreline. At this point there is a narrow fringe
                of emergent vegetation and a monospecific stand of Phragmites australis.

                Observation 2: Hibiscus moscheutos - Echinochloa walteii brackish marsh (marsh mallow-
                Walter's millet brackish marsh). This community is along a smaller stream leading into the
                main Augustine Creek. Within this larger community is a small pond/cove dominated by 7ypha


                                                                3








                 latifolia and Scirpus tabemaemontand. Phragmites australis was less common here, and there
                 generally appears to be greater species diversity.

                 Species of Special Concern:

                 Polygonum densiflorum (SI) - This species is relatively frequent along the shoreline of
                 Augustine Creek, growing in shallow water mixed with other Polygon= species.

                 AREA C


                 This area is on Delaware Wildlands property; to reach this site, proceed south on Route 9 from
                 Port Penn,, when Route 9 turns sharply south, continue on Route 423 (McDonough Road). Turn
                 onto the first road on the right. Although this area contains dense stands of Phragmites australis,
                 it does not dominate, as it does in the eastern sections of the marsh. The vegetation is relatively
                 diverse and the area seems to support many bird species.

                 Observation 1: Hibiscus moscheutos - Leersia oryzoides - Peftandra virginica fresh to
                 brackish marsh (marsh mallow - rice cutgrass - arrow arum marsh). A heterogeneous marsh
                 with a variety of species assemblages. A zone of woody vegetation between the marsh and the
                 agricultural fields is dominated by Nburnwn dentatwn and also includes Rhus copallina and
                 Diospyros Wrginiana.

                 Observation 2: Hibiscus moscheutos - Echinochloa walteii fresh to brackish marsh (marsh
                 mallow - Walter's millet marsh). This emergent wetland has a berm across its outlet. It
                 appears to be impounded, but low water levels and thick vegetation make that determination
                 difficult. The wetland outside the "impoundment" is a scrub-shrub wetland. Observation point
                 2 includes only the emergent wetland. The vegetation is relatively diverse; Phragmites australis
                 dominates in a small portion of the area, mainly along the northeast woody edge.

                 Species of Special Concern: No State species of special concern were found in this area.

                 AREA D


                 This area is on Delaware Wildlands property; to reach the site, proceed south on Route 9 from
                 Port Penn; when Route 9 turns sharply south, continue on Route 423 (McDonough Road). Turn
                 onto the first road on the right. Continue on the dirt farm road and turn into the lane just beyond
                 the house trailer on the left. All the observation points in Area D are on this peninsula. An
                 active great blue heron nesting colony is visible across the marsh in Cumples Woods. The marsh
                 is used extensively by herons, as well as by many other waders, ducks, ospreys, and other birds.
                 This is a relatively diverse, high quality marsh.

                 Observation 1: Hibiscus moscheutos - Leersia oryzoides fresh to brackish marsh (marsh
                 mallow - rice cutgrass marsh). This is a diverse wetland, closely bordering a small creek
                 entering the larger marsh. Common emergents include Echinochloa walteri, Rwnex verticillatus,


                                                                 4









                Peltandra Wrginica, and 7ypha latifolia. Polygonum densiflorwn is frequent at this observation
                point. There is woody vegetation throughout the area, with an abundance of trees and shrubs
                along the wetland-upland interface, species include: Salix nigra and Vibumwn dentatwn.

                Observation 2: Typha angusqoUa fresh to brackish marsh (narrowleaf cattail marsh). This
                is a broad marsh, which gently grades to agricultural fields. Although dominated by 7ypha, the
                marsh is relatively diverse, with frequent occurrences of Swnbucus canadensis, Solidago rugosa,
                Potygonwn densiflonan, and other species.

                Observation 3: Cephalanthus occidenwhs - Hibiscus moscheutos fresh to brackish marsh
                (button bush - marsh mallow marsh). This wetland is dominated by woody vegetation,
                including C occidentalis, Rosa palustfis, and Comus sp.

                Observation 4: Bidens sp. - Echinochloa walteli fresh to brackish marsh (tickseed -
                Walter's millet marsh). This is a broad, relatively diverse marsh. Some sections of the marsh
                are dominated by 7ypha latifolia and Phragmites australis. The Bidens species that is dominant
                in the marsh, was not blooming at the time of the survey and could not be identified. Other
                common species found were: Polygonum spp., Scirpus cypefinus, Solidago rugosa, and several
                grasses.

                Species of Special Concern:

                Polygonum dens#Torum (Sl) - Is frequent at observation point 1, common at point 2.

                AREA E


                The objective of the Area E survey was to cover all the major channels of Augustine Creek by
                boat for a general study of cover types. This survey was limited by low water depths in the
                smaller channels and detailed investigations of each observation point could not be done. The
                survey was conducted beginning at the boat launch where Route 9 crosses Augustine Creek. It
                progressed going west (upstream), generally following the main channel to the bridge where
                Route 420 (Port Penn-Boyd's Corner Road) crosses the creek. There is an active beaver dam
                below the bridge (between observation points 12 and 13). Going back downstream, observations,
                were made in several of the guts, minor channels, and feeder streams up to points where access
                was limited by low water depths.

                Observation 1: Phmgmites austmUs brackish shoreline (common reed shoreline). This is
                the boat launch site at Route 9. There is a sandy landing with Acer negundo. The banks of the
                creek here are dominated by Phragmites australis.

                Observation 2: Polygonum pennsylvanicum brackish shoreline (smartweed shoreline). There
                is a narrow emergent zone here, which includes Rwnex verticillaws, Panicum dichotomiflonan,
                and Peltandra Wrginica. The slightly higher woody zone is dominated by Diospyros virginiana
                and Rhus copallina.


                                                               5










                Observation 3: Phragmites australis brackish shoreline (common reed shoreline). Although
                Phragmites australis dominates this area, there were many emergent species along a narrow
                inundated zone. These include Peltandra virginica, LudWigia palustris, and Pontederia cordata.

                Observation 4: Echinochloa walteri - Ludwigia palustris brackish marsh (Walter's millet -
                water purslane marsh). This point is a shallow pond/cove off the main creek. Phragmites
                australis is common in this area and Typha latifolia is frequent.

                Observation 5: Typha latifolia brackish marsh (broadleaf cattail marsh). Another shallow
                cove near Observation Point 4, with somewhat different vegetation. In addition to the dominant
                T. latifiblia, Scirpus tabernaemontanii is frequent.

                Observation 6: Phragmites australis brachish shoreline (common reed shoreline). The
                shoreline emergent includes: Leersia oryzoides, Peltandra virginica, and Scirpus
                tabemaemontanii.


                Observation 7: Polygonum pennsylvanicum - Leersia oryzoides fresh to brackish shoreline
                (smartweed - rice cutgrass shoreline). The narrow emergent zone is bordered by a broader
                zone of woody vegetation, dominated by Diospyros virginiana and Rhus copallina.

                Observation 8: Hibiscus moscheutos fresh to brackish marsh (marsh mallow marsh). This
                point is dominated by H. moscheutos. The emergent zone includes Nuphar lutea, Peltandra
                virginica, and Rumex verticillatus. N. lutea increases in abundance going upstream, beginning
                in this area.


                Observation 9: Phragmites australis - Peltandra virginica brackish shoreline (common reed
                shoreline). This narrow emergent zone includes Rwnex verticillatus, Hibiscus moscheutos, and
                Ludwigia palustris.

                Observation 10: typha latifolia - Polygonum lapathifolium fresh to brackish marsh/shoreline
                (broadleaf cattail - nodding smartweed marsh/shoreline). The creek banks here are thickly
                lined with P. lapathifioliwn and Ludwigia palustis. T. larifolia dominates the marsh beyond.
                Viburnum dentatum and Lythrum salicaria are scattered throughout this area of the marsh in
                thick, dense stands.

                Observation 11: Hibiscus moscheutos - Nuphar lutea fresh to brackish shoreline ( marsh
                mallow - spatterdock shoreline). At this point, there are patches of Vibumum dentatwn
                scattered among the H. moscheutos. N. lutea is abundant in the channel.

                Observation 12: Nuphar lutea - Ludwigia palustris fresh to brackish shoreline (spatterdock-
                water purslane shoreline). Phragmites australis and Lythrwn salicaria are common here and
                there is a zone of woody vegetation dominated by Vibumum dentatwn and Diospyros virginiana.



                                                              6
 








                Observation 13: Nuphar lutea - Ludwigia palustris fresh water shoreline (spatterdock-water
                purslane shoreline). This observation point is found just above the beaver dam; Rosa palustris
                dominates the woody zone here.

                Observation 14: Acer rubrum - Viburnum dentatum wooded wetland/shoreline (red maple-
                arrowwood wetland/shoreline). This is a forested flood plain wetland dominated by Acer
                rubrum. There is little herbaceous vegetation, which includes Onoclea sensibilis and Boehmeria
                cylindrica.

                Observation IS: Nuphar lutea - Ludwigia palustris fresh water shoreline (spatterdock-water
                purslane shoreline). This observation point is very similar to #13. Rosa palustils dominates the
                woody zone here.

                Observation 16: Hibiscus moscheutos - Ludwigia palustris fresh water marsh (marsh mallow
                - water purslane marsh). This marsh is located near the bridge crossing on Augustine Creek
                (Pole Bridge Road/Port Penn-Boyd's Comer Road). The vegetation is a mixture of woody and
                herbaceous species, including Cephalanthus occidentalis, Salix nigra, Acer rubnan, Leersia
                orywides, Scirpus cypefinus, and Peltandra virginica.

                Observation 17: Nuphar lutea - Peftandm virginica fresh water gut/shoreline (spatterdock-
                arrow arum gut/shoreline). This point is a shallow gut off the main creek, below the beaver
                dam. Common emergent plants include: Acorus calwnus and Rumex verticillatus. Beyond the
                emergent zone, Hibiscus moscheutos and Viburnwn dentatum are abundant.

                Observation 18: Polygonum pennsylvanicum - Peftandra Wrginica fresh water gut/shoreline
                (nodding smartweed - arrow artun gut/shoreline). This gut branches off Augustine Creek
                further downstream than #17. The water levels are relatively shallow here and plants species
                found were: Nuphar lutea, Leersia orywides, and Rume-x verticillatus. Mum= dentatwn
                occurs at slightly higher elevations along the stream banks.

                Observation 19: Hibiscus moscheutos - Peltandm Wrginica fresh to brackish shoreline
                (marsh mallow - arrow arum shoreline). This point is near the mouth of a stream entering
                Augustine Creek from the southwest. There is some invasion of Phragmites australis, but it is
                not dominant. Other emergent plants include: Juncus effiaus, Polygonum lapathifiblium, and
                7ypha latifiblia.

                Observation 20A: Phmgmites austmlis fresh to brackish marsh/shoreline (common reed
                marsh/shoreline). Although P. australis is the dominant species in this area, there are many
                emergents on the shoreline, including: Echinochloa walteri, Leersia orywides, Peltandra
                virginica, and Hibiscus moscheutos.

                Observation 20B: Echinochloa waltefi - LudMgia palustris fresh to brackish cove/pond
                (Walter's millet - water purslane cove/pond). A shallow pond adjacent to the main creek.
                Common species include Scirpus tabemaemontanii, Hibiscus moscheutos, LudMgia palustfis,

                                                               7








                and Peltandra virginica.

                Observation 21: Typha Wolia - Hibiscus moscheutos - Rumex veyficillatus fresh to brackish
                shoreline (broadleaf cattail - marsh mallow - swamp dock shoreline). Common species
                include: Echinochloa walteri, Leersia oryzoides, 7ypha Wfolia, and Ludwigia palustris.
                Viburnum dentatum is abundant in the woody zone.

                Observation 22: Echinochloa walterf - Polygonum anfolium fresh to brackish marsh/wet
                meadow (Walter's millet - halberd-leaved tearthumb marsh/wet meadow). This point (north
                side of Augustine Creek) is accessed by a boardwalk leading into the marsh from the adjacent
                upland. The area is dominated by Panicwn dichotomiflon4m and P. virgatwn.

                Observation 23: Echinochloa wafteri - Leersia oryzoides fresh to brackish shoreline (Walter's
                millet - rice cutgrass shoreline). This point (as well as #24 and #25) is upstream in one of the
                larger streams flowing from the north into the eastern portion of Augustine Creek. Many
                emergent plants are found growing along the shoreline, and there is a dense woody zone
                dominated by Vi*burnwn dentatum and Diospyros virginiana.

                Observation 24: Viburnum dentatum - Leersia oryzoides fresh to brackish shoreline
                (arrowwood - rice cutgrass shoreline). The woody zone is close to the shoreline here,
                dominated by V. dentatum, Diospyros virginiana, and Rhus copallina. Echinochloa walteri,
                Ludvvigia palustris, Leersia orywides and Rumex verticillatus make up the relatively sparse
                emergent community.

                Observation 25: Viburnum dentatum- Echinochloa waUerf fresh to brackish shoreline
                (arrowwood - Walter' millet shoreline). Emergent plants are abundant at this observation
                point, and include Leersia orywides, Lud%dgia palustris, and Hibiscus moscheutos.

                Species of Special Concern: No State species of special concern were found in this area.

                AREA F


                This area includes wetlands associated with a headwater wetland/stream that leads to Augustine
                Creek Marsh, as well as a marsh reached by a boardwalk. Access to both areas was through
                the Fortner property bordering the north edge of the creek. The boardwalk is reached by driving
                through the Fortner property agricultural fields to the edge of the marsh.

                Observation 1: Hibiscus moscheutos - Sagiuaria Wfolia fresh to brackish marsh (marsh
                mallow - arrowhead marsh). This area was observed from the more western of two
                boardwalks constructed into the marsh from the north side of Augustine Creek Marsh. As the
                elevation increases, species such as Polygon= afifoliwn and Echinochloa walterii become more
                common, with slightly more elevation, woody species such as Viburnum dentatwn become
                dominant.




                                                               8









                Observation 2: Zkania aquatica fresh water marsh (wild rice marsh). This nearly monotypic
                stand of Z aquatica is located in the upper portions of a headwater stream that leads to a
                tributary of Augustine Creek. The swale/depression in which it is located is surrounded by
                wooded wetlands dominated by Acer rubrwn. A large stand of Phragmites australis is located
                nearby.

                Observation 3: Hibiscus moscheutos - Typha lWolia - Phragmites austmUs fresh to brackish
                marsh (mixed marsh). This observation point followed the stream toward Augustine Creek.
                Species found, generally form large, rather monotypic stands throughout the marsh. Species
                diversity is relatively low here, and the area appears to be disturbed (earth-moving, ditching,
                etc.).

                Species of Special Concern: No State species of special concern were found in this area.


                                          ZOOLOGICAL PqVENTORY RESULTS

                Although not specified in the scope of this project, a limited zoological inventory was done. Bird
                species were recorded when seen, but other animals were not specifically searched for. It is
                difficult to speculate to what extent this system provides feeding or breeding habitat for many
                of the animal species present. Future zoological inventories should be done to determine the
                significance of Augustine Creek Marsh to breeding birds, migratory birds, invertebrates
                (dragonflies, Lepidopteran species, etc.) and fish. A bird species list with state ranks can be
                found in Appendix II.

                Pea Patch Island, which lies approximately 8 miles northeast of Augustine Creek Marsh is the
                largest multi-species heronry on the Atlantic coast north of Florida. Preliminary results from
                a study undertaken on Pea Patch Island in 1993 (Manomet Bird Observatory), to determine
                critical foraging areas for these species, indicates that Augustine Creek Marsh is providing
                important feeding habitat for this colony. Great egrets (Casmerodius albus), snowy egrets
                (Egretta thula), little blue heron (Egretta caendea), cattle egret (Bulbulcus ibis), glossy ibis
                (Plegadis falcinellas), and great blue, herons (Ardea herodeas) all use this system regularly.

                Ospreys were observed during each visit (one to three per visit). This indicates that Augustine
                Creek Marsh may provide important foraging habitat for this species. Osprey populations have
                declined in northern Delaware, so these observations may be significant in terms of habitat
                management for this species.









                                                                 9











                                                              APPENDIX I



                           PLANT SPECIES ASSOCIATED WITH AUGUSTINE CREEK MARSH
                                                                    1993
                                                               (incomplete)


                 Acer rubrum                              red maple
                 Acer negundo                             box elder
                 Acorus calamus                           sweetflag
                 Amaranthus cannabinus                    water hemp
                 Baccharis halimifolia                    groundsel bush
                 Bidens sp.                               beggarticks
                 Boehmeria cylindrica                     false nettle
                 Cephalanthus occidentalis                buttonbush
                 Cyperus erythrorhizos                     red-root nut-sedge
                 Cyperus odorata                           fragrant nut-sedge
                 Cyperus sp.                               an umbrella sedge
                 Diospyros virginiana                     persimmon
                 Echinochloa walteri                      Walter's millet
                 Eclipta prostrata                        Yerba-de-tajo (alien)
                 Erechtites hieracifolia                  fire-weed
                 Eragrostis sp-                           love grass
                 Eupatorium dubium                        joe-pye-weed
                 Eupatoriwn pilosum                       hairy thoroughwort
                 Euthamia graminifolia                    slender fragrant goldenrod
                 Hibiscus moscheutos                      marsh mallow
                 flex verticillata                        winterberry
                 Impatiens capensis                       jewel weed
                 Iris pseudacorus                         yellow iris (alien)
                 Juncus effusus                           smooth rush
                 Leersia oryzoides                        rice-cut grass
                 Lemna minor                              duckweed
                 Lobelia cardinalis                       cardinalflower
                 Lonicera japonica                        Japanese honeysuckle (alien)
                 Ludwigia palustris                       water purslane
                 Lycopus americanus                       water horehound
                 Lythrum salicaria                        purple loosestrife (alien)
                 Microstegiurn vimineum                   alien grass (alien)
                 Nuphar lutea                             spatterdock
                 Onoclea sensibilis                       sensitive fern
                 Panicum dichotomiflorum                  fall panic grass
                 Panicum virgatum                         switch grass


                                                                     10
 









                 Peltandra virginica:                    arrow arum
                 Phragmites australis                    common reed
                 Pluchea odorata                         marsh fleabane
                 Polygonwn arifolium                    tearthumb
                 Polygonum densiflorum (SI)              smartweed
                 Polygonum hydropiperoides               mild water pepper
                 Polygonum lapathioium                  pale smartweed (alien)
                 Polygonum pennsylvanicum               Pennsylvania smartweed
                 Polygonwn punctatwn                     water smartweed
                 Polygonwn sagittatum                    arrowleaf tearthum
                 Polygonwn sp.                           smartweed
                 Prunus serotina                         black cherry
                 Rhus copallina                          winged sumac
                 Rosa palustris                          swamp rose
                 Rumex verticillatus                     swwnp dock
                 Sagittaria latifolia                    broad-leaf arrowhead
                 Salix nigra                             black willow
                 Sambuccus canadensis                    elderberry
                 Scirpus cyperinus                       woolgrass sedge
                 Scirpus tabernaemontanii                bullrush (alien)
                 Scutellaria lateriflora                 mad-dog skullcap
                 Setaria magna                          giantfox-tail
                 Solidago rugosa                         rugose goldenrod
                 Spirodela polyrhiza                     duckweed
                 Typha angustifolia                      narrow-leaf cattail (alien)
                 Typha latifolia                         broad-leaf cattail
                 Verbena hastata                         wild vervain
                 Viburnwn dentatum                       southern arrowood
                 Zizania aquatica                        wild rice
 










                                                         APPENDIX II



                             BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED AT AUGUSTINE CREEK MARSH
                                                                1993




                Great blue heron (Ardea herodeas)                    S2B
                Great egret (Casmerodius albus)                      S2B
                Green heron (Butorides striatus                      S5B
                Snowy egret (Egretta thula)                          SIB
                Little blue heron (Egretta caerulea)                 S2B
                Cattle egret (Bulbulcus ibis)                        S2B
                Glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellas)                   S2B
                Canada goose (Branta canadensis)                     S3B, S5N
                Wood duck (Aix sponsa)                               S4B
                Green-winged teal (Anas crecca)                      S4B
                American black duck (Anas rubripes)                  S4B
                Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos)                         S5B
                American coot (Fulica americana)                     S2B, S3N
                Greater yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca)               S3N
                Common tern (Sterna hirunqdo)                        S1B, S3N
                Osprey (Pandion haleatus)                            S4B
                Red-tailed hawk (Buteo Jamaiccensis)                 S5B
                Turkey vulture (Cathartes aura)                      S5B
                Tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor)                   S4B
                Eastern kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus)                 S5B
                Gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis)                S5B
                Eastern phoebe (Sayornis phoebe)                     S5B
                Common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas)             S5B
                Yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens)                S5B
                Northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis)            S5
                Indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea)                    S5B
                American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis)               S5











                                                                12
















                                                 APPENDEK M



                                             MAPS AND FIGURES



                            Figure 1: Survey Areas, A through F
                            Figure 2: Observation Points for Survey Areas A, B, C, D, F
                            Figure 3: Observation Points for Survey Area E
                            Figure 4: Species of Special Concern
                            Figure 5: Vegetative Cover Types































                                                       13





                      STATE OF DELAWARE
       DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND
                ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
               DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
               89 KINGS HIGHWAY, P.O. BOX 1401
                    DOVER, DELAWARE 19903

          OFFICIAL BUSINESS, PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300


                            40-06-00










                STATE RANK


                S1     Extremely rare within the state (typically 5 or fewer occurrences) or because some factor
                immediately threatens the future existence of this species within the state.

                S2     Very rare within the state (typically 6 to 20 known occurrences). Species is succeptable
                to becoming extirpated.

                S3     Rare to uncommon; typically 21 to 100 kn        own occurrences.      S3 species are not
                immediately threatened with extirpation, but may be if additional populations are destroyed.

                S4     Species apparently secure within the state under present conditions.

                S5     Species very common throughout the state; demonstrably secure under present conditions.

                SU     Species status uncertain within the state. Usually an uncommon species which is believed
                to be of conservation concern but there is inadequate data to determine degree of rarity.

                SH     Species historically known from the state but populations or reproductive evidence not
                verified for an extended period of time (usually 15 + years). There are expectations that this
                species may be rediscovered.

                SX     Species presumed to be entirely extirpated from the state. All historical locations and/or
                potential habitat has been inventoried unsuccessfully. There are no expectations that this species
                will be rediscovered within the state.


                SE     Exotic (introduced through human infiuence) within the state; not a part of the native
                fauna.


                SR     Reported from the state, but no evidence exists for accepting or rejecting the report.

                SRF    Reported falsely from the state but this report persists in the literature.

                SA     A species which occasionally accidentally enters the state.

                SC     A species which casually enters the state on a periodic basis but there is no evidence
                of reproduction or of potential reproductive habitat existing within the state.

                For long distance migrant animals, a particular species' breeding status may be very different
                than its noribreeding status, i.e. a species which winters commonly in Delaware may be a rare
                breeder within the state. B and N qualifiers are used to denote breeding and nonbreeding
                status respectively. For example, the Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus) is an uncommon
                winter resident but a very rare breeder and is therefore ranked SlB, S3N. A Z qualifier is used
                to denote species which regularly migrate through the state but do not breed or winter in
                Delaware. For lepidoptera, species, however, a SZB rank can be given for those individuals
                which regularly migrate through the state, breed, but no individuals survive to maturity.










             DOMINANT VEGETATION TYPES:


             RP: Rosa palustris

             HM: Hibiscus moscheutos

             S/S: Scrub-Shrub (Viburnum dentatum, Diospyros virginiana, Rhus copallina)

             PFO/AR: Palustrine Forested/Acer rubrum

             TL: Typha latifolia

             ME: Mired emergents



























                                                                                      PIC,




                              JAV




                                                           t.0tr









        Figure 5: Vegetative Cover Types





                                                                                                        r





















                                                                                                           I

























                                                                           't@



                                                                                                            fl"        c






                                                                                                                                              a

                                                              I
                                                                           i
                                                                           I
                                                                           t
                                  -PblvqoyN(Ayy\  a,   * @l OfLL Vy-\      .
                                                             I
                                                                           i







                                                                                                                                  C@




















  Vp






          I




          i
      0



                1:5

                                                                                 if
            1        8)
                                                        12                                1 I@k
          .1
          I
          I                                                                                      q                e            /:FA        nr4 f- Cpe  .
                                                                                                                               ur                    @
                                                                                                 vq                                                       5









                                                                                                                                                   ICIps vi t









                                                                                       's
                                                                                prea























































                                                                          AU























       Figure 2: Observation Points for Survey Areas A, B, C, D, F





                                                                                                                 I






                                                               I






















     e

    11
                                                    0-



                                                                                 I'll
                                                                                          E                      . 0
                                                                                                    AU
                                                                                                             e- C 6'Q
                                                                                          (9
                                               9

                                                    L---@j


                                                                                          cz%s U..21'-ATEQS                     el
   - Figure 1: Survey Areas, A through F















                                    APPENDIX IV



                                    FIEID FORMS




































         I













                                         14




                      STATE OF DELAWARE
       DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND
                ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
               DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
               89 KINGS HIGHWAY, P.O. BOX 1401
                    DOVER, DELAWARE 19903

          OFFICIAL BUSINESS, PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300

                            40-06-00




   FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                            MARSH SURVEYS
   A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION


      1. Survey site name:                                     2. Site name:

      3. Source Code:                    4. Surveyors:
                   Fq,@ wit405'A                         CKA.,-,    r EAZ S
      5. Date:                       6. USGS Quad:                          7. Quadcode:
                  0?>23q.5                                       C I T-f
      B. state:         9. County:                  10. Town:
                , Zf-                IqGw CASTLE-
      11. Directions.
                                                                              pA o0'         lcfil@@tLO-
                     ,5            V--7- 9 , a@@r                   I
              +         AU
                                            ctus       road auf-s s@n&rpul +0
          iy6i I -@o                     pop U-1       lx@ @@5


   B. TOPOGRAPHY


      12. Reconnaisance Diagram:










                  P--r
                                         A"A


   C. VEGETATION/HABITAT

      Observation Point.:                Observation Point:               Observation Point:

      Community name:                    Community name:                  Community name:
         Spwfina 61-krni%ro, L*,01dAVk
      soil comments:                     soil comments:                   Soil comments:
                     -Xr)LL mota;@TCL

      Dominant species                   Dominant species:                Dominant species:
      Tree/Shrub:                        Tree/Shrub:                      Tree/Shrub:

          +6yruL


      Herb:                              Herb:                            Herb:






      Commentsi                          Comments:                        Comments:
         IN& ay-ea@
      (AislKw6tot 6,1
             5M\je@/-@Al plC(Le-d-





     D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and
             indicate precise location                                                 of observation points)
                                              tj
                                                                                                                                                                                             bgi-. cir'l 6?(j4h



                                                                                                                                                                          X
                                                                                                                                                                  K@


                                                                                                                                                                                                   Lop-      is R_ I -b CrE



     E. LIST               OF PLANT SPECIES                                 [by strata                         and      w/cover values:                            [estimate percent cover
             values)

          Species                                   Ob # cv                                    Species                     Ob # CV                                    Species                     Ob            CV
                                                        I               -                                                      I                -                                                    I                  -
          Acorus calamus                            - - - - - -                                @npaticns capensia          - - - - - -                                Tbalictr= pubescens         - - - - - -
          AUsma subcordatum                         - - - - - -                                Iris pseudaconis            - - - - - -                                Thtlypteris paLustris       - - - - - -
          Amaranthus c-m-binus                                                                 Iris versicolor                                                        Toxicodendron rad.
          Ambrosia trifida                          - - - - - -                                Juncus ac,,mmn,tus          - - - - - -                                Triad. vixginicum           - - - - - -
          Amorphs frutescens                        - - - - - -                                Juncus caaadensis           - - - - - -                                Typtut angustifolia         - - - - - -
          Apios americana                           - - - - - -                                Juncus effusus              - - - - - -                                T. x glauca                 - - - - - -
          Aslepias incamaLa                         - - - - - -                                L=rsia oryzoides                                                       T. latifolia                - - - - - -
          Aster puniccus                            - - - - - -                                LzcrsL,a Vu,gu,u*ca         - - - - - -                                Vaccinium corymb.           - - - - - -
          Aster sp.                                 - - - - - -                                Lcmna minor                 - - - - - -                                Viburnum rccogn.            - - - - - -
          Bid= bidentoides                          - - - - - -                                Lilaeopsis chmcnsis         - - - - - -                                Viola sp.                   - - - - - -
          Bidens connats                                                                         iliura superburn          - - - - - -                                Wofffia brazillensis        - - - - - -
          Bidcns coronata                           - - - - - -                                Lobelia cardiaalis          - - - - - -                                7;7nnia aquatica            - - - - - -
          Bidens frondosa                           - - - - - -                                Ludwigia palustris          - - - - - -
          Bidens brvis                              - - - - - -                                Ludwigia peploides          . . . . . .                                OTHER
          Bideus polylepis                          - - - - - -                                Lycopussp.                  - - - - - -
          Carex strith                              - - - - - -                                Lysimachia tenutris         . . . . . .
          Carex sp,                                                                            Lytbr= sahcaria
                                                    - - - - - -                                                            - - - - - -                                    Y" cqmazu@ -is.
          Cepbalanthus occidentalia                                                            Nuphar lute&
                                                    - - - - - -                                                            - - - - - -
          Ceratophyllum demersum                    - - - - - -                                Osmunds cinn, omea                                                              @'i n cs@
          Cicuta maculata                           - - - - - -                                Oxypolis rigidior           - - -
          Cinna arundinacea                         - - - - - -                                Panicum virgatum            - i-                                                                   - - - - - -
          Clethra ainifolia                         - - - - - -                                Panicurn sp.                - - - - - -                                                            - - - - - -
          Cornus amornum,                                                                      Peltandra virginica
          Comus racemosa                                                                       Phalaris anmdinacea
          Cryptotacnia canadensis                   - - - - - -                                Phragmites australis
          Cuscuta sp.                               - - - - - -                                Pluchea odoratgL
          Cyperus odoratus;                         - - - - - -                                Polygonum, arifolium                        - -                                                    - - - - - -
          Cyperus eng.                              - - - - - -                                P. hydropiperoide3          - - - - - -                                                            - - - - - -
          Cyperus eryffirorbizos                    - - - - - -                                P. punctatum                - - - - - -                                                            - - - - - -
          cypcrus esculentus                        - - - - - -                                P. sagittatum               - - - - - -                                                            - - - - - -
          cyperus sp.                               - - - - - -                                Pontedcria. cordata                              -                                                 - - - - - -
          Decodon verticillatus                     - - - - - -                                Pdlimniura capillac.        - - - - - -                                                            - - - - - -
          Echinochloa crusgal                       - - - - - -                                Riccia fluitans
          Echinochloa walteri                       - - - - - -                                Rosa palustris
          Elcocharis obtusa                                                                    R. multiflora
          Eleocharis palustris                      - - - - - -                                Rumcx verticiU.             - - - - - -
          Eleocharis parvula                        - - - - - -                                Sagittaria calycina         - - - - - -
          Elcoebaris tenuis                                                                    S. Latifolia
          Erethtitcs; hieracifolia                  - - - - - -                                Salix nligra
          Eupatorium sp.                                                                       Sarnolus parvulus           - - - - - -
          Euthamia sp.                                                                         Scirpus cyperinus           - - - - - -
          Fraxinus pensylvanica                     - - - - - -                                S. fluviatilis
          Glyceria sp.                              - - - - - -                                S. pungens
          Heteranthera rcaifortnis                                                             S. robustus
          Hibiscus moscheutoa                                                                  Sium suave
          Humulus japorucus                                                                    Spargazu- curycarp.
          Hydrocotyle americans                     - - - - - -                                Spartina alterniflora                    ajrL
          11ex opaca                                - - - - - -                                S. cynosuroides             - - - - - --
          Rex verticiU ta                           - - - - - -                                Spirodela polyrhiza         - - - - - -
     L..                                                                                                                                           -)(-                      @FAC,4c-A Ct;-rU/rY,_

     F. ADDITIONAL NOTES:





       FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                                         MARSH SURVEYS
       A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION


            1. Survey site name:                                               2. Site name:

            3. Source Code:                         4. Surveyors:
                         F-93                                        C. WIALMrm            Fix,,4 woy
            5. Date:                           6. USGS Quad: -                                7. Quadcode:         Fo? 5-5-57-
                       oqo?oq-3                               260   .UMP-E- C(         7A,-u-cr-16f-,Yj1-        3 7092-4-5-
            8. State:  Z!@-    9. County:    /14 EW C .4 S 77-   10. Town:     '@QV-7- -PV- /14 A]
            11. Directions:
                '70 rfach                                          &,d         I            P-T'       sot@-111
            -@xe vi Y1.
                        4ttju YH ne-                     M 0,P


       B. TOPOGRAPHY


            12. Reconnaisance Diagram:




       IOPL^D                                       IS                       PON D

       C. VEGETATION/HABITAT


                        ion Point:                  observation Point:                     Obse            n Point:
            0bservat                                                              2              rva@,
            Community name:                         Community name:                        Communit     "17  e:
            EBISMILICALL'f-3 71toft-                C1415T0'9.1(ALL\43 TIDA<-                          y
                VIRhcv-                                        [email protected] MhRS+I-
            Soil comments:                          Soil comments:                         Soil co       nts:
                                  D-4T Y--b)
            Dominant species                        Dominant species:                      Dominant species:
            Tree/Shrub:                             Tree/Shrub:                            Tree/Shk@@
            INC>5?y ros/  \14 6u i-nLA


            Herb:                                   Herb:                                  Herb:

                           6wiya'-U&


            Comments:                               Comments:                              Commer@   s
             Kv,&h o@- f^r@ caeic VAAJ,(-                   SOYY\.Q- obot6     CL4Y-01-
                             bLj                         WO-1, --
                                                                          taw-r ry"
            5cat@ered @ZJLA,-U" [email protected]                -T. [C(4i@Glrc- J0yy\;V-Na-f%Ce-
            yyw@-e, ai\4eyse- covy\MU@y'\'i-He's.
            TKe- 1-fm lshyuAo We&rd @d
                                          C r-fa(!@
            Y\ -@@ OL rt 0@ . byy/





         D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and
                  indicate precise-                               location                  of       observation points)



                                                                                                                                                               pilik

                                                                                                                                               t

                                                                  24
                                                                                                                _4




         E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES [by strata and w/cover values:                                                                                                         [estimate percent cover
                 values]

               species                                    Ob # 060-                                  Species                       Ob                                       Species                      Ob # ob
                                                             1           2                                                           1                                                                      1           2-

               Acorus calamus                             - - - - - -                                Impatiens capeasis            - - - - - -                              Thalictrum pubescens         . . . . . .
               Afisma subcordatum                                                                    Iris pseudacorus              - - - - - -                              Thelypteris palustris        - - - - - -
               Amaranthus cannabinus                                                                 Iris versicolor                                                        Toxicodendron rad.
               Ambrosia trifida                                                                      Juncus acuminatus             - - - - - -                              Triad. virginicum            - - - - - -
               Amorpha frutescens                         - - - - - -                                Juncus canadensis             - - - - - -                              Typha angusufoda             'Mr--       EP-:F--
               Apios americans                                                                       Juncus effusus                                                         T. x glauca                  - - - - - -
               Aslepias                                               :1 Fie                         Lzersia oryzoides                                                      T. latifolia
               Aster puniceus                                                                        L=rsia virginica                                                       Vaccinium corymb.
                                                          - - - - - -                                                              - - - - - -
               A StCT 3P.                                 -77-                                       Lemna minor                             - - -                          Viburnum recogn.
               Bidens bidentoides                         - - - - - -                                Lilaeopsis chinensts          . . . . . .                              Viola sp.
               Bidens connata                                                                        Lillurn superbum              - - - - - -                              Wolffia braziliensis
               Bidens coronata                                                                       LobeLia cardinalis                                                     7;7mia aquatics              - - - - - -
               Bidens ftondc,                                                                        Ludwigia palustris
               Bidens Laevis                              - - - - - -                                Ludwigi3 peploides                                                     OTHER
               Bidens polylepis                           - - - - - -                                Lycopus sp.                   - - - - - -                       PrUv%kS 5AY6+ir\P-                              ---
               Carcx suicta                                                                          Lysimachia terrearis                    . . .                   0"5 WaGX0L-                         -f&&;::.    ---
               Carex sp.                                  - - - - - -                                Lythrum salicaria             DTsf--     ---                50.3?%jr0SViV5ir1ian 6                  M4          -
               CephaiAnthus occidentalis                  ---         -I&E                           Nuphar lutca                  - - - - - -                                     Vi 6s)-a@+6
               Ceratophyllum demersum                     - - - - - -                                Osmunda cinn-momea            - - - - - -
               Cicuta maculata                                                                       Oxypolis rigidior
               Ciana arundinacca                          - - - - - -                                Pamcurn virgatum                                                                                                DUE:-
                                                                                                     Panicum djChtDrhd@r.
               Clethra alnifolia                                                                                                   TN
               Cornus amomum                                          - - -                          Peltandra virginica           29:Z M-71                                                             - - - - - -
               Corous racemosa                                                                       Pbalaria arundinacea                                                                                - - - - - -
               Cryptotacnia canadensis                                                               Phragraites australis         COM
               Cuscuta sp.                                                                           Pluchea odorata,                                                                                    - - - - - -
               Cypcrus odoratus                           -F                                         Polygonum arifolium           V;VE,                                                                 - - - - - -
               Cyperus eng-channu                         - - - - - -                            -x-p-demManwn                     QL@
               Cyperus crythrorhizos                      - - - - - -                                P. otiacopiperdidA&           r-@@.
               Cyperus esculentus                         - - - - - -                                P- PUi%C*CLft-                                                                                      - - - - - -
               Cypents sp.                                - - - - - -                                Pontederin cordata            - - - - - -                                                           - - - - - -
               Decodon verticillatus                                                                 Ptilimni- capillac-           ---                                                                   -_ -_ -_I -_ -_ --
               Echinochloa crusgaW                                                                   Riccia fluitans               - - - - - -
               Echinochloa walteri                                                                   Rosa palustris                - - -
               FIcocharis obtusa                                                                     R. multiflorn
               Eleocharis palustris,                      - - - - - -                                Rumex vcrticifl.
               Eleochaxis parvula                         - - - - - -                                Sagittaria calycins.
               Eleocharis tenuis                                                                     S. ladfolia
               Erechtites hieracifolia                                   M7                          Saa nigra                     - - - - - -
               Eupatorium ru@osu WN                                                                  Samolus parvulus.
               Eutharnia sp.                              - - - - - -                                SCL,TPUS. cypermus
               Fraxinus pensylvanica                                                                 S
               Glyceria sp.                               - - - - - -                                S. pungens
               Heteranthcra rcniformis                                                               S. robustus
               Hibiscus moscheutos                        i4:17-      -gzt-U-                        Sium suave
               Humulus japonicus                                                                     Sparganitun. eurycarp.
                                                          - - - - - -                                                              - - - - - --
               Hydrocotyie americans                      - - - - - -                                Spartina alterniflofa
               Ilex opsca                                                                            S. cynosuraides
               flex verticillata                                                                     Spirodela poly&iza






          F. ADDITIONAL NOTES:




   FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                      MARSH SURVEYS
   A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION
       1. Survey site name:  A0".ST-7r,1F-- uzc-cAt-       2. Site name:         F-A CCD
       3. Source code;               4. Surveyors:
                     F-q':SWi/,q /2-                       cj t rATT-k-S
       5. Date:  0q,j             6. USGS Quad:                        7. Quadcade:
                      'f 3                      Thqt-o-p-'s
       8. state,....  9. County:                10. Town:
                                 NfU3 CA-STL E
       11. Directions:
                             q                            -          )ZI- 9 iuyvl S       C eydi YA@
       0-n              c-DeN a-L-r         -Fu r rj ory@           ro a,( a-,.,  r
       ay\ 4a@ ro -,-,a 4t@



   B. TOPOGRAPHY


       12. Reconnaisance Diagram:




                                                  @6






                                               UPL                                            Zelzm
                        CR S Fly-                 0 N.

   C. VEGETATION/HABITAT,


       Observation Point:            Observation Point:             Observation Point:


       Community name:               Community name:                 Community name:

       PREs)+ GIRAcvuso MA12-SK
       Soil comments:                Soil.comments:                  Soil comments:




       Dominant species              Dominant specie  s:             Dominant species:
       Tree/Shrub:                   Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:





       Herb:                         Herb:                           Herb:
        (+i &@c  Lze'" I +/-PC. I -r,*ii Z> F-A Hminzo5/ ,
              os/                          &*41NO@@HLOA

       Comments:                     Comments:                       Comments:
        -rl.,js 4yep*, 7D-Rw-6y-ed+o    &)W&Y,,a          berm
       SU.P'P0"*-       @iytLs
                                                kr ry-,@ re-
       phvajr'. Y@ttr abrn@ VA&yd-        .rATU'UnOW





    D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and
            indicate precise location                                                of       observation points)
                                                                                                                                        -7-

                                           b-

                                                                                                                                                     Az






                                                                                                                                                                 24

                                                                                                     7

                                                        120                                                                         10


   E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES [by strata and w/cover values: [estimate percent cover
            values]

          species                                   Ob #        Ob 44F                        Species                     Ob                                         species                     Ob         ob*f:


          Acorus calamus                            - - - - - -                               Impatiens capeasis                      - - -                          Thalictrum pubesccns        . . . . . .
          Afisma subcordatum                        - - - - - -                               Iris pseudacorus            - - - - - -                                Thelypteris palustris       - - - - - --
          Amaranthus cannabinus                                                               Iris versicolor                                                        Toxicodendron rad    - - - - - - -
          Ambrosia trifida                             - - - - -                              Juncus acuminaws            - - - - - -                                Triad. virgiaicum           - - - - - -
          Amorpha frutesccns                        - - - - - -                               Juncus canadcnsis           - - - - - -                                Typha, ang-ustifolia        - - - - - -
          Apios arnericaaa                          - - - - - -                               Juncus effusus                                                         T. x glauca
          Aslepias incarnata                        - - - - - -                               Leersia oryzoides           aZ-0-- Rai                                 T. latifolia
          Aster puniceus                            - - - - - -                               Ltersia virginica                                                      Vaccinium, corymb.
          Aster sp.                                                                           Lzmna n-Linor               DEF-1                                      Viburnum recoga.
          Bidens                                                                              Ulaeopsis chinensis         - - - - - -                                Viola sp.
          Bidens connata.                                                                     Lilium superbum             - - - - - -                                Wolffia braziliensis        - - - - - -
          Bidens coronata                                  - - - -                            Lobelia cardinali3                                                     7;7-n;- aquatica            - - - - - -
          Bidens frondosa                           - - - - - -                               Ludwigia palustris          i&i         --C&T--
          Bidens larvis                                                                       Ludwigia pcploides          . . . . . .                                OTHER
          Bidens polytepis                                                                    Lycopus Rp-                                                   [email protected] C:,@,
                                                    - - - - - -                                                           - - - - - -
          Carex strieta                                                                       Lysimachia termstris                                                          \11    M16@
          carex
                                                                                              LYLhrum saficuis                                             L6,Y MA
                                                                        E                                                                                                                        ---
          Cephalanthus occidentalis                 - - - - - -                               Nupbar lutes,               - - - - -bopl@nvyi                                      1(rdricak--- EV-E-z
          Ccratophyllum demersum                    - - - - - -                               Osmunda cinn-momea          ---         -
          Cicuta maculata                                                                     Oxypolis rigidior
          Cinna arundinacea                                                                   Panic= Vifgatnra                                            NCM@1#9) U M
          Clethra alnifolia                         - - - - - -                               Panicum(kvvlrom                                                                                    - - - - - -
          Cornus amonturn                           - - - - - -                               Peltartdra virginica        acK         E&Z@-                                                      - - - - - -
          Cornus racemosa                                                                     Phalaris arundinscea
          CryptoLsenia canadcasis                   - - - - - -                               Phragmitea ausU63                       EoD-                                                       - - - - - -
          Cuscuta sp.                                                                         Pluchea odorata                                                                                    - - - - - -
          Cyperus odoratus                                                                    Polygonum Fifolium                                                                                 - - - - - -
          C@yperus eng                                                                        P.
                                                    - - - - - -                                                                                                                                  - - - - - -
          Cypems erjthrorhizos                                                                P. hj6roj@-pem&                         A (50 IT                                                   - - - - - -
          Ofperus esculentus                                                                  P. pei%,,Nj\fdAtWM
                                                    - - - - - -                                                           - - -                                                                  - - - - - -
          Cyperus sp.                                                                         Pontedcria cordata          - - -       QL L
          Decodon verLicillatus                                                               Ptilimnium capWw          . . . . . . .                                                                   J
          Echinochloa crusgal                                                                 Riccia fluitans
          Echinochloa walteri                       --Ul-K- Mly                               Rosa palustris                   rr
          Eleocharis obtusa                                                                   R. multiflom
          Elcocharis palustris                                                                Rumex verticiU,             C6@-
          Eleocharis parvuls                        - - - - - -                               Sagginaria calycina         - - - - - -
          Elembaris tettuis                                                                   S. latifolia.               ---         -Yif-
          Erechutes hieracifolia                                                              Salix nigra                 - - - - - -
          Eupatorium &kj@kum                                                                  Samolus parvulus
          Euthamis sp.                              - - - - - --                              Scirpus cyperinus
          Fraxinus pensylvanica                     - - - - - -                               S. fluviatilis              - - - - - -
          Glyceria sp.                              - - - - -                                 S. pungcns                  - - - - - --
          Heteranthera reniformis                                                             S. robustas                 - - - - - -
          Hibiscus moscheutos                                                                 Sium suave
          Humulus japonicus                         - - - - - --                              Spargani- auycwp          . . . . . . .
          Hydrocoryle americans                                                               Spartins. alterniflora      - - - - - --
          Ilex opaca                                - - - - - -                               S. cynosuroides             - - - - - -
                                                                                              S iirodela polyrhi7A        BkZ,@
                        ta                                                                      P





    F. ADDITIONAL NOTES:




   FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                                 MARSH SURVEYS
   A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION

        1. Survey s ite name:    Aoct03-rINF- CRE-'g-                2. Site name: 14eF-A

        3. source Code:                     4. Surveyors:

        5. Date:                       6. USGS Quad:                               7. Quadcode:
                                                         -rAWP_S
        8. State:  T) F_ 9. County:    /YEL"') (A-STI_@_@ 10. Town:    -Po A:r 31z! 1-4 Iq
        11. Directions:
            7@,@     P-04t`   'i SOLL+h                          whan a*     9 -tLtrvi SoLO
                    tic-loy)mA.9 Vi Rd   _TL& Ysi o-n 4-o tKe_        road OV\ -t
        -%rrv, rmck o-,A 1,eft     I(As+ poa+ -hu_ Ytouse_ -troL@(w. Fot(o,,, rocLj Cs4-@ 41D
            K" @i fAd /)-nct,s

   B.   TOPOGRAPHY


        12. econnalsance Diagram:












                                         I                 \fscr,        MA ES W


   C. VEGETATION/HABITAT
        Observation-Point:                  Observation Point: .2               Observation Point:
        Community rLame:                    Community name:                      Community name:

        FK*S14            rIA" H
        Soil comments:                      Soil comments:                       Soil comments:
        'SATVf_*TM -> 1/4 ON D4--E-b,                       -D 1/1 Li/4 D,+-rF-                    1/4 L)74 D-4,1re-0
             r\UL4C_-f
        Dominant species                    Dominant species:                    Dominant species:
        Tree/Shrub:                         Tree/Shrub:.,.                       Tree/Shrub:

                    LnLP4 0 N
                                                                                        _,+f4                !>



        Herb:                               Herb:                                Herb:
           G I'v- 0-5 IZ_ f_ g_g S I A         7ypttA ANCrOS7-7FOI@4,4               jq18/56LJ_5


        Comments:                           Comments:                            Comments:


                 5irx;1    4 -e) e
                C rfeA- -
        CxrMikf v e7@@    G-r\, ea,
        a
    @




        _t
        2, @econnj_,,n,, lia,,,*



D.  OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and
    indicate precise location of observation points)


                    N                                                USGS  TAYLOR'S BRIDGE
                                                                              QUAD
 
                                                                  X165

E.  LIST OF PLANT SPECIES [by strata and w/cover values: [estimate percent cover
    values]


Species                           Ob #  Ob #  Ob#                    Species                             Ob #  Ob #  Ob #                     Species                                   Ob #  Ob #  Ob #           
                                   1     2     3                                                          1     2     3                                                                  1     2     3


 Acorus calamus                   ---   ---                          Impatiens capensis                  ---   ---                            Thalictrum pubescens                      ---   ---
 Alisma subcordatum               ---   ---                          Iris pseudacorus                    FRE   ---                            Thelypteris palustris                     ---   ---
 Amoranthus cannabinus            ---   ---                          Juncus acuminatus                   ---   ---                            Toxicodendron rad.                        ---   ---
 Ambrosia trifida                 ---   ---                          Juncus canadensis                   ---   ---                            Triad. virginicum                         ---   ---
 Amorpha frutescens               ---   ---                          Juncus effusas                      FRE   ---                            Typha angusifolia                         ---   ABUN
 Apoios americana                 ---   ---                          Leersia oryzoides                  ABUN   ---                            T. x glauca                               ---   ---
 Aslepias incarnata               ---   ---                          Leersia virginica                   ---   ---                            T. latifolia _                            COM   ---   COM
 Aster puniceus                   ---   ---                          Lernna minor                        ---   ---                            Vaccinium corymb.                         ---   ---
 Aster sp.                        ---   ---                          Lilaeopsis chinensis                ---   ---                            Viburnurn recogn.                         COM   ---
 Bidens bidentoides               ---   ---                          Lilium superbum                     ---   ---                            Viola sp.                                 ---   ---
 Bidens coronata                  ---   ---                          Lobelia cardinalis                  ---   ---   FRE                      Wolffia braziliensis                      ---   ---
 Bidens frondosa                  ---   ---                          Ludwigia pahistis                   ---   ---                            Zizania aquatica                          ---   ---
 Bidens laevis                    ---   ---                          Ludwigia peploidea                  COM   ---
 Bidens polylepis                 ---   ---                          Lycopus sp.                         ---   ---                            OTHER
 Carex stricta                    ---   ---                          Lysimachia terrestris               ---   ---   FRE                      Solidago semperivirens                    INF   ---
 Carex sp.                        ---   ---                          Lythrum salicaria                   ---   ---                            Commelind sp.                             INF   ---
 Cephalanthus occidentalis        ---   ---   ABUN                   Nuphar hitea                        ---   ---                            Solidago rugosd                           ---   COM
 Ceratophyllum demersum           ---   ---                          Osmunds cinnamornea                 ---   ---                            Verbeno hcototo                           ---   FRE
 Cicuta masculata                 ---   ---                          Oxypolis rigidior                   ---   ---                            Sombucus candensis                        ---   FRE
 Cinna arundinacca                ---   ---                          Panicum virgatum                    FRE   ---                            Eupatorium dubiurn                        ---   ---   FRE
 Clethra alnifoila                ---   ---                          Panicum sp.                         ---   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Cornus sp.                       FRE   ---   FRE                    Peltandra virginica                 COM   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Cornus racemosa                  ---   ---                          Phalaris arundinacea                ---   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Cryptotaenia canadensis          ---   ---                          Phragmites australia                COM   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Cuscut sp.                       ---   ---                          Pluchea odorata                     ---   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Cyperus odoratus                 ---   ---                          Polygonum arifolium                 ---   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Cyperus engelmannii              ---   ---                          P. hydropiperoides                  ---   ---                                                                      ---   ---
*Cyperus erythrorhizos            INF   ---                         *P. densifloruim                     FRE   COM                                                                      ---   ---
 Cyperus esculentus               ---   ---                          P. sagittstum                       ---   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Cyperus sp.                      ---   ---                          Pontederia cordata                  FRE   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Decodon verticillatus            ---   ---                          Ptilimnium capillac.                ---   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Echinochloa crusgalli            ---   ---                          Riccia fluitans                     ---   ---                                                                      ---   ---
 Echinochloa walteri              COM   ---                          Rosa palustris                      ---   ---   FRE                                                                
 Eleocharis obtusa                ---   ---                          R. multiflora                       ---   ---                                                                      
 Eleocharis palustris             ---   ---                          Rumex vericill.                    ABUN   ---                                                                      
 Eleocharis parvula               ---   ---                          Sagittaria calycins                 ---   ---                                                                      
 Eleocharis tenuis                ---   ---                          S. latifolia                        FRE   ---                                                                      
 Erecbtites hieracifolia          FRE   ---                          Salix nigra                         FRE
 Eupatorium pilosum               INF   ---                          Samolus parvulus                    ---   ---
 Euthamia graminifolid            ---   COM                          Scirpus cyperinus                   ---   ---
 Fraxinus pensylvanica            ---   ---                          S. fabernaernontanii                FRE   ---
 Glyceria sp.                     ---   ---                          S. pungens                          ---   ---
 Heteranthera reniformis          ---   ---                          S. robustus                         ---   ---
 Hibiscus moscheutos             ABUN   FRE  ABUN                    Sium suave                          ---   ---
 Humulus japonicus                ---   ---                          Sparganium eurycarp.                ---   ---
 Hydorcotyle americana            ---   ---                          Spartina alterniflora               ---   ---
 Ilex opaca                       ---   ---                          S. cynosuroides                     ---   ---
 Ilex verticillata                ---   ---                          Spirodela polyrhiza                 ---   --- 




F.  ADDITIONAL NOTES:           * species of special concern



   FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                       MARSH SURVEYS
   A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION


       1. Survey site name:                                2. Site name:

       3. Source Code:                4. Surveyors:
                - F:q3 LoN                           C.     TE e.-'@
       5. Date:                   6. USGS Quad:                         7. Quadcode:
                0&.2-5(73                         -rh-*-0P-,5 -if. I
       8. State:      9. County:                 10. Town:

       11. Directions-









   B. TOPOGRAPHY


       12. Reconnaisance Diagram:









    t4 A\(Fje@@
                             WAN MA"tf


   C. VEGETATION/HABITAT


       Observation Point:             observation Point:             Observation Point:


       Community name:                Community name:                 Community name:
       C4L570aAcAtLY3 -rjz,4(-
       PUS14 -MtV-Aa1Sff MA"-ff-
       soil comments:                 Soil comments:                  Soil comments:



           :ST.491-t-
       Dominant species               Dominant species:               Dominant species:
       Tree/shrub:                    Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:
         bP1fAL,+NT-ff0S
              ocr- tbeNrM-As


       Herb:                          Herb:                           Herb:
                cf. (nd-;n 61&oyn)/
         Eck@nochca2,

       Comments:                      Comments:                       Comments:
         ReA &h-,," diks-e-    ad-
       i-A a rsh AA- e dy- 66 or-
              durruina@td 6,f Twklb,
    @ @A@F@jj@








       WC,

                         rot ry.;
       C-h

       CLU     S
   LL


D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS  (in space below attach topo photocopy and
   indicate precise location of observation points)


                                 (see page 1)


E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES [by strata and w/cover values: [estimate percent over
   values]



Species                        Ob #                           Species                       Ob #                    Species                               Ob #                       
                                4                                                             4                                                             4
      
Acorus calamus                 --- ---                        Impatiens capensis            --- ---                  Thalictrum pubescens                  --- ---
Alisma subcordatum             --- ---                        Iris pseudacorus              --- ---                  Thelypteris palustria                 --- ---
Amaranthus cannabinus          --- ---                        Iris versicolor               --- ---                  Toxicodendron rad.                    --- ---
Ambrosia trifida               --- ---                        Juncus acuminatus             --- ---                  Triad. virginicum                     --- ---
Amorpha frutescens             --- ---                        Juncus canadensis             --- ---                  Typha angustifolia                    --- ---
Apios americana                --- ---                        Juncus effusus                --- ---                  T. x glauca                           --- ---     
Aslepias incarnata             --- ---                        Leersia oryzoides             --- ---                  T. latifolia_                        ABUM ---
Aster puniceus                 --- ---                        Leersia virginica             --- ---                  Vaccinium corymb.                     --- ---
Aster sp.                      --- ---                        Lemna minor                   --- ---                  Vibumum recogn.                       --- ---
Bidens sp.                    ABUN ---                        Lilaeopsis chinensis          --- ---                  Viola sp.                             --- ---
Bidens connata                 --- ---                        Lilium superbum               --- ---                  Wolffia braziliensis                  --- ---
Bidens coronata                --- ---                        Lobelia cardinalis            --- ---                  Zizania aquatica                      --- ---
Bidens frondosa                --- ---                        Ludwigia palustris            --- ---                                               
Bidens laevis                  --- ---                        Ludwigia peploides            --- ---                  OTHER
Bidens polylepis               --- ---                        Lycopus sp.                   --- ---                  Verbena hastata                       FRE --- 
Carex stricta                  --- ---                        Lysimachia terrestris         --- ---                  Solidago rugoso                       COM ---
Carex sp.                      --- ---                        Lythrum salicaria             FRE ---                  Onoclea sembilis                      FRE ---     
Cephalanthus occidentalis      FRE ---                        Nuphar hitea                  --- ---                  Microsteglum Vimineum                 COM ---
Ceratophyllum demersum         --- ---                        Osmunda cinnamornea           --- ---                  Granuneae cp.                         COM ---
Cicuta maculata                --- ---                        Oxypolis rigidior             --- ---                                                        --- ---
Cinna arundinaces              --- ---                        Panicum virgatum              --- ---                                                        --- --- 
Clethra alnifolia              --- ---                        Panicum sp.                   --- ---                                                        --- ---
Cornus amomum                  --- ---                        Peltandra virginica           --- ---                                                        --- ---
Cornus racemosa                --- ---                        Phalaris arundinacea          --- ---
Cryptotaenia canadensis        --- ---                        Phragmites australis        (ABUN)---
Cuscuta sp.                    --- ---                        Pluchea odorats               --- ---
Cyperus odoratus               --- ---                        Polygonum arifolium           --- ---
Cyperus engelmannii            --- ---                        P. hydropiperoides            --- ---
Cyperus erythrorhizos          --- ---                        P. pennsylvaniasm             COM ---
Cyperus esculentus             --- ---                        P. sagittatum                 COM ---
Cyperus sp.                    --- ---                        Pontederia cordata            --- ---
Decodon verticillatus          --- ---                        Ptilimnium espillac.          --- ---
Echinochloa crusgalli          --- ---                        Riccia fluitans               --- ---
Echinochloa walteri           ABUN ---                        Rosa palustri                 --- ---
Elcocharis obtusa              --- ---                        R. multiflora                 --- ---
Eleocharis palustris           --- ---                        Rumex verticill.              --- ---
Eleocharis parvula             --- ---                        Sagittaria calycins           --- ---
Eleocharis tenuis              --- ---                        S. latifolia                  --- ---
Erechtites hieracifolia        FRE ---                        Salix nigra                   --- ---
Eupatorium sp.                 --- ---                        Samolus parvulus              --- ---
Euthamia sp.                   --- ---                        Scirpus cyperinus             COM --- 
Fraxinus pensylvanica          --- ---                        S. fluviatilis                --- ---
Glyceria sp.                   --- ---                        S. pungens                    --- ---
Heteranthera reniformis        --- ---                        S. robustus                   --- ---
Hibiscus moscheutos            FRE ---                        Sium suave                    --- ---
Humulus japonicus              --- ---                        Sparganium eurycarp.          --- ---
Hydrocotyle americana          --- ---                        Spartina alterniflora         --- ---
Ilex opaca                     --- ---                        S. cynosuroides               --- --- 
Ilex verticillata              --- ---                        Spirodela polyrhiza           --- ---



F.  ADDITIONAL NOTE:


  FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                        MARSH SURVEYS
  A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION

      1. Survey site name:   AO&rds-"NE CREEIV--            2. Site name:
      3. Source Code:                 4. Surveyors:    C,             5
      5. Date:                    6. USGS Quad:                         7. Quadcode:
               10 a 2-'r -@,               -7ml-6 r-'% -pl, P-1 D&-r- A) a A-Wmtf- Ct r%./ qO -7 5-4Z, 5170 7 5 55-
      8. state: -     9. County:                 10. Town: ' -                                I
                .DE-             /1-1 *- Lk> C,4 -S             vz@ --Pf- /N 1,4
      ll. Directions:
                                                              v-)  W K-o--c. ro &a cy-o,%s@ -4u
       <f,Ar-vr,@ -V'YN@e, 'Ls a bo6i
       +0                                   -4 -2-0 -%-,,-t -'V@c v-, ds (Oy@



   B. TOPOGRAPHY


      12. Reconnaisance Diagram:













 .C. VEGETATION/HABITAT


      Observation Point:              observation Point:              Observation Point:


      Community name:                 Community name:                 Community name:
                                        6p,4@-  tf -, H-(@F- (-I rqf-

      Soil comments:                  Soil comments:                  Soil comments:




      Dominant species                Dominant species;               Dominant species:
      Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:
       ACe/y-                                       fzys
                                                      6 OpLi

      Herb:                           Herb:                           Herb:
       ,R\VtTwzz@                                  ffmm@)%nl CU YVN

      Comments:                       comments:                       Comments:
       T(@                                               @rj                r




                  Avyy,,@YN 04 a
                                         sww,@@r 6"e4jL
                "j,






 D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and
          indicate precise location of observation points)











  E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES (by strata and.w/cover values: [estimate percent cover
         values]

        Species                      Ob#1 OB#2 OB#3                                        SPECIES               OB#1  OB#2  OB#3                     Species                     Ob#1   OB#2    OB#3

                                                                                                                                                                     

        Acorus calamus                                                                    Impatiens capensis	                                    ThAlictrum pubescens
        Alisma subcordatum                      - - - - - -                               Iris pscudacorus                                            Thelypteris palustris
        Amaranthus cannabinus                                                             Iris versicolor                                             Toxicodendroc rad.
        Ambrosia trifida                                                                  Juncus acuminatus         - - - - - -                       Triad. virginicum
        Amorpha fruteseens                                                                Juncus canadensis                                           Typha angustifolia
        Apios americana                                                                   Juncus effusus            - - - - - -                       T. x glauca
        Aslepia  incarnata                                                                Leersia oryzoides         - - - - - -                       T. latifolia                        INF 
        Aster puniceus                                                                    Leersia virginica                                           Vaccinium corymb.
        Aster sp.                               - - - - - -                               Lemna minor               - - - - - -                       Viburnum recogn.            - - - - - -
        Bidens bidentoides                                                                Lilacopsis chinensis                                        Viola sp.
        Bidens connata                          - - - - - -                               Li1ium superbum           - - - - - -                       Wolffia braziliensis
        Bidens coronala                         - - - - - -                               Lobelia cardinalis        - - - - - -                       Zizania aquatics
        Bidens frondosa                                                                   Ludwigia palustris                  COM            
        Bidens laevis                           - - - - - -                               Ludwigia peploides        . . . . . .                       OTHER
        Bidens polylepis                                                                  Lycopus sp.                                                 Acernegrundo 			FRE
        Carex stricta                           - - - - - -                               Lysimachia terrestria                                       Rhus copalina			      COM				
        Carex sp.                                                                                                   - - - - - -                       Diospyros virginiana                COM 
                                                - - - - - -                               Lythrum salicaria         - - - - - -                       Microstegium vimixeum               COM  
        Cephalanthus occidentalis                                                         Nuphar lutca              - - - - - -                                                                     
        Ceratophyllum demersum                                                            Osmunda cinnamomea
        Cicuta maculata                         - - - - - -                               Oxypolis rigidior		       		
        Cinna arundinaces                                                                 Panicum virgatum			 	
        Clethra alnifolia                                                                 Panicum dichotomoflorum		 FRE
        Cornus amomum                           - - - - - -                               Peltandra virginica       	 INF COM      
        Cornus raccmosa                                                                   Phalaris arundinacca			
        Cryptotacnia canadensis                 - - - - - -                               Phragmites australis      DOM      DOM           		                                                         
        Cuscuta sp.                             - - - - - -                               Pluchea odorata			 INF
        Cyperus odoratus                                                                   Polygonum arifolium                                                                           
        Cyperus engelmannii                     - - - - - -                               P. bydropiperoides                                                                            
        Cyperus erythrorhizos                   - - - - - -                               P. pennsylvanicum         - - -COM      
        Cyperus esculenrus                                                                P. sagitiatum             - - - - -                                                         
        Cyperus sp.                                                                       Pontederis cordata        - - - - - FRE
        Decodon verticillatus                   - - - - - -                               Pulimnium capillac        . . . . . .                                                          
        Echinochloa crusgalli                   - - - - - -                               riccia fluitans           - - - - - -
        Echinochloa walteri                     - - - - - -                               Rosa palustris            - - - - - -
        Eleocharis obtusa                                                                 R. multiflora
        Eleocharis palustris                                                              Rumex verticill.		        FRE		
        Eeleocharis parvula                     - - - - - -                               Sagittaria calycina
        Eleocharis tenuis                                                                 S. latifolia
        Erechlites hicraeifloia                       COM                                    Salix nigra
        Eupatorium sp.                                                                    Samolus parvulus          - - - - - -
        euthamia sp.                            - - - - - -                               Scirpus cyperinus         - - - - - -
        Fraxinus pensylvanica                   - - - - - -                               S. fluviatilis            - - - - -
        glyceria sp.                            - - - - - -                               S. robustus               - - - - - -
        Heteranthera reniformis                 - - - - - -                               Sium suave                - - - - - -
        Hibiscus moshceutos                           FRE  INF                                    Sparganium eurycarp.
        Humulus japonicus                                                                 Spartina alterniflora
        Hydrocotyle americana                                                             S. cynosuroides           - - - - - - -
        Ilex opaca                              - - - - - -                               Spirodela polyrhiza       . . .
        Ilex verticillata                                                                 
                                                                                           




   F. ADbITIONAL NOTES:
 


   FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                        MARSH SURVEYS
   A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION
       1. Survey site name:   A0&-0.S11/,iF- CRE-F-W--      2. Site name:                        po@ 2--
       3. Source Code:                 4. Surveyors:   C.
       5. Date:                    6. usGs Quad:                         7. Quadcode:
                                                    1-1)@    / 1) 9L 14-WIX9 f- Ct T@-j 3 c7o -7 5-IZ. 3170 7 5 55-
       8. State:      9.  County:                10. Town:

       11. Directions:
                                                                    0jKs,-.rc- rc>&ct
        C,@rt-r-@ -n%a.-ee- is a            la,,-c-i-,  Cx, .e- L.,rts-i- 0--
       +o byick5e                                                                    rzb 6,,(
                       f-o-. 5 %




   B. TOPOGRAPHY


       12. Reconnaisance Diagram:










                   ?01'4D


   C. VEGETATION/HABITAT


       Observation Point:              Observation Point:             Observation Point:

       Community name:LH5Wr@ft,y]TjDk, Community name:                 Community name:
       bR4"-kS1+

       Soil comments:                  Soil comments:                  Soil comments:
        -TAcyt1doJ-ed                       -TY\ (A rN 0(6),Xd            s&+u,&Kd -:@JmkvwLca@L

       Dominant species                Dominant species:               Dominant species:
       Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:





       Herb:                           Herb:                           Herb:
       Eck%A
         (K@/'                            I ypha  4h fttpa,

       Comments:                       Comments:                       Comments:
                                                Is
                                          11-z , OA@                                                  19-1
       ca-@r- of   -q\.Q- rrw n c Mk .
                                             ck! fferC,-@@R fD--7"                            rIQ






 D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and
          indicate precise location of observation points











 E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES [by strata and w/cover values: [estimate percent cover
           values]

        Species                         OB#4   OB#5   OB#6                          species                      Ob #4  Ob#5  Ob#6                           Species		ob#4	ob#5	ob#6                     
                                                                                                                                                                                    

        Acorus calamus                                                                        Impatiens capensis                                                      Thalictrum pubescens
        Alisma subcordatum                                                                    Iris pseudacorus         - - - - - -                                    Thelypteris paulstris       - - - - - -
        Amaranthus cannabinus                                                                 Iris versicolor                                                         Toxicodendron rad.
        Ambrosia trifida                                                                      Juncus acuminatus         - - - - - -                                   Triad. virginicum            - - - - - -
        Amorpha fruteseens                                                                    Juncus canadensis          - - - - - -                                  Typha anustuifolia
        Apios americana                                                                       Juncus effusus             - - - - - -                                  T. x glauca				
        Aslepias incarnala              - - - - - -                                           Leersia oryzoides           - - - - - -                                 T. latifolia			  pre       Dom	
        Aster puniccus                                                                        Leersia virginica                                                 	    Vaccinium corymb.
        Aster sp.                                                                             Lemna minor                                                              Viburnum recogn.
        Bidens bidentoides                                                                    Lilacopsis chinensis                                                    Viola sp.
        Bidens connata                                                                        Lilium superbum                                                         Wolfria braziliensis         - - - - - -
        Bidens coronata                                                                       Lobelia cardiaalis                                                      Zizania aquatica
        Bidens frondosa                 - - - - - -                                           Ludwigia palustris         
        Bidens laevis                   - - - - - -                                           Ludwigia peploides                                                      OTHER
        Bidens polylepis                                                                      Lycopussp.                   - - - - - -
        Carex stricta                   - - - - - -                                           Lyimacbiatermatris                                                                                 - - - - - -
        Carex sp.                                                                             Lyuuum saficaria             - - - - - -
        Cephalanthus occidentalis                                                             Nuphar lutea
        Ceratophylium demersum          - - - - - -                                           Osmunda cinnamomea           - - - - - -                                                             - - - - - -
        Cicuta maculats                 - - - - - -                                           Oxypofis rigidior            - - - - - -                                                             - - - - - -
        Cinna arundinacca                                                                     Paicurn virgatum
        Clethra alnifolia               - - - - - -                                           Panicum sp.
        Cornus amomum                   - - - - - -                                           Peltandrs virginica                                          
        Cornus racemosa                                                                       Phalaris arundinacca
        Cryptotaenia canadensis         - - - - - -                                           Phragmites Australis                                                                                 - - - - - -
        Cuscuta sp.                                                                           Pluchea odorata
        Cyperus odoratus                 FRE                                                  Polygonum                                        
        Cyperus engelmannii             - - - - - -                                           P. hydropipcroides           - - - - - -                                                             - - - - - -
        Cyperus erythrorhizos           - - - - - -                                           P. punctatum                                                                                         - - - - - -
        Cyperus esculentus                                                                    P. sagimatum                                                                                         - - - - - -
        Cyperus sp.                                                                           Pontederia cordata
        Decodon verticillatus           - - - - - -                                           Pilimunium capillac.
        Echinochloa crusgalli                                                                 Ricci fluitans              - - - - - -
        Echinochloa walteri                                                                   Ross palustris
        Eleocharis obtusa                                                                     R. multiflora
        Eleocharis palustris                                                                  Rumex verticill                                         
        Eleocharis parvula              - - - - - -                                           Sagitaria calycina           - - - - - -
        Eleocharis lenuis                                                                     S. latifolia
        Erechtites hicracifolia                                                               Salix nigra
        Eupatorium sp.                                                                        Samoulus parvulus
	  Fraximus penaylvanica											    Scirpus cyperinus		
	  Glyceria sp.												    S. taberneemontonli	
	  Heteranthers reniformis										    S. pungens
	  Humulus japonieus											    S. robustus	
	  hydrocotyte americana											    Sium suave	
	  Nex opaca		  						       				    Sparganium eurycarp.	
	  Nex verticillats											    Spartina alterniflora
															    S. cynosuroides	
															    Spirodela polyrhiza	














   F. ADDITIONAL NOTES:



   FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                        MARSH SURVEYS
   A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION

        1. Survey site name:                 CRF-F-W--      2. Site name:     /A 9,EA

        3. Source Code:                4. Surveyors:
                       Fq S(k>l N 2                    C. W                1- 1/-4 K-
        5. Date: 10 2-             6. USGS Quad:                         7. Quadcode:
                                                    -@s P-a>6-C A) LL AA-W/h<f- Ct    3 qO -7 5-4j:, 3-?o 7 5 55-
        8. State: -DE- 9. County:                10. Town:
        11. Directions:
                                                                    CAjK-oc- ro&ct
        CA(-t-o- -ry\.a@ e, is a                        cx, 4- -,ms-t- c,- A-u5LLS+jyr,--(fV-CCj,--
        +o by-ick5e Cf7m3irn &-C-       RX-. 4                                          ".1)


   B. TOPOGRAPHY


        12. econnaisance Diagram:



   L                                                  A-OCT - CR664-0

   C. VEGETATION/HABITAT
        observation Point:             Observation Point:      e5     Observation Point:
        C.ommunity name:               Community name:                 Community name:
        -8"r,Y-k,St+

        Soil comments:                 Soil comments:                  Soil comments:
                                         a;vu    --i,> iywk Y)CLOR&                       nu Y\d a--W

        Dominant species               Dominant species:               Dominant species:
        Tree/Shrub:                    Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:
        ZiMNrct>    3YrLA-z,


        Herb:                          Herb:                           Herb:
        -@0@460-f"LA'1\                    t-kb&&An,                     -@@ral Mks
            Mf             0,@pLofGL@s                                      2z'
        Comments:                      Comments:                       Comments:



                                                                                          e
     @2e,connaisance Diagram:





                                         V@G- r rm,@.)                           2-o-n e-
          isryD-w eyn


                                         CTYUS 4ec@fs IyNcrtca-ksly@



E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES (by strata and w/cover values: (estimate percent cover



Species  			ob#7	ob#8   	ob#9				Species			ob#7		ob#8		ob#9			Species			ob#7		ob#8		ob#9							
Acorus calamus									Impatiens capensis								Thalictrum pubescens
Alisma subcordaium								Iris pseudacorus									Thelypteris palustris
Amaranthsu cannabinus								Iris versicolor									Toxicodendron rad.
Ambroisis trifida									Juncus acuminatus									Triad. virginicum
Amorpha frutescens								Juncus canadensis									Typha angustifolia
Apios americana									Juncus effusus									T. x glauca
Aslepias incarnata								Leersia oryzoides									T. laufolia
Aster puniceus									Leersia virginica									Vaccinium corymb.
Aster sp.										Lemna minor										Vibumum recogn.	
Bidens bidentoides								Lilaeopsis chinensis								Viola sp.
Bidens connata									Lilium superbum									Wolffia braziliensis
Bidens coronata									Lobelia cardinalis								Zizania aquatica	
Bidens frondosa									Ludwigia palustris								
Bidens laevis									Ludwigia peploides								Other
Bidens polylepis									Lycopus sp.										Rhus copalina			Com
Carex stricta									Lysimachis terrestris								Drospyras vorgomoam		Com
Carex sp.										Lythrum salicaria									Microstegium viminaum		Com
Cephalanthus occidentalis							Nuphar lutes	
Ceratophyllum demersum								Osmunda cinnamomes
Cicuta maculata									Oxypolis rigidor
Cinns arundinsces									Panicum virgatum
Clethra slinifolia								Panicum dichotomoflorum		Fre
Cornus amomum									Peltandra virginica		Inf	   Com	Abun
Cornus racemosa									Phalaris arundinacca
Cryplotaenia canadensis								Phragmites sustralis			   Inf	Dom
Cuscuta sp.										Pluchea odorsts			Ind
Cyperus odoratus									Polygonum arifolium
Cyperus engelmannii								P. bydropiperoides
Cypres erythrorhizos								P. pennsylvanicum
Cypcrus esculentus								P. sagittatum
Cyperus sp.										Pontederia cordata					Fre
Decodon veritcillatus								Pulimnium capillac.
Echinochloa crusgalli								Riccia fluitans
Echinochloa walteri								Rosa palustris
Eleocharis obtusa									R. multiflora
Eleocharis palustris								Rumex verticill.			Fre		Com	 Com
Eleocharis tenuis									Sagittaris calycina
Ereehtites hieracifolia			Fre					S. latifolia
Eupatorium sp.									Salix nigra
Euthamia sp.									Samolus parvulus
Fraxinus pensylvanica								Scirpus cyperinus
Glyceria sp.									S. fluviatilis
Heteranthers reniformis								S. pungens		
Hibiscus moseheutos			Fre		Dom  		Com	S. robustus
Humulus japonicus									Sium suave
Hydrocotyle americana								Sparganium eurycarp.
Ilex opaca										Spartina alteriflora
Ilex verticillata									S. cynousuroides			
											Spirodela polyrhiza


   FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                       MARSH SURVEYS
   A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION

      1. Survey site name:                  CRF-F-W--       2. Site  name:

      3. Source Code:                  4. Surveyors:

      5. Date:                     6.  USGS @uad:                       7. Quadcode:
      8. State:       9.  County:                                       CET%f        @ 3 qO -7 5-45-1, 3q0 7 5 55-
                -b E-            .               10. Town:
      ll. Directions:
              -r,4A@
        C-@vr-@ -ryva,-ee, IS a     bc6i                                  o,
        +0 by-iGkDe. Cro-@5%,-   o                                         cor,@


   B. TOPOGRAPHY


      '12. Reconnaisance Diagram:











                                                                                            .4oo- Cazer--


   C.- VEGETATION/HABITAT


      Observation Point:               Observation Point:              observation Point:


      Community name:                  Community name:                 Community name:


      Soil comments:                   Soil comments:                  Soil comments:


                                       s                  ct

      Dominant species                 Dominant species:.              Dominant species:
      Tree/Shrub:                      Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:
                                                     om(A rn                             r4e(@5y@@U hr-

      Herb:                            Her-b:                          Herb:
          4pha--  /,P0urUVy\-                                               PAU          jdu)l   --
                                                                              u#a
      Comments:                        Comments:                       Comments:
        C                      yu d

                 Lk)         a
                                                                              Iwran@
                                                     I h'r-'n a

          u r n u m      r
                              C),
                      '4M A61 I a



D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS(in space below attach topo photocopy and
   indicate precise location of oberservation points)










E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES (by strata and w/cover values: (estimate percent cover
   values)


Species				ob#10			ob#11		ob#12				Species				ob#10		ob#11		ob#12				Species					ob#10			ob#11		ob#12		
																			
Acorus calamus												Impatiens capensis										Thalictrum pubescens		
Alisma subcordatum											Irsi pseudaconus											Thelypteris paulustris
Amaranthus cannabinus											Iris versicolor											Toxicodendra rad.
Ambrosis trifida												Juncus acuminatus											Triad. virginicum
Amorpha frutescens											Juncus canadensis											Typha angustifolia
Apios americana												Juncus effusus											T. x glauca
Aslepias incarnata											Leersia oryzoides											T. latifolis				DOM		
Aster puniceus												Leersia virginica											Vaccinum corymb.
Aster sp.													Lemna minor												Vibumum recogn.				ABUN			ABUN		   DOM
Bidens bidentoides											Lilaeopsis chinensis										Viola sp.
Bidens connata												Lilium superbum											Wolffia braziliensis
Bidens coronata												Lobelia cardinalis										Zizania aquatica	
Bidens frondosa												Ludwigia patustris		ABUN				ABUN
Bidens lacvis												Ludwigis peploides										OTHER
Bidens polylepis												Lycopus sp.												Diospyros virginiana								    COM
Carex stricta												Lysimachia terrestria
Carex sp.													Lythrum salicaria			ABUN				COM
Cephalanthus occidentalis										Nuphar lutes			INF		ABUN		ABUN		
Ceratophyllum demersum											Osmunda cinnamonxnea		
Ciciuta maculata												Oxypolis rigidior
Cinna arundinacca												Panicum virgabum
Clethra alnifolia												Panicum sp.
Comus amomum												Peltandra virginica
Comus racemosa												Palaris arundinacea
Cryptotaenia canadensis											Phragmites australis
Cuscuta sp.													Pluchea odorats
Cyperus odoratus												Polygonum arifolium
Cyperus engelmannii											P. hydropoperoides
Cyperus erythrorhizos											P. lapathifollum 			ABUN
Cyperus esculentus											P. sagitatum
Cyperus sp.													Pontederia codats
Decodon verticillatus											Pilimnium capillac.
Echinochloa crusgalli											Riccia fluitans
Echinochios walteri											Rosa palustris							INF		
Eleocharis obtusa												R. multiflora
Eleocharis palustris											Rumex verticill.
Eleocharis parvula											Sagittaria calycina
Eleocharis tenuis												S. latifolia
Erechtites hieracifolia											Salix nigra
Eupatorium sp.												Samolus parvulus
Euthamia sp.												Scirpus cyperinus
Fraxinus pensylvancia											S. fluviatilis
Glyceria sp.												S. pungens
Heteranthera reniformis											S. robustus
Hibiscus moscheutos						ABUN					Sium suave
Humulus japonicus												Sparganium eurycarp-
Hydrocotyle americana											Spartina alterniflors
Ilex opaca													S. cynosuroides
Ilex verticillata											      Spirodel polyrhiza



F. ADDITIONAL NOTES:


    FOFU4 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                      MARSH SURVEYS
    A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION

       1. amwvav ALUA namii A06ru-S"/,ir-                    2. aLt" h&ffiat
       3. Source Code:                 4. Surveyors:    C. UJ i i%A     S    1 P4
       S. Date:                    6. USGS Quad:                         7. Quadcode:
                     2--r                                                c(T-4        3 -70 -7 5-ï¿½Z, 3'70-7 5- 55-
       8. state: -DE-  9. County:  N     C-0- 5 rz- E- 10. Town: '-Po M7- --Pf- /-4 N
       ll. Directions:
               -raa@ YZ-O.T t-                            -@,e,, Vn Uj Kj__Vt. ro &C( oy-OSS-es    (A S-hN@
                   -r(vaee-                             ca,-,..e.          cr-  "Lk S+i rQ- (f re e-k-
        +o bridk5e crm5%f-,       o -C- R;T-. .4 20 C -%-vt -Vr- v% y%


    B. TOPOGRAPHY


            econnaisance Diagram.:



    L                     Auct -Qzte-r-                     M@

    C. VEGETATION/HABITAT-,
       Observation Point:       15     Observation Point:       H      Observation Point:
       Community name:                 Community name:                 Community name:
       FRF-5k-@)5t+0Q-L(--4 E-
       Soil comments:                  Soil comments:                  Soil comments:
       s4ftj,r@@d -:,-, Ln"cla)a-d     5 &@Ur6ifd ---->In urd 4ed                 --> 1n,-Ly-%dc*6

       Dominant species                Dominant species:               Dominant species:
       Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:
                                                          ql'@Urnum           Rmc& P,@,Us+ri S@
                                                            (1cognitum
       Herb:                           Herb:                           Herb:
                      @tA d U-)                                            Nup'hcvr          W LI54'&-
                                                                             L@-k CL       pc@ k3t r-f
       Comments:                       Comments:                       Comments-T
         TVV-,., @@ree, @i @ust            FlooJ plair) doyr"&-@Rd                        1 6r- f-0
                                          b  -        rxk        -
       abm'T-e-    )Qjz 6@xr CA &-rn                           c@@d                         /5.
        ro
                                                               ShrAdld -
       W@





    D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and
             indicate precise location of observation points)











    E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES (by strata and w/cover values: [estimate percent cover
              values]
           Species                                      ob#          ob#  Ob#                      species                       Ob# 0b# Ob#                               Species                       Ob#  Ob#  Ob#
                                                           13         14   15                                                      13  14  15        is-                                                   13   14  15
           Acorus calamus                               - - - - - -                                 Impatiens capensis                                                          Tbalictrum pubsceans
           Alisma subcordatum                                                                       Iris pseudacoru               - - - - - -                                   Thelypteris palustris
           Amaranthus cannabinus                                                                    Iris Versicolo                                                              Toxicodendron  rad
           Ambrosia trifida                                                                         Juncus acuminatus                                                           Triad. virginicum
           Amorpha frutescens                                                                       Juncus canadensis                                                           Typha angustifolia          - - - - - - -
           Apios americana                                                                          Juncus effusus                                                              T. x glauca                   - - - - - -
           Aslepias incarnata                                                                       Leersia oryzaides                                                           T. latifolia
                                                                                                    Leersia virginica                                                           vaccinium corymb.
           Aster puniccus                               - - - - - -                                 Lemna minor                   - - - - - -
                                                                                                    Lilaeopsis chinensis                                                        Viburnum rccogn.
           Aster.sp.                                   - - - - - -                                  Lcmna minor                   - - - - - -
                                                        - - - - - -                                 Lilacopsis chinensis         - - - - - -                                    Viola sp.
           Bidens connata                                                                           Lilium superbum                                                             Wolffia braziliensis
           Bidens coronata                                                                          Lobelia cardinalis                                                          Zizania aquatica              - - - - - -
           Bidens frondosa                                                                          Ludwigia palustris                                    
	     Bidens laevis											          Ludwigia peploides                                                             																																																			                                                                                       
																    Ludwigis peploides                                                         OTHER
           Bidens polylepis                             - - - - - -                                 Lycopus sp.                                                                    Diospyros virginiana                                                             
	     Carex sp.                               - - - - - -                                                                                                                     Acer rubrum    
	     Carex stricta                                     - - - - - -                            Lysimachia terrestria                                               	     Onocleasensibilis	
	     Cephalanthus occidentalis                                                                Lythrum salicaria               MIN                                            Boehmeriacylindriea 
                                                        - - - - - -                                 Nuphar lutes                                                        
           Ceratophyllum demcersum         - - - - - -                                              Osmunda cinnamomea                                                                                       
           Cicuta maculatas                              - - - - - -                                Oxypotis rigidior             - - - - - -                                                                - - - - - -
           Cinna arundinacca                                                                        Panicum virgatum              - - - - - -                                                                - - - - - -
           Clethra alnifolia                                                                        Panicurn sp.                  - - - - - -                                                                - - - - - -
           Comus amomum                                                                             Peltandra virginica          
                                                        - - - - - -                                 Phalaris arundinaces          - - - - - -                                                                - - - - - -
           Comus racemoss                                                                           Phragmites australis       
           Cryptotacnia canadensis                                                                  Pluchea odorats               - - - - - -
           Cuscuta sp.                                                                              Polygonum arifolium    
           Cyperus odoratus                             - - - - - -                                 P. hydropiperoides            - - - - - -
           Cyperus engehnanaii                          - - - - - -                                 P. punctabum                  - - - - - -                                                                - - - - - -
           Cyperus crythrorhizos                        - - - - - -                                 P. sagittatum                 - - - - - -
           Cypcrus esculentUS                            - - - - - -                                Pontederia cordata            - - - - - -                                                                - - - - - -
           Cyperus sp.                                  - - - - - -                                 Poilimnium capillac.          - - - - - -
           Decodon verticillatus                        - - - - - -                                 Riccia fluitans               - - - - - -
           Echinohloa crusgalli                          - - - - - -                                Rosa palustria                - - -
           Echinochloa walteri                          - - - - - -                                 R. multiflora     
           Eleocharis obtuse                                                                        Rumex verticill.  
           Eleocharis palustris                             - - - - - -                             Sagittaria calycina           - - - - - -
           Eleocharis parvula                              - - - - - -                              S. Latifolia                  - - - - - -
           Eleocharis tenuis                                                                        Salix nigrs                   
           					                       - - - - - -                              Samolus parvulus              - - - - - -
           Erechutes hieracifolia                                      - - --- - -                  Svirpus cyperinus             - - - - - -
           Eupatorium sp.                                                                           S. fluviatilis                - - - - - -
           Euthamia sp.                                  - - - - - -                                S. pungens                    - - - - - -
           Fraxinus pensylvanica                        - - - - - -                                 S. robustus                   - - - - - -
           Glyceria sp.                                                                             Sium suave                    - - - - - -
           Heteranthera reniformis                                                                  Sparganium eurycarp.          - - - - - -
           Hibiscus moscheutos                                                                      Spartins alterniflora         - - - - - -
           Hydrocoryle americana                            - - - - - -                             S. cynosuroides               - - - - - -                
           Llex opaca                                                                               Spirodela polyrhiza           - - - - - -                               
           Llex verticillata     
                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                     






     F. ADDITIONAL NOTES:



    FORM 1: RECONVAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                       MARSH SURVEYS
    A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION

       1. Survey site name:   A06r-tjS-"f4F- CREE-@-,-       2. Site  name:   A                por4p
       3. Source Code:                 4. Surveyors:
       5. Date:                    6. USGS Quad:                         7. Quadcode:  (70 -7 57-qZ, 570 7 5- 55-
                                                       P-vb(rc           ct r%f
       8. State:       9. County: NEc-@ C.45ME_   10. Town: 'TO VZ@ --Pf-/-4 /14
       11. Directions-
                                    S- -11-,                           KA,,c-  ro &ct              (AS-h-11-
        C-rt-c)- -tN%z@e- Ls a bc6i                                        o--
        +o brick C- Crty;>5ir,   a -P   R;r  -4 -L0 C -@bt -,Or-   -&3ti CC5



    B. TOPOGRAPHY


       12. Reconnaisance Diagram:












    C. VEGETATION/HABITAT


       Observation Point               Observation Point:              Observation Point:


       Community name:                 community name:                 community name:
        FP,Z614 WAIE49- xrkA4Z64        r Pzni WAVA G-IJT- /S VICQEJAN E-                 CT0T-f!5140RV-,LjNF--
       Soil comments:                  Soil comments:                  Soil comments:


                       M UNT1,61- TE D

       Dominant species                Dominant species:               Dominant species:
       Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:
        Sa[IA Ceph34.--,@s                 V i @Ourv@ V-V,
                   6CCiAzyCk-t,,kiS                                          OtLMLIrn
                                              M05N", I                           fecogn; 4-(A v-
       Herb:                           Herb:                           Herb:

           W "uj-s      Wd                     &Y-
                            LIL) (@A 8111-
                                   S.                                                        N    RA e--

       Comments:                       Comments:,                      Comments:

                                              -Th  ay cr,
                             -We -@r id      js@,tjj@ ot)j- qzj
                                       y-
                                       L
            C M $$in d% Au@u @@. Y\@ C ru-p-       MCL@Y\ Crcvk,
                   cuclldAkatks UO-01"        betow-      beave7-
                                                         haf*);
                                              CU@,@ r\ &,'XCL- 06
                                               jr\( ria"'s I(
    L




	D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and
	   indicate precise location of observation points)










	E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES {by strata and w/cover values:  [estimate percent cover
	   values]	

		
	SPECIES				OB#	OB#	OB#		SPECIES				OB#	OB#	OB#			SPECIES				OB#	OB#	OB#
						16	17	18																	16	17	18
	Acorus calamus				ABUN			Impatiens capensis							Thalictrum pubescens
	Alisma subcordatum						Iris pseudacorus								Thelypteris palustris
	Amaranthus cannabinus						Iris versicolor								Toxicodendron rad.
	Ambrosia trifida							Juncus acuminatus								Triad. virginicum
	Amorpha frutescena						Juncus canadensis								Typha angustifolia
	Apios americana							Juncus effusus								T. x glauca
	Astepias incarnata						Leersia oryzoides			ABUN		ABUN			T. latifolia			COM		COM
	Aster puniceus							Leersia virginica								Vaccinium corymb.
	Aster sp.								Lemna minor						COM			Viburnum recogn				ABUN	ABUN
	Bidens bidentoides						Lilacopsis chinensis							Viola sp.
	Bidens connata							Lilium superbum								Wolffia braziliensis
	Bidens coronata							Lobelia cardinalis							Zizania aquatica
	Bidens frondosa							Ludwigia palustris		ABUN					
	Bidens laevis							Ludwigia peploides
	Bidens polylepis							Lycopus sp.
	Carex stricta							Lysimachia terrestris							OTHER
	Carex sp.								Lythrum salicaria					FRE			Acerrubrum				COM
	Cephalanthus occidentalis	FRE	FRE			Nuphar lutea				ABUN	ABUN			Diospyros virginiana				COM
	Ceratophyllum demersum						Osmunda cinnamomea			
	Cicuia maculata							Oxypolis rigidior
	Cinna arundinacea							Panicum virgatum
	Clethra alnifolia							Panicum sp.
	Cornus sp.				FRE				Peltandra virginica		FRE	ABUN	ABUN
	Cornus racemosa							Phalaris arundinaces
	Cryptolaenia canadensis						Phragmites australis
	Cuscuta sp.								Pluchea odorats
	Cyperus odoratus				INF			Polygonum arifolium
	Cyperus engelmannii						P. lapothifolium					ABUN	
	Cyperus erythrorhizos						P. punctatum
	Cyperus esculentus						P. sagittatum
	Cyperus sp.								Pontederia cordata
	Decodon verticillatus						Ptilimnium capillac.
	Echinochloa crusgalli						Riccia fluitans
	Echinochloa walteri						Rosa palustris
	Eleocharis obtusa							R. multiflora
	Eleocharis palustris						Rumex verticill.				ABUN	COM
	Eleocharis parvula						Sagittaria calycina		
	Eleocharis tenuis							S. Latifolia
	Erechtites hieracifolia						Salix SD.				COM
	Eupatorium sp.							Samolus parvulus
	Euthamis sp.							Seirpus cyperinus			COM	
	Fraxinus pensylvanica						S. fluviatilis
	Glyceria sp.							S. pungens
	Heteranthera reniformis						S. robustus	
	Hibiscus moscheutos		DOM	ABUN			Sium suave
	Humulus japonicus							Sparganium eurycarp.
	Hydrocotyle americana						Spartina alterniflora
	Hex opaca								S. cynosuroides
	Hex verticillata				INR 			Spirodela polyrhiza




F.	ADDITIONAL NOTES:

	





   FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                       MARSH SURVEYS
   A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION

       1. Survey site name:   A06r-U5-"NF-                  2. Site name:    A I@U-
       3. Source Code:                4. Surveyors:    C.              S
       5. Date:                    6. USGS Quad:                        7. Quadcode:
                Igi @z 2- -13,             -TA'ILOVA                    ccr-1        3 qO -7 5-ï¿½@ V0 7 5 55-
       8. state:      9. County:                 10. Town:      wx- -pg-/-4 /,j
                -I>E-             /1-1 E u,,.> C-4
       ll. Directions:
                      gOuTz-                                       WKA@c- ro&ct
        C,,rt-c@ -ry\.a@e
       +0 b 6 ck5e
                                 a     R.;T-. .4 -2-0    -1@r     -&njC('5 (OyyLe,@


   B. TOPOGRAPHY


       12. Reconnaisance Diagram:













   C. VEGETATION/HABITAT
       observation Point:             Observation Point:      .20A    Observation Point:
       Community name:                Community name:                  Community name:
       FP,;964 -D5KkKISH                                                                C(NE/POAD
       Soil comments:                 Soil comments:                   Soil comments:

       S,P,TUgAJE,D->
                                        AwgA-yx-c) I ti U N ",M-Z)          j^UNt@xTEI>

       Dominant species               Dominant species:                Dominant species:
       Tree/shrub:                    Tree/Shrub:                      Tree/Shrub:





       Herb:                          Herb:                            Herb:
                                          -0                             &NKocVxkC.,a,- Lvdw;j i 6.
         \jiTinira.   mbschev-4,os                                         waiteri         @6 i Lkz--'rr-f _,>

       Comments:                      comments:                        Comments:
                                                                         -TKjs poirok- CS    Srr,*-LL
                                                                          SkvALL,,@ p"/   co"re-
                                                                              ad, i a cx-v@ 4,1 uL


            Y"@ dzy" n &-r;:;Ir-






   D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy ana
           indicate precise location of observation points)











   E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES (by strata and w/cover values: [estimate percent cover
            values]

	Species			Ob #	Ob #	Ob#		Species		Ob #	Ob #	Ob #		Species			Ob #	Ob #	Ob #
					19	20A	20B					19	20A	20B						19	20A	20B	

	Acorus calamus					Impaticus capensis					Thalictrum pubescens		
	Alisma subcordatum				Iris pscudacorus			INF			Thelypteris palustris
	Amaranthus cannabinus				Iris versicolor						Toxicodendron rad.
	Amorpha frutescens				Juncus acuminstus						Triad. virginicum
	Apios americana					Juncus canadensis						Typha angustifolia
	Aslepias incarnata				Juncus effusus		FRE				T. x glauca	
	Aster puniceus					Leersia oryzoides		ABUN	ABUN	COM		T. latifolia		FRE	FRE	FRE			
	Aster sp.						Lemna minor							Vaccinium corymb.
	Bidens bidentoides				Lilacopsis chinensis		FRE			Viburnum recogn.
	Bidens connata					Lilium superbum						Viola sp.
	Bidens frondosa					Lobelia cardinalis					Wolffia brazilieosis
	Bidens lacvis					Ludwigis palustris	COM	ABUN	ABUN		Zizania aquatica	
	Bidens polylepis					Ludwigis peploides
	Carex stricta					Lycopus sp.							OTHER
	Carex sp.						Lysimachia terrestris
	Cephalanthus occidentalia			Lythrum salicaria
	Cerstophyllum demersum				Nuphar lutea		COM	FRE
	Cicuta maculata					Osmunda cinnamomea
	Cinna arundinacca					Oxypolis rigidior
	Clethra sinifolia					Panicum virgatum			INF
	Cornus amomum					Panicum sp.
	Cornus recemosa					Peltandra virginica	ABUN	COM	COM
	Cryptotacnia canadensis				Phalaris arundinacca
	Cuscuta sp.						Phragmites australis	COM	DOM
	Cyperus odoratus					Pluchea odorats
	Cyperus engelmannii				Polygonum arifolium
	Cyperus erythorhizos				P. tapathifolium		INF
	Cyperus esculentus				P. punctatum
	Cyperus sp.					INF	P. sagittatum	
	Decodon verticillatus				Pontederia cordata		FRE	FRE
	Echinochloa crusgalli				Ptilimnium capillac
	Echinochloa walteri		COM	ABON	Riccia fluitans		INF
	Elchocharis obtusa				Rosa palustris
	Elcocharis palustris				R. multiflora	
	Elchocharis parvula				Rumex verticill		ABUN	ABUN	COM	
	Elchoaris tenuis					Sagittaria calycina
	Erechtites hicracifolia				S. latifolia
	Eupatorium sp.					Salix nigra
	Euthamia sp.					Samolus parvulus
	Fraxinus pensylvanica				Scirpus cyperinus				FRE
	Glyceria sp.					S. tabernaemontanii		FRE	COM
	Heteranthera reniformis				S. pungens
	Hibiscus mosheutos	ABUN 	COM	COM	S. robustus
	Humulus japonicus					Sium suave	
	Hydrocotyle americana				Sparganium eurycarp.
	flex opaca						Spartina alterniflora
	flex verticillata					S. cynosuroides
								Spirodela polyrhiza

	F. ADDITIONAL NOTES:
	
	

          


   FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                               MARSH SURVEYS
   A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION
        1. Survey site name:                                      2. site   name: hg@c4    (DE
        3. Source Code:  FqSco,^420        4. Surveyors:     C. W                 L- 1 P4 V-
        5. Date:                      6. USGS Quad:                             7. Quadcode:
                                                -wit.6gA. -Ps Ribcf-r- IDELA-Q349f- c(TS4     3 qO 7 5-q@-, NO 7 5 55-
        8. state: -J>E-   9.  County: NZL@--> C-&5,ME- 10. Town: ' -PC. VZ7- --PE /14 N
        11. Directions:
                                                                           WKj--Yc- ro&c( Cy-c)NS-C&         (A S-h,-R-
         C,-Y-t-c@ -revaee- is a        bo6i la,--c-k- - C,,&-e- L-,ms-t- cr-                    Yk- (f
         +0 briGkDc- cy-t@5if,       0      R-;T- -4 20 C                       '5


   B. TOPOGRAPHY


        12.*Reconnaisance Diagram:












    C. VEGETATION/HABITAT


        Observation Point:                 observation Point:                 Observation Point:
                        . .   - . -2-1                                                                   .23
        Community name:                    Community name:                    Community name:
        FREZ0 --)' 11P-A-CY-1.5ti                                                      bPwY@wt Sft"LJNF--
        Soil comments:                     Soil comments:                     Soil comments:

        S#Tu ?-A49D    /q V                   6 hT-u 9- h- T-F--@                5ATUC-k4so ---> wquKb.@

        Dominant species                   Dominant species:                  Dominant species:
        Tree/Shrub:                        Tree/Shrub:                        Tree/Shrub:

          N;bWrt\LAM


        Herb:                              Herb:                              Herb:
        T%ha          @A ib is CUS           e6xincy-h 106. j1@,.jq0r%UVy%      Eck@1nachic>a>

        Comments:                          Comments:                          Comments:
         06" - a ftaoruwr .
                                            -This obs. P6, r",* WZ6& 2@:t-
                                            i K.O.     @f                  -
                                            -p.,SL Oyea wajs dov.;r\adXd
                                                  Qy6Ty,@r\eJec
                                                                                      1>




D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and
   indicate precise location of observation points)








E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES [by strata and w/cover values:  [estimate percent cover
   values]

	Species				OB#	OB#	OB#	Species			OB#	OB#	OB#	Species			OB#	OB#	OB#
						21	22	23					21	22	23					21	22	23
	Acorus calamus						Impatiecens capensis				Thalictrum pubescens
	Alisma subcordatum					Iris pscudacorus					Thelypteris palustris
	Amaranthus cannabinus					Iris versicolor					Toxicodendron rad.
	Ambrosia urifida						Juncus acuminatus					Triad. virginicum
	Amorpha frutescens					Juncus canadensis					Typha angustifolia
	Amorpha americana						Juncus effusus					T. x glauca
	Aslepias incarnata					Leersia oryzoidea		ABUN		ABUN	T. latifolia		ABUN	FRE	COM
	Aster puniceus						Leersia virginica					Vaccinium corymb.
	Aster sp.							Lemna minor						Viburnum recogn.		ABUN		ABUN
	Bidens bidentoides					Lilacopsis chinensis				Viola sp.
	Bidens connata						Lilium superbum					Wolffia braziliensis
	Bidens coronata						Lobelia cardinalis				Zizania aquatica
	Bidens frondosa						Ludwigia palustris	ABUN		ABUN
	Bidens sp.							Ludwigia peploides				OTHER
	Bidens polylepis						Lycopus sp.						Rhus copalina		COM
	Carex stricta						Lysimachia terrestris				Setaria				INF
	Carex sp.					INF		Lythrum salicaria					Diospyros virginiana			ABUN
	Cephalanthus occidentalis				Nuphar lutea					Baccharis holimifolia			INF
	Ceratiphyllum demersum					Osmunda cinnamomea
	Cicuta maculata						Oxypolis rigidior
	Cinna arundinacea						Panicum virgatum				FRE
	Clethra alnifolis						Panicum dichotomoflorum			COM
	Cornus amomum						Peltandra virginica				COM
	Cornus racemosa						Phalaris arundinacea
	Cryptotaenia canadensis					Phragmites australis	FRE		INF
	Cuscuta sp.							Pluchea odorats
	Cyperus odoratus						Polygonum arifolium			ABUN
	Cyperus erythrorhizos					P. lapathifolium		FRE
	Cyperus esculentus					P. punctatum
	Cyperus sp.							P. sagitatum
	Decodon verticillstus					Pontederia cordata
	Echinochloa crusgalli					Pulimnium capillac.
	Echinochloa walteri		COM	ABUN	ABUN	Riccia fluitans
	Eleocharis obtusa						Rosa fluitans
	Eleocharis palustris					Rosa palustris
	Eleocharis parvula					R. multiflora
	Eleocharis tenuis						Rumex verticill.		ABON
	Erechtites hieracifolia			INF		Sagittaria calycina
	Eupatorium sp.						S. latifolia
	Euthamia sp.						Salix nigra
	Fraxinus pensylvanica					Samolus parvutus
	Glyceria sp.						Scirpus cyperinus
	Heteranthera reniformis					S. Taberraemontanii	INF
	Hibiscus moscheutos		ABUN	FRE	FRE	S. pungens
	Humulus japonicus						S. robustus
	Hydrocotyle americana					Sium suave
	Hex opaca							Sparganium eurycarp.
	Hex verticillata						Spartina alterniflora
									S. cynosuroides
									Spirodela polyrhiza

F.	ADDITIONAL NOTES:
	



    FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                        MARSH SURVEYS
    A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION

       1. Survey site name:   A06rU.S-T-INE 'fREE-r--        2. Site name:
       3. Source Code:                 4. Surveyors:

       5. Date:                     6. USGS Quad:                         7. Quadcode:
                        5                   74'ye-o r-'S 1-@ 9- 11>(Cf- /D EL,4-W11A f- cc T-,j -70 -7 5-4Z 370 7 5 55-
       8. state:       9. County:                 10. Town:
                 IDE-  -           Nt".>
       11. Directions.
                       ",ITP--                                       WKac. ro&c(                    (A   R-
         C,-rve,@ -rna@e-                                          t,@s-@- o-,  A-CIIJ Lt S4i
        +0 by-id5e Cfv-.3jr,      0                          v,         a,s             a, d


    B. TOPOGRAPHY


       12. Reconnaisance Diagram:













    C. VEGETATION/HABITAT
       observation Point:      2-A     Observation Point:       2-5     Observation Point:
       Community name:                 Community name:                  Community name:
       FP,z,&4           SWoRzL-4,N&

       Soil comments:                  Soil comments:                   Soil comments:

       SATL)QA-'rW ---> )A 0 ND-4-@     S4T.-,)rLATSD--> IAUN-b-+TE2@>
       Dominant species                Dominant species:                Dominant species:
       Tree/Shrub:                     Tree/Shrub:                      Tree/Shrub:
                     ce, co) Yv4u vv,     q          Q 109rKh ry-\

       Herb:                           Herb:                            Herb:

           L-ecy-5i6                                     wa@4cTj


       Comments:                       Comments:                        Comments:


D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and indicate precise location of observation points)



E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES (by strata and w/cover values: (estimate percent cover values)


Column (1)

Species				Ob #24	Ob #25	Ob#			

Acorus calamus
Alisma subcordatum
Amaranthus cannabinus
Ambrosia trifida
Amorpha frutescens
Apios americana
Aslepias incarnata
Aster puniceus
Aster sp.
Bidens bidentoides
Bidens connata
Bidens coronata
Bidens frondosa
Bidens laevis
Bidens polylepis
Carex stricta
Carex sp.
Cephalanthus accidentalis
Ceratophyllum demersum
Cicuta maculata
Cinna arundinacca
Clethra alnifolia
Cornus amomum
Cornus racemosa
Cryptotaenia canadensis
Cuscuta sp.
Cypertus odoratus
Cypertus engelmannii
Cypertus erythrorhizos
Cypertus esculentus
Decodon verticillatus
Echinochloa crusgalli
Echinochloa walteri		COM		ABUN
Eleocharis obtusa
Eleocharis palustris
Eleocharis parvula
Eleocharis tenuis
Erechlites hjeracifolia
Eupatorium sp.
Euthamia sp.
Fraxinus pensylvanica
Glyceria sp.
Heteranthera reniformis
Hibiscus moscheutos		FRE		FRE
Humulus japonieus
Hydrocotyle americana
Ilex opaca
Ilex verticillata


Column (2)

Species				Ob #24	Ob #25	Ob #

Impatiens capensis
Iris pseudacorus
Iris versicolor
Juncus acuminatus
Juncus canadensis
Juncus effusus
Leersia oryzoides			ABUN		COM
Leersia virginica
Lemna minor						COM
Lilaeopsis chinensis
Lilium superbum
Lobelia cardinalis
Ludwigia palustris		COM		COM
Ludwugia peploides
Lycopus sp.
Lysimachia terrestria
Lythrum salicaria
Nuphar lutes
Osmunda cinnamomes
Oxypolis rigidior
Panicum virgatum
Panicum sp.
Peltandra virginica
Phalaris arundinacca
Phragmites australis
Pluchea odorata
Polygonun sp.			INF
P. hydropiperoides
P. punctatum
P. sagittatum
Pontederia cordata
Ptilimnium capillac.
Riccia fluitans
Rosa palustris
R. multiflora
Rumex verticill.			COM		FRE
Sagittaria calycina
S. latifolia
Salix nigra
Samolus parvulus
Scirpus cyperinus
S. tabernae montama				INF
S. pungens
S. robustus
Sium suave
Sparganium eurycarp.
Spartina alterniflora
S. cynosuroides
Spirodela polyrhiza


Column (3)

Species				Ob #24	Ob #25	Ob #

Thalictrum pubescens
Thelypteris palustris
Toxicodendroa rad.
Triad. virginicum
Typha angustifolia
T. x glauca
T. latifolia					INF
Vaccinium corymb.
Viburnum recogn.			COM		ABUN
Viola sp.
Wolffia braziliensis
Zizania aquatica

OTHER
Baccharis halimifolia		FRE
Diospyras virginiana		COM
Rhus copalina			COM

F. ADDITIONAL NOTES:



         FORM 1: RECONNAISANCE / DELAWARE DRAFT 1993                                           MARSH SURVEYS
         A. IDENTIFIERS/LOCATION

             1. Survey site name:           Aoori@T-7r4f-                          2. Site      name:      A K FA
             3. Source Code:                           4. Surveyors:
                              Ff1w1tq SL                                 C.
             S. Date:                             6. USGS Quad:                                    7. Quadcode:
                           (:qo3q3                                   166ALOam (--try                             6?01.55-25-
             8. State:   -@D @-   9. County:     14w> C,45m f_       10. Town:      @0 V T- -@,e I-Vlq
             71. Directions:
                   ob%yNwrn       '@o               -5'art mchd                      -n@ W"knyl - -bo-@Gi *5 (0-f ykz",- [Zoo. A
             kyv.,- -pc5yt- --@t                        ciozz      4m -ry@




         B. TOPOGRAPHY


             12. Reconnaisance Diagram:






                                                                                  C,




                  UILWID
             F94Z                                                                                                                    tlhtz5


         C. VEGETATION/HABITAT
             Observation Point:                        Observation Point:                       Observation Point: 3
             Cgmmunity name:                           Community name:                           Community name: 7 T fdj-
                                                          ;rIZESH wArTZjZ MA-j2zj+                   NW-W -Do 2,W-AC-P&H MAV-1SH

             Sail comments:                            Soil comments:                            Soil comments:
             S#-yoXh4t.t@ -->                                                                       S4-TUf--A-TZb        JN U/V aA rEd)
                   MUCV-V SUQ@ST-PA-T-E-
             Dominant species                          Dominant species:                         Dominant species:
             Tree/Shrub:                               Tree/Shrub:                               Tree/Shrub:
                                                           ticer rU-1cr(Av-,,


             Herb:                                     Herb:                                     Herb:
               41815r-L)-f> / S,4cjrr,,@-91,4              :21ZA-NIA AqUA-TICAr                        tiliBISCL)_5 MOSCHEUTOS


             Comments:                                 Comments:                                 Comments:
                Spe,cjeS C-m-,pi4inS:)ryW16,-             -@h @s @Uvy@ S4-&-y' ak- 0,6               R)ff&w@  @3  -hNe cvcek- +z@6,d,
                                          Awo@               CL%L&         L"@s IRT,.& v-,cL      Auj  .M&rs.h J@,@ oe,.-#2- j-tKQ-
                                                                V--                                h-o-myw aLo,@S +Ke- LVtele-Suffm*d
             ovzeyvtct,@z@ 6@-fdwoj@.                    I "        M;C@-@ cr6                     5+&YdS 0-@ 4jb L@,,,
                                                           wDocLO a w ak@ - NCJC( L,-r-* 6
             14@5Kky elk\16-Hmas hbus-f-                                 LQUCU
                         \4f7,e-+0+,Dy@ Ocatr-
                                                                          yy\:sT. Nec@y6Lf           [b@w cU v-e, s+,/.
                         3h        Y\CTf ue\s +0           j@@ iY\ UY,0@ p@c- SV-a-r@ 6b            yvo4r- Vu Y.\                 sfucbk d
             06@4@w" rna%, L.,L-    cruk/ 01;z,          CN@
             W64C-r - L'@@                  -              . ...........




D. OBSERVATION POINTS LOCATIONS (in space below attach topo photocopy and indicate precise location of observation points)
                                                                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                                                                            

                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                  
E. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES (by strata and w/cover values: [estimate percent cover values]

Column (1)

Species					Ob #1		Ob #2		Ob #3

Acortus calamus
Alisma subcordatum
Amaranthus cannabinus
Ambrosia trifida
Amorpha frutescens
Apios americana
Aslepias incarnata var. pulchra	INF
Aster puniceus
Aster sp.
Bidens bidentoides
Bidens sp.									ABUN
Bidens coronata
Bidens frondosa						FRE
Bidens laevis
Bidens polylepis
Carex stricta
Carex sp.
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Ceratophyllum dermersum
Cicuta maculata
Cinna arundinacea
Clethra alnifolia
Cornus amomum
Cornus racemosa
Cryptotaenia canadensis
Cuscuta sp.
Cyperus odoratus
Cyperus engelmannii
Cyperus erythrorhizos
Cyperus esculentus
Cyperus sp.
Decodon Verticillatus
Echinochloa crusgalli
Echinochloa walteri 		FRE		COM
Eleocharis obtusa
Eleocharis palsutris
Eleocharis parvula
Eleocharis tenuis
Erechtites hieracifolia
Eupatorium sp.
Euthamia sp.
Fraxinus pensylvanica
Glyceria sp.
Heteranthera reniformis
Hibiscus moscheutos		ABUN		ABUN	
Humulus japonicus
Hydrocotyle americana
Ilex opaca
Ilex verticillata
Impatiens capensis
Iris pseudacorus
Iris versicolor							PRE
Juncus acumimatus
Juncus canadensis	
Juncus effusus
Leersia oryzoides						COM		ABUN
Leersia virginica		
Lemna minor				COM
Lilaeopsis chimensis
Lilium superbum
Lobelia cardinalis
Ludwigia palustris
Ludwigia peploides
Lycopus mericenus 		FRE
Lysimachia terrestris
Lythrum salicaria
Nuphar lutea
Osmunda cinnamomea
Oxypolis rigidior
Panicum virgatum
Panicum sp.
Peltandra virginica		FRE
Phalaris arundinacea
Phragmites australis		FRE		COM		ABUN
Pluchea odorata
Polygonum arifolium 		COM
P. hyfropiperoides
P. punctatum
P. sagittatum
Pontederia cordata
Ptilimnium capillac.
Riccia fluitans
Rosa palustris
R. multiflora
Rumex verticill.		FRE
Sagittaria calycina
S. latifolia 		COM		
Salix sp.					FRE
Samolus parvulus
Scirpus cyperinus
S. fluviatilis
S. pungens
S. robustus
Sium suave
Sparganium eurycarp.
Spartina alterniflora
S. cynosuroides
Spirodela polyrhiza
Thalictrum pubescens
Thelypteris palustris
Toxicodendron rad.
Triad. virginicum
Typha angustifolia
T. x glauca
T. latifolia								COM
Vaccinium corymb.
Viburnum sp.		COM
Viola sp.
Wolffia braziliensis
Zizania aquatica						ABUN

OTHER
Scutellania laterifolla		INF
Rhus copalina			FRE
Diosyros virgiana			FRE
Lonicero Japonica			FRE
Boehmeria cylindrica				FRE
Onodea sensibius					FRE
Acer rutorum						COM
Erigrostis hyemale							PRE
Microstegium Wimineum							COM




F. ADDITIONAL NOTES:
		



         Dept. of Natural Resources & Environmental Control
         Division of Fish & Wildlife
         RichardsonJRobbins Building
         P.O. Box 1401
         Dover, Delaware 19903

         Official Business, Penalty For Private Use $300.





    . . .........


                                                                                     14"






                                                                                                                            It

                                NORTHERN                                      DELAWARE






                                                                                                       X, 0


                                                                                                                't                       0'









                                                                            A&         k  A
                                                         lie






                                                                                              An



                                         40



                                                                                                            LA


                                                                              lot
                                                                                                                                          All.




              T
                   he Northern Delaware                               turn marshland into farmland.
                   Wetlands Rehabilitation                            Other areas were drained in
                   Program was established                            hopes of decreasing mosquito
              by the Department of Natural                            populations. And still other wet-
              Resources an    d Environmental                         lands were drained to support a
              Control to bring together civic                         growing population and its atten-
              and business leaders, scientists,                       dant industrial, residential, and
              resource managers, and property                         highway expansion.                                     Installing wood duck boxes isjust
              owners to develop strategies to                            Despite nearly three centuries                      one way to help attract wildlife back
              restore nearly 10,000 acres of                          of environmental abuse, however,                       to once-degraded marshes.
              wetlands-31 distinct sites-                             Delaware's northern marshes can
              along the Christina and Delaware                        be brought back to life.                               and islands-all can help attract
              rivers in New Castle County.                                                                                   wildlife to once-damaged marshes.
                                                                                   How Do You
                                                                                                                                Control Nuisance Plants.
              W                                                                RiESTORE A NIARSH?                            Phragmites is a tall, tasseled plant
                                                                                The Northern Delaware                        that can overtake a wetland, form-
                                                                             Wetlands Rehabilitation                         ing dense stands of little value to
                                                                             Program seeks to achieve                        wildlife. When interspersed
                                                                             the following goals.                            among other plants and open
                                                                                Improve Water Quality.                       water, however, Pbragmites
                                        Nf                                                                                   can provide good habitat.
                                                                             One key to restoring most
                                                                                                                             Thus, the goal is to control
                                                                  7"r.'      degraded marshes is to re-
                                                                             establish their hydrology-                      rather than eradicate this
                                                                             that is, daily tidal exchange                   plant. The current practice
                                               ,91"
                                                                             between marsh and river.                        is to spray Phragmites with
                                                                             Water control structures can                    herbicides in late summer,
              Nearly 10, 000 acres of tidalfresbwater marshes in             be installed, permitting the                    followed by the controlled
              New Castle County are targetedfor restoration by the
              Northern Delaware Wetlands -Rehabilitation Program.            tides to flush nutrients and                    burning of dead, standing
                                                                             aquatic organisms into and                      canes during winter.
                 These marshes once contained                         out of the marsh as well as in-                           Control Mosquitoes. Histori-
              some of the state's richest water-                      crease the volume of water that                        cally, wetlands were drained
              fowl populations and served as                          can be cleansed by the wetland.                        as a mosquito control mea-
              important nursery grounds and                              Another key is controlling the                      sure. However, removing the
              breeding habitat for a wide variety                     inputs of pollution to the marsh,                      water from the wetland sur-
              of fish and other wildlife.                             conveyed during storms, through                        face creates a prime egg-
                 They also helped filter pollu-                       implementation of non-point                            laying site for floodwater
              tants and sediments out of river                        source control plans.                                  mosquito species. Heavy
              water and provided a buffer zone                           Increase Wildlife Populations.                      rains or malfunctioning tide
              during storms, protecting proper-                       Constructing duck and songbird                         gates can then flood the
              ties from flooding.                                     boxes, establishing preferred food                     marsh, permitting mosquito
                 The marshes that are the focus                       and cover plants, adjusting water                      eggs to hatch and the larvae
              of this recovery initiative have                        levels to accommodate the needs                        to develop, essentially pro-
              undergone a varied history of                           of aquatic mammals, water birds,                       moting mosquito breeding.
              change over the years: some                             and endangered species, and                               Several practices can help
              were drained by early Dutch and                         increasing the diversity of shallow-                   control mosquito populations
              Swedish settlers, who wanted to                         water habitats -ponds, ditches,                        in wetlands and decrease the




                                                                   Phragmites is a tall, tas-                                                                             Curr
                                                                   seled reed that can quickly                                                                            requi
                                                                   overtake a wetland, fo",n-
                                                                                                                                                   Ali






























































                                                                                                                                                                          tbep
                                                                   ing thick stands that are                                                                              durii
                                                                   relatively useless as wildlife                                                                         wbe),
                                                                   habitat. Controlling the                                                                               its wi
                                                                   spread of tbisplant is a                                                                               planj
                                                                      jor goal of marsh                                                                                   also i
                                                                   ma
                                                                   restoration.                                                                                           whic
                                                                                                                                                                          thep


use of insecticides: increase the		
abundance of mosquito-eating
fish and insect, increase the ac-
cess of these species to mosquito
breeding areas, and elminate
mosquito egg-laying sites.
	Control Flooding. Wetlands
help soak up water during heavy
rains.  Rehabilitation efforts focus
on installing new water control
structures or improving the effi-
ciency of existing ones to expe-
dite floodwater removal without
flooding adjacent properties.
	Reduce Shoreline Erosion. As
buffer strips between land an
sea, wetlands absorb wave action
and protect shoreline soils with
an extensive root network.  These
features can be enhanced by
revegetating exposed shoreline
or installing other forms of
erosion control, such as riprap.
	Improve Recreational & Edu-
cational Opporutunities.  Rehabili-
tation plans for many wetlands 
include installing nature trails
and greenways, observation 
towers, and canoe and boat
ramps.  Environmental curricula
will give school groups and 
the public the opportunity to
learn more about wetlands and
their values. 

WHAT WETLANDS	
ARE TARGETED FOR	
REGABILITATION?

Planning has begun for reha-
biliating four northern marshes:
Gambacorta and Broad Dyke
marshes in New Castle, Augustine
Marsh near Port Penn, and Old 
Wilmington Marsh.
	Gambacorta Marsh. This 41-
acre marsh, located within the
New Castle city limits, is owned
by the Trustees of New Castle
Common.  It is bordered on the
east by a recreational trail that
runs atop a dike, which isolates
the marsh from the Delaware

		
	WHY SHOULD WE RESTORE DELAWARE'S NORTHERN MARSHES?
That good is a marsh? To								Delaware, 38% of the state's
some folks, the word marsh								endangered species rely on wet			
is synonymous with "muck" and								lands for breeding, nesting, forag-
mosquitoes." But a marsh is								ing, or resting.  These species
worth much more than that....								range from barking tree frogs to
												bald eagles and bog turtles.
Like giant kidneys, marshes								
filter out nutrients, suspended							A marsh is like a big sponge
sediments, toxic substances,								during heavy rains, soaking
and other pollutants from local							up floodwater and then
waters thereby improving								slowly releasing it down-
water quality. 				  					 	river after peak storm flows 
						  						have subsided.
Coastal freshwater marshes sup-						
port the largest and most diverse	  Wetlands provide a host		Wetlands act as buffer strips
populations of birds and are		  of benefits, from clean-		between sea and mainland
vital habitats for ducks, geese,	  sing coastal waters of		absorbing wave action from
herons, egrets, and shorebirds.	  pollutants to providing		storms. and thereby reducing
Many other wildlife depend on		  vital wildlife habitat.		shoreline erosion.
wetlands, from deer to turtles.							
												Marshes provide a wealth of
The wetlands of the Delaware and 		shad, herring, catfish, 	recreational activities including
Christina rivers provide spawning		crabs, and perch.			birdwatching, boating, fishing,
nursery, and feeding site for eels,							wildlife photography, hunting,
						Many endangered species de-		hiking, and crabbing.
						pend on wetlands for survival. In

									
nt Phragmites control
es aerial spraying of	
ant with an herbicide
g the late summer
the plant is storing
uter reserves. As the
stores nuitrients, it
ikes in the herbicide, 
weakens and kills
ant.

The winter after Phragmites 
is sprayed with an herbicide, 
the dead, standing canes
are burned, freeing
areas for colonization
by plants more beneficial
to wildlife.







            River. However, the dike does                           water-out of the marsh. Occa-                              Augustine Creek Mars& This
            contain a water control structure.                      sional malfunctions, however,                           1,130-acre wetland south of Port
            on its other three sides, the marsh                     have caused flooding of adjacent                        Penn is bordered to the east by
            is surrounded by urban and com-                         properties. In addition, the one-
            mercial development.                                    way exchange of water has
                Part of the marsh was drained                       degraded the marsh and made it a
            and used as landfill for industrial                     potential breeding ground for
            waste. However, the waste has                           mosquitoes. Plant and animal di-
            been removed, and the landfill                          versity are down, and Pbragmites
            site has been capped.                                   has taken over parts of the marsh.
                Gambacorra Marsh is already                            A recent temporary water
            on the rebound. Pbragmites con-                         management plan allowing tidal                          Restoration effbils can b@lng back a di-
            trol efforts have cleared part of                       exchange, combined with a                               versity ofplants to afonnerly degraded
            the marsh, the addition of wildlife                     Pbragmites control program and                          mamb, providing attractive babitatfor
            habitat enhancement structures                          installation of wildlife enhance-                       waterfowl, turtles, and other wildlife.
            has attracted more waterfowl,                           ment strucrures, has restored much
            the water control structure has                         of the marsh's biodiversity. A de-                      Route 9 and surrounded by agricul-
                  been temporarily modified to                      sign for a new water control struc-                     tural lands. The wetland is owned
                  allow daily tidal exchange,                       ture also has been selected. It will                    by many different landowners
                  and a water management                            allow managers to continue to im-                       including the State and Delaware
                  plan has been implemented.                        prove tidal exchange between                            Wildlands Inc., a private nonprofit
                      Preliminary plans call for                    marsh and river, and release flood-                     conservation organization.
                  permanently modifying the                         waters rapidly during major storms.                        Migrating and wintering
                  existing water control struc-                        Preliminary plans call for add-                      waterfowl make extensive use
                  ture to allow for daily tidal                     ing more wildlife enhancement                           of the 912-acre tidal impound-
                  exchange, clearing clogged                        structures and open water habitat                       ment within this wetland as
                  waterways to increase open                        for mosquito- eating fish, continu-                     do migrating neotropical shore-
                  water habitat, continuing                         ing Phragmites control, and                             birds. Surrounding the impound-
                  Phragmites control, and en-                       building a trail, boardwalk, obser-                     ment are forested areas that are
                  hancing the recreational and                      vation tower, and canoe launch.                         critical habitat for many wildlife,
                  educational opportunities
                  presented by the walkway.
                      Broad Dyke Mars& Lo-
                  cated north of New Castle
                  and owned by the Trustees
                  of New Castle Common and
                  New Castle Immanuel Epis-
                  copal Church, this 210-acre
                  tidal freshwater marsh is
                  bordered on three sides by                                        41,@11*90'
                                                                                                                            44
                  housing developments and
                                                                                                                                                 A,@
                  separated from the Delaware
                  River by a dike containing a
                  water control structure,
                     This structure is designed                   Gambacorta Marsh in New Castle already is beginning to reboundfrom years of envi-
                  to allow a one-way flow of                      ronmental abuse.                                                                                             16



                                7bis technician is checking                                                                              Marsbesprovide a host of              ir
                                a water samplefor mosquito                                                                               environmental benefits,               71,
                                larvae. Years ago, many                                                                                  from filtering pollutants             ?I
                                New Castle County marshes                                                                                from the water to providing           M
                                were drained as a mosquito                                                                               wildlife habitat, but they            7e
                                control measure. But over                                                                                also offer us a wide range            U
                                time, these areas became less                                                                            of recreational opporruni-            7r,
                                efficient in removing rain-                                                                              ties, from canoeing and               ;0
                                water and essentiallypro-                                                                                fishing, to birdwatcbing              7i(
                                moted mosquito breeding.                           0!@@                                                  and other activities.                 ? I


BRINGING THE PAST TO LIFE IN DELAWARE'S MARSHES

Not long after their arrival in Delaware in the 1600s,Dutch and Swedish
settlers began to build dikes to drain the extensive freshwater tidal
marshes of the northern portion of the state. Today, some 300 years later,
a nearly continuous series of dikes
and tide gates extends from Wilming-
ton south along the lower Delaware
River to Port Penn, and west along the
Christina River to Churchman's Marsh.

	Despite this rigorous drainage sys-
tem, as recent as 40 years ago, many
of northern Delaware's tidal marshes
were still productive habitats, thick
with stands of wild rice, cattails, sweet 
flag, rushes, smart weed, and other
plants favored by birds, waterfowl, 
muskrats, and many other wildlife.

	Indeed, these marshes were full of
life. Aerial waterfowl censuses in
1950-51 registered from 705 to 1,516
waterfowl per square mile-dramati-
cally eclipsing the statewide average						Urbanization, coupled with drainage
of 155 waterfowl per square mile.  An						activities, destroyed or seriously damaged
aerial count on November 1, 1950, re-						many of Delaware's northern wetlands,
corded as many as 15,000 pintail							which once hoasted the largest waterfowl
ducks on the Newport marshes at one 						populations in the state.  The top photo
time.  And in 1957, the marsh areas							was taken of Broad Dyke Marsh, near
from the Christna Rvier to the C&D							New Castle, in the 1940's.  The bottom
Canal were estimated to produce							photo shows the same marsh in 1973.
about 20,000 muskrat hides each year.						With proper management techniques,						
												once-degrated marshes can be restored.
Eventually, however, increasing urbanization and constant drainage took
their toll on these marshes, rendering many areas unsuitable for wildlife.

												
	Can these marshes be saved?  A major restoration project at the 615-acre
Dragon Run Creek Impoundment, just northwest of Delaware City, is proving
that through water management and water-quality improvement, the past
can be brought to life again.  This site is now a diverse wetland with more
than 35 palnt and 200 bird species, an abundance of game fishes including
largemouth bass and chain pickerel, and a wide range of mammals such as 
beaver, otter, and mink.  Presently, Dragon Run Creek Impoundments is one
of the most important waterfowl areas in northern Delaware.

	




                                                                                                                                        HOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY   I
                                                                                                                                   i                                        ,
                                                                                                                                        3 6668 14111983 6 @













                                                                                                                                                                            I
                                                                                                                                                                           I
                                                                                                                                                                          I
                                                                                                                                                                        -1
                                                                                                                                                                        I
                                                                                                                                                                       I
                                                                                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                                                                                     I
                                                                                                                                                                   I
                                                                                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                                                                                I