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


                                                      FY 1992 FINAL PRODUCT Task 2.6
                                                               APES Report Printing









                  CONSERVATION PLANNING FOR THE
                    MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION
                             OF NATURAL AREAS
              IN THE ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE
                         STUDY AREA OF VIRGINIA




                                   FINAL REPORT.





                                    Submitted To:

                    Virginia Coastal Resource Management Program'
                        Department of Environmental Quality















                 Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
                      gatural Heritage Technical Report #94-9
                                      June, 1994
         QH
         541
         V8
         E65







          C-C-ONSERVATION PLANNING FOR THE MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION
                               OF NATURAL AREAS


                 IN THE ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE STUDY AREA


                                 OF VIRGINIA






                               Prepared by the
               Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
                         Division of Natural Heritage
                       1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
                              Richmond, VA 23219




                      Principle Investigator and Authors
                                Sandra Erdle-
                               Melissa Donoff
                                Caren Caljouw
                                 Larry Smith

                             Contributing Authors
                                Kennedy Clark
                                 Shepard Moon
                               Janit L. Potter






   V)

                                     wroF



        This project was funded,  in  part, by the Virginia Coastal
                                                    NA2707-01 of the
        Resources Management Program through Grant
                                  ibrid Administration-,. Of f ice of ocean
        National Oceanic and Atmosph
             coastal Resource Management,,  under the Coastal
        and                                                       Zone
                                  /491116







  --r   Management Act of 1972, as amended.




                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I


                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 ,v
                                                                                                                 I .

                                            Prope    or
                                   NOAA Coastal. rearVicMems
                                              Library
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 I










                Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
                           Division of Natural Heritage




        Thomas Smith - Division Director
        Patricia Jarrell - Executive Secretary
        Faye McKinney - Secretary/Receptionist
        Leslie Trew - Natural Heritage Program Manager
        Allen Belden - Field Botanist
        Bill Moorhead - Ecologist
        Gary Fleming - Field Ecologist
        Christopher Ludwig - Botanist
        Sarah Mabey - Migratory Songbird Research Specialist
        Thomas Rawinski - Vegetation Ecologist
        Steve Roble - Zoologist
        Chris Hobson - Field Zoologist
        Nancy van Alstine - Field Botanist
        Steven Carter-Lovejoy - Information Manager
        Sarah Holbrook   Data Specialist
        Megan Rollins   Data Specialist
        Harold Evans - Conservation Intern
        Caren Caljouw - Stewardship Coordinator
        Kennedy Clark - Stewardship Biologist
        Sandra Erdle - Conservation Planner
        Lawrence Smith - Natural Areas Program manager
        Melissa Donoff - Natural Area Protection Specialist
        Tom Stuart   Landscape Architect













                                            CONTENTS



          INTRODUCTION   ................................................          1
          Overview of the DCR - Division of Natural Heritage          ..........   3
          Review of Natural Areas Inventory       ...........................      6

          METHODS  .....................................................           7
          Collection of Information     ...................................        7
          Conservation Planning Principles       ............................      7
          Ecological Boundaries     .......................................        8
          Protection of Natural Areas      .................................     10
            Landowner Contact     .........................................      11
            Natural Area Registry     .....................................      12
            Natural Area Management Agreements       ....................    o... 12
            Open Space Easements    ....................    o ...... o.......... 13
            Natural Area Dedication     ........ o ..........................    13
            Natural Area Acquisition     .... o .................   o........... 13
          Stewardship Guidelines ....                      -:  ................. 13
                          Scenic, and                     s
          Recreational,                     cation 1 C n iderations..      ...... 15

                                                                                 17
          Natural Area Reports     ........................................      17
          Results From Landowner Contact Program        ..........  o.....  --.18
          Key To Natural Area Report Format      .......................     o... 20
          Blackwater River Macrosite     ............   o........ -   .......... 22
          Antioch Swamp Pine Barrens      .......................    o.......... 26
          Blackwater River - Below Rt. 603o       ...........................    30
          Blackwater River - Above 620      ................................     35
          South Zuni Sandhills    ....... o ................................     40
          Horse swamp Pine Barrens     ........ o ...........................    44
          Cat Ponds  ......................    oo-    ...o ........ o.........  -49
          Disputanta  ..... o.............................     o  .............. 55
          Northwest River Macrosite     ..... o.......  o...........  o ...... -60
          Northwest River - Smith Creek      ...............................     66
          Northwest River - Southwestern Marshes..        ..............   -  ... 74
          Northwest River - Upper Section       ........ o ....................  82

          LITERATURE CITED AND PERTINENT REFERENCES**.,o*..*...,.*****90


          APPENDICES
          A. Local Options for Conserving Natural Areas
          B. Landowner Contact Report
          C. Natural Area Registry Information Sheet
          D. Natural Area Registry Agreement













                                      INTRODUCTION



         In 1992, the Department of   Conservation and Recreation - Division
         of Natural Heritage was awarded a Coastal Resources Management
         Program grant to complete a conservation planning project for
         selected natural areas identified in the Albemarle-Pamlico
         Estuarine Study (APES) region in Virginia.       Matching funds were
         provided by the Virginia Department of Conservation and
         Recreation.     This report relates the methods, results, and
         conclusions from the       conservation planning effort for ten
         natural areas and two natural area macrosites of the Albemarle-
         Pamlico Estuarine Study (APES) region in Virginia.           The ten
         natural areas presented in this report comprise some of the most
         significant unprotected natural areas within APES region.           The
         purpose of the conservation planning project is to provide
         comprehensive information to guide the management and protection
         for these significant natural areas.

         The Albemarle-Pamlico region is located in the southeastern
         portion of Virginia and includes all or part of ten counties and
         three cities.    This region encompasses approximately 10 percent
         of the state's acreage and includes the Chowan and Dismal Swamp
         drainage basins, and portions of the Coastal Plain and Piedmont
         physiographic provinces.

         This conservation planning project follows a 1991-1993 natural
         areas inventory in the study area.       The Virginia Department of
         Conservation and Recreation - Division of Natural Heritage, was
         contracted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the
         Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program in 1991 and 1992 to
         conduct a natural areas inventory of the Albemarle-Pamlico
         Estuarine Study region in Virginia.       The goal of the inventory
         was to systematically identify the region's best remaining
         natural areas, wetlands and rare species sites.            Fifty-seven
         significant natural areas were documented in this study.           The
         final report for the natural areas inventory was completed in
         1993 (Rawinski and Fleming).

         Individual objectives for this conservation planning project
         include the development of natural area protection boundaries,
         natural    area   management    and   protection    strategies,    the
         implementation of a natural area landowner contact and education
         program, and site protection for these high priority natural
         areas.   The goal of the conservation planning project for the
         APES region is to provide comprehensive and refined information
         to guide the management and protection for the ten significant
         natural areas selected for the project.

         To complete this project, additional information on the natural
         heritage resources, threats, site management and protection
         needs, and ownership were collected for each natural area.
         Forty-three landowners were contacted by Department of









         Conservation and Recreation staf f in an ef f ort to educate them
         about the ecological significance of their land and to discuss
         natural area management and protection needs.

         By combining the new data with existing knowledge from the
         inventory project, the following information was provided for each
         of the ten natural areas through this project:

              - refined conservation planning boundaries and
              biodiversity ranks for the ten state - significant
              natural areas and two macrosites;

              - more detailed descriptions for the natural heritage
              resources and ecological significance of each site,
              expanded protection and stewardship recommendations for
              each natural area;

                further information on the current status and use of
              each site;

              -basic information regarding ownership and zoning of each
              natural area;

              - considerations for the recreational, scenic, and
              educational value of each site; and

              - information regarding options local governments can
              utilize to protect their natural areas.

         The purpose of this information is to facilitate better natural
         area protection and ecological management, well-informed planning,
         and wise land use decisions by natural resource agencies,
         conservation groups, and local governments. The information will
         help guide the local decision makers in their         endeavors to
         actively protect the natural diversity of their localities. The
         report can be f urther utilized to increase awareness of local
         officials and residents of regional biodiversity issues, guide
         environmental review of projects which may affect the natural
         areas, and to assist local conservation organizations in their land
         conservation and environmental education efforts.

         The involvement of the Virginia Department of Conservation and
         Recreation in the conservation of these natural areas does not
         end with the submission of this final report. The Department is
         committed to providing assistance and support to local
         governments, developers, consultants, conservation organizations,
         businesses, and private citizens concerned with the preservation
         of biodiversity in the remaining natural areas of the APES region.
         Additional meetings will occur with natural area owners here to
         further the site protection and management objectives.



                                         2











         OVERVIEW OF THE DCR - DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

         The Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act of 1989 (section 10.1-209
         et secr., Code of Virginia) directs the Virginia Department of
         Conservation and Recreation to "preserve the natural diversity of
         biological resources of the Commonwealth. is      The  Act further
         establishes the Virginia Natural Heritage Program and  requires the
         Department to develop a natural heritage plan, produce an inventory
         of the Commonwealth's natural heritage resources, maintain a
         natural heritage data bank of inventory data, and provide for the
         protection and stewardship of natural areas.     The Department of
         Conservation and Recreation - Division of Natural Heritage fulfills
         this mandate.   The DCR - Division of Natural Heritage is the
         Commonwealth's principal collector and manager of information on
         natural heritage resources and performs a variety of protection and
         stewardship tasks for priority natural areas and natural heritage
         resources throughout the state.    Natural heritage resources are
         defined as "the habitat of rare, threatened, or endangered plant
         and animal species, rare or state significant natural communities
         or geologic sites, and similar features of scientific interest"
         (section 10.1-209, Code of Virginia).   The Virginia Natural Area
         Preserves Act defines natural area as "any area of land, water, or
         both ... which is important in preserving rare or vanishing flora,
         fauna, native ecological systems, geologic, natural historical,
         scenic, or similar features-of the Commonwealth" (section 10.1-
         209, Code of Virginia).

         The Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act defines natural areas as
         "any area of land, water, or both ... which is important in
         preserving rare or vanishing flora, fauna, native ecological
         systems, geological, natural historical, scenic, or other similar
         feature ... of the Commonwealth"    (section 10.1-209,    Code of
         Virginia). Natural heritage resources are defined as "the habitat
         of rare, threatened, or endangered plant and animal species, rare
         or state significant natural communities or geologic sites, and
         similar features of scientific interest" (section 10.1-209, Code of
         Virginia). The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
         administers the Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act through its
         Division of Natural Heritage.

         Each natural heritage resource is assigned a rank that indicates
         its relative rarity on a five-point scale (1 = extremely rare, 5 =
         common) or otherwise indicates the status of the species with
         letters (gg, X = apparently extirpated). Table I defines each rank
         in detail. Each natural heritage resource receives two ranks. One
         rank indicates the resource's rarity throughout its entire range
         (the global or "G" rank) and the other indicates the resource's
         rarity within Virginia (the state or "S" rank).       For example,
         mountain camellia is ranked as G4/S2 indicating the species is
         uncommon throughout its range and very rare in Virginia.

         The primary criterion for ranking natural heritage resources is the

                                          3










        number of occurrences, that is the number of known distinct
        locations containing that resource. Also of great importance to
        the ranking process is the number of individuals at each location
        or, for highly mobile organisms, the total number of individuals.
        Other considerations include the condition of the occurrences, the
        number of protected occurrences, and threats. Although all species
        protected under state or federal endangered species laws are rare,
        not all rare species are listed as endangered or threatened.
        Natural heritage rarity ranks should not be interpreted as legal
        designations, but as indices of known biological rarity.

        In addition to ranking each natural heritage resource in terms of
        rarity, Department of Conservation and Recreation scientists also
        rank each location or occurrence of natural heritage resources in
        Virginia on a four-point scale (A = excellent, D = poor), so that
        protection efforts can be aimed not only at the rarest natural
        heritage resources, but at the best examples of each. In the case
        of species, an occurrence of a natural heritage resource is ranked
        according to its quality (size and vigor of population, etc.),
        condition (natural quality of habitat, etc.), viability (the
        likelihood of long-term survival of resource), and defensibility
        (level of difficulty of protecting the resource).        Given the
        intimate relationship between a natural community and its
        environment, occurrences of rare or exemplary natural communities
        are ranked in terms of their quality and size.



























                                         4













               TABLE 1 - DEFINITION OF NATURAL HERITAGE RARITY RANKS

         State rarity ranks are def ined below; global rarity ranks are
         similar, but  refer to a species rarity throughout its entire
         range. State  and global ranks are denoted, respectively, with an
         "S" and a "G" followed by a character.    Note that GA and GN are
         not used and GX means extinct.        These ranks should not be
         interpreted as legal designations.


         S1   extremely rare; usually five or fewer occurrences in the state
              or may be few remaining individuals; often very vulnerable to
              extirpation;

         S2   very rare; usually between five and twenty occurrences or with
              many individuals in fewer occurrences, often susceptible to
              becoming extirpated;

         S3   rare to uncommon; usually between twenty and one hundred
              occurrences; may have fewer occurrences, but with many large
              number of individuals in some populations; may be vulnerable
              to large-scale disturbances;

         S4   uncommon to common; usually more than one hundred occurrences,
              but may be fewer occurrences with many large populations; may
              be restricted to only a portion of the state; not usually
              vulnerable to immediate threats;

         S5   very common; demonstrably secure under present conditions;

         SA   accidental in the state;

         SH   historically known from the state, but not verified for an
              extended period (usually fifteen or more years); this rank is
              used primarily when inventory has been attempted recently;

         SN   regularly occurring migrants, transients, or non-breeding
              seasonal residents; usually no specific site can be identified
              with its range in the state; note that congregation and
              staging areas are monitored separately;

         SU   status uncertain; often because of low search effort or
              cryptic nature of the resource;

         Sx   apparently extirpated from the state





                                          5










        one of the many ways that the DCR - Division of Natural Heritage
        uses the ranks of natural heritage resources and their locations is
        to assess the biodiversity significance of natural areas, which may
        include only one natural heritage resource or may harbor many.
        Based upon the ranks, each site is assigned a biodiversity (or "B")
        rank on the following five-point scale:

              Bl   outstand "n significance, only known site for a natural
                   heritage resource or an excellent occurrence of a
                   Gl species;

              B2   very high sicmificance, the best example of any natural
                   community type, a good occurrence of a G1 species, or an
                   excellent occurrence of a G2 or G3 species;

              B3   high sicmificance, excellent example of any natural
                   community type, a good occurrence of a G3 species;

              B4   moderate siMificance, a good example of a rare natural
                   community type, a fair occurrence of a G3 species, an
                   excellent or good occurrence of a Sl or S2 species;

              B5   general sicmificance, fair to poor occurrence of a rare
                   natural community, an S1 species, or S2 species, an
                   excellent or good occurrence of a S3 species.

        Natural areas which harbor many natural heritage resources may have
        their B rank upgraded to a level higher than that which would be
        indicated by the presence of any one of the resources.           For
        example, a site containing good occurrences of four different G3
        species would be ranked B2, rather than B3.

        REVIEW OF NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY

        The goal of the Albemarle-Pamlico natural areas inventory conducted
        from 1991 to 1992 was to systematically identify the best remaining
        natural areas of the region.      The natural areas inventory was
        conducted in six steps:

        1)   review aerial photographs,
        2)   gather existing information,
        3)   conduct aerial reconnaissance of potential natural areas,
        4)   perform an initial ground survey,
        5)   complete a thorough biological survey of each potential
             natural area, and;
        6)   compile the results and prepare a final report.

        A total of fifty-seven ecologically significant natural areas were
        documented from the region. The sites were prioritized according
        to their biological significance, described in detail, and mapped.


                                          6









         Further information regarding the inventory project can be found in
         An Inventory for Southeast Vigginia Is -Critical Natural Areas,
         Exemplary Wetlands, and Endangered Species Habitats Natural
         Heritage Technical Report 93 - 13 (Rawinski and Fleming, 1993).


                                       METHODS


         COLLECTION OF INFORMATION

         For this conservation planning project, existing knowledge
         regarding the natural areas and new information relevant to their
         conservation and the natural heritage resources they support were
         collected and studied.    Recent aerial photography, soil surveys,
         field notes from the inventory project, scientific publications,
         and conservation literature were included in this review.
         Additionally, several scientific and conservation experts outside
         of the DCR - Division of Natural Heritage were consulted f or
         their specialized information or skills relating to conservation
         of the natural areas.

         Property ownership and zoning was researched f or each natural
         area f rom. county or city records.    Basic ownership and zoning
         information is provided in each natural area report presented in
         the results section.

         Each natural area was visited at least once during the data
         collection phase of this project.      During the visits, ef f orts
         were made to find the natural heritage resources originally
         documented by the inventory project, locate additional resources
         associated with the sites, assess the condition of the resources,
         determine threats to the resources, and establish what protection
         and stewardship measures are necessary to insure the long-term
         survival of the resources.



         CONSERVATION PLANNING PRINCIPLES

         Standard natural heritage conservation planning guidelines were
         used for this project.    The f irst step of conservation planning
         involved gathering of information relevant to the site including
         information on natural heritage resources, geology, hydrology,
         landscape features, economic and social factors of a site.         An
         ecological analysis of this information is conducted and provides
         the scientific foundation for the conservation planning process.
         In addition a stress analysis is conducted and provides
         information which will shape the protection and management
         recommendations included in the plan.     After these analyses are
         completed,   the   ecological   boundaries    are   determined    and
         landownership information is compiled. The ownership information
         allows for further refinement of the protection strategies.
         Stewardship strategies are best determined with an understanding

                                          7








         of ecological forces influencing a natural area and particular
         ecosystems. In developing management recommendation, the following
         categories are considered: ecological management, monitoring,
         research, inventory, and public use/facilities management.

         Additional information on these planning guidelines can be found in
         the Preserve Selection and Design Manual of The Nature Conservancy
         and in site conservation planning procedures outlined in reports of
         the DCR - Division of Natural Heritage.

         ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARIES

         A principle component of conservation planning f or any natural area
         is   the   conservation   planning,    or   ecological    boundaries.
         Preliminary conservation boundaries, such as those established in
         the APES natural areas inventory, are carefully refined into two
         ecological boundaries: primary and secondary. It should be noted
         here that these boundaries are delineated for planning purposes
         only and have no regulatory intent.

         The primary ecological boundary encompasses the natural heritage
         resources of the site and the secondary ecological boundary
         includes all areas intended to mitigate threats to the natural
         heritage resources and allow for proper ecological management. The
         area within the primary boundary should normally be restricted from
         disturbance of any kind, while some environmentally sensitive land
         uses are compatible with the conservation of the area between the
         primary and secondary boundaries.

         The primary ecological boundary simply includes all known
         occurrences of natural heritage resources at a site.           Because
         "natural heritage" resource is defined (in part) as the habitat of
         rare species, the primary ecological boundary encompasses the
         locations where rare species have been documented as well as the
         surrounding habitats in which they are likely to be found.         The
         conservation planner should be intimately familiar with the habitat
         requirements of the species in question and the habitats available
         in the natural area. Primary ecological boundaries around rare or
         exemplary natural communities delineate the extent of the
         communities.    This requires the planner to be knowledgeable
         regarding the ecological parameters defining the natural community
         type.    The primary ecological boundary does not include any
         "buffer" to separate the natural heritage resources from the
         effects of adjacent land (or water) uses.        Primary ecological
         boundaries may also include species movement corridors connecting
         two or more stations of natural heritage resources of the same type
         within a single natural area. Corridors are only included in the
         primary ecological boundary where they are determined to be
         essential habitat for the survival of the resources within the
         natural area.

         The secondary ecological boundary includes all lands and water

                                           8









         intended to mitigate natural and human threats to the natural
         heritage resources of the site and lands related to special
         management needs. The secondary ecological boundary is often used
         to indicate an area within which certain land (or water) uses may
         affect the viability of the natural heritage resources.
         Occasionally, secondary ecological boundaries are also used to
         designate areas for some types of ecological management or
         scientific research, such as areas for fire breaks for prescribed
         burning or wildfire control. Secondary ecological boundaries may
         also include species movement corridors. Unlike corridors within
         primary ecological boundaries, corridors designated by secondary
         ecological boundaries normally connect two or more natural areas
         containing similar resources, not similar habitats within a single
         natural area.

         The most common purpose of secondary ecological boundaries is to
         provide a buffer zone to the primary, or core, area. Buffer zones
         are areas of transition between natural heritage resources and
         surrounding land uses designed to protect the resources within the
         primary boundary from damage or degradation. Even the strongest
         and most complete protection of the core area containing natural
         heritage resources would be useless if surrounding land uses
         incompatible with the existence of the natural heritage resources
         were not attenuated. Buffer zones are generally the most effective
         and convenient way to protect natural heritage resources from
         surrounding incompatible land uses. The size and composition of a
         buffer zone varies depending upon the biology of the natural
         heritage resource and the disturbances to which it may be
         subjected. A buffer zone may be designed to protect the core area
         by maintaining surface and ground water quality and quantity,
         preventing alterations of ambient light, temperature, humidity, or
         wind conditions, or screening sensitive organisms from human
         activities and noise.     Buffer zones can also be designed to
         minimize soil erosion and to prevent the invasion of aggressive or
         "weedy" species.

         The design of effective secondary ecological boundaries requires
         that the planner be familiar with the biology and threats of the
         natural heritage resource and have a basic understanding of how
         ecosystems function. An understanding of the structure, function,
         and uses of the landscape and movement patterns of species upon the
         landscape is also essential.    For these reasons, site visits to
         targeted natural areas are mandatory before accurate ecological
         boundaries can be designed.

         The best and most current information is always used to guide the
         conservation planning decisions.       AS the knowledge of the
         biological, geological, hydrological,  social, and economic aspects
         of the natural area increases or changes, alterations or revisions
         in the ecological boundaries may be necessary to reflect the
         updated information.   In some cases, complete information is not
         available.   For example, the biology of some species is not

                                          9










        well-understood due to a lack of scientific research or sometimes
        abiotic (non-living) environmental factors, such as ground water
        flow patterns or soil composition, have not been determined for an
        area. In these cases, conservation planning decisions are based
        upon the available information on and knowledge extrapolated from
        similar species, natural communities, and ecosystems.

        The determination of compatible activities and uses within the
        primary and secondary ecological boundaries is dependent upon the
        biology of the natural heritage resources of the site and the
        ecology of the natural area. Land use standards are specific to
        each site and may vary even among sites that support similar
        natural heritage resources if other environmental factors are
        different.

        Secondary ecological b  'oundaries are not designed to protect the
        natural heritage resources from large scale environmental
        catastrophes such as global warming or acidic precipitation.
        Solutions to these broad problems must be addressed in similarly
        broad environmental education, policies, and regulations.

        Primary and secondary ecological boundaries shou        'ld not be
        interpreted as regulatory zones or acquisition boundaries, but as
        conservation tools to help guide the protection and stewardship of
        natural heritage resources.

        Ecological boundaries for each natural area are presented in the
        site accounts in the results and recommendations section.


        PROTECTION OF NATURAL AREAS

        Many natural area protection tools are available to local
        governments, conservation organizations, natural resource agencies,
        and private citizens.    Examples include acquisition, easements,
        natural area registry, and conservation zoning. Figure 1 depicts
        a conceptual model of land protection tools used by the Department
        of Conservation and Recreation.     Local governments have all of
        these protection tools available for their use to them plus several
        protection options unique to local governments.      A document to
        guide local governments in their efforts to secure protection of
        the natural areas within their jurisdictions appears in Appendix A.

        An important component of the APES conservation planning project
        was the task of contacting natural area landowners and seeking
        protection for these natural areas.

        Several protection options are available to ensure the conservation
        of natural heritage resources and the natural areas in which these
        resources occur.    The options are chosen to meet the individual
        needs of the particular area of land as well as the desires of the
        individual landowner.    A specific protection tool may be used
        individually or more than one may be used in conjunction with

                                         10









         another.   Some options encourage voluntary protection, without
         legal implications or long-term commitments; other options legally
         protect property for extended periods or permanently to ensure
         protection today as well as the future.

         LANDOWNER CONTACT

         One of the most simple, but crucial, tools for protecting natural
         areas is a landowner contact program.       Many natural areas are
         degraded simply due to lack of knowledge.          It is extremely
         important to inform the landowners that their property is
         ecologically signif icant.   It is very dif f icult f or someone to
         protect a resource if they are unaware that it exists.

         The purpose of this program is three-fold:

              1. to inform natural area owners that their land is of high
         ecological significance;

              2. to educate landowners about the natural heritage resources
         on their property, the value of protecting biological diversity,
         reasons for species or natural community rarity, and the threats,
         management, and conservation needs of their site; and,

              3. to establish a positive relationship with a landowner so
         that future contact and conservation strategies may be approached.

         Five steps are involved in the process of contacting landowners:
         conducting ownership research, preparing introductory letters,
         scheduling personal meetings, compiling site packages, and visiting
         the landowner.     Once the significant lands are determined,
         ownership information and boundary maps are collected from local
         courthouses. Next, an introductory letter is mailed that briefly
         explains our Department's purpose, why the owner's land is
         significant, and the request for a meeting in the near future.

         Approximately two weeks after mailing the letters, the landowners
         will be contacted by telephone to set a meeting date to discuss the
         natural area.    Site packages describing the natural' heritage
         resources will be given to the owners during the visit.           The
         contents of the packages include a Department of Conservation and
         Recreation brochure, a DCR - Division of Natural Heritage brochure,
         a fact sheet describing the natural area, a fact sheet or other
         information about the species within the natural areas, and a fact
         sheet describing Virginia's Registry of Natural Areas. In addition
         to supplying the owner with this information,      the location and
         features of their land will be pointed out using boundary maps.,
         topographic maps, and aerial photographs.

         General information about the landowners, their feelings towards
         @onservation, their future plans for the land, and other
         information learned during the visit will be recorded on a









         landowner contact report f orm af ter the visit (Appendix B) - Thank-
         you letters and other correspondences are mailed within a month
         after the meeting. It is extremely important to keep in touch with
         the owner after the initial contact is established.

         once a relationship is established with private or public
         landowners through landowner contact, stronger protection for
         natural areas such as registry, management agreements, easements or
         acquisitions may result.

         NATURAL AREA REGISTRY

         Virginia's Natural Area Registry is a protection tool which
         involves a voluntary commitment by the landowner to protect the
         site under his or her ownership. No legal agreement is signed and
         permanent natural area protection does not occur. The Natural Area
         Registry program encourages landowners of significant natural areas
         throughout Virginia to voluntarily protect the resources on their
         land to the best of their ability. Landowners who participate in
         the registry program agree to inform DCR of any potential threats
         to the resources or other changes, such as intent to sell the
         property.

         Aside from being rewarded with the pride of conserving one of the
         most significant natural areas in Virginia, the owner receives a
         plaque in recognition of the significance of their property and
         their effort in preserving it.      In addition, the landowner may
         receive management advice and assistance from professional natural
         area management staff, if they so desire.

         The Natural Area Registry is an option available to both public and
         private landowners and may be used alone or in conjunction with
         another protection tool, such as a management agreement.

         More specific information about the Virginia Natural Area Registry
         program is included in Appendix C and Appendix D.

         NATURAL AREA MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS

         A management agreement is an appropriate option for landowners who
         have been managing their land as conseirvation-minded stewards but
         have no desire to sell their property or encumber the land with an
         easement.   Such a landowner would like to continue to own and
         manage their property in a way which will protect the resources on
         their land. The management agreement is a legal agreement but it
         does not provide permanent protection for the land. If this option
         is chosen, the landowner and the Department of Conservation and
         Recreation will prepare agreement that - clearly states the
         management objectives, schedules, and responsibilities.          This
         agreement must be acceptable to both parties.      These agreements
         fulfill the conservation goals of the Department of Conservation
         and Recreation while meeting the individual needs of the landowner

                                          12











         as well.


         OPEN SPACE EASEMENTS

         An open space easement provides stronger natural area protection
         than the previously mentioned options.     An easement is a legal
         agreement recorded with the property deed  which restricts certain
         property rights in perpetuity.    This is  an excellent option for
         property owners who take pride in their land for its beauty,
         natural resources, family heritage, etc. and want to ensure that
         future generations will be able to enjoy the land in its natural
         condition. The landowner gives up a property right, such as the
         right to subdivide the land for development in order to achieve
         specific conservation goals, yet still enjoys many other property
         rights, such as the right to farm. This option is quite flexible in
         that, depending upon the landowners wishes, the easement may be
         strict to ensure no future land disturbance or it may place very
         limited restrictions.    Open space easements may reduce federal
         estate taxes and Virginia inheritance taxes, reduce assessment for
         real estate purposes, and entitle the landowner to a charitable
         deduction for state and federal income tax purposes.

         NATURAL AREA DEDICATION

         Natural Area Preserve Dedication the strongest protection tool
         available to natural areas. Dedication is a legal process whereby
         the landowner restricts future uses of a property for the purpose
         of preserving the land in its natural state.       Dedication of a
         property places it in the Virginia Natural Areas Preserve System.
         This protection option is available to private landowners, state
         agencies, or other public body (excluding federal).             With
         dedication, the private landowner retains ownership rights of the
         property as well as the right to sell or transfer the property.
         However, the landowner relinquishes the rights to use the land in
         ways which are inappropriate for the preservation goals for the
         property.   only lands of the highest ecological significance
         qualify for inclusion in Virginia Natural Area Preserve System. In
         addition to the satisfaction of preserving important natural
         heritage resources, the landowner also receives the same financial
         incentives as available for open space easements.

         NATURAL AREA ACQUISITION

         The most direct method for conservation of natural areas is
         acquisition of the property. Though, due to the limited amount of
         funds available and the expense of land, this option is only
         applicable to a small percentage of the most ecologically
         significant natural areas in Virginia.

         STEWARDSHIP GUIDELINES

         Natural area stewardship involves the administrat ion and management

                                          13









         of a natural area after it is protected to assure the long-term
         survival of the natural heritage resources it supports.        Basic
         stewardship recommendations are given for each natural area in the
         results and recommendations section.    The higher priority sites
         (Bl-B3) deserve comprehensive stewardship plans.
         @n important aspect of stewardship is determining compatible and
         incompatible land (and water) uses within the natural area. Which
         land uses are harmonious with the resources will depend upon the
         type of natural heritage resource, the ecosystem, and the type of
         land use being considered. Allowable land uses will therefore vary
         from site to site.     Certain forms of some land uses may be
         incompatible, while more environmentally sensitive methods of the
         same general land use type may be compatible.         For example,
         clearcutting of timber within a buffer zone delineated by the
         secondary ecological boundary of a given natural area may produce
         unacceptable effects to the natural heritage resources of the site,
         but selective cutting with strict environmental performance
         standards may be compatible. For some natural heritage resourcesf
         land uses may be only seasonally restricted. For example, timber
         harvest may not be compatible in the vicinity of a bird nesting
         colony during the nesting season, but can be conducted in the
         vicinity of the colony when nesting birds are not present.

         Ecological management is the most important component of    natural
         area stewardship. Ecological management includes all activities on
         a natural.area specifically intended to benefit, save, or maintain
         natural heritage resources.    Examples of ecological management
         include prescribed burning, removal or planting of vegetation for
         habitat restoration, problem species control, and restoration of
         natural processes.     Some natural heritage resources require
         intensive active management, while others require no or little
         active management.

         Probably the two most common ecological management strategies that
         will benefit natural areas and natural heritage resources in the
         APES region are restoring natural processes such as fire and
         controlling invasive species. Fire has played a major role in the
         ecology of many plant communities in the coastal plain of Virginia.
         many communities such as longleaf pine-turkey oak barrens,
         pocosins, and estuarine marshes require fire to stimulate flowering
         and seed production, enhance regeneration by exposing bare mineral
         soil, reduce shade and competition from woody overstory species,
         and release nutrients into the soil. Natural fires no longer sweep
         over vast expanses of Virginia's landscape and play the role they
         once did in maintaining these ecosystems. The reintroduction of
         fire as a prescribed management action is necessary. Ecological
         burning is intended to restore fire to its natural frequencies and
         time of year to simulate natural processes occurring in natural
         areas.

         Invasive species are plants or animals which directly or indirectly

                                         14









         threaten the viability of natural heritage resources or have the
         potential to do so.    Most invasive species are aliens.       Alien
         species are those whose natural range does not include the coastal
         plain of Virginia, but which were intentionally or unintentionally
         introduced to the region by humans.     Often these alien species
         become particularly invasive in disturbed areas.       Examples of
         invasive species include common reed, Japanese honeysuckle, purple
         loosestrife and feral pigs. Some native species can also threaten
         natural heritage resources, especially in urban areas where
         nature's delicate balance has been disrupted.          Beaver and
         white-tailed deer are examples of native species which can
         adversely affect natural heritage resources.

         Stewardship also includes biological monitoring activities.
         Biological monitoring involves the periodic quantitative study of
         natural heritage resources and their environment. The purpose of
         biological monitoring is to furnish long term scientific data, to
         provide warnings as to any declines or damage to natural heritage
         resources, and to determine possible causes of such events.
         Additionally, biological monitoring may document increases in rare
         species populations and recovery of disturbed ecosystems.
         Monitoring visits usually also include some analysis of the status
         of invasive species and environmental conditions. Whether or not
         and how often a natural heritage resource is monitored is
         determined by its priority, sensitivity, and threats.
         @tewardship should also address the need for additional biological
         inventory or scientific research. In many natural areas, the true
         status of the natural heritage resources is poorly known and the
         potential for additional natural heritage resources to be found has
         not been thoroughly examined. Additional biological inventory may
         be recommended for these situations. Some species, habitats, and
         natural communities are not well understood due to a lack of
         scientific research. Natural areas provide an excellent setting
         for field research which may not only increase the general
         knowledge  of the    natural heritage resources and sensitive
         ecosystems, but may also provide information directly pertinent to
         the site's conservation.

         RECREATIONAL, SCENIC, AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

         Natural areas have uses other than the preservation of
         biodiversity. Depending upon the size and situation of the site
         and the sensitivity of the natural heritage resources it contains,
         a natural area may also furnish recreational, visual, and
         educational resources.   Local governments can integrate natural
         areas into their comprehensive plans to improve the quality of life
         for residents and attract visitors.

         The natural areas identified in this region may offer a variety of
         recreational opportunities. Public access to some of these areas
         could encourage the awareness of the natural resources and promote

                                         15









        their protection.    Recreational opportunities may include nature
        observation, boating, canoeing, hiking, biking, and horseback
        riding. The natural areas may also contribute to greenspace either
        as designated greenways or open space.        Existing recreational
        facilities could be identified along with the natural areas to form
        an extensive greenways system in the APES region. The concept of
        incorporating the natural areas into local comprehensive, open
        space, and parks and recreation plans should be encouraged to
        provide various levels of recognition and protection for the
        valuable natural and biological resources.

        Natural areas often contribute to the scenic resources of an area.
        A preliminary visual assessment for each of the natural areas of
        the APES region should be conducted for the conservation and
        enhancement of scenic resources.      These natural areas have a
        significant visual character which is typical of the environment
        early European settlers encountered upon arriving on the continent.
        The preservation of scenic resources is important to capture these
        historical perspectives of the early colonists as well as enhance
        the present perceptions of the environment.

        The educational opportunities which the natural areas could offer
        are numerous.    The focus of environmental education on the APES
        natural areas could include levels ranging from public awareness to
        scientific research. There may be additional opportunities to form
        linkages for educational and interpretive facilities which would
        create an entire system of natural area educational opportunities
        within the region. A coalition of public education representatives
        as well as educators and research scientists from surrounding
        institutions could facilitate such a system of educational
        opportunities in the area.

        Preliminary recommendations regarding the recreational, scenic, and
        educational possibilities of each natural area are included in the
        site accounts. This information was provided by Janit Potter of
        the Department of Conservation and Recreation's Division of
        Planning and Recreation Resources.














                                         16














                                        RESULTS

         Information collection and site visits for this project began in
         October of 1992 and were completed in February of 1994.
         Ecological boundaries and conservation planning recommendations
         were formulated for the natural areas through February of 1994.

         The conservation planning boundaries and recommendations for
         protection and stewardship furnished in this document should not
         be   interpreted    as    acquisition    boundaries,     proclamation
         boundaries,   or   regulatory   land-use   zones.      Instead,    the
         conservation planning boundaries and recommendations should be
         considered tools to help steer wise land use planning on the
         complex economic, social, and ecological landscape at all levels
         of government and the private sector.

         The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation strongly
         urges the local governments to vigorously utilize all the
         conservation tools at their disposal to secure protection for
         their natural areas and provide for the long-term stewardship of
         the sites.     The Department of Conservation and Recreation's
         commitment to  natural areas conservation in the APES region does
         not end with the conclusion of this project. Project staff will
         continue to offer support to the local governments, developers,
         consultants, conservation organizations, and private citizens in
         the forms of environmental review, refined conservation planning,
         and active technical assistance with planning, protection, and
         stewardship of natural areas.

         NATURAL AREA REPORTS

         Each natural area report presented here includes information on
         the location, biodiversity rank, natural heritage resources,
         ecological boundaries, and surrounding land uses.          Each site
         report includes a map indicating the primary and secondary
         ecological boundaries and text providing justification of these
         boundaries. Further, a general description of each natural area,
         protection and stewardship recommendations, and recreational,
         scenic, and educational considerations are included in each
         natural area account.
         @rimary and secondary ecological boundaries should not be
         interpreted as regulatory zones or acquisition boundaries, but as
         conservation tools to help guide the protection and stewardship
         of natural heritage resources-

         Table 2 shows the format for the site accounts and explains the
         what data is presented in each field of information.



                                           17











         RESULTS FROM LANDOWNER CONTACT PROGRAM

         The purpose of the landowner contact program for the APES natural
         areas was threefold:

              1. to inform owners that their land is of high ecological
         significance;
              2. to educate owners about the natural heritage resources,
         their characteristics, and threats; and,
              3. to establish relationships with landowners so that
         additional contacts and stronger natural area protection strategies
         may be approached at a later date.

         During this project, the owners of significant natural areas in the
         Albemarle-Pamlico region were contacted. Landowners were contacted
         for eight natural areas in this region. These sites were Antioch
         Swamp Pine Barrens, Blackwater River--Below Rt. 603, Cat Ponds,
         Disputanta, Northwest River--Upper Section, Northwest River--Smith
         Creek, Northwest River --Southwestern Marshes, and South Zuni
         Sandhills. These sites are located in the counties of Surry,
         Sussex, Isle of Wight, and Prince George and the City of
         Chesapeake.

         Forty-three landowners with tracts at the eight natural areas
         mentioned above were contacted during the course of this project.
         Most of the natural area tracts (70%) were owned by private
         individuals.    The remaining tracts were either in corporate
         ownership or in an estate.

         The success rate of meeting with landowners after the initial
         contact letter or telephone call has been positive thus far. Only
         five landowners have declined the request to meet and discuss the
         natural area. Seven landowners have not been contacted since
         ?riginal introductory letter was mailed. This was due either to
         inadequate information locating the landowner or difficulty in
         reaching the owner at home.      Meetings have taken place with
         landowners of more than half of the natural area tracts thus far.
         Meetings have been scheduled with the remaining six landowners.

         Ninety percent of the landowners visited were interested in
         learning about the natural areas and the species and natural
         communities they support.   A majority of these landowners had a
         genuine interest in learning about the species, and were proud that
         such rarities existed on their property. Five of the landowners
         expressed an interest in strong natural area protection and
         management such as conservation easements, management agreements,
         and acquisition.   Seven landowners responded positively to the
         concept of placing their land on the natural area registry in the
         future.

         A few landowners were interested in learning about the significance
         of their property, yet not sure about possibility of future

                                         18









        protection for various reasons.     For example, one parcel is an
        estate controlled by nine family members and the likelihood of
        getting all the owners together and to agree to manage the area
        would be difficult. Another owner, the land manager of property
        under a trust fund, is interested in protection, but the property
        may not be under his management in next few years. Another parcel
        is deeded to heirs and the current owner is wary of imposing
        restrictions on the way the heirs may use the land in the future.
        Two of the owners seemed to have an indifferent attitude towards
        conservation. They listened to all of the information presented,
        but did not comment on it one way or the other.

        The five landowners who declined a visit from the DCR Natural Area
        Protection Specialist did so for various reasons.       One elderly
        landowner was interested in the information, but lives out of state
        and was concerned about traveling to Virginia to learn more.
        @nother owner viewed his property solely as a means of producing
        income from timber production and had no interest in learning
        anything else about the natural values of their property.         The
        remaining three landowners were quite antagonistic and defensive
        during telephone conversations. They obviously felt threatened,
        possibly in fear of possible land use restrictions due to presence
        of rare species or concern of being approached by a state agency.

        At the time this report was written, no landowners had placed their
        property on the Virginia Registry of Natural Areas. However, as
        mentioned previously, several landowners have expressed in interest
        in placing their land on the registry and it is expected that
        several landowners will do so in the future.      During the first
        personal meeting with a landowner, the registry program was not
        Tentioned unless the landowner showed a strong conservation
        interest or requested information on ways they could help conserve
        the species and communities of concern.      A few landowners felt
        pressured when asked if they were interested in placing their
        natural area on the registry. Rather than endanger the possibility
        of a productive relationship with a landowner in the future, the
        issue was not pursued during the first personal visit.














                                         19










         Table 2. Key To Natural Area Report Format


         LOCATION: the city or county and USGS 7.5' quadrangle in which
         the natural area occurs.

         BIODIVERSITY RANK: the overall (global) significance of the
         natural area in terms of the rarity of the natural heritage
         resources and the quality of their occurrences. These ranks are
         explained in detail in the introduction to this report.

         GENERAL DESCRIPTION: a brief narrative picture of the natural
         area. This section usually includes information on topography,
         general vegetation, wetlands and watercourses, soils, historic
         and existing land uses within the natural area, and land use
         surrounding the natural area.

         NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES: a synopsis of the natural heritage
         resources found in the natural area. Information given usually
         includes common and scientific names, taxonomic affiliation,
         global and state ranks, global and state range, a brief physical
         description, habitat requirements, threats and vulnerabilities,
         and occurrence data. For the protection of the resources,
         precise locations are not provided. Normally, natural
         communities are discussed first, then key species are discussed.

         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY: description and justification of
         the primary ecological boundary.

         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY: description and justification of
         the secondary ecological boundary.
         @RIMARY AND-SECONDARY ACREAGE: the total size of the natural area
         in acres. Acreage given in the site accounts has been approximated
         using a hand-operated planimeter.

         TRACTS:   the number of individual ownership tracts within the
         primary and secondary ecological boundaries.

         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:     a discussion of current land
         use and.general information regarding current zoning.

         MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations include compatible
         and incompatible land uses, need for further inventory or
         scientific research, ecological management needs, and biological
         monitoring needs.

         PRO TECTION RECOMMENDATIONS: existing and proposed protection of
         the natural area. Information furnished includes existing
         regulations that protect the natural area, existing legal
         protection to the land, and suggestions for protection tools

                                          20









        appropriate for the natural area.

        INFORMATION NEEDS: additional information needed to improve our
        ability to protect and manage each natural area.

        RECREATIONAL, SCENIC, AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS: existing and
        potential recreational opportunities; preliminary assessment of
        scenic value; suggestions for appropriate educational activities.
        These comments were provided by Janit Potter of the Department of
        Conservation and Recreation's Division of Planning and Recreation
        Resources.

        MAP: A ma  p of each natural area showing the primary and secondary
        ecological boundaries accompanies each natural area report. U.S.
        Geologic Survey 7.5 minute topographic maps are used as base maps
        with the ecological boundaries superimposed upon them. The scale
        is 1:24,000 (1 inch = 2000 feet).       A site map legend f or the
        ecological boundary symbols used on the maps is presented below.
        Although the most current revisions available are      used for base
        maps, many of the most recent developments are not     depicted upon
        them. Because of the missing information on many of the base maps
        and their relatively large scale, a small margin f or error may
        exist with m 'any of the ecological boundaries. Fine tuning of the
        boundaries can be accomplished through field survey as necessary.

        SITE MAP LEGEND:

        site (ecological) boundaries:

                                          Primary:

                                        Secondary:

        where Primary and Secondary Correspond:

                          Managed Area boundary:     0

        AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH:    A color infra-red aerial photograph of each
        natural area follows the site map. These photos were taken in the
        early 19801s. They have been included here to clearly illustrate
        land use, (forested, agricultural, residential, etc.), wetlands
        versus upland, and proximity of the natural area to other natural
        or developed lands.










                                          21













                             BLACKWATER RIVER MACROSITE


         Size: 25 miles (river corridor and floodplain)


         Location: Virginia, counties of Isle of Wight,
                   Southampton, Surry, Sussex


         overview:

         The Blackwater River,      part of the Chowan watershed in
         southeastern Virginia has its headwaters in Prince George County.
         It then winds through Surry, Sussex, Southampton and Isle of
         Wight Counties in Virginia, crosses the state line and joins the
         Nottoway River.   The Blackwater and Nottoway Rivers merge with
         the Meherrin River, and together they become the Chowan River,
         which ultimately empties into the Albemarle Sound in North
         Carolina.

         The Blackwater River is generally shallow with extensive swamps
         and a wide floodplain which supports a diverse spectrum of native
         flora and fauna.    This river has been recommended as a State
         Scenic River and there is a great deal of interest in pursuing
         this designation.   Currently, the Blackwater River is awaiting
         evaluation as a State Scenic River.

         The Blackwater River Macrosite stretches for 25 miles along the
         river channel and floodplain.    From Route 603 in Surry County,
         also called "Three Bridges" to the Route 603 bridge in Isle of
         Wight County, five conservation sites and a variety of natural
         heritage resources have been identified (see Table 1).      Two of
         the five sites include the river channel and associated swamp,
         and the remaining three sites are located on lands adjacent to
         the river.   Five rare fish species and three rare mussels are
         found in the river along this particular stretch, with one fish,
         the Blackbanded Sunfish, Enneacanthus chaetodon listed as state
         endangered.   The Blackwater Ecologic Preserve, a managed area
         owned by old Dominion University is contiguous with two of the
         latter conservation sites.      A joint conservation effort to
         protect this portion of the river and floodplain, as well'as the
         identified conservation sites would serve many rare species of
         plants and animals, and unique vegetative communities.

         The conservation sites that include the river channel have been
         identified as exemplary bottomland forests and are believed to be
         globally significant.     These two sites have several State-
         champion trees and cypress-tupelo swamps marked by 600 year old
         cypress trees.   Acquisition and landowner agreements have been

                                         22









         recommended, and begun for the lands associated with these two
         sites.

         The three sites located on lands adjacent to the Blackwater River
         support rare vegetative communities.       These communities are
         comprised of rare plant species which are fire-dependent and are
         consequently in great peril. Some of these  species are at the edge
         of their distribution in addition to representing exemplary
         communities. Acquisition and landowner/ management agreements are
         recommended, and have also begun for the lands associated with
         these three sites.


         Locality description:

         Four localities and two planning districts are incorporated into
         this unique corridor of natural resources. The counties involved
         are Isle of Wight, Southampton, Surry and Sussex. Surry and Sussex
         Counties are located within Planning District No. 19, the Crater
         Planning District; and Isle of Wight and Southampton Counties are
         located within Planning District No. 23, the Hampton Roads Planning
         District.

         Although all four counties recognize the value of rivers,
         floodplains and wetlands as natural resources, county planners,
         officials and citizens must be informed of the State and National
         significance of these particular conservation sites and the
         importance of preserving the integrity of the Blackwater River.


         Threats:

         Residents of these four counties obtain their water primarily from
         wells, although there are several withdrawal locations near the
         city of Franklin, in Southampton County.     Increased withdrawals
         could adversely affect the hydrology of the river, degrading it and
         ultimately jeopardizing it's many uses.

         Another major threat to this watershed is agricultural and urban
         non-point source pollution.      The Division of Soil and Water
         @onservation has rated this particular watershed as high priority
         in the state for agricultural non-point source concerns. Increased
         development in the area will lead to increased urban run-off and
         pollution, further endangering the Blackwater River and its
         associated flora and fauna.       Carefully planned, responsible
         development should be strongly encouraged in these critical areas.


         Recommendations:

         The necessity of cooperative conservation planning becomes evident
         when examining this macrosite.      It is recommended that joint

                                         23









        efforts be undertaken between planning districts, localities,
        conservation organizations, state agencies and local citizen's
        groups and private citizens. An example of joint community, state
        and private group action to protect a river corridor is the Saco
        River Corridor Commission in Maine.       This commission has been
        extremely successful; it incorporates 20 Maine municipalities, was
        approved by the state legislature in 1973 and has been in effect
        for over 20 years.

        Pursuing Scenic River designation will heighten recognition of this
        significant resource.     Focusing protection efforts on the key
        conservation sites will provide an anchor for expanded protection
        and stewardship work along the river.         Innovative landowner
        incentive programs such as the Department of Conservation and
        Recreation's Registry of Natural Areas Program,, the Partners in
        Wildlife Program and the Forest Stewardship Program will increase
        our capability to reach many landowners and develop model land-use
        plans.

        In Virginia, the Blackwater River, it's floodplain and associated
        lands support a rich array of plants and animals. Many of these
        species are rare or threatened and are in critical periods in their
        respective natural histories. Protection of the Blackwater River
        Macrosite is a worthy endeavor. Progressive foresight on the part
        of county and regional planners, municipalities, agencies,
        conservation organizations, citizens groups, and private landowners
        could make a substantial contribution to the preservation of one of
        Virginia's finest centers of biological diversity.





















                                         24









           Table 1.       List of Natural Heritage Resources: Blackwater River
           Macrosite.

                  COMMON                    SCIENTIFIC                  State   State    Global
                  Name                        Name                      Rank   Status    Rank
           COMMUNITIES


           Eutrophic semi-permanently flooded forest                     S3       
           Oligotrophic woodland                                         Sl       
           Oligotrophic forest                                           Sl       

           PLANTS


           Dwarf paw-paw                     Asimina parviflora           S2              G5
           Sweet shrub                       Calycanthus floridus         S2            G5T4T5
           Sandy-woods chaffhead             Carphephorus bellidifolius   Sl              G4
           Wooly chaffhead                   Carphenhorus tomentosus      Sl              G4
           Coast sandbur                     Cenchrus carolinianus        S2              G5
           Pineland tick-trefoil             Desmodium strict             S2            G3G4
           Cottony golden-aster              Heterotheca crossypina       Sl              G5
           Pine barren rush                  Juncus abortivus             Sl            G4G5
           Sheep-laurel                      Kalmia anoustifolia          S2S3            G5
           Long-leaf pine                    Pinus Ralustris              Sl            G4G5
           White-fringe orchid              Platantanthera                S2              G4
                                                     blepharialottis
           October-flower                    Polyaonella -polygama        Sl               G4
           Flowering pixie-moss              Pyxidanthera barbulata       Sl              G4
           Blue-jack oak                     ouercus incana               S2              G5
           Turkey oak                        ouercus laevis               S2              G5
           Sand post oak                     Ouercus margarettae          S2              G5
           Fasciculate beakrush              Rhqynchospora fascicularis    S2             G5
           Coast rose-gentian                Sabatia calycina             SlS2          G3G5
           Northern pitcher plant            Sarracenia Purpurea          S2             G5
           Seymeria                          Seymeria cassioides          SlS2            G5
           White blue-eyed grass             sisyrinchium albidum         Sl             G?
           Narrow leaved bluecurls           Trichostema setaceum         S2             G5
           Creeping blueberry                Vaccinium crassifolium       Sl            G4G5
           Carolina yellow-eyed grass        Xyris caroliniana            Sl            G4G5
           viperina                          Zornia bracteata             Sl              G5

           ANIMALS


           Mud sunfish                       Acantharchus pomotis        S3              G5
           Mabee's salamander                Ambystoma mabeei             Sl      LT       G4
           Swampfish                         Chologaster cornuta          S3               G5
           Blackbanded sunfish               Enneacanthus chaetodon       Sl      LE       G5
           Lake chubsucker                   Erqimvzon sucetta             S2              G5
           Lined topminnow                   Fundulus lineolatus          Sl              G5
           Eastern lampmussel                Lamipsilis radiata           S2      G4
           Southeastern crowned snake        Tantilla coronata            S2             G5
           Tidewater mucket                  Lentodea ochrachea           S3              G4
           Eastern pondmussel                Licrumia nasuta              S3                     G5












                                                    25











                             ANTIOCH SWAMP PINE BARRENS

         LOCATION: Virginia, Isle of Wight County
                    Quadrangle: Zuni             Quadrangle code: 3607677

         BIODIVERSITY RANK: B2


         DIRECTIONS:
         The site is located south of Antioch Swamp, east of the
         Blackwater Riverr and north of the Blackwater Ecological
         Preserve.


         GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
         The site supports a large, A-ranked occurrence of an old growth
         loblolly pine forest, and is one of the finest remaining stands
         of this type in Virginia.         In addition to the significant
         community found at this site, Antioch Swamp Pine Barrens also
         supports 3 rare oak species.           With additional zoological
         inventory it is very likely that rare insects or other unusual
         invertebrates for Virginia will be discovered.

         NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES:

          Scientific           Common              G / S     EO   Fed / State
            Name                Name                Rank     Rank   Status
         communities:
         oligotrophic forest                            S1    A    -     -

         plants:
         Ouercus incana           blue jack oak    G5   S2    D    -     -
         Ouercus laevis           turkey oak       G5   S2    AB   -     -
         Ouercus margarettae      sand post oak    G5   S2    AB   -     -

         This oligotrophic forest consists of over 100 acres of    old   growth
         loblolly pine forest supported by dry sandy soils.        At least 3
         rare oak species are found here, turkey oak (Ouercus laevis),
         ?and post oak (Ouercus margarettae), and blue jack oak (Ouercus
         incana).    These unique fire-dependent plants and the soils
         supporting them indicate a vegetative community known as a "pine-
         barren ".   Soils here are primarily Alaga fine sand and Chipley
         sand; both are characterized as being very deep, well drained
         soils with low natural fertility, low organic matter content and
         low available water capacity (Kitchel et al., 1982).          Included
         with these soils is Nawny loam which is most often associated
         with the floodplains and drainages.      The area is north of , and
         adjacent to the Blackwater Ecologic Preserve.          Protection of
         Antioch Swamp Pine Barrens would result in a large, contiguous,
         diverse natural area which supports rare vegetative communities,
         plants and animals.

         Fire has played a major role in creating and maintaining the
         unique combination of plant species at this site.       The area has

                                           26









         not burned in several decades though, and consequently the fire-
         dependent species are reproducing poorly.         Appropriate fire
         management is desperately needed to preserve these resources.

         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary ecological boundary encompasses the oligotrophic f orest
         and rare plant species. The main purpose of the primary ecological
         boundary is to delineate and encompass known occurrences of natural
         heritage resources, and existing and potential habitat for those
         resources.    Inclusion of minimal buffers provides excellent
         restoration potential for rare species with active management.

         on the north and west sides of the site, the primary boundary is
         the upland/wetland interface and adheres to the contours of Antioch
         Swamp, and on the east side, it follows Britt Run, a small stream.
         The southeastern primary boundary follows a small dirt road. The
         primary and secondary boundaries coincide on the southern,
         southeastern, and southwestern sides of the site.      The boundary
         along the southern edge of the site is contiguous with the
         Blackwater Ecologic Preserve.

         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The secondary ecological boundary includes the oligotrophic f orest,
         rare plant species, and potential habitat f or additional rarities.
         Fire management is crucial to the preservation and maintenance of
         the unique community and rare plant species at this site. Because
         @he primary purpose of the secondary ecological boundary is to
         include lands intended to mitigate natural and human threats to the
         resources and their habitats, and to include lands related to
         special management needs, this boundary was drawn with special
         consideration given to the potential natural and existing
         firebreaks and lands needed for this future active management of
         protected lands.

         On the northern, western, eastern, and southeastern sides of this
         site, the secondary boundary extends minimally to include Antioch
         Swamp and Britt Run.      Inclusion of the swamp and additional
         drainages provides natural firebreaks for future management.
         The secondary ecological boundary continues southward linking
         Antioch Swamp Pine Barrens with the Blackwater Ecologic Preserve
         @nd Horse Swamp Pine Barrens.       This site and the others are
         integral parts of a larger sandhill ecosystem.      For the sake of
         consistency with the APES inventory report, they have been
         described separately.

         PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
         Primary acreage (acreage within primary
         ecological boundary)- 300 acres
         Secondary acreage (acreage within secondary
         ecological boundary)- 48 acres
         Total acreage recommended for protection- 348 acres


                                          27











         TRACTS:
         Number of ownership tracts within site: four.
         Number of ownership tracts within the primary ecological boundary:
         one.   One tract, representing one landowner makes up the entire
         area within the primary ecological boundary of the Antioch Swamp
         site.


         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
         Much of the land within the primary ecological boundary is managed
         as corporate timber land and is leased to a private hunt club which
         assists with road maintenance and security. Land use surrounding
         this site is primarily agricultural and silvicultural,     .though this
         site is adjacent to the Blackwater Ecological Preserve which is
         owned and managed by old Dominion University.

         Residential or industrial development in the area are serious
         offsite considerations which may influence future management
         activities related to developing fire and smoke management
         programs.

         This area lies entirely within Isle of Wight County. In the county
         comprehensive plan, the Blackwater River and Antioch Swamp
         floodplains are designated Resource Management Areas.               This
         designation carries the following developmental and agricultural
         recommendations designed to protect the natural resources (Isle of
         Wight County Comprehensive Plan, 1991).

               -No development be permitted on slopes exceeding 25% where
                    soils are unsuitable.

               -Development in floodplains should be limited and
               responsibly managed.

               -Clearing of woodlands and forests should be minimized to
                    the extent possible.

               -In  general, only very limited low density residential
                    development should be permitted in those areas of the
                    Resource Conservation District which are developable.

               -When development does occur in the Resource Conservation
                    District, all environmental impacts should attempt to
                    be avoided and in cases where impacts do occur,
               mitigation measures should be employed.

               -The state and private conservation organizations should
                    actively pursue programs to purchase and/or acquire
                    easements for privately owned lands in the Resource
                    Conservation District so they can be preserved.

         MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
         Fire has played a major role in creating and maintaining the unique

                                            28








         vegetation at this site, although the area has not burned in recent
         years. Once protection is secured, a fire management plan should
         be developed for the barrens. The rare species populations will be
         enhanced through prescribed burning. The site's proximity to the
         Blackwater Ecologic Preserve allows for the creation of a larger
         and more viable preserve, and increased habitat for many rare
         species. Managers of the Blackwater Ecologic Preserve possess the
         technical and scientific expertise needed to manage pine barrens,
         and a coordinated management strategy is recommended for these two
         sites.


         PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
         Acquisition, or voluntary landowner protection is recommended for
         land within the primary and secondary ecological boundaries.
         Landowner contact is currently underway in this area. Access and
         management agreements on much of this land are critical to the
         future active management of this site.

         If this site is protected as a natural area, administrative and
         managerial access might be best accomplished in coordination with
         the efforts at the Blackwater Ecologic Preserve.

         Antioch Swamp Pine Barrens is north of and adjacent to Blackwater
         Ecologic Preserve. Another site recommended for protection, Horse
         Swamp Pine Barrens is located just south of the preserve.
         Together, these areas support many rare species and exceptional
         communities   and represent     an important    priority    for   the
         conservation of Virginia biological diversity. The proximity of
         these sites to the Blackwater Ecologic Preserve and the restoration
         potential for additional rarities makes this area, and specifically
         this site, extremely important.

         INFORMATION NEEDS:
         More vertebrate and invertebrate inventories of this site are
         needed.    Further inventories of this area will likely reveal
         additional rarities.

         Additional information concerning protection status and future
         plans for the adjacent significant lands would be extremely helpful
         in making comprehensive conservation planning decisions.

         RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
         It is recommended that Isle of Wight County:

              -Provide an educational program which focuses on natural
                    resources within the area.

              -Make local developers and businesses aware of the natural
                    resource issues which are relevant to the area and
                    encourage them to consider these issues in future
                    planning activates.


                                          29















                                                                                                                                                                                              3 rvt




                                        83





                                                                                                                     r)
                                                                                                                                                                 X39

                                                                                                                                             r





                                                                                                                                               qI
                                                                                                                                                It




                                                                                                                                                                                   cc)


                                                                          V

                                                   x82                                                                                                    XJ4)





                                                                                                                                    10

                                                                                -4y
                                                                                                                              ILI
                                         Al
                                                                                               0                                If                                             614
                                                                                                   It

                                                                                                                              it)

                                                                                                                                                                              68
                                                                                                                            it








                                                                                                                              1\%



                                                                     le
                                                                     jj







                                                                                                     X4/         11
                                                                                               If               it







                                  SITE NAME: ANTIOCH SWAMP BARRENS                                                                                                                               N
                                  USGS 7.5' QUADRANGLE: ZUNI
                                  SCALE: 1:24,000











                          BLACKWATER RIVER - BELOW ROUTE 603

         LOCATION: Virginia, Surry County and Sussex County
                     Quadrangle: Dendron     Quadrangle code: 3707618

         BIODIVERSITY RANK: B2


         DIRECTIONS:
         From Wakefield on Route 460, take Route 603 north for 7 miles to
         the Blackwater River "triple bridges". Proceed by canoe down the
         river to the site.


         GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
         This forested swamp along the Blackwater River is significant
         because it has more pristine bald cypress (Taxodium distichum)
         and water tupelo (Nvssa aquatica) vegetation than any other area
         in Virginia.    It may be one of the nation's premier old growth
         swamps.   Canopy trees are consistently over 30 meters tall for a
         distance  of two miles along the Blackwater River.        The presence
         of water  tupelo in this swamp may indicatea rich nutrient base,
         as these trees are thought to be more common in bald cypress
         habitats  with higher water and nutrient f low (Ewel and Odum,
         1984).     Soils found in the Blackwater River floodplain are
         primarily Mattan mucky silty clay loam.              These soils are
         characteristic of freshwater swamps and basins (Hodges, 1993).
         The   cypress-tupelo    swamp   shows   only occasional      signs of
         disturbance from logging, and much of it could be characterized
         as virgin forest (Rawinski and Ludwig, 1992).

         NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES:


         Scientific            Common       Global State EO Federal State
         Name                  Name          Rank   Rank Rank Status       Status


         communities:
         Eutrophic Semipermanently
         Flooded Forest        cypress swamp -         S3    A

         This site supports Virginia's finest cypress swamp, according to
         Mr. Gary Williamson who is a respected authority on wetlands of
         this type. Some of the larger cypress trees at this site along the
         Blackwater River are 180 to 200 cm in diameter, and consequently,
         are estimated to be at least 600 years old. The bald cypress has
         an existing range that is limited primarily to the humid Southern
         and Southwestern bottomlands. It can be found only as far north as
         southern Delaware and Maryland, and extends southward through the
         Coastal Plain to extreme south Florida. To the west, bald cypress
         ranges through south-central Texas and northward in the Mississippi
         Valley as far as southeastern Missouri, southern Illinois and
         southwestern Indiana. In Virginia, bald cypress is found only in
         the southeastern region and within a narrow corridor stretching
         along the eastern edge of the State (Dennis, 1988).

                                            30









         The site encompasses an existing state natural area, The Charles C.
         Steirly Natural Area which is owned by the Commonwealth and managed
         by the Department of Conservation and Recreation to protect a
         nesting site for the Great Blue Heron. The natural area consists
         of 19 acres located on the southern side of the western reach of
         the Blackwater River in Sussex County. There are historic records
         of both Great Blue Herons and American Egrets using this area as a
         nesting site. Recent observations by Department of Conservation
         and Recreation personnel indicate that the viability of this
         heronry may be in question.    Although a few remnant nests were
         seen, it appears that current nesting activity is occurring
         downstream from the former nesting site and that at best, a small
         heronry may still be active at the state natural area.

         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary boundary encompasses the full extent of the existing
         cypress-tupelo swamp forest. The principle purpose of the primary
         ecological boundary is to delineate and encompass all known
         occurrences of the natural heritage resources and their existing
         and potential habitats. For this reason, the primary boundary is
         drawn to include all of the forested wetlands in the immediate
         area.


         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The secondary boundary includes the cypress-tupelo swamp with
         minimal buffers of forested upland and several critical drainages.
         The principle purpose of the secondary ecological boundary is to
         include lands and water intended to mitigate natural and human
         threats to the resources and their habitats, and to include lands
         related to special management needs.      Minimal buffer lands of
         several small drainages and some upland forests have been included
         within this secondary boundary.    In general, buffers around the
         forested swamp are 150 feet. This distance, prescribed as the 1.5
         X tree height, "rule of thumb", (Rawinski, 1993) should help
         mitigate effects from surrounding land uses.      In addition, the
         upland buffer will help protect the ancient trees from wind-throw
         damage, water quality degradation, and changes in light penetration
         which could ultimately allow the invasion of alien plant species
         and aggressive competitors.    The secondary boundary is expanded
         around heron nesting sites, and around areas that were identified
         as critical drainages..

         Inclusion of several small drainages within the secondary
         ecological boundary aid in protecting the river from perturbations
         to the natural flooding regime.    The boundary on the east side
         encompasses four of these small drainages, and the boundary on the
         west end of the site includes three such areas.      The secondary
         boundary at the northeastern corner of the swamp includes a
         drainage up to, but excluding an impoundment. The maintenance of
         the natural water levels and flow are crucial to the health of the
         swamp and to the use of heron nesting sites. Organic material is
         disseminated by the river's naturally unhurried flow; and proper

                                         31









         water levels impact waterbird nesting by regulating vegetational
         growth and health of existing trees, and by exerting some predator
         control.

         Along the southwestern reach of the Blackwater River the secondary
         boundary is approximately 1000 feet from the C. C. Steirly Natural
         Area and from general locations identified as active nesting areas.
         This allows the prescribed buffer of approximately 1000 feet around
         the heronry which should not only adequately protect the birds from
         disturbance, but should also allow for some expansion of the
         nesting areas (Buckley and Buckley, 1976). Great Blue Herons are
         particularly   sensitive    while   nesting   and   rearing    chicks;
         reproductive success depends largely upon minimal disturbance
         during this crucial time.

         The secondary boundaries have an added advantage of providing
         visual and noise buffers for people seeking a natural recreational
         or educational experience in this premiere cypress-tupelo swamp.
         Upland acreage to the south of the swamp has been included to
         provide for site access, security and educational interpretation.

         PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
         Primary acreage (acreage within the primary
         ecological boundary)- 359 acres.
         Secondary acreage (acreage within the secondary
         ecological boundary)- 503 acres.
         Total acreage suggested for protection - 862 acres.

         TRACTS:
         Number of ownership tracts within site: thirteen.    Thirteen tracts
         representing ten different landowners surround this site. Number
         of ownership tracts within the primary ecological boundary : eight.
         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
         The character of the surrounding lands is predominantly rural.
         Current activities are primarily timber management and agriculture.
         Current farming practices do not appear to be a threat to these
         particular natural heritage resources at this time. Future logging
         of the adjacent uplands could result in an increased susceptibility
         to wind damage, increased sediment flow or the spread of exotic
         species. Changes in water quality or flow could drastically affect
         the existing vegetation within the swamp.

         The hydrologic regime of the Blackwater River and associated
         tributaries appears in tact. Although some of this cypress-tupelo
         swamp has been selectively logged in the past, it currently stands
         relatively undisturbed.    Some uplands included in the secondary
         ecological boundaries have been intensively logged and are in early
         growth pine plantation. Intentions of the present landowners are
         not known, therefore, future logging and development should be
         determined.

         Sussex County relies on ground water and surface water from the

                                           32









        Nottoway River to supply it's residents, and the Blackwater River
        floodplain is described as a "conservation district" in the county
          mprehensive plan. This designation offers no specific protection
        through regulatory restrictions, however activities in this area
        co

        receive close scrutiny by local planners.

        Residents of Surry County rely on ground water and on surface water
        from the Blackwater River. The major point of removal appears to
        be near the town of Dendron, which is several miles downstream from
        this forested swamp site.      The Blackwater River floodplain is
        designated a "conservation district" in the county comprehensive
        plan, and although this designation is not accompanied by any
        regulatory restrictions, activities in this area receive close
        scrutiny by local planners. The county comprehensive plan states
        that Surry County officials are actively pursuing a plan to promote
        tourism in their county which is rich with historical assets.
        Nature tourism, or eco-tourism of outstanding natural resources
        would seem to be an excellent compliment to this endeavor.

        Local planning officials in both Surry and Sussex Counties should
        be made aware of the ecological significance of this natural area.
        The Department of Conservation and Recreation, other natural
        resource agencies and conservation organizations, and localities
        should work on strategies to protect water quality and hydrologic
        regimes along critical drainages and mainstem of the Blackwater
        River.

        The best way to tour this site is by canoe. Canoeists should be
        warned however, that the river is strewn with sunken logs and that
        caution should be exercised when traveling through this area.

        MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
        No active vegetation management is needed, but the general health
        and vitality of the forest should be monitored to permit early
        detection of perturbations. The natural heritage resources at this
        site require long-term biological monitoring. The Department of
        Conservation and Recreation has staff with expertise in designing
        monitoring plans and in conducting long term biological studies of
        this type.

        Abandonment and relocation of the heron nesting colony may have
        resulted from local disturbances. Seasonal restriction of access
        around the nesting sites and long-term protection and monitoring of
        these sites should be initiated to prevent future disruption of the
        nesting herons.

        PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
        Acquisition and/or landowner agreements are recommended for all
        land included within the primary ecological boundary. Protection
        of critical drainages on the north, east and west sides of the
        swamp may best be accomplished through landowner contact, and
        consequently, conservation easements, management agreements or

                                         33









        natural area registry agreements.

        The Charles C. Steirly Natural Area is partially contained within
        the primary ecological boundary and completely contained within the
        secondary ecological boundary. Currently this area is managed by
        the Chippokes Plantation State Park to protect the heronry. The
        presence of this natural area further enhances the importance of
        protecting this Blackwater River site below the Route 603 bridge.

        Although this site is similar to Blackwater River above Route 620,
        this site is distinguished by a slightly less dense cypress stand.
        This conservation site lies approximately 15 miles upstream from
        the other Blackwater River conservation site. In this area, the
        Blackwater River serves as the county line and thus incorporates
        four localities in these two sites. All counties involved, Isle of
        Wight, Southampton, Surry and Sussex recognize the need to preserve
        and protect floodplains, wetlands and natural resources. Perhaps
        a cooperative conservation effort could ultimately protect large
        stretches of this river in addition to the specific sites
        identified by these reports.     The nature of the swamp and the
        inherent qualities which prohibit its development also allow the
        river and floodplain to serve as a corridor for wildlife.
        Certainly, protection of as much of this floodplain as possible
        would be an ultimate goal.

        These conservation sites are represent two of the most important
        components of a much larger natural area, the Blackwater River
        watershed, or Macrosite.     These two sites have been described
        separately within this report, but comprehensive conservation
        planning should take into account the boundaries presented in the
        Blackwater River Macrosite report.

        INFORMATION NEEDS:
        Information concerning the foraging habits of waterbirds using the
        nesting colony'would be useful in establishing future protection
        plans for the area.

        Information concerning long-range water supply needs and plans for
        both Surry and Sussex Counties would be needed for future
        management planning for this site.

        RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:

        It is recommended that the respective counties:

              -Provide an educational program wh   ich focuses on natural
              resources within the area.

              -Make local developers and businesses aware of the natural
              resource issues which are relevant to the area and to
              consider these issues when making planning decisions.


                                         34
















                                                                                                                                                                                                                             'o






                                                                                                                                                                      100
                                                                                     X104

                                                                                                                                                                    9,

                                                                 96                                                                                    /1



                                     cem,'                                                                                                                         it 11




                                                                                                                                                                                                         \cp



                                                                                                                                                                         ci.





                                                           ------------












                                                  ,00




                                                                                                                                                     00








                                                                                                                                                                                                                            stkam
                                                               IOU
                                                                                        0

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                31








                                     SITE NAME: BLACKWATER RIVER BELOW ROUTE 603                                                                                                                                                N
                                     USGS 7.51 QUADRANGLE: DENDRON
                                     SCALE: 1:24,000











                          BLACKWATER RIVER - ABOVE ROUTE 620


         LOCATION: Virginia, Isle of Wight County and Southampton County
                     Quadrangle: Raynor          Quadrangle code: 3607687

         BIODIVERSITY RANK: B2


         DIRECTIONS:
         Blackwater River - north of Route 620.        Route 460 East, north
         onto Route 620 at Ivor, several miles before crossing the river.
         Site is approximately 2.5 - 3 miles north of Zuni along the.
         Blackwater River.


         GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
         This site encompasses a four-mile riparian corridor along the
         Blackwater River.    It supports one of the Nation's premiere old
         growth cypress-tupelo swamps, with a        large expanse of bald
         cypress (Taxodium distichum) and water tupelo (Nyssa acruatica)
         bottomland forest.    Four state-champion   trees are found at this
         site, including Virginia's largest bald    cypress. Soils found in
         the Blackwater River floodplain within      this area are primarily
         Nawney loam (Kitchel, 1985).       The site is comparable to the
         Blackwater River site located below Route 603, however this site
         supports a denser stand of cypress as well as State-champion
         trees.    Both areas are nationally significant because they
         contain such fine examples of old growth cypress swamp.

         NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES:


         Scientific           Common       Global State EO Federal State
         Name                 Name          Rank   Rank Rank Status      Status


         communities:
         Eutrophic Semipermanently
         Flooded Forest       cypress swamp -         S3    A

         This site supports an excellent example of a cypress-tupelo swamp
         forest,. a nutrient-rich forest with standing water most of the
         year. After a survey of bottomland forests by Mr. Gary Williamson,
         a respected authority on wetland forest vegetation, it was evident
         that this swamp is one of the two best in the state. Some of the
         larger cypress at this site are two meters or more in diameter, and
         consequently, are estimated to be at least 600 years old.

         Bald cypress has an existing range that is limited primarily to the
         humid southern and southwestern bottomlands. It can be found only
         as far north as southern Delaware and Maryland, and extends
         southward through the coastal plain to extreme south Florida. To
         the west, bald cypress ranges through south-central Texas and
         northward in the Mississippi Valley as far as southeastern
         Missouri, southern Illinois and southwestern Indiana. In Virginia,

                                           35









         bald cypress is found only in the southeastern portion of the state
         and within a narrow corridor stretching along the eastern edge of
         the state (Dennis, 1988).

         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary ecological boundary encompasses the full extent of the
         cypress-tupelo swamp forest. The map convention for the primary
         ecological boundary is a solid line with single-crosshatches.

         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The secondary ecological boundary includes the eutrophic semi-
         permanently flooded forest, minimal upland buffers and several
         critical drainages.       The map convention for the secondary
         ecological boundary is a solid line with double-crosshatches.

         In general, minimal buffers around the forested swamp are 200 feet.
         This distance, prescribed as the 2.0 X tree height "rule of thumb",
         will help mitigate effects from surrounding land uses and excessive
         wind-throw (Rawinski, pers. com. . 19 9 3). Damage from wind-throw is
         a threat on all floodplains (Wharton, 1978), but a severe threat to
         this swamp because of the underlying soils.           Nawney loam is
         characterized as being deep, poorly drained, only moderately
         permeable and as having a minimal slope of 0-2% (Kitchel, et al.
         1982). The characteristics of this soil and the size of the trees
         combine to make wind-throw a considerable threat to this old growth
         swamp.   Additionally, the upland buffer will help protect the
         ancient trees from water quality degradation and changes in light
         penetration which could ultimately allow the invasion of alien
         plant and animal species.

         Inclusion of several small drainages within the secondary
         ecological boundary should serve the purpose of protecting the
         river from perturbations to the natural flooding regime.            The
         boundary on the east side encompasses three of these small
         drainages. The boundary for one of the drainages on the east side
         is below the gas pipelines located along the river. on the west
         side, the boundary includes five drainages. The maintenance of the
         natural water levels and flow are crucial to the health of the
         swamp. In addition to disseminating organic material, the natural
         hydrologic regime also plays a small role in excluding alien plant
         species.

         The secondary boundaries offer an added advantage of providing
         visual and noise buffers for people seeking a natural recreational
         or educational experience in this exemplary old growth cypress
         swamp.

         A corridor of upland area has been included in the northwest
         portion of the site to provide access. This strip follows a stream
         which runs from Route 617 to the Blackwater River. The area should
         be sufficient for administrative, managerial and interpretive
         access.


                                           36











         PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
         Primary acreage (acreage within primary
         ecological boundary)- 828 acres.
         Secondary acreage (acreage within secondary
         ecological boundary)- 490 acres.
         Total acreage recommended for protection- 1318 acres.

         TRACTS:
         Number of ownership tracts within site: twenty one. These tracts
         are owned by 14 different landowners.
         Number of ownership tracts within the primary ecological boundary:
         eighteen.

         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
         The character of the surrounding lands is predominantly rural.
         Current activities are primarily timber management, row cropping
         and pig farming. Current farming practices do not appear to be a
         threat to these particular natural heritage resources. Some of the
         adjacent uplands were logged recently.       If logging activities
         continue in the area, greater upland/wetland buffers are
         recommended to mitigate wind damage, altered light regimes, the
         spread of exotic plants and increased sediment loads to the wetland
         system. Forested upland buffers will help maintain a defensible
         old growth swamp and allow for continued forestry and agricultural
         activities.

         The hydrologic regime of the Blackwater River and associated
         tributaries appears to be relatively intact. Although some of this
         forested swamp has been selectively logged . in the past, the
         @emainder currently stands primarily undisturbed.      Some uplands
         included in the secondary ecological boundary have been intensively
         logged in the past and are in early growth pine plantation. The
         entire east side of the site is owned by a paper/lumber company,
         and since intentions of these and other present landowners are
         unknown, continued logging and development should be considered
         imminent threats.

         Isle of Wight County, which makes up the north and northeastern
         portions of this site, relies on ground water to supply it's
         residents.    The Blackwater River floodplain is designated a
          Resource Protection Area", and a "Resource Management Area",
         d"esignations which carry several developmental restrictions. In
         the County Comprehensive Plan, county planners appear to take an
         aggressive conservation stance in the protection of existing
         natural resources, and the Blackwater River f loodplain receives the
         same land-use designation as the James River.        Although this
         floodplain doesn't fall under the protection umbrella of the
         Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and Regulations, the nearby James
         River and it's tributaries are included. County Comprehensive Plan
         recommendations that apply to the Blackwater River floodplain are:
         development within the floodplain is limited; clearing should be
         minimized; only low density residential development will be allowed

                                          37








         where soils permit; when development occurs, environmental impacts
         should be avoided, and when impossible, mitigation measures should
         be employed; and finally, State and private conservation
         organizations should actively pursue programs to purchase and/or
         acquire easements for privately owned lands in these districts so
         they can be preserved.   The Floodplain Management Ordinance for
         Isle of Wight County is in compliance with the Federal Emergency
         Management Agency, and is also sensitive to the preservation of the
         floodplains as natural resources as well.

         Residents of Southampton County which constitutes the western and
         southwestern portions of this site, rely on ground water for their
         water needs.   The Blackwater River floodplain is designated a
         '$major swamp or flood hazard area". There are no restrictions that
         protect these areas, however the County Comprehensive plan states,
         "the scenic and recreational value of the County's waterways and
         wetlands should be protected and promoted for use by County
         residents and recreational visitors from outside the County". The
         plan goes further to say that "new residential subdivision activity
         will be discouraged from occurring in the County's floodplains and
         more remote rural areas".

         This site can be toured by canoe during the seasons of high water.
         Canoeists should be warned however, that the river is strewn with
         submerged logs and that caution should be exercised when traveling
         through this area.

         MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
         No active vegetational management of this site is needed, but the
         general health and vitality of the forest should be monitored to
         permit early detection of perturbations.

         PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
         This site represents one of the most significant and awe-inspiring
         natural areas in Virginia. It is an ecological treasure worthy of
         long-term protection and stewardship.

         Acquisition and/or voluntary landowner protection is recommended
         for all land included within the primary ecological boundary.
         Protection of critical drainages on the east and west sides of the
         swamp may best be accomplished through landowner contact, and
         consequently, conservation easements, management agreements or
         registries.

         Although this site is similar to the other Blackwater River site
         (Blackwater River Below Route 603), it is distinguished by a denser
         cypress stand, and the occurrence of several state champion trees.
         This conservation site lies approximately 15 miles downstream from
         the other Blackwater River conservation site. In this area, the
         Blackwater River serves as the county line and thus incorporates
         four localities in these two sites. All counties involved, Isle of
         Wight, Southampton, Surry and Sussex recognize the need to preserve

                                         38








         and protect floodplains, wetlands and natural resources. Perhaps
         a cooperative conservation effort could ultimately protect large
         stretches, if not all, of this river in addition to the specific
         sites identified by these reports. The nature of the swamp and the
         inherent qualities which prohibit it's development also allow the
         river and floodplain to serve as a corridor for wildlife.
         Certainly, protection of as much of this f loodplain as possible
         would be an ultimate goal.

         These conservation sites are two of the most important components
         of a much larger natural area, the Blackwater River watershed, or
         macrosite.    They have been described separately to remain
         consistent with the APES report,   but comprehensive conservation
         planning should take into account the boundaries described in the
         Blackwater River Macrosite report.

         Local planning officials in both    Isle of Wight and Southampton
         Counties should be made aware of   the ecological significance of
         this natural area. The Department  of Conservation and Recreation,
         other natural resource agencies and conservation organizations, and
         localities should work on strategies to protect water quality and
         hydrologic regimes along critical drainages and the mainstem of the
         Blackwater River.


         INFORMATION-NEEDS:
         Information concerning long-range water supply needs and plans for
         both Isle of Wight and Southampton Counties would be needed for
         future management planning for this site.

         RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
         It is recommended that the respective counties:

              -Provide an educational program which focuses on natural
              resources within the area.

              -Make local developers and businesses aware of the natural
              resource issues which are relevant to the area, and encourage
              them to consider these issues when making future development
              plans.













                                         39









                                                                                                                                                                                 'o






                                                                                                                                                                                 6',
                                                                                                                                         50
                                                                           an






                                                                                                               42X







                                                                                                                                            X38

                                                                                                                                                                                 --Z







                                                                                                                                X.


                                                                                       to



                                                                                                                                       vo


                                                                                                                                                                  10

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


                                                       82


                                                                                                                                                    %

                                                                                          110                                     \\ 1-4












                                                                                       ck Co
                                                    CX7                co


                                                                                                            17


                                                                                                     BM4







               4                                                                                                                                                           34

                                                                                         r\




                          SITE NAME: BLACKWATER RIVER ABOVE ROUTE 620                                                                                            N
                          USGS 7.5' QUADRANGLE: RAYNOR
                          SCALE: 1:24,000











                                        SOUTH ZUNI SANDHILLS

           LOCATION: Virginia, Isle of Wight County
                         Quadrangle: Zuni                    Quadrangle code: 3607677

           BIODIVERSITY RANK: B4


           DIRECTIONS:
           The site is located south of Zuni, north of Antioch Swamp, east of
           the Blackwater River, and west of Route 614.

           GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
           This site supports a rare vegetative community and five rare plant
           species. In the woodlands are found an unusually high number of
           oak species, three of which are rare in Virginia.

           This site and other conservation sites nearby are integral parts of
           a larger sandhill ecosystem.

           NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES:


           Scientif ic               Common                    Global State EO Federal State
           Name                      Name                      Rank     Rank Rank Status Status


           communities:
           oligotrophic woodland    turkey oak sandhill                  Sl    c       -     -

           plants:
           Asimina parviflora       dwarf paw-paw                G5      S2    CD      -     -
           Desmodium strictum       pineland tick-trefoil      G2G4      S2    BC      -     -
           Ouercus incana           blue jack oak                G5      S2    BC      -     -
           Ouercus laevis           turkey oak                   G5      S2    AB      -     -
           Ouercus margarettae      sand post oak                G5      S2    AB      -     -


           This oligotrophic woodland is a          remnant of    once   a large   expanse of
           xeric sandhill vegetation.           At least three rare oak species are
           found here: turkey oak (Ouercus. laevis), sand post oak (Quercus
           marcrarettae), and blue jack oak (Ouercus incana).                    These fire-
           dependent plants and the soils that support them compose a
           vegetative community unique to the state. Soils here are primarily
           Alaga f ine sand, Leon Chipley sands and Kinston loam; characterized
           as being very deep, well drained soils with low natural fertility,
           low organic matter content and low available water capacity
           (Kitchel et al., 1982).

           Many of the rare species found here are f ire dependent plants,
           therefore, fire has played a major role in creating and maintaining
           this plant community.           The area has not burned in many years
           though, and many of these plants are reproducing poorly. The South
           Zuni Sandhills site is in great need of prescribed burning to
           restore the quality of the sandhill vegetation and the rare oaks.


                                                    40








         South Zuni Sandhills is very close to the Antioch Swamp Pine
         Barrens site. The protection and appropriate management of these
         two areas would represent a significant contribution to the

         conservation of one of Virginia's rarest vegetation types. This
         effort would complement the protection work underway at the nearby
         Blackwater Ecological Reserve which supports many rare species of
         plants and animals.


         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary ecological boundary encompasses the rare sandhill
         vegetation and rare plant occurrences.       The main purpose of the
         primary ecological boundary is to delineate and encompass known
         occurrences of natural heritage resources and existing and
         potential habitat for those resources. Minimal buffers included
         here represent excellent restoration potential for rare species
         with active management.

         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The secondary ecological boundary encompasses the turkey oak
         sandhill vegetation, rare plant occurrences, and a small amount of
         additional land which serves as buffer.         Because the secondary
         ecological boundary is meant to mitigate for natural and human
         threats to the resources and their habitats, and to provide lands
         related to special management needs (such as prescribed fire), only
         minimal buffer lands are needed. As much as possible, through the
         use of maps and aerial photographs, ecological boundaries were
         drawn to exclude existing residences and agricultural fields. The
         site is bordered on the east/southeast and southern sides by
         Antioch Swamp and one of it's tributaries.              The secondary
         ecological boundary continues southward linking South Zuni
         Sandhills with Antioch Swamp Pine Barrens, the Blackwater Ecologic
         Preserve and Horse Swamp Pine Barrens.

         The primary ecological boundary coincides with the secondary
         ecological boundary except on the northern and western edges of the
         site.   Where the two boundaries do not coincide, the. buffer is
         extremely narrow (approximately 75 feet) to allow for managerial
         access.


         This site and the others are integral parts of a larger sandhill
         ecosystem.    For the sake of consistency with the APES inventory
         report, they have been described separately.

         PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
         Primary acreage (acreage within primary
         ecological boundary)- 134 acres
         Secondary acreage (acreage within secondary
         ecological boundary)- 17 acres
         Total acreage recommendedfor protection- 151 acres


                                            41












         TRACTS:
         Number of ownership tracts within site: thirteen.
         Number of ownership tracts within the primary ecological boundary:
         thirteen.


         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
         Land use surrounding this site        is primarily agricultural,
         residential and forestal. Some of the land identified within the
         primary ecological boundary is actually, much the same, residential
         or rural. Although the ecological boundaries were drawn to exclude
         developed lands as much as possible, the site is intertwined with
         houses, pastures, agricultural fields and timber tracts.

         Clear-cutting, and large scale timbering will significantly degrade
         the natural character of the woodland vegetation, especially if
         followed by herbicide treatments and pine plantations.

         This area lies entirely within Isle of Wight County. In the county
         comprehensive plan, the Blackwater River (to the west of this site)
         and Antioch Swamp f loodplains (bordering the southeast and southern
         edges of this site) are designated Resource Management Areas. This
         designation carries the following developmental and agricultural
         recommendations designed to protect the county's natural resources
         (Isle of Wight County Comprehensive Plan, 1991).

              -No development be permitted on slopes exceeding 25% where
                   soils are unsuitable.

              -Development in floodplains should be limited and responsibly
                   managed.

              -Clearing of woodlands and forests should be minimized to the
                   extent possible.

              -In general, only very limited low density residential
                   development should be permitted in those areas of the
                   Resource Conservation District which are developable.

              -When development does occur in the Resource Conservation
                   District, all environmental impacts should attempt to be
                   avoided and in cases where impacts do occur, mitigation
                   measures should be employed.

              -The State and private conservation organizations should
                   actively pursue programs to purchase and/or acquire
                   easements for privately owned lands in the Resource
                   Conservation District so they can be preserved.

         Residential or industrial development of nearby, undisturbed tracts
         is a serious offsite consideration which may influence future
         management activities related to developing fire and smoke.
         management programs.

                                          42









        The southern edge of the South Zuni Sandhills site lies at the edge
        of Antioch Swamp. The swamp is the northern edge of another site
        recommended for protection, Antioch Swamp Pine Barrens, which is
        adjacent to Blackwater Ecologic Preserve.      If protected, these
        sites would be separated only by the width of Antioch Swamp.
        Because the swamp is designated a Resource Management Area and
        extensive development is improbable, the protection of this site,
        and the nearby Antioch Swamp Pine Barrens would significantly
        increase the area and defensibility of a contiguous natural area
        which already supports many rarities and has tremendous restoration
        potential for still others.

        MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
        Fire has played a major role in creating and maintaining the unique
        vegetation at this site, although the area has not burned in recent
        years. Once protection is secured, a fire management plan should
        be developed.    The rare species populations will be enhanced
        through prescribed burning.

        PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
        This site is a mosaic within a small residential community,
        therefore, protection of this site should be achieved primarily
        through means other than acquisition. Landowner notification is
        recommended, and is ongoing.      Additions to the Department of
        Conservation and Recreation's Natural Areas Registry Program are
        currently under consideration.    One landowner, contacted at the
        time of the survey is currently enrolled in the Forest Stewardship
        program. Landowners should be informed of the significance of the
        existing natural heritage resource element occurrences, and should
        be encouraged, where possible to manage potential habitat
        appropriately.

        No administrative access would be necessary for this site, however
        managerial access to critical areas would be a crucial part of
        management agreements with individual landowners.

        INFORMATION NEEDS:
        Further inventory of this natural area may reveal additional
        rarities; vertebrate and invertebrate inventories are needed.

        Protection status and future plans of the significant nearby lands
        would be extremely helpful.

        RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
        It is recommended that Isle of Wight County:

              -Provide an educational program which focuses on natural
              resources within the area.

              -Make local developers and businesses aware of the natural
              resource issues which are relevant to the area and encourage
              them to consider these issues in future planning activities.

                                         43






















                                                    50



                                                                                                                                   tPauls
                                                                                      L30
                                                                                                                                                       -Al

                                                                                                                                                   x76


                                                                                                                                       A




                                                                                    0

                                                                              In

                                                                                                                                         76


                                                                                                       @.-..:X39
                                                        It
                                                        It













                                                                                                      X34




                                                                                                           r
                                                                        it


                                                                                                                                                 --\-70
                                                                        1,0          o

                                                                        it
                                                                                                                        614















                         SITE NAME: SOUTH ZUNI SANDHILLS                                                                                                N
                         USGS 7.51 QUADRANGLE: ZUNI
                         SCALE: 1:24,000












                               HORSE SWAMP PINE BARRENS

          LOCATION: Virginia,, Isle of Wight County
                        Quadrangle: Zuni                   Quadrangle code: 3607677

          BIODIVERSITY RANK: B2


          DIRECTIONS:
          From Zuni, take Route 460 east one mile. Right on Route 645, and
          one mile to Route 614 - three miles on Route 614.                     All sites
          within the Zuni Macrosite are east of the Blackwater River and
          within 1.5 miles of the river channel.                The general area runs
          from Route 603 north to 0.7 miles north of Zuni.                  This site is
          located east of the Blackwater River, and just east of the
          junction of Route 603 and Route 614.

          GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
          This site supports very rare, fire-dependent long-leaf pine and
          turkey oak vegetation. This particular assemblage of rare plants
          and vegetation types is extremely rare in Virginia.                  Because of
          widespread destruction throughout its range, long-leaf pine
          turkey oak vegetation should be considered globally rare.

          NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES:


          Scientif ic              Common                   Global State Eo Federal State
          Name                     Name                     Rank    Rank Rank Status Status


          communities:
          oligotrophic woodland pine barren                           Sl    C      -     -

          plants:
          Carphephorus bellidifolius
                                  sandy-woods chaffhead      G4       si     D     -     -
          Kalmia angustifolia     sheep-laurel               G5     S2S3     A     -     -
          Pinus palustris         long-leaf pine            G4G5      S2    CD     -     -
          Pyxidanthera barbulata  flowering pixie-moss       G4       Sl     C     -     -
          ouercus laevis          turkey oak                 G5       S2    AB     -     -
          Ouercus margarettae     sand post oak              G5       S2    AB     -     -
          Vaccinium; crassifolium creeping blueberry        G4G5      Sl     D     -     -


          The site contains an extremely rare type of oligotrophic f orest
          characterized by long-leaf pine (Pinus palustris) and turkey oak
          (Ouercus laevis).        Long-leaf pine and understory plants such as
          creeping blueberry (Vaccinium crassifolium), flowering pixie-moss
          (PyKidanthera barbulata), and sheep-laurel (Kalmia ancrustifolia)
          indicate a fire-maintained vegetation type sometimes called "pine
          barren".     Soils here are primarily Alaga fine sand and Chipley
          sand; both are considered to be deep, well drained soils with low
          natural fertility, low organic matter content and low available
          water capacity (Kitchel et al., 1982).



                                                 44








         Horse Swamp Pine Barrens is at the northern range limit of long-
         leaf pine and perhaps because of the soils and climate, the site
         lacks a number of southern plant species which are typical of this
         community type in the center of its range.            Department of
         Conservation and Recreation ecologists regard this community as
         globally endangered, as an overwhelming percentage of this forest
         type has been decimated through development or converted to other
         uses.

         Horse Swamp Pine Barrens is in very close proximity to the
         Blackwater Ecologic Preserve which supports similar rare vegetation
         and many of the same rare plant species.      The protection of the
         Horse Swamp Pine Barrens would represent a significant contribution
         to the conservation of Virginia's biological diversity and greatly
         complement the conservation efforts at the Blackwater Ecological
         Preserve.


         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary ecological boundary encompasses the rare pine barren
         vegetation and some critical adjoining lands. The main purpose of
         the primary ecological boundary is to delineate and encompass known
         occurrences of natural heritage resources and existing and
         potential habitat for those resources. Inclusion of minimal buffer
         lands provide excellent restoration potential for rare species with
         active management. The northern and southern edges are bordered by
         roads, and the eastern side is bordered by another small stream and
         @gricultural fields.     On the western edge of the site, the
         inclusion of a small stream should serve as an excellent natural
         firebreak for future  management activities.

         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL  BOUNDARY: The secondary ecological boundary
         includes the rare community, rare species occurrences and some
         additional lands to serve as buffer.      The secondary ecological
         boundary is designed to include lands for mitigation of natural and
         human threats',    and to provide      lands   related to special
         administrative or managerial needs, such as prescribed fire
         management. Because fire management is crucial to the preservation
         and maintenance of this distinctive community and the rarities
         supported here, the secondary ecological boundary includes several
         small streams, drainages and minimal additional lands to serve as
         natural and existing fire breaks.

         The secondary ecological boundary reaches east and drops south of
         the primary on the eastern and southeastern sides of the site; this
         encompasses some of the agricultural fields located along Route
         603. Portions of these fields will be crucial in future management
         for administrative access and as fire breaks.

         The secondary ecological boundary continues northward, and
         separated only by a rural, secondary road, it links Horse Swamp
         Pine Barrens with the Blackwater Ecologic Preserve, Antioch Swamp
         Pine Barrens and South Zuni Sandhills. This site and the others

                                          45









        are integral parts of a larger sandhill ecosystem. For the sake of
        consistency with the APES inventory report, they have been
        described separately.

        PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
        Primary acreage (acreage within primary
        ecological boundary)- 156 acres
        Secondary acreage (acreage within secondary
        ecological boundary)- 86 acres
        Total acreage recommended for protection- 242 acres

        TRACTS:
        Number of ownership tracts within site: six. This site includes
        six parcels of land representing five different landowners.
        Number of ownership tracts within the primary ecological boundary:
        six.


        ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
        This area is managed primarily for timber, and parts of the site
        have been selectively logged and clearcut. Surrounding land use is
        timber or agriculture, and there is a large working farm to the
        east and southeast of the site.

        Lack of fire poses a serious threat to this natural area. Because
        this community has been created and maintained by fire, many of the
        rare plants here are reproducing poorly.     Prescribed burning is
        recommended to enhance the rare species populations.       As fires
        create open soil habitats, the number of rare plant species here
        will likely increase dramatically. Virtually all of the rare plant
        species found at the Blackwater Ecologic Preserve and other nearby
        significant lands should be expected to colonize the Horse Swamp
        Pine Barrens site following prescribed burning.       Lowland areas
        within the pine barrens currently support sphagnous thickets of
        pond pine (Pinus serotina), laurel-leaf greenbriar (Smilax
        .1aurifolia), and sweetbay magnolia (Macrnolia virainiana).     With
        fire, these wet areas would be converted to open, bog-like
        environments and exceptional rare plant habitat.

        Future logging likely could degrade this natural community and its
        rare plant populations. Residential or industrial development in
        the nearby surrounding area may pose a threat to future management
        activities related to developing future fire and smoke management
        programs.

        This area lies entirely within Isle of Wight County. The county
        comprehensive plan designates Horse Swamp as a Resource Management
        Area (Bradby, 1991). Horse Swamp is the easternmost border of the
        Blackwater Ecologic Preserve before it crosses Route 614 and serves
        as a border for this site along the northern and western sides.
        The designation of Resource Management Area is designed to protect
        the natural resources, and carries the following recommendations
        for development and agricultural uses.

                                         46









              -No development be permitted on slopes exceeding 25% where
                   soils are unsuitable.

              -Development in floodplgins should be limited and responsibly
                   managed.

              -Clearing of woodlands and forests should be minimized to the
                   extent possible.

              -in general, only very limited low density residential
                   development should be permitted in those areas of the
                   Resource Conservation District which are developable.

              -When development does occur in the Resource Conservation
                   District, all environmental impacts should attempt to be
                   avoided and in cases where impacts do occur, mitigation
                   measures should be employed.

              -The State and private conservation organizations should
                   actively pursue programs to purchase and/or acquire
                   easements for privately owned lands in the Resource
                   Conservation District so they can be preserved.

         MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
         It is recommended that a fire management plan be developed for this
         area. managers of the Blackwater River Ecologic Preserve possess
         the technical and scientific expertise needed to manage pine
         barrens.    If protected, Horse Swamp Pine Barrens could be
         efficiently managed through a cooperative effort with the
         Blackwater Ecologic Preserve.

         PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
         Acquisition of some of the land within the primary and secondary
         ecological boundaries is recommended.    An old logging road from
         Route 614 into this tract could provide access. Secondary access
         might be considered on the southern portion of the site, by
         acquiring small portions of land along the road.

         The combination of appropriate management, and proximity to the
         Blackwater Ecologic Preserve and additional significant lands,
         gives this site excellent restoration potential for additional
         rarities, and offers the possibility of a large, diverse,
         contiguous and defensible natural area preserve. It is among the
         highest protection priorities in southeastern Virginia.

         Horse Swamp, which runs along the northern and western sides of the
         site, and a stream located on the east side of the site have been
         included within the primary and secondary ecological boundaries.
         Although these wetlands are not necessary for the maintenance of
         the natural resources, they are crucial for future management as
         natural fire breaks.       The inclusion of a portion of the
         agricultural fields should also serve as a good fire break, as well

                                          47









        as assuring future access to the site for management purposes.
        Lands within the secondary boundary alone need not be acquired as
        long as access and management rights are secured for the future
        active management of protected lands.

        INFORMATION NEEDS:
        More vertebrate and invertebrate inventories of this site are
        needed, as well as further exploration of the entire tract.
        Further inventories here could yield the discovery of more
        rarities.

        It would be useful to know the status and future land use plans of
        the nearby lands which support rare plant species.

        RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
        It is recommended that Isle of Wight County:

             -Provide an educational program which focuses on natural
                  resources within the area.

             -Make local developers and businesses aware of the natural
                  resource issues which are relevant to the area and
                  encourage them to consider these issues in future
                  planning activities.


























                                         48
























                      x3





                          %


                            %         V
                                                                                                                         46



                                                                                                   V:
                    32                                                           41







                                                                             X4/


                                                 7









                     X28-
                                                       N1
                                                                                                                                          X87
                                                                                     X37




                                                            614
                                                                                                                                1-7



                                                                                                 76
                                                     m
                                                     4


                                                     G



                                        @,'Ce
                                                                              73X
                                          9















                        SITE NAME: HORSE SWAMP BARRENS                                                                                    N
                        USGS 7.51 QUADRANGLE: ZUNI
                        SCALE: 1:24,000











                                             CAT PONDS


            LOCATION: Virginia, Isle of Wight County
                          Quadrangle: Benns Church                 Quadrangle code: 3607685

            BIODIVERSITY RANK: B4


            DIRECTIONS:
            Cat Ponds is clearly named on the USGS topographic map and is
            located approximately one mile northwest of Wills Corner in the
            area north of Route 600, east of Route 602, and west of Route 10.

            GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
            This site was first made known to scientists in 1938 by Harvard
            botanist M. L. Fernald.           At that time, these ephemeral sinkhole
            ponds were pristine and supported a great variety of rare plants
            (Fernald, 1938).         Since Fernald's time, many developments have
            occurred around these ponds, although the ponds still support two
            ecologically unique communities and several rare species of plants
            and animals.         Though the natural integrity of . the ponds and
            surrounding drainage has been compromised, Cat Ponds remains an
            area of biological significance.


            Scientif ic               Common                     Global State EO Federal State
            Name                      Name                       Rank     Rank Rank Status Status


            communities:
            buttonbush-maidencane community                      G3        Sl     C        -     -
            coastal plain sinkhole pond                          G4        Sl     A        -     -

            plants:
            Eleocharis melanocarpa    black-fruited spikerush    G4        S2     BC       -     -
            Eleocharis tricostata     three-angle spikerush      G4        Sl     D        -     -
            Ludwigia brevipes         long beach seedbox         G4G5      S2     D        -     -
            Panicum. hemitomon        maidencane                 G5        Sl     A        -     -


            animals:
            Ambystoma. mabeei         Mabee's salamander         G4        Sl     C        -     LT
            Ambystoma tigri           eastern tiger salamanderG5           Sl     C        -     LE
            Atlides halesus           great purple hairstreak G5           S3     C        -     -
            siren intermedia          lesser siren               GS        SU     B        -     -


            The ponds at this site are formed in sinkhole basins. These                    basins
            f orm when the limy beds in the underlying soils are leached by
            groundwater and the overlying sediments subside or collapse
            suddenly into the void created by dissolution.                      The sinkholes
            originally form as shallow depressions on the otherwise level
            plain, and increase in depth and areal extent as more underlying
            lime is dissolved.            In the Early Phase of development, the
            depressions are too shallow and too small to hold water for very
            long.      In the Middle Phase of development, the depressions
            characteristically are larger, and deep enough now to collect and

                                                      49








         retain water f or variable periods of time.     As the depressions
         continue to increase in size, the basins eventually coalesce, and
           mpound sinkholes form. Many of these 'merged' sinkholes contain
         ponds in the shape of a figure-eight.     The sinkholes eventually
         co

         fill with sediment (in the Late Phase of development@ and are
         breached by eroding streams. Most sinkholes in the Cat Ponds area
         are in the Middle Phase of development.

         The sinkhole ponds here range in age from 80,000 to more than
         100,000 years old. The pond-bottom sediments of the older ponds
         often contain extensive fossil pollen records. Studies of fossil
         pollens can reveal important clues about climate, vegetation, and
         fire history of the prehistoric past. As might be expected, older
         ponds usually have thicker layers of accumulated bottom sediments
         than do younger ponds. These sediments actually retard water loss
         and these ponds will hold water for longer periods of time than
         similar-sized ponds with thinner bottom sediments (Clark, 1993;
         Rawinskil pers. comm.).

         The hydrology of sinkhole ponds is influenced by groundwater and
         surf acewater interactions. A tremendous amount of infiltration and
         downward percolation occur here, with little lateral movement of
         groundwater, due to the especially porous nature of this area's
         geology and a lack of topographic relief. Water seeping downward
         is captured in a perched water table (an aquifer close to the
         surface separated from the deeper groundwater aquifers by an
         impermeable layer). During the wet seasons (late winter through
         early spring) rainfall percolates down to the perched aquifer. The
         filled aquifer then retards further downward movement of water.
         Flat'topography discourages fast runoff and the filled, perched
         water table retards quick percolation, rainwater then finds its way
         into the sinkhole depressions forming seasonal ponds (Clark, 1993).

         Most ponds fill in the winter and spring and lose water to
         evaporation and percolation through late spring and summer. They
         are usually dry by late summer or early fall. The decrease of each
         pond's water level depends upon the demographics of each pond (e.g.
         age, size, depth, location and vegetation).        Individual pond
         hydrology is further influenced by varying amounts of annual
         precipitation. Natural water level fluctuations maintain open or
         semi-open forest canopies and help create diverse zones of
         vegetation on pond margins and bottoms. Since fish cannot survive
         in these seasonal ponds, the ponds provide predator-free breeding
         habitat for many amphibians.-

         Because of many variables affecting hydrology, each pond has a
         unique hydrologic regime which may vary annually.      Most of the
         ponds are beneath a closed forest canopy, although some ponds that
         are larger or that retain more water, have less canopy cover,
         resulting in well-developed shrub and herbaceous layers. For these
         reasons, larger, deeper ponds will generally be more biologically
         diverse than smaller ponds. When this variability among ponds is

                                         50









         multiplied by the large number of ponds, it is clear that the Cat
         Ponds site supports an extremely diverse complex of isolated
         freshwater depression wetlands.

         Although there have historically been many sinkhole ponds in
         Virginia, because of degradation and outright destruction there are
         very few pond complexes which still support native vegetation
         and/or rare species of plants and animals.       The sinkhole ponds
         occurring at the Cat Ponds site are the deepest and largest coastal
         plain sinkhole ponds in Virginia (Buhlmann, 1992). Maintenance of
         these ephemeral sinkhole ponds and associated flora and fauna is
         extremely important.

         Two plant species considered to be quite rare in Virginia are the
         three-angle spikerush (Eleocharis tricostata) and maidencane
         (Panic   hemitomon). In Virginia, three-angle spike rush is known
         from only five locations, and maidencane is known from only four.
         Both plants are characteristically found at pond edges in
         relatively shallow water, and they are considered to be quite
         "faithful to the sinkhole pond and Carolina Bay habitat" (Ludwig,
         pers. comm., 1993).

         The Cat Ponds site also supports breeding populations of two rare
         salamander species, the eastern tiger salamander (Ambystgma
         tiarin ), which is state listed as endangered, and Mabee's
         salamander (Ambystoma mabeei), state listed as threatened. These
         species are generally found in small fish-less ponds (because fish
         will readily eat the juveniles, or larvae of the salamanders, they
         are rarely found in locations with naturally occurring or stocked
         fish populations)-

         Although tiger salamanders spend the larval period in the water,
         most of the adult period is spent on land, in terrestrial burrows.
         The terrestrial habitat for the eastern tiger salamander is usually
         described as a' substrate which is suitable for burrowing or sandy
         areas near shallow ponds.    Large range movements (approx. 175 m
         from breeding ponds) have been documented for these animals (Pague
         and Buhlmann, 1991).

         Like the tiger salamander, Mabee's salamander spends its larval
         period in an aquatic environment and remains primarily terrestrial
         throughout its adult period.     Little is known about the natural
         history of this animal; it is believed that they remain in the
         general vicinity of the breeding ponds, although normal range
         movements are thought to be comparable to those of the tiger
         salamander (Pague and Mitchell, 1991).

         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary ecological boundary encompasses several groups of
         seasonal ponds and a powerline right-of-way.             Ecologically
         significant areas designated by the primary ecological boundaries
         actually f lank a sand-mining operation which is located in the

                                          51










         middle of the three areas. The delineated areas are located to the
         northwest, northeast and south of the mining activity. Clusters to
         the northwest and south contain several sinkhole ponds which
         support rare vegetation and amphibians. The area to the northeast
         of the site contains several similar ponds as well as the power
         line right-of-way from which the great purple hairstreak was
         collected.


         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The secondary ecological boundary includes the three areas
         identified by primary ecological boundaries, as well as lands
         intended as buffers to protect these sensitive ponds and the
         species they support.        A naturally vegetated buffer of
         approximately 260 meters  is suggested for protection of the ponds
         and rare salamanders (Pague and Buhlmann, 1991). Buffers to these
         ponds are imperative as aquifer recharge areas, for the protection
         of water quality, and for providing terrestrial habitat for rare
         amphibians.   Although more information is needed on terrestrial
         habitat requirements for these rare amphibians, both the tiger
         salamander and Mabee's salamander spend their adult periods on
         land, and are known to travel fairly large distances for normal
         activities.

         The secondary ecological boundary roughly follows the pipeline
         right-of-way and a secondary road on the northeast and north. on
         the western and southwestern edges the boundary follows the land
         contour and then crosses the powerline right-of-way. The secondary
         ecological boundary then rounds the southern tip of the site and
         generally follows the land contours up the eastern edge.
         Additional land is included here for protection of recharge areas
         and to mitigate natural and human threats to the normal hydrologic
         regime of these ephemeral sinkhole ponds. The boundaries will be
         continually refined as more information about this complex
         hydrologic system is gathered.

         PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
         Primary acreage (acreage within primary
         ecological boundary)- 84 acres.
         Secondary acreage (acreage within secondary
         ecological boundary)- 346 acres.
         Total acreage recommended for protection- 430 acres.

         TRACTS:
         Number of ownership tracts within site: nine.
         Number of ownership tracts within the primary ecological boundary:
         Six tracts, representing six different landowners make up this
         site.

         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
         The surrounding land uses at the Cat Ponds site are primarily
         agriculture, silviculture, and mining.        A large sand-mining
         operation is located in the center of the conservation site. Much

                                          52








         of the land has been altered in relation to the mining activities,
         timbering activities or as a result of the increasing amount of
         residential development in this county (Clampitt, 1989).          The
         population and associated services within Isle of Wight County are
         growing and expanding very rapidly.

         The most severe threats to the sinkhole pond complex at Cat Ponds
         are hydrologic perturbations or interruptions.       Disruptions of
         recharge areas, nearby water withdrawals and other hydrologic
         altering activities are grave threats to the continued existence of
         these ponds.

         Exotic species do not appear to be a large threat at this time,
         although landowners need to be warned against stocking these ponds
         with fish that may pose threats to the rare plant and animal
         species supported here.

         Some off site considerations include nutrient enrichment from nearby
         agricultural lands, and sedimentation and other run-off from new
         housing developments. In the center of the secondary ecological
         boundary, and surrounded by small islands distinguished by primary
         ecological boundaries is a sand-mining operation. Several of the
         original ponds have succumbed to filling and associated problems
         with sedimentation from this activity. Cat Ponds site is located
         at the junction of two powerlines, and just south of the junction
         of two pipelines. There is an electric power substation located
         between two of the 'pond clusters' and the area is surrounded by
         agricultural and timbering activities; "outside",, or alternate land
         use pressures are obviously quite intense.

         MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
         Management agreements for power line construction and right-of-way
         maintenance need to be discussed with VA Power.        It should be
         stressed that right-of-way maintenance and power lines need to be
         manually or physically maintained instead of spraying with
         chemicals.   Buffer strips of natural vegetation should be re-
         established around the ponds and also in areas of high run-off
         potential. A small dike constructed at the outlet of one of the
         ponds should be fortified and monitored to ensure protection
         against drainage of that particular pond.

         Research on the hydrology of this sinkhole pond complex is
         necessary to understand conservation and future management
         considerations.


         PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
         Acquisition is not recommended for any of the land at the Cat Ponds
         site. The large amount of disruption and human alteration make the
         long-term viability of this site questionable. A large sand-mining
         operation is located in close proximity to the ponds identified by
         primary ecological boundaries, and is within the secondary
         ecological boundary. It is suggested that management agreements be

                                          53









         sought with appropriate landowners concerning the ponds and nearby
         land management and land use activities.

         INFORMATION NEEDS:
         Additional zoological inventory is needed here.          Biological
         monitoring of these seasonal ponds and the rare plant and animal
         species is recommended once site protection is achieved.

         Additional information is needed on the terrestrial habitat needs
         of the rare amphibians found at the Cat Ponds site.

         RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
         It is recommended that Isle of Wight County provide an educational
         program which focuses on natural resources within the area, and on
         local natural resource and environmental issues.











































                                         54

























                                                                                                                                                50







                                                                                                                                          BM
                                        -3



                                                602



                                                                                                                       b ta W

                                     /A h Grove,,,
                                              c









                                                                              15'
                                            77 Longview


                                                                                   73
                                          Radl.Vo
                                          Tl@ wer

                                                                                                 70,
                                                                                                                    e      ro
                                                                                                                  \J(
                                                                        -7/.'                             B14
                                                                                                          54
                                 A
                                 AA                       50
                                  A                       so







                                                                                                                            mer.     0--




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

                                                                                                                                          ...................
                                                                                                                                                .............
                                                                                                                                          ............ . ........
                                                                                                                                I pl
                                                                                                                                               ...........


                                                      3.U                                     3.rR                                                                             3(











                             SITE NAME: CAT PONDS                                                                                                                              N
                             USGS 7.51 QUADRANGLE: BENNS CHURCH
                             SCALE: 1:24,000














                                                DISPUTANTA

            LOCATION: Virginia, Prince George County
                      Quadrangle: Disputanta North              Quadrangle code: 3707722

            BIODIVERSITY RANK: B2


            DIRECTIONS:
            The site is located at the headwaters of Otterdam. Swamp along
            Hines Road (Route 625) approximately one mile southwest of
            Lebanon Church.


            GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
            This rare plant site was discovered by noted Harvard botanist,
            M.L. Fernald in the 19301s.                   The sun-facing sunflower has
            continued to survive at this site since the original discovery to
            the present.        The site consists of the right-of-way of Hines
            Road, along a 3/4 mile stretch of the road. The Disputanta site
            provides habitat for Virginia's               only known population of the
            globally-rare, sun-facing coneflower (Rudbeckia helioRsidis).
            The highest number of plants is found on the north, northwest
            side of Route 625, although there are scattered plants on the
            southeast side of the road as well. Cut-over pine-oak flatwoods
            and pine plantations surround the site.

            NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES:

            Scientif ic               Common                     Global State BO Federal State
            Name                      Name                       Rank    Rank Rank Status Status


            plants -.
            Rudbeckia heliopsidis     sun-facing coneflower      G2        Sl      B      C2     C
            Sphacr   trinitense       trinidad peatmoss          G4      S2S3      U
            animals:
            Libellula flavida         yellow-sided skimmer       G5        S2      C


            The habitat of the sun-facing coneflower is the                           seasonally
            inundated and organic soils that exist over a clay-rich substratum.
            This area includes the headwater seep that forms Otterdam Creek.
            The herbaceous vegetation at the site is very diverse with 72
            species noted by Wright (1989). At the southern end of this site
            is a small seasonal pond which supports the rare trinidad peatmoss
            (Sphacmum, trinitense) and a rare dragonfly (Libellula flavida).
            Cut-over pine-oak f latwoods and pine plantations surround the site.


            The sun-facing coneflower (Rudbeckia heliopsidis) is a globally
            rare plant, and is a Category 2 species for possible federal
            listing as an endangered or threatened species. The coneflower is
            a southeast endemic of coastal plain and piedmont areas, and is


                                                      55









         known from only 7 to 10 locations world-wide.         It occurs in
         Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Alabama
         (Ormes, 1987). The Disputanta location in Prince George County is
         the only known Virginia occurrence of this rare species.

         This attractive sunflower is similar in appearance to the common
         black-eyed susan, however as its name implies, the head and flower
         of this plant migrate to positions which face the sun. The sun-
         facing coneflower is a perennial herb which flowers in mid-summer
         and ripens its fruits in late summer to early fall (Ware, 1991).
         The species apparently reproduces both sexually and vegetatively,
         although, as is often the case with rare plants, much still needs
         to be determined about the life history. The sun-f acing conef lower
         appears to require moist, acidic soils with high levels of sunlight
         (Ware, 1991).

         The Virginia population of the sun-f acing conef lower currently
         seems fairly healthy, thought its habitat has become more, probably
         due to fire suppression in the past fifty years. When surveyed in
         the late 1980 Is, there were approximately 400 flowering plants and
         an additional 215 rosettes (Wright, 1989), with an extensive ground
         cover of young sun-facing coneflowers.

         This plant is a poor competitor with woody vegetation and the
         maintenance of an opening within the habitat is imperative to the
         preservation of this population.

         A combination of seasonally high water and some frequency of
         prescribed or wild fire are critical factors influencing the open
         character of this habitat. Other man-made disturbances such as log
         staging and road side maintenance practices have contributed to
         creating openings where this plant persists.

         The swale at the southern end of the Disputanta site evidently is
         seasonally flooded, and serves as habitat for trinidad peatmoss,
         found at only several locations in,Virginia; and for the yellow-
         s,ided skimmer 1 a dragonf ly which is rare in Virginia.         The
         occurrences of these three rare species and the respective status
         of each one make this site extremely worthy of protection efforts.

         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary ecological boundary encompasses the known occurrences
         of all three natural heritage resources as well as the existing and
         potential habitats. The primary ecological boundary follows Route
         625 'fairly closely, although it widens some to encircle the
         seasonal pond at the southern end of the site.          The primary
         boundary also widens on each side of the road to take in two swales
         that are part of the headwater seeps of Otterdam Creek, and that
         support slightly larger numbers of the sun-facing coneflower

         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The secondary ecological boundary includes the-primary ecological

                                          56









         boundary and some additional lands to allow for ecological buffers
         and managerial access. The secondary ecological boundary follows
         the primary ecological boundary around the northern and southern
         ends of the site. The secondary boundary expands somewhat on the
         northwest side of the site to encompass the headwaters swale/seep
         feeding into Otterdam Creek. Both ecological boundaries coincide
         brief ly at a private road.       This is a well maintained, gated
         logging road.      The secondary ecological boundary also widens
         slightly to include an intermittent stream bed on the southeastern
         side of the road. The stream bed is adjacent to the population of
         the sun-facing coneflower which is frequently found in moist,
         seasonally flooded swales (Wright, 1989).         The amount of land
         included in the secondary ecological boundary should adequately
         provide for expansion into potential habitat, with active
         management, for the sun-facing coneflowe'r.      Buffer land included
         within the secondary ecological boundary should also provide
         sufficient managerial access.

         PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
         Primary acreage (acreage within primary
         ecological boundary)- 57 acres.
         Secondary acreage (acreage within secondary
         ecological boundary)- 83 acres.
         Total acreage recommended for protection- 140 acres.

         TRACTS:
         Number of.ownership tracts within site: three
         Number of ownership tracts within the primary ;cological boundary:
         one.   The land which encompasses both the primary and secondary
         ecological boundaries for this site is owned by' one landowner,
         although the roadsides (right-of-way, 20 feet on each side - from
         center of hard surface) are owned and managed by Virginia
         Department of Transportation (VDOT).

         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
         Much of this site is commercial forest land and is managed for
         pulpwood production -    It is planted with loblolly pine.         Areas
         where rare species are concentrated are likely old log staging
         areas, wetland fringes where tree growth may be inhibited, and
         roadside maintenance areas. Japanese honeysuckle has invaded some
         portions of the site and carpets the swale area. There have been
         some recent wildfires in the area, though prescribed burning is not
         practiced on the commercial forest acreage. Nearby timberlands are
         leased to local hunt clubs.

         Logging practices on nearby lands should be carefully planned to
         avoid damage to sensitive plants and their habitat. Access routes
         for heavy equipment in and around the area should avoid sensitive
         plant habitat.

         The roadside continues to be managed with standard management
         activities such as mowing, ditching, and spraying. Herbicide spray

                                            57









         plans should consider potential drif t into sensitive areas and
         determine no spray zones and buffer widths. New ditching, digging
         ?r logging could occur at any time, and should be considered
         imminent threats. Controlling natural forest succession is crucial
         to the preservation of the sun-facing coneflower, however, heavy
         equipment or physical alteration would be extremely damaging to
         this population. VDOT road improvement plans for Route 625 should
         be carefully monitored as roadside alteration and physical
         destruction pose obvious threats to this rare plant population. A
         close, accurate and current line of communication should be
         maintained with VDOT to prevent the unintentional destruction of
         this population of the sun-facing coneflower.

         The Disputanta site is located in a "Critical Conservation" area
         for Prince George County (Ramming, 1986). The comprehensive plan
         describes this site as an area where development is restricted. In
         @his area, development is restricted primarily by soil type, which
         is Muckalee-Levy. The Muckalee-Levy soils are very poorly drained
         with a loamy or clayey substratum.

         MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
         The sun-facing coneflower is a poor competitor with woody
         vegetation. Therefore, natural succession to woodland may threaten
         the continued viability of this population. Means of preventing
         succession will be critical to maintaining the population of the
         coneflower at this site. Photographs and notations by Wright in
         1989, indicate that this site was apparently burned seven to ten
         years ago, although no recent management is evident.             The
         Disputanta site is in desperate need of active fire management. A
         long-term fire management program (encompassing the seasonality and
         frequency of burning) needs to be developed based on the results of
         life history studies and fire effects research. This particular
         land management technique is compatible with ongoing forest
         resource management activities. It is recommended that Department
         of Conservation and Recreation stewardship staff develop prescribed
         burn research plans and work with the appropriate landowners in
         implementation.

         Besides reduction of woody cover, prescribed burning may increase
         mineral soil areas where rare plants germinate and release
         nutrients in the soil for improved growth. Some form of hydrologic
         research assessments are warranted to better understand the role of
         water in influencing vegetation structure and composition.

         Since this is the only known population of the globally rare sun-
         facing coneflower in Virginia, a regular annual monitoring program
         is recommended. A long-term monitoring program of this plant would
         help ensure the continued vitality and health of the population.

         The exotic species encroachment into the sun-f acing conef lower
         habitat needs to be monitored and an appropriate invasive specie   s
         control program should be designed and implemented.

                                         58









         Because collection could pose a threat to this population of rare
         plants, the precise location of the sun-facing coneflower
         occurrence should probably be kept confidential.

         PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
         Initial contact has been made with the primary landowner and basic
         site protection and management options were discussed.        At a
         minimum a long-term management plan following the guidelines
         mentioned above should be implemented. Strong forms of protection
         are encouraged because of the great rarity of the sun-facing
         sunflower in Virginia.

         INFORMATION NEEDS:
         Further research needs to be conducted on the hydrology of the area
         and how it affects this rare plant.       Additional life history
         information is needed on the sun-facing coneflower, pertaining to
         roles of sexual and asexual reproduction, seed viability and
         requirements for seedling establishment (Ware, 1991).

         Research into the fire history of the area is needed, as well as
         more information about the effects of fire on these plants and
         their habitat.

         Further invertebrate inventories are needed in this area.
         Specifically, more information about the dragonfly is needed to
         determine some population demographics such as size, reproductive
         activity and health.

         RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
         It is recommended that Prince George County provide an educational
         program which focuses on natural resources within the area, and on
         local natural resource and environmental issues.      This program
         could be administered through the Parks and Recreation Department,
         the Planning Department or through the local schools.

















                                         59

















                                                                                                        /00



                                                                                  x136


                                                                                                                                         m
                                                                                                                                           133-'


                                                                                                                                       Le   non
                                                                                                                                       Ch
                                                                                                                                 124

                                                                 20





                                                                       120                                              5








                                                                                        sm
                                                    Op




                                                                                       7


                                                                                                      20



                                                                                                                       Ld















                                                                    30
                                                                                                                                            fl


                                                               r2

                                                                                                                                                    20
                                         -43 5@           120
                              00
                                                                                                              V







                           SITE NAME: DISPUTANTA                                                                                                N
                          USGS 7.51 QUADRANGLE:                         DISPUTANTA NORTH
                           SCALE: 1:24,000











                          NORTHWEST RIVER MACROSITE


        Size: Approximately 16 miles
              (river channel and adjacent forests and marshes)


        Location: Virginia, City of Chesapeake
                 Quad: Moyock, Lake Drummond SE
                Quad Codes: 3607652, 3607653


        overview:
        The headwaters of the Northwest River are in the City of
        Chesapeake, just east of Route 17, the intracoastal waterway (which
        is the Dismal Swamp Canal) and the eastern edge of the Great Dismal
        Swamp National Wildlife Refuge.    The river originates from
        groundwater, ditches and drainage f rom the southern half of the
        historic Dismal Swamp, and possibly f rom part of the existing Swamp
        as well.  The Northwest River runs a short distance (16 to 18
        miles) from east of the Great Dismal Swamp to just below the
        Virginia/North Carolina line.   Shortly after entering North
        Carolina, the Northwest River empties into Tull Bay which then
        flows into the southern reach of the North Landing River, and
        ultimately, into Currituck Sound.

        As the Northwest River follows a course through southeast Virginia,
        it is generally slow moving and fairly shallow with extensive swamp
        forests and marshes. The watershed of the Northwest River, the
        associated forests, marshes, and river channel, support a diverse
        and rich assemblage of natural resources. In addition to harboring
        many rare species of plants, animals and vegetative communities,
        the river supports many recreational activities.

        Description of Macrosite:
        The Northwest River Macrosite includes the entire reach of the
        river (from just east of the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife
        Refuge to the Virginia/North Carolina state line) and some critical
        adjacent lands. Within the Macrosite, which includes a city park,
        three conservation sites and numerous natural heritage resources
        have been identified (see Table 1). All three conservation sites
        are located near the Battlefield Boulevard bridge across the
        Northwest River, and all sites include the river channel and
        port ions of the nearby forests and marshes.

        The Great Dismal Swamp, believed to have been formed approximately
        10,000 years ago is located at the northwestern edge of the
        Northwest River Macrosite. The boundary drawn here is obviously an
        arbitrary separation (made for political and logistical reasons).
        The Northwest River, obviously, is inseparably interconnected with
        the Great Dismal Swamp, and the riverine system still retains much
        of the wild, ecologically rich character of the swamp. Because the

                                     60









         area floods seasonally, and because it can occasionally be rather
         inhospitable, there are areas within the watershed that remain
         quite similar to the original swamp.      These areas often support
         many species of plants and animals which are now rare in Virginia.
         Along this stretch of the Northwest River, three unusual vegetative
         communities and many rare plant and animal species have been
         identified.    Extensive marshes, forested swamps, small raised
         islands and open river and creek channels support many rare species
         and are integral parts of one of the most biologically significant
         areas in Virginia.

         The marshes in this area represent two broad community types; low
         herbaceous palustrine wetland and mid-height herbaceous palustrine
         wetland. These rare wetland communities are rich in diversity and
         support many rare plant and animal species.      Areas of low marsh
         vegetation occur away from the primary creek channels. In these
         low marshes are found such plant rarities as the ten-angle pipewort
         (Eriocaulon decancrulare), elongated lobelia (Lobelia eloncrata),
         winged seedbox (Ludwicia alata), beaked spikerush (Eleocharis
         rostellata),   and    slender-leaved   dragon    head    (Physostegia
         leptophylla).

         Tall   robust   emergents    such   as   big   cordgrass     (Spartina
         cynosuroides), common reed (Phragmites australis), broad-leaf
         cattail    (Typha    latifolia),    narrow-leaf    cattail      (Typha
         ancTustifolia), and black needlerush (Juncus roemerianus) dominate
         many of the remaining marshes along the Northwest River.         These
         diverse marshes also support rare animals such as the little grass
         frog (Limnaoedus ocularis), carpenter frog (Rana virgatipes) and
         the scarce swamp skipper (Euphyes dukesi).

         The small, raised islands here, characterized by submesotrophic
         forests of loblolly pine, red oak, American beech and sourwood, are
         unusually rich in woody species. Over 24 woody plants have been
         documented here, including the rare shrub, silky camellia
         (Stewartia malachodendron). Silky camellia is rare throughout its
         range, and is known from fewer than 20 locations in Virginia.
         Although some of the larger islands along the Northwest River may
         have been selectively logged in the past, vegetation recovery
         appears to be complete for some of the islands located within
         primary ecological boundaries of some of the conservation sites.
         Department of Conservation and Recreation ecologists have suggested
         that some of these areas may actually represent pre-settlement
         conditions.

         The extensive forested swamps along the river support such species
         as bald cypress (Taxodium. distichum), water tupelo (Nyssa
         aquatica), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), sweet gum (Liguidambar
         styraciflua) and red maple (Acer rubrum). These forested wetlands
         also support the rare epiphytic sedge (Carex decomposita), known
         from only one other watershed in Virginia.

                                          61








         Epiphytic sedge and winged seedbox are very rare plants, and the
         populations along the Northwest River are considered to be some of
         the f inest anywhere for these species.       Epiphytic sedge,, of ten
         called cypress-knee sedge is found in disjunct locations throughout
         it's historic range (Ostlie, 1990). At one time, the range of this
         sedge included the east coast and midwestern United States, but in
         recent years the range has shrunk considerably. Epiphytic sedge is
         found usually in undisturbed, organic-rich backwaters; it occurs on
         floating or partially submerged rotting logs, stumps and most
         often, on cypress knees along the edge of the swamp forest. It is
         a perennial species that bears its perigynia in mid-summer.
         Dispersal of seeds is believed to be facilitated by waterbirds,
         carried inadvertently on the feet and deposited onto the log or
         stump when the birds come to rest (Ostlie, 1990). Epiphytic sedge
         is threatened by negative changes in water quality, direct habitat
         destruction, and disruptions in normal hydrology which may
         significantly raise or lower water levels.

         The canebrake rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus atricaudatus) is one
         of the rare vertebrates found within the Northwest River watershed,
         and is state listed as endangered. This animal is a subspecies of
         the timber rattlesnake yet it inhabits only a small portion of the
         southeast corner of the state. It's numbers here are decreasing
         rapidly due to habitat loss and deliberate molestation and
         destruction by people. The canebrake rattlesnake feeds primarily
         on grey squirrels and cotton-tail rabbits (Savitsky, pers. COMM.)
         but spends large amounts of time resting in cypress swamps in or
         near the water. These snakes are good swimmers and readily enter
         the water. The canebrake rattlesnakes spend approximately four to
         five months in underground hibernacula during the winter.
         Canebrake rattlesnakes are reclusive and non-aggressive (Savitsky,
         pers. comm.; Erdle, pers. observation) and their cryptic coloration
         frequently renders them virtually invisible.

         The Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew (Sorex lonairostris fisheri) is
         another rare animal found within the Northwest River Macrosite.
         This shrew is listed as threatened on both the Federal and State
         level.   These tiny mouse-like mammals spend much of their time
         under leaf litter and under and around decaying logs and stumps.
         In spite of a physical similarity to mice and other small rodents,
         this mammal is actually an insectivore (Order Insectivora) and its
         diet consists primarily of spiders, grubs, earthworms and insect
         larvae. It is believed that these small mammals bear one to two
         litters of young per year, but because shrews are small and
         secretive, much of the biology and natural history of these animals
         remains unknown. Principle threats to these animals are habitat
         @estruction and loss; and habitat alteration which promotes
         interbreeding with the more common upland shrew, the southeastern
         shrew (Sorex longirostris lonairostris).

         Many of the marshes associated with the Northwest River are used by
         hunt clubs and individuals for hunting throughout the various

                                           62








         seasons. Fishing is a very popular activity in most of these areas
         including the river, it's marshes and tributaries. Additionally,
         the river supports a number of other recreational activities from
         water skiing and boating to canoeing, nature tourism, photography
         and wildlife watching. The Northwest River is under consideration
         by the Department of Conservation and Recreation for inclusion into
         the State Scenic Rivers System; it has also been recommended for
         inclusion in the Virginia Natural Area Preserve System.

         Locality description:
         This corridor, which supports many natural resources is located
         within the City of Chesapeake, hydrologic unit HUC 03010205 and
         watershed K04. The city is located within Planning District Number
         23, the Hampton Roads Planning District. It is recommended that
         city planners, officials and citizens of the City of Chesapeake be
         informed of the State and National significance of the Northwest
         River.   The Northwest River's importance as a resource, and the
         necessity of preserving the integrity of the entire riverine
         ecosystem should be stressed.

         Threats:
         Residents of the City of Chesapeake obtain their water primarily
         from the Northwest River. The principle withdrawal station is just
         below (downstream from) the Battlefield Boulevard bridge, which is
         within the proposed macrosite.        Increased withdrawals from the
         Northwest River could adversely affect the hydrology of the river,
         and could.ultimately degrade and jeopardize the many resources and
         activities that it supports.

         Agricultural and urban non-point source pollution pose another
         serious threat to this special ecosystem.               Department of
         Conservation and Recreation's Division of Soil and Water
         Conservation has rated this particular watershed as a high priority
         in the state for agricultural non-point source concerns. Increased
         land conversion for alternate uses may lead to increased urban run-
         off and pollution, further endangering the Northwest River and its
         associated flora and fauna.          Carefully planned, responsible
         development should be strongly encouraged in these critical areas.

         A landfill proposed for the area east of the Great Dismal Swamp
         National wildlife Refuge represents both immediate and long-term
         threats to this ecosystem. Immediate threats would obviously be
         habitat destruction, clearing of old, swamp forests for alternative
         purposes, and the many impacts that this type of development can
         impose. Further fragmentation of one of the few remaining large,
         forested tracts which connects the Great Dismal Swamp and the
         Northwest River watershed can pose grave long-term threats. The
         forested swamps and marshes of the Northwest River act as a vital
         corridor for countless species of plants and animals (both common
         and rare) .    Plants and animals use this corridor not only f or
         physical movement f rom. one place to another, but as a means f or
         healthy genetic f low as well       This corridor connects the Great

                                            63









         Dismal Swamp with the Northwest River, Tull Bay, the Albemarle
         Sound and ultimately, the North Landing River. Fragmentation and
         disruption of this corridor could have serious long-term impacts on
         this riverine ecosystem.

         Another threat to the rare plants and animals within the Northwest
         River ecosystem is the conversion of bordering forests to alternate
         land uses. These natural lands serve as buffers which maintain the
         integrity of the river and its associated marshes. Conversion of
         land for alternative uses could threaten the hydrologic integrity
         of the river.


         Protection recommendations:
         Acquisition and landowner/management agreements are recommended for
         the lands associated with the conservation sites. Protection of
         the lands within the Northwest River Macrosite would preserve a
         large, contiguous area which supports a tremendous array of rare
         natural resources.

         Within the Northwest River Macrosite, and ideally located among the
         conservation sites, is the Northwest River Park. This city park
         supports several rare natural heritage resources and contributes
         substantially to the long-term viability and protection importance
         of the macrosite as a whole.

         The Northwest River is currently under consideration for inclusion
         in the Virginia Scenic Rivers System.       The river has received
         several recommendations' as such, and is scheduled to be evaluated
         in the future.

         Cooperative conservation planning is imperative for preserving the
         Northwest River and the resources and activities that it supports.
         It is recommended that joint efforts be undertaken between
         localities, conservation organizations, state agencies, federal
         agencies, Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge, local
         citizens groups and private citizens.         An example of joint
         community, state and private group action to protect a river
         corridor is the Saco River Corridor Commission in Maine.         This
         commission has been in effect for approx. 20 years, and has been
         extremely successful; it incorporate 20 Maine municipalities and
         was approved by the state legislature in 1973.










                                          64












         Table 1.    List of Natural Heritage Resources: Northwest River
         Macrosite

         Common Name          Scientific Name            State State Global
                                                         Rank    Status Rank
         communities;
         Low Herbaceous Palustrine Wetland                 S2       -    *G2G3
         Mid-Height Herbaceous Palustrine Wetland          S2       -    *G3G4
         Submesotrophic Forest                             S2       -

         plants:
         Ephiphytic sedge        Carex decomiposita        S1       -    G3G4
         Sawgrass                Cladium jamaciensis       S1       -      G5
         Beaked spikerush        Eleocharis rostellata     Sl       -      G5
         Ten-angle pipewort      Eriocaulon decancrulare   Sl       -      G5
         Elongated lobelia       Lobelia elongata          Sl       -    G3G5
         Winged seedbox          Ludwigia alata            Sl       -    G3G4
         Aster-like boltonia     Boltonia asteroides       S2       -      G5
         Slender-leaved          Physosteqgia leptophpvlla  S2       -    G4G5
                 dragonhead
         Silky camelia           Stewartia malachodendron  S2       -      G4
         Purple bladderwort      Utricularia purpurea      S2     -      G4
         Greater bladderwort     Utricularia vulaaris      S2       -      G5


         animals:
         Canebrake rattlesnake   Crotalus horridus         Sl       LE G5TUQ
                                             atricaudatus
         Scarce swamp skipper    Euphyes dukesi            S2            G3G4
         Dismal Swamp            Sorex lonairostris        S2       LT   G5T2
             southeastern shrew                    fisheri
         Little grass frog       Limnaoedus ocularis       S3              G5
         Carpenter frog          Rana virgatipes           S3              G5


         !*Global ranks for communities are estimates based on      incomplete
         information.)













                                           65
 










                                     NORTHWEST RIVER SMITH CREEK

            LOCATION: Virginia, City of Chesapeake
                          Quadrangle: Moyock                  Quadrangle code: 3607652

            BIODIVERSITY RANK: B3


            DIRECTIONS:
            This site is approximately 3 miles east of the community of
            Northwest.      It encompasses the marshes on the east side of the
            Northwest River, south, southeast of the Northwest River Park and
            just north of the VA/North Carolina line.

            GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
            The Smith Creek site supports good examples of both low and mid-
            height herbaceous palustrine wetland communities, as well as
            forested wetlands. Along this stretch of the Northwest River, wind
            tides cause irregular water level fluctuations and the water is
            fresh to very slightly brackish. Plant species richness is high,
            and a mosaic of different vegetation types exists.                      The wetland
            communities here support a rich diversity of rare plant (6) and
            animal (5) species, in addition to the two unusual marsh
            communities.



            NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES:

            Scientif ic               Common                     Global State Eo Federal State
            Name                      Name                       Rank   Rank Rank Status Status
            communities:
            Low Herbaceous Palustrine Wetland                    G2G3   S2      c
            Mid-Height Herbaceous Palustrine Wetland             G3G4   S2      c

            plants:
            carex decomposita         epiphytic sedge            G3G4   Sl    BC       3C     c
            Cladium iamaciensis       sawgrass                   G5     Sl    BC
            Eriocaulon decancrulare   ten-angle pipewort         G5     Sl    BC
            Lobelia elongata          elongated lobelia          G4G5   Sl      A
            Phygostegia leptophylla   slender-leaved
                                      dragonhead                 G5     S2      A      C2
            Utricularia vulaaris      greater bladderwort        G5     S2      B      -

            animals:
            Limnaoedus ocularis       little grass frog.         G5     S3      B      -
            Rana virgatipes           carpenter frog             G5     S3    AB       -
            Crotalus horridus
            atricaudatus              canebrake rattlesnake      G5T5Q  Sl             -     LE
            Euphyes dukesi            scarce swamp skipper       G3G4   S2
            Sorex longirostris        Dismal swamp
              fisheri                  southeastern shrew        GST2   S2             LT    LT

            This area of extensive marsh vegetation and                 forested wetlands is
            part of the Northwest River watershed.                      The Northwest River
            originates in the southern half of the historic swamp, and in the
            existing Great Dismal Swamp, which is thought to have been formed


                                                      66









         approximately 10,000 years ago.     The Great Dismal Swamp National
         Wildlife Refuge, which is now the existing swamp, is just eight to
         nine miles upstream of this natural area, and much of the riverine
         ecosystem retains the wild, ecologically rich character of this
         swamp. Because the area is seasonally flooded, and because it has
         a reputation for being somewhat inhospitable, there are pockets of
         habitat that remain quite similar to the historic Great Dismal
         Swamp. These pockets, like the large, natural area where the Smith
         Creek site is located, often support many species of plants and
         animals which are now rare in Virginia.

         The marshes at Smith Creek represent two broad community types; low
         herbaceous palustrine wetland and mid-height herbaceous palustrine
         wetland. These rare wetland communities are rich in diversity and
         support several rare plant and animal species.         Areas of " low
         marsh" vegetation occur away from the primary creek channels. In
         these low marshes are found the rare ten-angle pipewort (Eriocaulon
         decancrulare) elongated lobelia (Lobelia elongata), little grass
         frog (Limnaoedus ocularis), carpenter frog (Rana virgatipes) and
         the scarce swamp skipper (Euphyes dukesi).

         Tall   robust    emergents   such    as   big   cordgrass     (Spartina
         cynosuroides), common reed, a potentially aggressive grass,
         (Phragmites australis), broad-leaf cattail (TvT)ha latifolia),
         narrow-leaf cattail (Typha ancrustifolia), and black needlerush
         (Juncus roemerianus) dominate most of the remaining marshes at
         Smith Creek.

         Many of the marshes at Smith Creek are being invaded by woody
         species such as red maple (Acer rubrum), swamp rose (Rosa
         palustria) and waxmyrtle (Myrica cerifera).          Lack of regular
         burning allows woody species succession to proceed.              Active
         monitoring and appropriate fire management will enhance the marshes
         and the rare plant species found there.

         The forested wetlands at the Smith Creek site support bald cypress
         (Taxodium. distichum), water tupelo (Nvssa aguatica), black gum
         (Nvssa biflora),     loblolly pine (Pinus taeda),          sweet    gum
         (Liguidambar styraciflua) and red maple. Canebrake rattlesnakes
         (Crotalus horridus atricaudatus) and the Dismal Swamp southeastern
         shrew (Sorex lonairostris fisheri) are also found in these forested
         wetlands.

         Epiphytic    sedge,   often   called    cypress-knee    sedge    (Carex
         decomposita) is one of the rare plants known from this site. At
         one time, the range of this sedge included the east coast and
         midwestern United States, but in recent years the range has shrunk
         considerably.    It is now found in somewhat disjunct locations
         throughout parts of it's historic range (Ostlie, 1990). The
         epiphytic sedge is found usually in undisturbed, organic-rich
         backwaters; it occurs on floating or partially-submerged rotting
         logs, stumps and most often, on cypress knees along the edge of the

                                           67








         swamp forest. It is a perennial species that bears its perigynia
         in mid-summer. Dispersal of seeds is believed to be facilitated by
         waterbirds, carried inadvertently on the feet and deposited onto
         the log or stump when the birds come to rest (Ostlie, 1990).
         Epiphytic sedge is threatened by negative changes in water quality,
         direct habitat destruction and disruptions in normal hydrology
         which may either raise or lower water levels.

         The two rare amphibians at Smith Creek, little grass f rog and
         carpenter frog occur throughout the marshes as do the scarce swamp
         skipper, the canebrake rattlesnake, and the Dismal Swamp
         southeastern shrew.   Although the rattlesnake and the shrew can
         probably be f ound within the marshes        they are most of ten
         associated with the marsh/upland forest interface or edge.

         The canebrake rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus atricaudatus) is state
         listed as endangered. This animal is a subspecies of the timber
         rattlesnake, found throughout the eastern portion of the country,
         but in Virginia, the canebrake rattlesnake inhabits only a small
         portion of the southeast part of the state. Its numbers here are
         decreasing rapidly due to habitat loss and deliberate molestation
         and destruction by people.       The canebrake rattlesnake feeds
         primarily on grey squirrels and cotton-tail rabbits (Savitsky,
         pers. comm.) but spends large amounts of time resting in cypress
         swamps in or near the water. These snakes are good swimmers and
         readily enter the water.        The canebrake rattlesnakes spend
         approximately four to five months in underground hibernacula during
         the winter.     These animals are reclusive and non-aggressive
         (Savitsky, pers. comm., Erdle, pers. observation) and their cryptic
         coloration frequently renders  them virtually invisible.

         Another somewhat invisible, animal is the Dismal Swamp
         southeastern shrew (Sorex lonairostris fisheri).     This animal is
         found only in southeastern Virginia (in the Dismal Swamp and some
         remnant locations) and in northern/north eastern North Carolina,
         and is listed as threatened on both the Federal and State level.
         These tiny mouse-like mammals spend much of their time under leaf
         litter, and under and around decaying logs and stumps. The primary
         food source of this shrew is spiders, earthworms, grubs and other
         insect larvae. It is believed that they bear one to two litters of
         young per year, but because shrews are small and secretive, much of
         the biology and natural history of these animals remains unknown.
         Principle threats to these animals are habitat destruction and
         loss; and habitat alteration which allows interbreeding with the
         more   common upland shrew,      the   southeastern   shrew    (Sorex
         lonairostris lonairostris).

         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary ecological boundary encompasses the two marsh
         communities (low and mid-height herbaceous palustrine wetlands) and
         the occurrences of rare plant and animal species and the respective
         potential habitats.      The marsh community types intertwine'

                                          68









         somewhat forming a "habitat mosaic" with small upland islands
         within the marshes. Plant and animal occurrences are scattered and
         distributed by microhabitat throughout this mosaic, and for this
         reason,. element locations are not specifically identified.

         The principle purpose of the primary ecological boundary is to
         delineate and encompass known occurrences of targeted resources at
         the site, as well as existing and potential habitats of those
         resources. Inclusion of some additional marshes provides excellent
         restoration potential (with active management) for wetland plant
         species. The upland islands and upland/marsh interface areas are
         critical habitat for the canebrake rattlesnake and the Dismal Swamp
         southeastern shrew.

         The primary ecological boundary follows the Northwest River channel
         and the State line to the south. On the east side of the site, the
         primary boundary skirts agricultural fields in an attempt to allow
         foraging and cover for the canebrake rattlesnake. The northeast
         portion of the site encompasses Smith Creek and the associated
         marshes and swamp forests up to Baum Road at the intersection of
         Baum and Indian Creek Roads.


         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The secondary ecological boundary includes the primary ecological
         boundary, rare plant and animal occurrences and critical ecological
         and administrative buffers.   Some upland is included within the
         secondary ecological boundary as critical buffer from agricultural
         land uses.    One of the purposes of the secondary ecological
         boundary is to provide a hydrologic buffer. Good water quality and
         the persistence of normal hydrology are important factors for
         maintaining sensitive marsh communities. This protective buffer,
         located at the interface between marsh and upland forest
         communities is also crucial habitat for the canebrake rattlesnake
         and the Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew.

         The secondary ecological boundary follows the primary ecological
         boundary at a distance of 75 - 150 feet.       The two boundaries
         coincide on the southern edge of the site, along the State Line
         where they are adjacent to the boundary of Northwest River Marsh
         Game Lands. The primary and secondary ecological boundaries also
         coincide on the southeastern edge of the site, and along part of
         the northern edge of the site, where the secondary ecological
         boundary adjoins the Northwest River Park.
         It is important to note that this site and others are only pieces
         of a much larger natural area. They are of course, integral parts
         of a large riverine ecosystem, but for the sake of consistency with
         the APES inventory report, they have been described separately.
         Some of the boundaries, such as the city park and the state line
         are obviously political boundaries and it should be noted that the
         ecosystem, which is of primary importance, is not and can not be
         partitioned in these ways. It is important to view the Northwest

                                         69








         River and the associated conservation sites as a whole, vital
         ecosystem. Therefore, comprehensive conservation planning should
         strongly consider the boundaries described in the Northwest River
         Macrosite which encompass much of the Northwest River watershed and
         which extend to connect with the Great Dismal Swamp.

         PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
         Primary acreage (acreage within primary
         ecological boundary)- 668 acres
         Secondary acreage (acreage within secondary
         ecological boundary)- 272 acres
         Total acreage recommended for protection- 940 acres

         TRACTS:
         Number of ownership tracts within site: nine.
         Number of ownership tracts within the primary ecological boundary:
         Nine tracts, representing eight private landowners, are within the
         primary ecological boundary.

         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
         Surrounding land use is primarily agricultural and silvicultural.
         Past use has predominantly been hunting and fishing.      The swamp
         forest on the east side of the site is an interface between the
         marshes and forested upland and is rapidly disappearing as current
         landowners timber and then convert the natural lands for
         alternative uses.    The Northwest River was identified in the
         Nonpoint,Source Pollution Watershed Assessment Report as having a
         high potential (H1) for pollution impact from nutrient loadings
         from agricultural land (Wilson, 1993). Residential or agricultural
         development and large tract, clear-cut timbering in the area are
         serious off site considerations which may influence the integrity of
         the marshes as well as future management activities.             Best
         management practices designed to avoid soil compaction and
         excessive sedimentation should be adhered to for all activities
         within this area.

         This area lies entirely within the City of Chesapeake.        It is
         within hydrologic unit HUC 03010205, watershed K04 (Wilson, 1993).
         The City Comprehensive Plan (Curtis, 1990) has designated the
         Northwest River a 'conservation area' primarily because the
         Northwest River is a main source of the city's surface water.
         Although the city has several wells, all surface water is drawn off
         of the Northwest River at an out-take location just east of the
         Battlefield Boulevard Bridge. The Comprehensive Plan defines the
         City's plans to monitor and control the quality of the water in the
         Northwest River by the following four principles:

              1. Promotion of the Northwest River's special characteristics
              and the need for water quality management.

              2. Exclusion of activities which threaten the water supply
              f rom the basin, or at least the portion of the basin near

                                          70










              the intake.

              3. Constant monitoring of the river to ascertain water quality
              conditions.

              4. Control and monitoring of land use activities; the
              institution of good land management practices.

         In 1987 the City of Chesapeake entered into a contractual agreement
         with the City of Virginia Beach whereby Chesapeake would share in
         the development, cost and ownership of the Lake Gaston water
         resource project.    This project and all ensuing agreements are
         proceeding slowly due to a great deal of citizen and political
         opposition to the project.
         Smith Creek is contiguous with, and located south, southeast of the
         Northwest River Park. Northwest River Park is a city park within
         Chesapeake which supports several rare plant and Animal species. on
         the west side of the Northwest River, and also contiguous with
         Smith Creek and Northwest River Park is another proposed natural
         area, the Southwestern Marshes Site. The Southwestern Marshes site
         supports nine rare plants and five rare animals.              On the
         Virginia/North Carolina state line,      the Smith Creek site is
         adjacent to the Northwest River Marsh Game Land. The Smith Creek
         and Southwestern Marshes sites are similar exemplary occurrences of
         this wetland community type but support a different mix of rare
         species.    Protection of Smith Creek would result in a large,
         contiguous, diverse natural area which supports many rare species
         of plants and animals.

         MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
         Woody species such as red maple, swamp rose and wax myrtle seem to
         be increasing in some of the marshes and less frequent fire in the
         marshes is probably contributing to this woody plant invasion.
         These marshes are in tremendous need of active fire management,
         which would enhance and preserve the marshes and the rare plant
         species found there.     Fire history studies will help determine
         appropriate fire regimes for these wetlands.       It is recommended
         that Department of Conservation and Recreation stewardship
         personnel develop and implement a f ire management plan for this
         area.


         Common reed (Phragmites australis), a potentially aggressive marsh
         grass, occurs in many of the marshes.         In some par .ts of the
         @orthwest River, this grass does not appear to be increasing, while
         in other sections it is forming large dense clones.
         An interagency reed-grass control project is currently underway
         which evaluates stands of common reed along the Northwest River.
         Some limited control work with an herbicide and prescribed fire
         management is being conducted this year, and monitoring of these
         and additional stands will continue.        This species should be
         monitored, and disturbances to the wetland vegetation (which favor
         common reed) should be avoided.

                                          71








         Much information about the biology and natural history of some of
         these natural heritage resources is lacking. Continued research on
         and monitoring of many of these species will enhance knowledge of
         these resources, and allow for more refined and effective
         conservation planning.

         Where public access is planned, it is recommended that experts on
         the rattlesnake and on the shrew be consulted to minimize impacts
         to these especially sensitive species.

         Water quality and quantity are crucial to many rare species, but
         particularly to the rare Carex decomposita. A significant change
         in the water level, resulting in an extended elevated or lowered
         level could be extremely detrimental to existing epiphytic sedge
         populations. The status and health of the sedge population should
         be closely monitored, as well as water levels and the
         withdrawal/use situation in the City of Chesapeake.

         PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
         These wetlands have been recommended for inclusion within the
         Virginia Natural Area Preserve System. Acquisition is recommended
         for land within the primary ecological boundaries, and negotiations
         are with several landowners are underway. The land included within
         the secondary ecological boundary need not be acquired, however,
         the maintenance of this land as a buffer for marshes, water quality
         and natural heritage resources is critical.       For this reason,
         management agreements and landowner agreements are recommended for
         the land encompassed by the secondary boundary.

         Access to this site could be achieved either through an agreement
         with the Northwest River Park, or by a public boat landing on Smith
         Creek, located at the corner of Baum Road and Indian Creek Road.
         Currently this dirt ramp is used only occasionally by fishermen,
         but Smith Creek runs directly to the Northwest River, and this
         should afford good access to the marshes and river channel.

         This is an ideal site for protection efforts because it is uniquely
         located between two large, partially protected areas.        To the
         north, with adjacent boundaries, lies the Northwest River Park,
         managed by the City of Chesapeake Department of Recreation, and to
         the south, also adjacent to Smith Creek, is the Northwest River
         Marsh Game Land, managed by the North Carolina Game Commission.
         Although the City park is managed primarily for outdoor recreation,
         park personnel are aware of rare natural heritage resources located
         within the park, and attempt to afford these species some
         protection. The Game Land is not actively managed, although it is
         used seasonally by hunters. This area has no public access roads
         and is protected from residential and agricultural development.
         Protection specifically of the Smith Creek site is extremely
         important.   This site and the Northwest River Park support many
         rare species.    In addition to providing protected, contiguous
         habitat, it is highly probable that the N.C. Game Land supports

                                          72









         rare species as well. Active management of the marshes at Smith
         Creek will enhance existing populations and allow additional
         colonization by rarities.

         INFORMATION NEEDS:
         Additional vertebrate and invertebrate inventories are needed in
         this area. Further inventories will likely reveal more rarities
         supported by this site.   Additional research is needed into the
         status and health of the existing populations of the Dismal Swamp
         black bear (Ursus americanus) and the eastern big-eared bat
         (Plecotus rafinesquii).

         Future water procurement and use plans for the City of Chesapeake
         should be closely monitored to avoid negative impacts on the
         Northwest River and associated habitats.



         RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
         It is recommended that the City of Chesapeake:

              -Provide an educational program which focuses on natural
              resources within the area.

              -Make local developers aware of the natural resource issues
              which are relevant to the area and encourage them to include
              public interpretive opportunities and conservation
                   mechanisms in design plans for the area.

         The Northwest River is currently under consideration for inclusion
         in the Virginia Scenic Rivers System.      The river has received
         several 'recommendations, as such, and is scheduled to be evaluated
         in the future.

         The Northwest River is included in the "Public Access and Visual
         Assessment for the North Landing River Watershed" planning study.
         This study is a planning study funded in part by the Coastal Zone
         Management Program, which is administered by the Department of
         Environmental Quality (DEQ), through a grant of the National
         Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Office of Ocean and
         Coastal Resource Management.    The purpose of this study is to
         evaluate the North Landing and Northwest Rivers for potential
         public access opportunities and to study the visual components
         contributing to these scenic waterways.









                                         73


























                                                                          3
                                                                          4Q














                                                                          40



                       awel










                     N,




                                                                          4C
            :n;

                                                                          LL
                                                                          LL















                                                      ipaE  EA:
                                                       eulLAlTucK\




            SITE NAME:  NORTHWEST RIVER SMITH CREEK                       N
            USGS 7.51 QUADRANGLE: MOYOCK
            SCALE: 1:24,000










                                 NORTHWEST RIVER SOUTHWESTERN MARSHES

           LOCATION: Virginia, City of Chesapeake
                          Quadrangle: Moyock              Quadrangle code: 3607652

           BIODIVERSITY RANK: B3

           DIRECTIONS: This site is located south of the Northwest River Park
           (just across the river channel) in the City of Chesapeake, on Route
           610. It encompasses the marshes on the southern and western sides
           of the river bend.


           GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
           Southwestern Marshes supports nine species of rare plants, five
           rare animal species and two rare marsh communities.                       Wind tides
           here cause irregular water level fluctuations and the water is
           fresh to very-slightly brackish. Plant species richness is high,
           and a mosaic of different vegetation types exists. This site is
           quite similar to the Smith Creek site, although the two sites
           support different mixes of rare plants. Southwestern Marshes is
           adjacent to the Smith Creek site on the east, the Upper Section
           site on the west, the Northwest River Park to the north, and barely
           adjoins the Northwest River Marsh Game Land in North Carolina to
           the southeast. Protection of this unique area would result in a
           large, contiguous, extremely diverse natural area which supports
           many rare species of plants and animals.

           NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES:

           Scientif ic                Common                     Global State EO Federal State
           Name                       Name                       Rank   Rank Rank Status Status
           communities:
           Low Herbaceous Palustrine Wetland                     G2G3   S2      C
           Mid-Height Herbaceous Palustrine Wetland              G3G4   S2      C

           plants:
           Carex decomposita          epiphytic sedge            G3G4   Sl     BC       3C    C
           Cladi    iamaciensis       sawgrass                   G5     si     BC       -     -
           Eleocharis rostellata      beaked spikerush           G5     Sl     B        -     -
           Eriocaulon decancrulare    ten-angle pipewort         G5     Sl     BC       -     -
           Ludwigia alata             winged seedbox             G3G4   Sl      B       -     -
           Lobelia elongata           elongated lobelia          G4G5.  Sl      A       -     -
           Physostegia leptophylia    slender-leaved
                                      dragonhead                 G5     S2      A      C2     -
           utricularia Purpurea       purple bladderwort         G4     S2      A
           utricularia vulgaris       greater bladderwort        G5     S2      B

           animals:
           crotalus horridus
           atricaudatus               canebrake rattlesnake      G5TSQ  Sl                    LE
           Euphyes dukesi             scarce swamp skipper       G3G4   S2
           Sorex lowirostris          Dismal Swamp
              fisheri                   southeastern shrew       G5T2   92              LT    LT

           Limnaoedus ocularis        little grass frog          G5     S3      U
           Rana virgatipes            carpenter frog             G5     S3      U


                                                      74











         The Southwestern Marshes site and associated marshes and forested
         wetlands are part of the Northwest River watershed. The Northwest
         River originates in the southern half of the historic swamp, and in
         the existing Great Dismal Swamp, which is estimated to have been
         formed approximately 10,000 years ago.      The Great Dismal Swamp
         National Wildlife Refuge, which is now the existing swamp, is just
         eight to nine miles upstream of this natural area, and much of the
         Northwest River ecosystem retains the wild, ecologically rich
         character of this swamp. Because the area is seasonally flooded,
         and because it has a reputation for being somewhat inhospitable,
         there are pockets of habitat which remain quite similar to the
         original Great Dismal Swamp. These pockets, like the large natural
         area where Southwestern Marshes is located, often support many
         species of plants and animals which are now rare in Virginia.

         The extensive marshes here represent two broad community types; low
         herbaceous palustrine wetland and mid-height herbaceous palustrine
         wetland. These rare wetland communities are rich in diversity, and
         support many species of plants and animals. A large number of rare
         plant species are found in these communities including elongated
         lobelia   (Lobelia   eloncrata),   beaked   spikerush    (Eleocharis
         rostellata), ten-angle pipewort (Eriocaulon decancrulare), winged
         seedbox (Ludwigia alata), twigrush (Cladium mariscoides), and
         slender-leaved dragonhead (Physostecia leptophylla).     The little
         grass frog (Limnaoedus ocularis), carpenter frog (Rana virgatipes),
         and the scarce swamp skipper (Euphyes dukesi) can also be found
         throughout these marshes.

         Many of the marshes at this site are being invaded by woody species
         such as red maple (Acer rubrum), swamp rose (Rosa valustris), and
         waxmyrtle (Myrica cerifera). Less frequent fire in the marshes is
         probably contributing to the woody plant invasion problem. Active
         fire management will enhance the marshes and the rare plant species
         found there.

         Forested wetlands at this site support bald cypress (Taxodium.
         distichum), water tupelo (Nyssa aquatica), black gum (Nvssa
         biflora) loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), sweet gum (Liquidambar
         styraciflua) and red maple. These forested wetlands also support
         the very rare epiphytic sedge (Carex decomposita), known from only
         one other Virginia watershed.

         The winged seedbox, which is found in the low marshes here, is rare
         throughout its range (Godfrey, 1981). The population found in the
         Southwestern Marshes site is exemplary, and is considered to be one
         of the finest populations anywhere ( Ludwig, pers. comm.).

         Interestingly, this site supports two species of insectivorous
         plants, and one insectivorous animal. Both the purple bladderwort
         (Utricularia purpurea) and the greater bladderwort (Utricularia
         vulgaris), are plants that derive much of their nourishment from

                                          75








         small crustaceans and invertebrates that are trapped, then digested
         in the plant 'bladders'. They are both state ranked as rare and
         imperiled. The Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew (Sorex lonairostris
         fisheri), listed as threatened on both the state and federal level
         is an insectivorous mammal. This tiny animal routinely preys upon
         meal worms, grubs, spiders and earth worms.

         The Southwestern Marshes site supports five rare species of
         animals. Two of these are rare amphibians, little grass frog, and
         the carpenter frog.    The remaining three animals are the scarce
         swamp skipper, the canebrake rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus
         atricaudatus) which is state listed as endangered, and the Dismal
         Swamp southeastern shrew (mentioned above), all of which occur
         throughout the marshes and onto the upland interface.

         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary ecological boundary encompasses the known element
         occurrences and their existing and potential habitats.            The
         extensive marshes, both low and mid-height herbaceous palustrine
         wetlands are included within the primary ecological boundary, along
         with some upland interfaces on the southern and southwestern edges
         of the site.    These communities support 13 of the 14 natural
         heritage resources described for this site. The marsh community
         types 'intertwine, here, forming a "habitat mosaic" with the
         uplands.   Rare plant and animal occurrences are scattered, and
         distribution is primarily  based upon microhabitat throughout this
         mosaic. Because of the     scattered nature of these occurrences,
         element locations are not  specifically identified on the preserve
         design map.

         The principle purpose of   the primary ecological boundary is to
         delineate and encompass    known occurrences of natural heritage
         resources and existing and potential habitat for those resources.
         Inclusion of some additional marshes north of the Northwest River
         channel provides excellent restoration potential for wetland plant
         species, with active management. The upland islands and interface
         areas are also critical habitat for the rare vertebrate species
         supported here.

         The primary ecological boundary is contiguous with the Northwest
         River Park to the north, and with Smith Creek Site (a potential
         natural area) to the east. On the south and southwest sides of the
         site, the primary ecological boundary runs long the upland
         interface with the marshes and skirts existing agricultural fields.
         The primary ecological boundary then follows the river channel and
         associated marshes and extends past the train trestle bridge, to
         the bridge for Route 168, Battlefield Boulevard. At this edge the
         Southwestern Marshes site is adjacent to the Northwest River Upper
         Section site. Primary boundaries on the northern edge of the site
         run just outside of the marshes, taking in several small upland
         islands, and running north along Indian Creek to Indian Creek Road
         to include the buffering wetlands on the west side of the creek.

                                          76











         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The secondary ecological boundary includes the primary ecological
         boundary and some additional upland buf f er.    This buffer zone,
         provided by the secondary ecological boundary includes lands and
         water intended to mitigate natural and human threats to the natural
         heritage resources and associated habitats. Marshes and drainages
         located north of the Northwest River channel, and included within
         the secondary boundary provide a vegetated buffer for maintenance
         of water quality in the marshes, as well as critical habitat for
         several of the rare vertebrate species supported by this site.
         Additionally, the buffer should provide for future administrative
         and managerial access.

         The secondary ecological boundary follows the primary ecological at
         a distance of 75 to 100 feet. The two boundaries coincide at the
         southern edge of the site, along the state line, and at the
         northern and western edges of the site.    The two boundaries are
         contiguous with the Northwest River Park on the northern/
         northwestern side of the site.

         It is important to note that this site, and others are only pieces
         of a much larger natural area. They are of course, integral parts
         of a riverine ecosystem, but for the sake of consistency with the
         APES inventory report, they have been described separately. Some
         of the boundaries, such as the city park and the state line are
         obviously political boundaries and it should be noted that the
         ecosystem, which is of primary importance, is not and can not be
         partitioned in these ways.    It is important to view the Great
         Dismal Swamp, the Northwest River and the associated conservation
         sites as a whole, vital ecosystem.       Therefore, comprehensive
         conservation planning should strongly consider the boundaries
         described in the Northwest River Macrosite which encompass much of
         the Northwest River watershed and which extend to connect with the
         Great Dismal Swamp.

         PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
         Primary acreage (acreage within primary
         ecological boundary)- 1802 acres
         Secondary acreage (acreage within secondary
         ecological boundary)- 258 acres
         Total acreage recommended for protection- 2060 acres

         TRACTS:
         Number of ownership tracts within site: twenty four.
         Number of ownership tracts within the primary ecological boundary:
         Twenty three tracts, representing 21 landowners make up the
         Southwestern Marshes site.

         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
         Surrounding land use is primarily agriculture and forestry. Much
         of the land identified within the primary ecological boundary is
         open marsh with stream channels.     Past use has primarily been

                                         77









         hunting and fishing. The swamp forest on the south, southwest side
         is the interface between the marshes and upland forests. This area
         has likely been hunted and selectively logged in the past.
         Residential or agricultural development and large tract, clear-cut
         timbering in the immediate area could be serious offsite
         considerations which may influence the integrity of the marshes and
         @uture management activities. The Northwest River was identified
         in the Nonpoint Source Pollution Watershed Assessment Report as
         having a high probability (Hl) for pollution impacts from nutrient
         loadings from agricultural land.       Best management practices
         designed to avoid soil compaction and excessive sedimentation
         should be adhered to for all activities within this area.

         Water withdrawal and use, from the Northwest River is a primary
         concern and affects all plants and animals located downstream from
         the withdrawal station.    ongoing use and withdrawal should be
         carefully monitored to prevent any changes in the normal hydrology
         of the river.

         This area lies entirely within the City of Chesapeake, hydrologic
         unit HUC 03010205, watershed K04 (Wilson, 1993).          The City
         Comprehensive Plan (Curtis, 1990) has designated the Northwest
         River a 'conservation area, primarily because the Northwest River
         is a main source of the city's surface water. Although the city
         has several wells, all surface water is drawn off of the Northwest
         River at an out-take location just east of the Battlefield
         Boulevard Bridge. The Comprehensive Plan defines the City's plans
         to monitor and control the quality of the water in the Northwest
         River by the following four principles:

              1. Promotion of the Northwest River's special characteristics
              and the need for water quality management.

              2. Exclusion of activities which threaten the water supply
              from the basin, or at least the portion of the basin near the
              intake.

              3. Constant monitoring of the river to ascertain water quality
              conditions.

              4. Control and monitoring of land use activities; the
              institution of good land management practices.

         In 1987 the City of Chesapeake entered into a contractual agreement
         with the City of Virginia Beach whereby Chesapeake would share in
         the development, cost and ownership of the Lake Gaston water
         resource project.   This project and all ensuing agreements are
         proceeding slowly due to a great deal of citizen and political
         opposition to the project.
         Southwestern marshes site is south, southwest of, and adjacent to
         the Northwest River Park.        Another potential natural area

                                         78








         recommended for protection, Smith Creek site,, is just east of and
         adjacent to this one (boundaries abut in the Northwest River
         channel). The Smith Creek site is also located south of the city
         park, and has boundaries that coincide with the park's.           The
         southeastern tip of this site adjoins the boundary for the
         Northwest River Marsh Game Land. The Game Land consists of 1,252
         acres which is managed by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
         Commission.   This area has unrestricted hunting and primitive
         camping, for citizens with hunting and/or fishing           licenses.
         Although it is essentially open to the public, there are   no access
         roads and use is no doubt seasonal. The designation as a   Game Land
         at least affords this area protection against development for
         alternative uses.


         Protection of the Southwestern Marshes site and the Smith Creek
         site is extremely important.      These sites, in addition to the
         Northwest River Park and the Northwest River Marsh Game Lands
         support many rare species; active management will enhance existing
         populations and allow additional colonization by rarities.

         MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
         The status of woody species in these marshes should be closely
         monitored, since woody species seem to be increasing in some areas.
         @ess frequent fire is probably contributing to the woody plant
         invasion in these areas; the open marshes at this site are in
         desperate need of active fire management.      Fire history studies
         will help determine appropriate fire regimes for this area, and it
         is recommended that Department of Conservation and Recreation
         stewardship personnel develop and implement a fire management plan
         for the wetlands in protective/conservation ownership.

         Common reed (Phracrmites australis), a potentially aggressive marsh
         grass, occurs in many of the marshes.        In some parts - of the
         @orthwest River this grass does not appear to be increasing, while
         in other sections it is forming large dense clones. This species
         should be closely monitored, and disturbances to the wetland
         yegetation (which favor common reed) should be avoided.            An
         interagency reed-grass control project is currently underway which
         evaluates stands of P. australis along the Northwest River. Some
         limited control work with an herbicide and prescribed fire
         management is being conducted this year, and monitoring of these
         and additional stands will continue. In addition to monitoring, an
         invasive species control plan needs to be developed for the
         Northwest River, and specifically for the sites supporting rare and
         endangered species of plants and animals.

         A long-term biological monitoring program needs to be implemented
         for extremely rare species such as Carex decomr)osita, which is
         known from only 1 other watershed in Virginia.

         PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
         These wetlands have been recommended for inclusion within the

                                          79









        Virginia Natural Area Preserve System. Acquisition is recommended
        for some land within the primary ecological boundaries, and
        @egotiations with several landowners are underway.       The land
        included within the secondary ecological boundary need not be
        acquired, however, the maintenance of this land as a buffer for
        marshes, water quality and for future active management is
        critical.   Good water quality is imperative for some of the
        sensitive marsh vegetation, and much of the adjacent land is
        currently used for alternative purposes.

        Access to this site could be achieved by acquisition of, or through
        landowner agreements concerning, a tract on the south/southwest end
        of the site. This semi-circle piece of upland has been timbered in
        the past, but it all fronts along a small secondary road just above
        the state line. This tract allows access to the marshes, and has
        sufficient upland for interpretive signs, or visitor information.
        There are actually numerous tracts along Indian Creek Road with
        both road and river access that would probably be suitable for the
        above purposes.

        INFORMATION NEEDS:
        Additional vertebrate and invertebrate inventories are needed in
        this area. Further inventories will likely reveal more rarities
        supported by this site.   Additional research is needed into the
        status and health of the existing populations of the Dismal Swamp
        black bear (Ursus americanus) and the eastern big-eared bat
        (Plecotus rafinesgiiii).

        Future water procurement and use plans for the City of Chesapeake
        should be closely monitored to avoid negative impacts on the
        Northwest River and associated habitats.

        RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
        It is recommended that the City of Chesapeake:

             -Provide an educational program which focuses on natural
             resources within the area.

             -Make local developers aware of the natural resource issues
             which are relevant to the area and encourage them to include
             public interpretive opportunities and conservation mechanisms
             in design plans for the area.
        The Northwest River is currently under consideration for inclusion
        in the Virginia Scenic Rivers System.     The river has received
        several recommendations as such, and is scheduled to be evaluated
        in the future.

        The Northwest River is included in the "Public Access and Visual
        Assessment for the North Landing River Watershed" planning study.
        This study is a planning study funded in part by the Coastal Zone
        Management Program, which is administered by the Department of

                                        so









         Environmental Quality (DEQ), through a grant of the National
         Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Office of Ocean and
         Coastal Resource Management.    The purpose of this study is to
         evaluate the North Landing and Northwest Rivers for potential
         public access opportunities and to study the visual components
         contributing to these scenic waterways.










































                                         81



                                                                                                                                                                           m                                                                                                          mm Nip










                                                                                                                                                                It




                                                                                                                                                              if
                                                                                                                                                              it
                                                             . ... ... ....
                                                             .. .....          ... ...
                                                             .............
                                                                                                                                                              to

                                                                                                                                        P-A

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             of

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ll
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 If

                                                             ...............   .... ..
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  It



                                                                                                                                                                                         41




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


                                                                  ..........
                                                                  ........ .
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       I    if                                                               f.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   f                                                                                                        it

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


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


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



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




I




                               NORTHWEST RIVER UPPER SECTION

          LOCATION: Virginia, City of Chesapeake
                      Quadrangle: Moyock               Quadrangle code: 3607652

          BIODIVERSITY RANK: B4


          DIRECTIONS:
          This site includes the wetland adjacent to the Northwest River,
          upstream of Route 168 and downstream of Walnut Road. It is directly
          northwest of the community of Northwest.

          GENERAL DESCRIPTION:
          This site supports good examples of mid-height herbaceous
          palustrine wetlands and submesotrophic forests. Many of the
          significant herbaceous wetlands and marshes occur along the unnamed
          northern branch of the river. Within the bottomland at this site,
          forests occur on slightly elevated "islands".                  One of these
          islands, approximately 3 acres in size, supports four natural
          heritage resources. Most of these islands were apparently never
          cleared for agriculture and are believed to represent, or at least
          approximate, presettlement conditions. This site supports two rare
          plant species and two rare animal species in addition to the rare
          vegetative communities.

          NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES:

          Scientif ic              common                  Global State EO Federal State
          Name                     Name                    Rank   Rank Rank Status Status
          communities:
          Mid-Height Herbaceous PalustrIne Wetland         G3G4   S2     c     -      -
          Submesotrophic forest                                   S2     U     -      -

          plants:
          Boltonia asteroides      aster-like boltonia     G5     S2     D     -      -
          stewartia malachodendron silky camellia          G4     S2     B     -      -

          animals:
          Crotalus horridus
          atricaudatus             canebrake rattlesnake   G5TSQ Sl                   LE
          Sorex longirostris       Dismal Swamp
            fisheri                 southeastern shrew     GST2 S2             LT     LT


          This natural area is part of the Northwest River watershed. The
          Northwest River originates in the southern half of the historic
          swamp, and in the existing Great Dismal Swamp, which is estimated
          to have been formed approximately 10,000 years ago.                  The Great
          Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge, which is now the existing
          swamp, is just eight to nine miles upstream of this site. Much of
          the Northwest River ecosystem retains the wild, ecologically rich
          character of this swamp. Because the area floods seasonally, and
          because it has a reputation for being somewhat inhospitable, there


                                                 82






'A








         are pockets of habitat which remain quite similar to the original
         Great Dismal Swamp.   These pockets, like the large natural area
         where the Upper Section site is located, of ten support many species
         of plants and animals which are now rare in Virginia.
         This area supports two broad community types, the mid-height
         herbaceous wetlands, and the submesotrophic forests. many of these
         significant wetlands are found along the northern, unnamed branch
         of the Northwest River.      The small herbaceous wetlands found
         slightly back from the river's edge are significant from a
         botanical and ecological perspective.    These wetlands, sometimes
         referred to as "fens", occur on quaking mats of organic sediments,
         and are perennially saturated. Characteristic plants here include
         twigrush (Cladium mariscoides), beaked-rush (Rhynchospora spp.),
         water lily (Nvmphaea odorata), and the rare species, aster-like
         boltonia (Boltonia asteroides). Of great scientific interest are
         the populations of common reed (Phragmites australis), which here
         show none of the aggressive tendencies evident at many disturbed
         wetlands in southeastern Virginia.

         The islands here, characterized by submesotrophic forests of
         loblolly pine, red oak, American beech and sourwood, are unusually
         rich in woody species. Over 24 woody plants have been documented
         here, including the rare shrub, silky camellia (Stewartia
         malachodendron).     This rare member of the tea family is
         characteristically found in moist forests, low woods and on creek
         banks (Radford, 1968).    Silky camellia is rare throughout it's
         range, and is known from only 16 locations in Virginia. The silky
         camellia is a small shrub with lovely, delicate white flowers.
         Further inventories of this site will likely reveal additional
         nearby populations of this rare plant.

         Although larger islands at this site may have been selectively
         logged in the past, vegetation recovery appears to be complete.
         Department of Conservation and Recreation ecologists have suggested
         that some of these areas may actually represent pre-settlement
         conditions.

         Extensive forested swamps surrounding and within this natural area
         are dominated by bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), water tupelo
         (Nyssa aquatica), black gum (Nvssa biflora), loblolly pine (Pinus
         taeda), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) and red maple (Acer
         rubrum).

         Also found on these small islands and within the adjacent forests
         and marshes are the canebrake rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus
         atricaudatus) and the Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew (Sorex
         longirostris fisheri). These two animals are found throughout the
         riverine ecosystem and particularly at the ledges, or habitat
         interfaces. The canebrake rattlesnake, which inhabits only a small
         portion of southeast Virginia, is state listed as endangered. Its
         numbers are decreasing rapidly though, due to habitat loss and
         deliberate molestation and destruction by people. This snake feeds

                                          83








         primarily on grey squirrels and cotton-tail rabbits, but spends
         large amounts of time resting in cypress swamps in or near the
         water (Savitsky, pers. comm.).     Canebrake rattlesnakes are live-
         bearing snakes, they give birth to one to two litters per year; and
         they spend approximately four to five months in underground
         hibernacula during the winter. The canebrake rattlesnake suffers
         greatly from public fear and paranoia and misidentification with
         the more aggressive and more visible, eastern cottonmouth.          The
         canebrake rattlesnake is generally reclusive and non-aggressive
         (Savitsky,  pers. comm.; Erdle, pers. observation) and their cryptic
         coloration frequently renders them virtually invisible.

         The Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris fisheri)
         which also  inhabits only a small portion of southeast Virginia, is
         listed as  Threatened at both the State and Federal level.         The
         shrew is a tiny mouse-like mammal that spends much of its time
         under and around decaying logs and stumps.        Because shrews are
         insectivores, the primary food sources of this animal are spiders,
         earthworms, grubs and other insect larvae.       It is believed that
         they bear one to two litters of young per year, but because shrews
         are small and secretive, much of the biology and natural history of
         these animals remains unknown. Principle threats to these animals
         are habitat destruction and loss; and habitat alteration which
         allows interbreeding with the more common upland shrew, the
         southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris longirostris).

         PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The primary ecological boundary encompasses the two rare vegetative
         communities (mid-height herbaceous wetlands and submesotrophic
         forests) and the occurrences of rare plant and animal species and
         their respective potential habitats.

         The main purpose of the primary ecological boundary is to delineate
         and encompass known occurrences of targeted resources at the site,
         as well as the existing and potential habitats. Inclusion of some
         additional marshes north and south of the NorthwestRiver channel
         provides excellent restoration potential for wetland plant species,
         with active management.      The upland islands found within this
         boundary are existing critical habitat for the rare vertebrate
         species at the site.

         The primary ecological boundary follows the channel of the unnamed
         northern branch of the river northwest and then turns northeast to
         include wetlands up to Route 168. From there the primary boundary
         either coincides with the secondary ecological boundary, or is
         followed closely by it, as the primary boundary encompasses the
         bottomland forests along the northern edge of the site.           Both
         boundaries cross the VA Power cleared right of way, and extend for
         a short distance west before turning sharply south.         Along the
         southwestern and southern edges of the site, the primary ecological
         boundary encompasses the forested swamps and wetlands. Near the
         community of Northwest, the primary ecological boundary was drawn

                                           84









         to -encompass critical natural heritage resource habitats, while
         skirting residential and business dwellings.

         SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARY:
         The secondary ecological boundary includes the primary ecological
         boundary and some additional buffer lands intended to mitigate
         natural and human threats to the natural heritage resources. These
         buffer areas should also provide administrative and managerial
         access.


         Inclusion of several drainages and associated lands north of the
         un-named branch of the Northwest River provide vegetated buffers
         for the lower headwater area of that branch.      Water quality and
         maintenance of the normal hydrology of the area are crucial for
         plants such as the aster-like boltonia, and epiphytic sedge, found
         further downstream.

         The secondary ecological boundary follows the primary ecological
         boundary closely except along the eastern and southwestern edges of
         the site.   In these areas, the secondary ecological boundary is
         expanded slightly to include additional minimal buffer zones
         critical to the health and maintenance of the integrity of the
         marshes.

         The Northwest River actually originates from groundwater and
         drainage from the southern half of the historic Dismal Swamp and
         from the existing swamp as well.        It is important that the
         connectedness of this ecosystem be strongly considered in all
         conservation planning.     The primary and secondary ecological
         boundaries which separate the Upper Section site from the remainder
         of the Northwest River drainage up to the Dismal Swamp are somewhat
         arbitrary boundaries which delineate the northwestern boundary of.
         this site just north (upstream) of the entrance of the northern
         branch of the river.     Many of the natural heritage resources
         undoubtedly occur throughout this riverine ecosystem and for
         comprehensive conservation planning, boundaries described in the
         Northwest River Macrosite report should be strongly considered.
         Boundaries for the Northwest River Macrosite include the standard
         conservation sites and coincide with the southeastern side of the
         Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge (GDSNWR).

         On the southeastern edge of the Upper Section site the secondary
         ecological boundary abuts Route 168.      At this point the Upper
         Section site is adjacent' to the Southwestern Marshes site,
         separated only by the bridges for Route 168 and the railroad
         trestle.    The protection of these sites would result in the
         conservation of a large, contiguous portion of the Northwest River
         ecosystem which supports many rare species of plants and animals.

         The inter-relatedness of this system must be emphasized.       It is
         important to note that this conservation site and others, are only
         pieces of a much larger natural area. They are of course, integral

                                          85









         parts of a large riverine ecosystem, but for the sake of
         consistency with the APES inventory report, they have been
         described separately.     Some of the boundaries are obviously
         political/ownership boundaries, and it should be noted that the
         ecosystem, which is of primary importance, is not and can not be
         partitioned in these ways. It is important to view the Northwest
         River, the Great Dismal Swamp and the associated conservation sites
         as a whole, dynamic ecosystem.

         PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ACREAGE:
         Primary acreage (acreage within primary
         ecological boundary)- 1530 acres.
         Secondary acreage (acreage within secondary
         ecological boundary)- 356 acres.
         Total acreage recommended for protection- 1886 acres.

         TRACTS:
         Number of ownership tracts within site: forty-two.
         Number of ownership tracts within the primary ecological boundary:
         Thirty one tracts are all or partially within the primary
         ecological boundary.

         ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSIDERATIONS:
         Surrounding land use here is primarily agricultural and
         silvicultural.   Much of the land identified within the primary
         ecological boundary is bottomland forest, past use has probably
         been primarily hunting and fishing. Residential or agricultural
         development and large tract, clear-cut timbering in the immediate
         area could be serious offsite considerations which may influence
         the integrity of the marshes and future management activities      *
         Best management practices designed to avoid soil compaction and
         excessive sedimentation should be adhered to for all activities
         within this area.

         The Northwest River was identified in the Nonpoint Source Pollution
         Watershed Assessment Report as having a high probability (H1) for
         pollution impacts. Pollutants are identified as nutrient loadings
         from agricultural land.

         This area lies entirely within the City of Chesapeake.       It is
         within hydrologic unit HUC 03010205, watershed K04 (Wilson, 1993).
         The City Comprehensive Plan (Curtis, 1990) has designated the
         Northwest River a "conservation area", primarily because the
         Northwest River is the main source of the city's surface water.
         Although the city has several wells, all surface water is drawn off
         of the Northwest River at an out-take location just east of the
         Battlefield Boulevard Bridge (which is just downstream of this
         site). The Comprehensive Plan defines the City's plans to monitor
         and control the quality of the water in the Northwest River by the
         following four principles:

              1. Promotion of the Northwest River's special characteristics

                                         86









                  and the need for water quality management.
                2. Exclusion of activities which threaten the water supply
                  from the basin, or at least the portion of the basin near
                  the intake.

                3. Constant monitoring of the river to ascertain water quality
                  conditions.

                4. Control and monitoring of land use activities; the
                  institution of good land management practices.
         In 1987  the City of Chesapeake entered into a contractual agreement
         with the City of Virginia Beach whereby Chesapeake would share in
         the development, cost and ownership of the Lake Gaston water
         resource project.     This project and all ensuing agreements are
         proceeding slowly due to a great deal of citizen and political
         opposition to the project.

         Common reed (Phracrmites australis), a potentially invasive marsh
         grass occurs in some of these marshes.        In this portion of the
         Northwest River however, it fails to form dense stands and does not
         presently appear to be a problem. If this plant does increase in
         these marshes, the increase will likely be the result of hydrologic
         perturbations or similar disruptions.

         MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
         Woody species such as red maple, swamp rose and wax myrtle seem to
         be increasing in some of the marshes, and less frequent fire is
         probably contributing to this woody plant invasion in these areas.
         Fire history studies will help determine appropriate fire regimes
         for this area, and it is recommended that Department of
         Conservation and Recreation stewardship personnel develop and
         implement a fire management plan for the wetlands under protective
         ownership.

         Water level, water quality, and the withdrawal/use situation in the
         City of Chesapeake should be monitored carefully.

         Continued monitoring of the stands of common reed (Phragmites
         australis) is necessary. In some parts of the Northwest River this
         grass does not appear to be increasing, while in other sections it
         is forming large dense clones.       This species should be closely
         monitored, and disturbance to the wetland vegetation (which favor
         common reed) should be avoided. An interagency reed-grass control
         project is currently underway which evaluates stands of common reed
         along the Northwest River.       Some limited control work with an
         herbicide and prescribed fire management is being conducted this
         year, and monitoring of these and additional stands will continue.
         An invasive species eradication control plan needs to be developed
         for the Northwest River and specifically for the sites supporting
         rare and endangered species of plants and animals.

                                           87












         PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:
         These wetlands have been recommended for inclusion within the
         Virginia Natural Area Preserve System. Acquisition is recommended
         for some land within the primary ecological boundary, and
         negotiations with several landowners are underway.          The land
         included within the secondary ecological boundary need not be
         acquired, but the maintenance of this area as a protected buf f er is
         important to the continued preservation of the natural heritage
         resources.   For this reason, management agreements and landowner
         agreements are recommended for the land encompassed by the
         secondary boundary.

         Access for canoeing or interpretive trails     could be obtained at
         several different locations either along Route 168 or from
         Ballahack Road to the south. Administrative    and managerial access
         may be achieved at the same locations, or from one of several
         additional points located along the eastern   or southeastern edges
         of the site. The proximity of the Upper Section site to the Great
         Dismal Swamp, the Southwestern Marshes site and the many other
         nearby significant lands makes this site extremely important in the
         preservation of the Northwest River watershed.

         INFORMATION NEEDS:
         Further plant and animal inventories are needed at this site to
         verify historical records and to update existing data. Additional
         research is needed into the status and health of the existing
         populations of the Dismal Swamp black bear (Ursus americanus) and
         the eastern big-eared bat (Plecotus rafinesquii).

         RECREATIONAL, SCENIC AND EDUCATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
         It is recommended that the City of Chesapeake:

              -Provide an educational program which focuses on natural
              resources within the area.

              -Make local developers aware of the natural resource issues
              which are relevant to the area and encourage them to include
              public interpretive opportunities and conservation
              mechanisms in design plans for the area.
         The Northwest River is currently under consideration for inclusion
         in the Virginia Scenic Rivers System.       The river has received
         several recommendations as such, and is scheduled to be evaluated
         in the future.

         The Northwest River is included in the "Public Access and Visual
         Assessment for the North Landing River Watershed" planning study.
         This study is a planning study funded in part by the Coastal Zone
         Management Program, which is administered by the Department of
         Environmental Quality (DEQ), through a grant of the National
         Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Office of Ocean and
         Coastal Resource Management.     The purpose of this study is to

                                          88








        evaluate the North Landing and Northwest Rivers f or potential
        public access opportunities and to study the visual components
        contributing to these scenic waterways.












































                                       89







                                                                                                                                                                                                                                'Ll 5


                                                                                                           D

                                                                                                                                                                       o o,








             -7





















                0





                       z

                              zz-
                                                                                                                                                        P-L

                                                                                                                                                        tz


                                                                                                                                                                                                     12-

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ...........

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   ....... ....


                                                                                                 10











                                                                                                                                                                                                               w


                  Radi
                   fa'   n




                                                                                                                         .-0


                                                                                                                                     E57
                                                                                                                                  @@          - - ;
                 0
                                                                                                 rthwe -NorthAllest
                                                                                                                                                                                             Cerp C,
                                                                                               h
                                                                                                                   em
                                              20

                 Cd





                                    ..........                                                                                                                                                 ......
                                                                                                                                                            . .........
                                                                                                                                                                                                     ................
                                                                                                                        ZPMW@                                                                    ..... .
                                                                                                                                                                                                     .............
                                                                                                                                                                                                ....................
                                                                                                                                                                            ......  ..... ...........
                                                                                                                                                                                                     ...............


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











                      LITERATURE CITED AND PERTINENT REFERENCES:


         Bradby, H. H. 1991. (Chairman, County Board of Supervisors)
               Comprehensive Plan, Isle of Wight County, Virginia. Adopted in
               1991.

         Buckley, P. A. and F. G. Buckley. 1976. Guidelines for the
               Protection and Management of Colonially Nesting Waterbirds.
               North Atlantic Regional Office, National Park Service, Boston,
               MA.

         Buhlmann, K. A,1992.      Field notes,   survey forms (Cat Ponds) for
               the Department of   Conservation   and Recreation - Division of
               Natural Heritage,   Richmond, VA.

         Clampitt, C. A. 1989.     Field notes,   survey forms (Cat Ponds) for
               the Department of   Conservation   and Recreation - Division of
               Natural Heritage,   Richmond, VA.

         Clark, K. H. 1993. Conservation Planning for the Natural Areas of
               the Lower Peninsula of Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical
               Report    93-4.     Virginia Department of Conservation and
               Recreation - Division of Natural Heritage. 8 March 1993. 193
               pp-

         Curtis, P. L. (director) 1990. The Comprehensive Plan for the
               City of Chesapeake Virginia.      Adopted by City Council July
               24, 1990. 153 pp.

         Dennis, John V. 1988. The Great Cypress Swamps. Louisiana State
               University Press, Baton Rouge and London. 142 pp.

         Dixon, J. A. and P. B. Sherman. 1990.          Economics of Protected
               Areas: A New Look at Benefits and Costs. Island Press,
               Washington, D.C., Covelo, CA, 234 pp.

         Edwards, V. M. 1994. Developing America's Natural Areas Market.
               Natural Areas Journal. Vol 14 (1) pp 17-21.

         Ewel, K. C. 1993. Fire in cypress swamps in the southeastern
               United States .    Symposium: Fire in Wetlands: A Management
               Perspective. Tall Timbers Research Station, Florida.

         Ewel, K. C. and H. T. Odum. 1984. Cypress Swamps. University
               Presses of Florida, University of Florida Press, Gainesville,
               FA. 472 pp.

         Godfrey, R. K. and J. W. Wooten. 1979. Aquat     ic and Wetland Plants
               of Southeastern United States. University of Georgia Press,
               Athens, GA 712 pp.


                                            90









        Hodges, Robert L. 1993. (Personal communication).           Virginia
              Polytechnic Institute and State University Extension Agent,
              Soil Scientist.

        Kitchel, W. F., H'. T. Saxton, III, R. A. Strauss, S. K. Thomas
              and C. D. Peacock, Jr. 1982.   Soil Survey of Isle of Wight
              County, Virginia.   U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil
              Conservation Service in Cooperation with Virginia
              Polytechnic Institute and State University. 105 pp.

        Little, C. 1990. Greenways for America. John Hopkins Press,
              Baltimore, MD

        Ludwig, J. C. 1993. Natural Heritage Resources of Virginia: Rare
              Vascular Plant Taxa and Virginia Plant Watch List. (compiled
              by J. C. Ludwig),Department of Conservation and Recreation -
              Division of Natural Heritage. Richmond, VA 27 pp.

        Ostlie, W. R. 1990. Element Stewardship Abstract for Carex
              decomposita, cypress-knee sedge.    The Nature Conservancy,
              Arlington, VA 10 pp.

        Pague, C. and K. Buhlmann. 1991. Eastern Tiger Salamander
              (Ambystoma tigrinum tigriLium).    Pages 431-433 in J. N.
              McDonald and T. Skwara, editors Virginia's Endangel@ed
              Species: Proceedings of a Symposium/Coordinated by Karen
              Terwilliger. The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company,
              Blacksburg, VA.

        Pague, C. and J. C. Mitchell. 1991. Mabee's salamander.
              (Ambystoma mabeei Bishop).  Pages 427-429 in J. N. McDonald
              and T. Skwara, editors Virginia's Endangered Species:
              Proceedings of a Symposium/Coordinated by Karen Terwilliger.
              The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company, Blacksburg,
              VA.

        Radford, A, E,, H, E. Ahles and C. R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the
              Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The University of North
              Carolina Press. 1183 pp.

        Ramming, G. Eo 1986.     Prince George County Comprehensive Plan.
              Submitted by William C. Overman Associates, P.C. (George E.
              Ramming) to Prince George County Board of Supervisors and
              Planning Commission. 164 pp.

        Rawinski, T. J. 1991, 1992, 1993. Field notes, survey forms, for
              the Department of Conservation and Recreation - Division of
              Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA.

        Rawinski, T. J. 1993. (Personal communication. Thomas Rawinski is
              a vegetation and community ecologist at the DCR - Division of
              Natural Heritage. Mr. Rawinski is one of the ecologists that

                                         91









              did much of the initial survey work at the sites included in
              this report.)

        Rawinski, T. J. and G. P. Fleming. 1993. An inventory and
              protection plan for southeast Virginia's critical natural
              areas, exemplary wetlands, and endangered species habitats.
              Albemarle-Pamlico Study. Report No. 93-13, Raleigh. 200 pp.

        Rawinski, T. J. and J. C. Ludwig. 1992. Critical natural areas,
              exemplary wetlands, and endangered species habitats in
              southeastern Virginia: Results of the 1991 inventory
              encompassing Prince George County, Surry County, Isle of
              Wight County, Chesapeake City, Suffolk City, and Virginia
              Beach City. Natural Heritage Technical Report 92-14,
              Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation - Division
              of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA 87 pp.

        Saco River Corridor Commission, P. 0. Box 283, Main Street,
              Cornish, ME 04020 (207) 625-8123.

        Savitsky, A. 1993. (Personal communication. Dr. Savitsky is a
              professor at Old Dominion University currently studying the
              canebrake rattlesnake in southeastern Virginia.)

        USDOI/National Park Service. 1990. Economic Impacts of Protecting
              Rivers, Trails and Greenway Corridors: A Resource Book. NPS,
              Rivers Trails and Conservation Assistance, Western Region,
              San Francisco, CA -

        Ware, D. M. E. 1991. Sun-Facing Coneflower (Rudbeckia heliopsidis
              Torrey and Gray).   Pages 147-148 in J. N. McDonald and T.
              Skwara editors. Virginia's Endangered Species: Proceedings
              of a Symposium/Coordinated by Karen Terwilliger. The
              McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company, Blacksburg, VA.

        Wharton, C. H. 1978. The Natural Environments of Georgia.
              Geologic and Water Resources Division and Resource Planning
              Section, Office of Planning and Research, Georgia Department
              of Natural Resources, Atlanta, GA.

        Whelan, T. (ed) 1991. Nature Tourism: Managing for the
              Environment. Island Press, Washington, D.C., 223 pp.

        Wright, R. A. S. 1989. Field survey for the sun-loving
              coneflower, Rudbeckia helionsidis Torrey and Gray, in
              Virginia. Unpublished report submitted to The Nature
              Conservancy through the Department of Conservation and
              Recreation's Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA

        Wilson, S. 1993. Virginia Nonpoint Source Pollution Watershed
              Assessment Report. DCR, Division of Soil and Water
        Conservation, Richmond, VA. 157 pp.

                                         92






                                                                            APPENDIX A











                        LOCAL OPTIONS FOR CONSERVING NATURALAREAS

                                   Virginia Council on the Environment

                                            February 19, 1993





                 This report was prepared by staff of the Virginia Council on the Environment
           at the request of the Department of Conservation and Recreation. It is a general
           guide to the land management options available to local governments in Virginia for
           conserving natural aro-as. T'he report is for use in conjunction with the Division of
           Natural Heritage report, Conservation Planning for the Natural Arm of the Lower
           Peninsula, which contains detailed information on identified natural areas in James
           City and York Counties, and the City of Williamsburg. The Natural Heritage report
           is the final product of a multi-year effort to survey and promote protection for
           important natural areas in the subject localities. The Natural Heritage survey was
           conducted at the request of local officials. ne concepts presented here are
           applicable throughout Virginia and can be used for natural area conservation planning
           in any state locality.














                  This report was funded, in part, by the Virginia Council on the Environment's
            Coastal Resources Management program through Grant #NA170ZO359-01 of the
            National Oceanic and atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal
            Resource Management, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 as
            amended.











                                                 Contents




                                                                                          Page

           I. Introduction                                                                1

           11. State and Federal Regulations                                              3

                  State and Federal Laws Protecting Rare Plants and Animals
                  Environmental Impact Review
                  State and Federal Regulation of Significant Areas

           III. Non-regulatory Options                                                    6

                  Acquisition
                  Conservation Easements
                  Dedication of Natural Area Preserves
                  Natural Areas Registry and Management Agreements
                  Tax Incentives

           IV. Managing Development                                                        11

                  Comprehensive Planning
                  Conventional Zoning
                  Flexible Zoning
                  Transfer, Purchase and Lease of Development Rights

           V. Developing a Natural Area Conservation Program                               16













                         LOCAL OPTIONS FOR CONSERVING NATURAL AREAS




             I. Introduction


                  This report describes options available to Virginia localities for conserving
             natural areas identified through a natural heritage resource inventory. Natural
             heritage resources are "the habitat of rare, threatened, or endangered plant and
             animal species, rare or state significant natural communities or geologic sites, and
             similar features of scientific interest" (Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act, Virginia
             Code ï¿½10.1-209 et seq.). Natural areas are determined based on an inventory,
             conducted by the Department of Conservation and Recreation's Division of Natural
             Heritage, which systematically identifies natural heritage resources and the land area
             necessary to protect them.

                    Natural areas are increasingly threatened by the cumulative effects of human
             activities which alter the natural environment. Habitat disturbance, fragmentation, or
             destruction is occurring as a result of encroaching urban development as well as
             logging, agriculture, and surface mining. The conservation techniques described in this
             report can be used in various combinations to prevent the loss of important natural
             areas and provide a comprehensive local natural areas protectioh program.

                    In describing natural area boundaries, staff scientists from the Division of
             Natural Heritage consider a number of factors including;

                      the extent of current and potential habitat for important biological
                    communities,
                    * species migration corridors, and
                    9 buffer requirements to maintain surface and ground water quality and
                    quantity within the site, and exclude or control problem species.

             Using  these guidelines, a preserve design is prepared for each natural area which
             generally consists of two zones: a core reserve, and a buffer zone. Each zone has its
             own special planning considerations. In general, the core reserve requires the highest
             level of protection. A buffer zone around the core protects it from outside threats
             and encroachments. This buffer may still be used in a low intensity manner if
             appropriate performance standards are applied. The specific requirements of each









             zone may vary from site to site, based on the characteristics and needs of the
             resources found there.


                   The primary goal of a local natural areas program is to conserve natural
             heritage resources. Other benefits of preserving these natural areas include providing
             habitat for other, more common species, as well as providing opportunities for
             recreation, education and research. In order to better integrate natural area
             conservation into the local decision process, complementary goals should be to protect
             these resources in ways that do not impose unfair restrictions on private property, and
             that serve as an asset for local economic and community development efforts.

                   Most efforts to date to conserve natural heritage resources have focused either
             on state and federal regulations or traditional non-regulatory options such as
             acquisition or easements. These most commonly used methods are discussed in the
             next two sections of this report. There is also, however, a growing trend toward
             increased local government involvement in natural area conservation. An enhanced
             local role can fill the gaps where federal and state programs are unable to limit
             habitat loss from land development and other activities which fall under the purview
             of local programs. Information on the location of natural areas can assist localities in
             planning for community development and implementing local land management
             programs. These options for managing development are also discussed later in this
             report.


                   A key principle for a successful local natural areas program is to integrate
             natural heritage resource conservation into the planning and land management process
             in a way that considers local circumstances and accommodates community
             development. There is no single approach for natural area conservation that is
             appropriate for all localities. An appropriate program is determined by local
             conditions such as population density, anticipated growth, the extent and value of
             natural areas, public awareness of the issue, and the general vision the community has
             for its future. Each strategy has advantages and disadvantages in different situations
             and for different localities. Certain local. goverriments will choose to emphasize one
             approach over another. The most effective local programs, however, will likely consist
             of a combination of strategies and management techniques. These issues will be
             discussed in the last section entitled "developing a natural areas conservation
             program".





                                                         2










             11. State and Federal Regulations

                   State and federal mandates play an important role in conserving natural
             heritage resources. Some, such as state and federal endangered species laws, are
             directed specifically at protecting these resources. Others are focused on managing
             significant lands such as wetlands, beaches, or Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas
             ,which may contain natural heritage resources or be closely tied to the well being of
             these resources. Still others, such as the National Environmental Policy Act and
             Virgin4s Environmental Impact Review Process are designed to identify and manage
             the effects of proposed public facilities, including impacts to natural heritage
             resources. Taken together, - these mandates can provide an important component of a
             comprehensive natural area conservation program.



             State and Federal Uws Protecting Rare Plants and Animals

                   Virginia@s natural heritage includes a number of species which are listed or
             proposed for inclusion on the state or federal endangered or threatened species lists.
             Several protection measures are afforded to listed endangered and threatened species
             such as systematic surveys, preparation and implementation of recovery plans, permit
             review, land acquisition and other species conservation actions.

                    Virginia has two laws designed to protect endangered species. The Virginia
             Endangered Species Act (Virginia Code ï¿½29.1-230 et seq.) was passed in 1972 and is
             administered by the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. This legislation
             prohibits the taking, transportation, sale, etc. of endangered and threatened animal
             species, except by permit. Virginia's Endangered Plant and Insect Act (Virginia Code
             ï¿½3.1-1020 et seq.) was passed by the General Assembly in 1979 in order to "tend
             protection and management to endangered and threatened species of plants and
             insects. This act is administered by the Department of Agriculture and Consurn    er
             Services and prohibits the taking or possession of listed species except from a person's
             own land or by permit.

                    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service administers the federal Endangered Species
             Act, which was passed in 1973. The Fish and Wildlife Service's regulations
             promulgated pursuant to this act prohibit the taking of any endangered species
             including significant modification or degradation of their habitat. Cooperative
             agreements for the implementation and enforcement of provisions of the federal
             Endangered Species Act have been signed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with

                                                         3









             the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Department of Agriculture and
             Consumer Services.



             Environmental Impact  Review

                   Environmental review affords an important opportunity to provide. early
             comments on the potential impacts to natural heritage resources from proposed
             federal and state development projects. Projects proposed, funded, or permitted by a
             federal agency may require some level of environmental review under the National
             Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Under this act, any federal agency proposing,
             funding, or granting a'permit for an activity which could affect a threatened or
             endangered species must consult with the U.S. Fish and- Wildlife Service. The rules
             governing the federal environmental impact process require that federal agencies
             contact affected state and local governments in preparing and reviewing federal
             documents. The Council on the Environment is the coordinating agency for the
             Commonwealth of Virginia for federal environmental documents, with the exception of
             road projects.

                   The Commonwealth of Virginia also requires an environmental review of major
             state-funded projects. The Virginia Environmental Quality Act (Virginia Code ï¿½10.1 -
             1200 et seq.) requires that any state agency or institution proposing to construct
             facilities costing more that $100,000 must prepare an environmental impact report and
             submit it to the Council on the Environment. If there is a possibility that natural
             heritage resources will be affected by a state project, the Division of Natural Heritage
             will be asked to comment. The impacts to natural heritage resources must be
             described in the environmental impact report along with measures to avoid or
             minimize these impacts. Following a review of the project, the Council provides
             comments to the Governor prior to authorization for project funding.     Unlike the
             federal NEPA, state legislation does not require state agencies to prepare an
             environmental impact report before issuing permits to private parties.

                    Certain agencies and organizations submit permit applications and project
             notices directly to th e Division of Natural Heritage in response to various mandates
             beyond the coordinated review programs described above. These include the Virginia
             Department of Transportation, the Virginia Marine Resources Conunission, the State
             Water Control Board, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
             Service and other permitting and regulatory agencies,. along with some private
             concerns. Again, the objective of this review is to protect natural heritage resources


                                                         4









             by avoiding or minimizing impacts to the resources. The Division of Natural Heritage
             reviews these proposals and makes recommendations to assist in planning efforts.



             State and Federal Regulation of Significant Areas

                   State and federal regulations apply to certain classes of environmentally
             significant areas which may contain or be closely linked to natural heritage resources.
             These include wetlands, dunes, beaches, and Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas.
             These areas provide rich habitats and often have a higher than average likelihood of
             supporting rare species. Although natural heritage conservation may not be the sole
             or primary purpose for protecting these areas, applicable regulations can form an
             important component of a comprehensive local natural areas program.

                   Wetlands, both tidal and non-tidal, have a number of important physical and
             biological functions, including providing important habitat for many rare and
             endangered species. Nationally, almost 35 percent of protected animal species are
             found in wetlands, although wetlands cover only about 5 percent of the nation's land
             area. In Virginia, over 50 percent of our rare, threatened, or endangered plant
             species are found in wetlands.

                    State law regulates the use of tidal wetlands in Virginia (Virginia Code ï¿½28.2-
             1300 et seq.). This law is administered cooperatively by local wetlands boards and
             the Virginia Marine Resources Commission. A permit from the local wetlands board
             is required prior to starting construction, dredging, or filling a tidal wetland. Permits
             are to be issued only if the proposed activity would not violate the intent and
             standards of the law and the benefits of the activity exceed its detriment. One of the
               andards listed in the law is that "wetlands of primary ecological significance shall not
             be altered so that the ecological systems in the wetlands are unreasonably disturbed."
             st



                    Non-tidal wetlands are regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
             (1977), administered by the  U.S  Army Corps of Engineers. The Act prohibits
             disposal of dredged material or placement of fill material into "waters of the United
             States," which are interpreted by the Environmental Protection Agency to include most
             non-tidal wetlands. Section 401 of the Act gives states the authority to review the
             404 permit applications (as well as other federal water permits or license requests),
             and to certify accordance with state water'quality standards and policies. As a result
             of 1989 Virginia legislation, the state has strengthened its 401 certification program
             through the issuance of a Virginia Water Protection Permit.


                                                          5











                  Beaches and coastal primary sand dunes in Virginia are regulated by Virginia
            Code ï¿½28.2-1400 et seq. This law is administered in similar fashion to the wetlands
            law and requires a permit for any dune or beach disturbing activity above the mean
            high water mark. Beaches below the mean high water mark are regulated by the
            wetlands law.


                  The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (Virginia Code ï¿½10.1-2100 et seq.),
            although enacted to protect water quality, has provisions which can help conserve
            natural heritage resources. The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Designation and
            Management Regulations are administered by the Chesapeake Bay Ucal Assistance
            Department and implemented by local governments in the Tidewater region of
            Virginia. ne regulations require local governments to designate tidal and contiguous
            non-tidal wetlands, tidal sbores, and at least a 100 foot buffer as Resource Protection
            Areas. Development or alteration of these areas is, in most cases, prohibited.
            Adjacent lands which may affect water quality are designated as Resource
            Management Areas. Land uses in these areas must meet specific water quality
            protection criteria.

                  The regulations that apply to each of these environmentally significant areas
            can be instrumental in protecting natural heritage resources. It is important to
            recognize, however, that these programs were not designed solely to conserve natural
            heritage resources. In some cases, the regulations may permit activities which are
            detrimental to these resources. For example, non-tidal wetlands 'such as bottomland
            hardwood areas may be logged under current regulations, thus severely altering the
            ecosystem. This doesnot mean that the regulations have no value for habitat
            protection, but rather that it may be necessary in some cases to use other
            management techniques in addition to the applicable regulations.



            111. Non-regulatory Opt ions


                   The state and federal regulatory programs described above may afford
            protection against some of the threats to natural areas. More than likely, however,
            they will not by themselves provide sufficient conservation measures to fully protect a
            natural area. In order to provide comprehensive natural area conservation, other
            protection techniques need to be used as well. An integral part of a comprehensive
            natural area conservation program will be effective partnerships among the various
            parties having influence over activities that affect the target resources. Undowners,


                                                       6









             businesses, developers, environmental groups and citizens in general need to be
             included in this partnership along with local and state government. This section
             describes some techniques that can be used for building partnerships to conserve
             natural areas through non-regulatory means.



             Acquisition

                  Fee simple acquisition is one of the oldest and most direct strategies for
             conserving natural areas. Natural areas can be acquired by the federal, state, or local
             governments, or by private concerns. Funds to acquire these areas can also come
             from some combination of these groups. There are hundreds of natural areas in need
             of protection in Virginia. Because funds are limited and land is expensive, only a
             small percentage of the most biologically important natural areas can be protected
             through outright acquisition by the state and federal governments or by private
             conservation organizations. Still, acquisition can play an important role in local
             natural area conservation and can be particularly effective if local governments,
             businesses, and conservation groups take an active role in acquiring important
             properties.

                   In some cases land acquisition may be the only realistic option for preserving
             significant natural areas. For instance where parcels lie entirely within an important
             natural area, conservation might require a difficult compromise between habitat
             preservation and reasonable use of the land. Where the owner is interested in
             altering land in ways detrimental to the natural heritage resources, some form of
             acquisition may be the most appropriate preservation technique. The property   could
             be acquired by the local government, a private environmental group, or a coalition of
             interests including businesses and private citizens.

                   There are a number of options, and combinations of options, available for
             acquiring and maintaining important natural areas. The simplest option is for the
             local government to purchase property with either general funds or through a local
             bond issue. This option, of course, requires strong support from local citizens. Local
             govermment funds can also be used as "seed money' to attract contributions from
             businesses, citizen, groups and private individuals, or to be used as a match for other
             grants. Funds may also be available on a competitive basis from the state or federal
             governments and national conservation organizations. In addition to fee simple
             purchase of property, these funds could also be used to protect natural heritage
             resources by leasing land. This technique can be a more cost effective use of hinds if

                                                        7









             the property owner is interested in such arrangements.

                  Acquisition of important natural areas can provide a core from which to build
             a more comprehensive open space network. It may also encourage nearby property
             owners to preserve their land through other techniques such as those discussed below.



             Conservation Easements


                   Conservation easements are legally enforceable agreements between a
             landowner and a government agency or conservation organization that place
             restrictions on the present and future use of land. State agencies and local
             governments can hold easements, or property, under the provisions of the Open Space
             Land Act (Virginia Code ï¿½ 10.1-1700 et seq.). The Virginia Outdoors Foundation,
             which was created to accept and bold gifts of open space land, also accepts easements
             (Krginia Code ï¿½ 10.1-1800 et seq.). Non-profit conservation organizations can hold
             conservation easements under the provisions of the Virginia Conservation Easement
             Act (VYginia Code ï¿½ 10.1-1009 et seq.). An easement can run for a term of years or
             can be a perpetual easement to be observed by the present and future owners of the
             land. Easements are attractive for both the conservation-minded landowner as well as
             the agency or conservation organization. The restrictive terms of the easement are
             entirely negotiable between the parties involved. The present and future landowners
             continue to enjoy many uses of the property while the agency or conservation
             organization achieves their conservation goals for the site. There are also financial
             benefits for the donor of the easement such as a possible reduced assessment for real
             estate purposes, a.charitable deduction for state and federal income tax purposes, and
             reduction of federal estate taxes and Virginia inheritance taxes.



             Dedication of Natural Area Preserve5


                   'Me Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act authorizes the Department of
             Conservation and Recreation to accept the dedication of qualified natural areas into
             the Virginia Natural Area Preserves System. Natural area dedication is the strongest
             form of protection that can be afforded a natural area. It involves recording a legally
             binding agreement which states the conservation purpose of a property and grants a
             conservation interest to the Department. The terms of a dedication agreement can be
             similar to those of a conservation easement and should state intentions for the use of
             the property, its management, development, and possible public uses. ne dedication









             agreement is recorded with the deed of the property and is perpetual. The Natural
             Area Preserves Act allows any private landowner, state agency, or other public body
             (other than federal) to dedicate their lands as natural area preserves. Private
             landowners may dedicate their property as a natural area preserve and still maintain
             ownership and all rights to sell or otherwise transfer title to the property. In addition
             to the satisfaction of preserving important natural resources, the same financial
             benefits offered the donor of a conservation easement are available to a private
             landowner who dedicates land as a natural area preserve.



             Natural Areas Registry and Management AgLeements

                  The Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act also authorizes the Department of
             Conservation and Recreation to maintain a state registry of voluntarily protected
             natural areas. ne Division of Natural Heritage is initiating a registry program for
             voluntary conservation of publicly and privately owned natural areas. Natural Area
             registry agreements will be sought on private, state, and federal lands. Participating
             landowners receive a plaque that recognizes the significance of the property and its
             placement on the Department's Natural Area Registry. In return, the landowner
             offers voluntary protection for their property and agrees to notify the Department of
             Conservation and Recreation of any intent for ownership to change bands, as well as
             the condition of the natural heritage resources on the land. In return for this
             voluntary protection, a landowner receives the personal satisfaction of knowing that
             they have contributed to a statewide natural area conservation effort. Landowners
             also receive advice and assistance with site and species management and monitoring,
             and other assistance from the Department of Conservation and Recreation relating to
             natural area conservation.



                   A management agreement is a contract between the landowner of a natural
             area and an agency or conservation organization to achieve specific conservation
             objectives. - Management agreements are designed to clearly state the desires of the
             landowner and the conservation group in regard to the conservation intent for the site
             and the duration of the agreement. These agreements can be used to conserve
             natural areas on either publicly or privately owned land. A natural area management
             agreement may be an effective conservation option alone, or may be used in
             conjunction with some other technique such as natural areas registry.


             Tax Incentives


                                                       9










                  Under the "Land Use Assessment Law" (Kirginia Code ï¿½58.1-3230 et seq.) a
             locality may, at its own option, adopt a program of preferential assessment for lands
             devoted to agriculture, horticulture, forestry, and open space uses. In localities which
             adopt this program, real estate which meets qualification standards formulated by the
             State Land Evaluation Advisory Committee is assessed by local officials according to
             its "use value" as opposed to its fair market value. Such assessments promote the
             conservation of open space by ameliorating pressures which might otherwise force a
             property's conversion to more intensive use.

                   'ne Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act (Vuginia Code ï¿½15.1-1506 et seq.)
             allows farm or timberland owners to voluntarily form agricultural or forestal districts.
             These are areas in which landowners declare their intention to maintain their land in
             agricultural or timber harvesting for a period of five to eight years. Although the
             primary goal of this legislation is to preserve the economic production aspects of these
             lands, the act also states that the areas will serve to "conserve and protect agricultural
             and forestal lands as valued natural and ecological resources which provide essential
             open spaces for clean air sheds, watershed protection, wildlife habitat, as well as for
             aesthetic purposes." In return for entering into a district agreement, landowners
             receive certain financial incentives and protection from development pressures.
             Landowners in an agricultural or forestal district are automatically eligible for use-
             value assessments for property taxes. Limitations are placed on the expenditure of
             public funds for infrastructure expansion in districts as well as restrictions on the
             acquisition of land through eminent domain. Local governments rezoning parcels next
             to agricultural and forestal districts must also consider the existence of these districts
             in their decision making.

                   Although agricultural and forestal districts do not prohibit all activities which
             may be detrimental to natural areas, they can help reduce development pressures and
             provide some buffering from development. In this respect, these districts would be
             most valuable when combined with some form of acquisition, such as conservation
             easements, for the most important natural areas within a district.






             IV. Managing Developnient

                                                         3-0










                   Non-regulatory protection options, used in combination with state and federal
              regulations, can provide a strong core for a local natural area conservation program.
              But these regulations and agreements, although valuable components, do not by
              themselves represent a comprehensive natural areas program and probably cannot
              protect all. of the natural areas in a locality. State and federal regulations will not
              apply to all of the land within most natural areas. Non-regulatory protection options
              are limited by available funds and by the wishes of current landowners. In order to
              supplement these strategies and develop a more extensive system of protected natural
              areas, local governments should use their land management authority to harness the
              development pressures threatening natural areas. Development proposals can then
              actually be used to conserve these areas. To accomplish this objective, a strong
              natural area conservation component in the comprehensive plan is essential. The plan
              can provide a blueprint for natural area conservation which can be implemented
              through several different flexible zoning techniques. This section describes these
              planning and land management mechanisms which are available to localities for
              conserving natural areas by managing development.



              Comprehensive Plannin

                    All localities in Virginia are required to adopt a comprehensive plan.
              Comprehensive planning provides a means for anticipating and influencing changes
              occurring within a community. Comprehensive plans include information on existing
              conditions, community goals and objectives, and strategies for attaining the
              community's vision for its future. Conserving natural areas should be an integral part
              of this vision.


                    With regard to natural areas, deciding how to best display the occurrence of
              rare species populations is a matter of some debate. A natural areas inventory will
              provide detailed information on natural area boundaries, as well as a description of
              the natural heritage resources within the area and their location and management
              requirements. The debate occurs over how much detail should be given in
              comprehensive plans available to the public. 71ere is some concern that including
              details on species location may invite barm to those species from collectors or by
              landowners wishing to remove what they may see as an obstacle to achieving their
              goals for their property. On the other hand, limiting the level of detail to very
              general location information also limits the usefulness of the information for planning
              purposes. Some have argued that very general location information is sufficient and









            that precise location data should be reserved for local staff review of development
            proposals. This strategy has limitations, however, because it does not encourage
            developers to consider sensitive resources as they design developments. Each locality
            must decide how to best balance these risks and opportunities.

                 There is no debate, however, over the value of developing strong
            comprehensive plan goals and objectives for conserving natural areas. The
            comprehensive plan can be a powerful tool for coordinating a comprehensive natural
            area conservation program. A goal is an end towards which community actions are
            aimed. An objective is a measurable activity to be accomplished in pursuit of that
            goal. The final part of the natural area planning process is to develop conservation
            strategies. Strategies are specific proposals for accomplishing an objective. Strategies
            to employ for attaining natural area conservation objectives should include the non-
            regulatory and development management options described in this report. These
            strategies, when added to applicable state and federal regulations, form a well
            balanced and comprehensive natural area conservation program.

                  One planning strategy for natural area conservation is to incorporate natural
            areas into a comprehensive open space plan. Open space planning involves
            identifying open spaces and recommending strategies to conserve these areas through
            various land management techniques. An open space plan may address conservation
            of many important community features, including natural areas, historic sites and
            districts, scenic routes and rivers along with their adjacent "viewsheds", national, state
            or local parks and forests, other environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands and
            steep slopes, groundwater recharge areas, and public reservoir watersheds. In addition
            to their primary purposes, these areas may provide opportunities for recreation and
            education. Open space planning can also help guide growth and result in a more
            orderly community.

                  The cultural and recreational value of open space can be amplified by
            connecting various resources through a system of greenways. Greenways are linear
            corridors of private and public lands and waters providing access to open space and
            other recreational resources. These corridors can also be used to connect rural open
            spaces with more urbanized areas. Often abandoned rail lines, utility right-of-ways,
            scenic routes, rivers, and stream floodplains are used as greenways. If greenways
            contain a sufficient amount of undisturbed vegetation, they may also add to the
            habitat value of the natural areas they connect by providing a natural corridor
            between them. Habitat corridors among natural areas provide avenues of movement
            for species and help keep populations genetically healthy.


                                                      12










                  To help incorporate the concepts of. natural areas, open space, and greenways
             into the planning process, various natural and cultural resources can be assembled
             into a single data base. Although not a necessity, a computerized geographic
             information system (GIS) can make it easier to manage such a data base. A GIS
             can be useful in land management decisions such as rezoning requests by providing a
             quick reference on the natural resources that will be affected by a particular decision.

                  The combined benefits of open spaces and greenways make it easier to justify
             conservation of significant resources in the face of expanding suburban growth. In
             addition to conserving valued natural and cultural resources, they provide a valuable
             community asset which contributes to a higher quality of life. As a community asset,
             these areas can have the added benefit of enhancing local economic development and
             tourism efforts. To achieve these many benefits, however, the strategies identified in
             the comprehensive plan must be implemented through local land management
             authority such as zoning.



             Conventional Zonin


                   State law enables localities to use their zoning authority to protect open spaces
             (Virginia Code ï¿½15.1-486), and to provide for the preservation of "lands of significance
             for the protection of the natural environment" (Virginia Code ï¿½15.1-489). State law
             also cites conservation of natural resources as one of the matters to be considered in
             drawing and applying zoning ordinances and districts (Virginia Code ï¿½15.1-490).

                   Conventional zoning can be used for natural area conservation, however it has
             some limitations. In general, conventional zoning by itself does not offer the
             flexibility needed to protect natural areas while allowing reasonable use of private
             property. Conventional zoning typically only classifies land uses and regulates
             development density. It does not provide the flexibility to conserve sensitive natural
             areas while allowing appropriate development in other, more suitable portions of a
             tract. Classifying large tracts of land for natural area preservation would require strict
             limits on development and may prohibit most uses of land within that zone.

                   Limiting development to very low densities through large lot zoning also
             presents problems. Although the number of dwelling units may be an appropriately
             low intensity for protection of the natural area, no actual protection is afforded to
             living resources since they are subject to the will of individual property owners. Urge

                                                       13









             lot zoning may actually cause more rapid loss of natural areas because more land is
             required to meet the demand for development.



             Flexible Zonin


                  Other more flexible zoning techniques are available for conserving natural
             areas. These include overlay zones, cluster and planned unit development provisions,
             and conditional zoning. These techniques can be used in conjunction with
             conventional zoning and incorporate guidelines for preserving natural areas and open
             space into the development review process. They can encourage sensitive site design
             which conserves natural areas without sacrificing other objectives. Each of these
             techniques can be used to provide more flexibility because they offer an opportunity
             for negotiation regarding site design.

                   Overlay zones are special districts that are placed "on top of' portions of other
             conventional zoning districts. The development standards for the overlay zone are
             then added to the standards of the original zones. Overlay zones can be used to
             outline natural areas or, land designated for open space preservation. Within this
             zone, developments can be required to provide a certain percentage of open space or
             meet certain design standards which increase the viability of natural areas. Overlay
             zones can also include provisions for density bonuses for clustering development and
             preserving open space.

                   Cluster development encompasses many techniques that allow moderate to high
             density development in exchange for conservation of open space and natural areas.
             Clustering is an excellent way to preserve open space by minimizing the amount of
             land needed for development. Development costs are usually lower because fewer
             streets are needed and water and sewer systems can be made more compact. By
             concentrating development on the most suitable portion of a tract, open space,
             including natural areas elsewhere on the tract, can be preserved.

                   A planned unit development, or PUD, is a form of clustering, but is generally
             larger and can include non-residential land uses. Planned unit development
             regulations set an average development density for large tracts and then permit higher
             density and cluster development on selected portions of the tract. The more intensely
             developed areas are off-set by areas with little or no development. Clustering of both
             residential and non-residential uses can be done within a PUD, thus yielding benefits
             to the developer while conserving open space and natural areas. Many PUD

                                                       14









             regulations appear as floating zones which are not designated on a zoning map. This
             allows more flexibility for the community to reserve judgement on placement of such
             large developments until a request is received.

                  Conditional zoning is a procedure that allows localities to accept conditions
             proffered (voluntarily offered) by an applicant for a rezoning. Proffered conditions
             are commitments, not required by the zoning ordinance, to limit how the property is
             to be used or to provide facilities to meet the needs of the area being rezoned.
             Under conditional zoning, developers'could proffer to leave important natural areas
             undeveloped and assure the protection and management of these areas. Other
             measures to protect natural areas could also be proffered such as stormwater
             management facilities to protect the water quality of sensitive aquatic habitats, or
             water dependent terrestrial species and communities.

                   The purpose of conditional zoning is to add flexibility to the way zoning is
             practiced. It allows applicants to proffer conditions that make the proposed rezoning
             more acceptable to the community. Conditional zoning enabling legislation (Virginia
             Code ï¿½15.1-491.1 et seq.) requires that proffers must relate to the rezoning and
             conform with the comprehensive plan. Upon approval, conditions become legally
             binding on the property and are enforced by the zoning administrator.



             Transfer. Rurchase and Lease of DevelQp=nt Rights

                   Another mechanism which holds promise for the future is the transfer, purchase
             or leasing of development rights. Current state law does not allow the transfer of
             development rights between parcels of land, however a number of efforts have been
             made to promote this legislation. Where such systems have been used in other states,
             owners of designated open space have been assigned development rights according to
             a formula based on the amount of land owned in the area where development is to
             be restricted. Landowners in these designated areas may not develop their land, but
             may transfer, sell or lease the development rights while keeping the land itselL Once
             the development rights are gone, the land may be used only for limited purposes such
             as open space conservation, agriculture or forestry and is taxed accordingly.

                    The development rights removed from these "sending" properties can then be
             used to increase allowable density on other more suitable properties. In some cases,
             the community itself may obtain development rights from property owners in order to
             restrict growth while, at the same time, providing compensation to those property









             owners. Advocates of the use of development rights see them as the most effective
             and equitable way yet devised to conserve open space in areas experiencing rapid
             growth. Although the transfer of development rights alone does not assure habitat
             protection, it can be used in combination with other non-regulatory techniques such as
             easements to conserve natural areas while providing compensation to landowners.



             V. Developing a Natural Areas Conservation Program

                   The various techniques described in this report present a broad spectrum of
             options for local governments to use for conserving natural areas. Beyond addressing
             natural area conservation in the local comprehensive plan, there is no one technique,
             or combination of techniques, that is best for all natural areas or all localities. A
             local strategy must consider a number of variables. This sections describes these
             variables and their relation to conservation strategies.

                   Local governments must adopt strategies for individual natural areas that
             consider the characteristics of each site. An initial step should-be to prioritize natural
             areas according to their natural values and risk of loss from development. The
             natural areas inventory provides information on the natural heritage value of each
             area. This information should be combined with details on other natural values such
             as opportunities for passive recreation, water quality maintenance, education, research,
             and linkages to other,open space areas. The potential for development is determined
             by factors such as current land use designation and zoning, environmental constraints
             such as steep slopes or wetlands, access, available utilities, and proximity to urban
             growth areas. Natural areas with high natural values and high development potential
             should be given first priority.

                    Once natural areas have been prioritized, other factors such as ownership
             patterns and parcel size should be analyzed. It is important to determine the
             attitudes of the property owner, or owners, with regard to natural area conservation.
             Conservation minded owners may be willing to provide voluntary protection for the
             natural area. if so, representatives from a state agency such as the Department of
             Conservation and Recreation, or a private organization such as The Nature
             Conservancy may be able to provide technical assistance by working with the
             landowner to assure protection. If the landowner desires compensation for conserving
             the site, he may be interested in a below-market-value sale, or sale of a conservation
             easement on the property.
                    If owners are less conservation minded, other strategies will be necessary. An


                                                         16









             important factor in this case is the location of the natural area in relation to
             individual parcels and owners. If the designated natural area, or portion of the
             natural area, constitutes only asmall portion of the parcel in question there may be
             an opportunity to conserve the natural area while still allowing reasonable use of the
             remainder of the site. Tbis could be accomplished through the flexible zoning
             techniques described above. If, however, the natural area constitutes a high
             percentage of the parcel, negotiation through flexible zoning may not be feasible. In
             this case, it may be difficult to conserve the natural area while allowing reasonable
             use of the site. Under these circumstances, the only option for protecting the natural
             area may be acquisition of either the property or a conservation easement at market
             rate.


                   In cases where some form of acquisition, whether at or below market value, is
             the only option available, localities should seek creative solutions for raising the
             necessary funds. Local funds, either from the general budget or from the sale of
             bonds, can be.used as seed money to attract other resources. Although scarce, grant
             monies from the state or federal governments or private national conservation
             organizations may be available to provide matching funds. Local ftindraising through
             private conservation groups or businesses could also be added into this effort.

                   Whatever strategy is used must be appropriate for local circumstances such as
             projected growth and community attitudes. Localities experiencing, or expecting,
             moderate to high growth can harness development pressure to conserve natural areas.
             Flexible zoning techniques can be used in these localities to protect natural areas as
             growth occurs. In this way, as land is developed, the more sensitive features of that
             land, such as natural areas, are permanently protected. In the face of rapid growth,
             citizens may also be more willing to commit public and private ftinds to resource
             protection. Although natural areas in growing communities may be the most
             threatened, these circumstances may offer in ore opportunities for resource
             conservation.


                    Highly urbani zed areas and rural areas with little projected growth may require
             different strategies. In these cases, it may be difficult to use local land management
             authority to conserve natural areas because little growth is occurring. Highly
             urbanized areas may have few remaining natural areas, but because of their scarcity,
             these areas may be highly valued by citizens. Citizens in rural localities with little
             expected growth, on the other hand, may not be as willing to support conservation
             efforts because natural resources seem abundant and unthreatened. This does not
             mean, however, that actions to conserve natural areas through local land management


                                                        17









           authority are inappropriate for localities that do not expect high growth. On the
           contrary, a natural area conservation strategy which includes comprehensive planning
           and flexible land management techniques is appropriate for any locality. This type of
           strategy is simply more likely to be effective in growing localities that have more
           opportunities to use this technique.

                  In conclusion, there are a number of options available for localities.to use to
           conserve natural areas. The keys to protecting these areas are good information on
           the resources to be preserved, a strong natural area or open space component in the
           comprehensive plan, land management ordinances that provide adequate flexibility,
           and in particular, strong public involvement and support for natural area conservation.

































                                                       18







                                                                    APPENDIX B



                                 Landowner Contact Report


          OWNER:
          SITE:



          Type of contact accomplished:
               mail
               telephone
               meeting with landowner
               site visit with landowner
               other

          Date of next contact (if applicable):

          Next plan of action:

          Information needed:



          Notification Proaress:

          Date introductory letter mailed:

          Date of telephone contact:

               If no telephone contact, explain:

          Date of visit:

               If did not schedule an appointment for visit, explain:

          Person(s) visited:

          Date thank you letter mailed:

          Additional information mailed:



          Site Information:


          Site name:

          Quadrangle name:

          Quadrangle  code:

          County/City:
          Estimated value of land/improvements:

          Access to property:









         Plat map/parcel number:

         Size of tract in acreage:

         Resources in natural area:

         Which of these resources have been documented on this tract?

         In the preserve design, does this tract fall within the primary
               conservation boundary, the secondary, or both?

         Resources observed during visit (if site visit done):

         Short-term threats to these resources:

         Long-term threats to these resources:


         Ownership Information:


         Name:

         Mailing address:

         Phone number:


         Age:

         Occupation:

         Children:
         How many?    -      Ages(range):

         How long has the owner owned the tract?

         Does the owner reside on the tract?

               If no, what is the property address?

         What  is the present land use?

         What  are the plans for future land use?

         What  (if any) specific concerns were expressed by owner?


         Conservation Progress:

         What is the owners attitude towards conservation?

         Was the owner aware of the resources prior to contact?

         If yes, has the owner protected them deliberately?









        What is DNHIs conservation goal for this tract?

        What conservation options were discussed?

        What was the owners response and attitude toward these options?

        What level of protection was achieved through this contact?

        Does the owner appear to be receptive to stronger levels of
             protection in the future (if necessary):


        Additional comments or observations during visit:







                                                             APPENDIX C





                           VIRGINIA NATURAL  AREA REGISTRY


         VIRGINIA'S NATURAL HERITAGE.

         Virginia is a state of extraordinary natural diversity--from the
         sandy beaches of the Atlantic Ocean and the Chesapeake Bay,
         across the gentle hills of the Piedmont and the Shenandoah
         Valley, to the mountains of the western highland.      Residents of
         the Commonwealth take great pride in the beauty of our natural
         heritage.   Over 2,700 species of plants, 880 vertebrate animals
         and 30,000 invertebrate animals interact with Virginia's rocks,
         soils, and water to form unique natural communities and
         ecosystems.   However, some of the species and ecosystems which
         flourished in Virginia's past are threatened today. As the human
         population increases, so does the need for conversion of natural
         lands to other uses.     As a result, the land of which certain
         plants and animals depend upon for survival may be permanently
         damaged or destroyed. Fortunately, we are learning to take
         precautions and property owners are acting voluntarily to
         safeguard the best that remains of our natural world.

                       WHAT IS THE REGISTRY OF NATURAL AREAS?

         Virginia's Registry of Natural Areas is a program developed to
         encourage voluntary conservation of significant lands in private
         and public ownership. Our staff has identified over 900 natural
         areas throughout the Commonwealth which support natural heritage
         resources. The landowners of these sites play a crucial role in
         the conservation of such lands and in turn the future survival of
         the natural communities and rare species they support.       Species
         are often lost simply because the landowner is unaware of its
         existence and needs. By informing and recognizing the landowners
         of these significant natural areas, the Registry of Natural Areas
         program reduces the chance that these resources may be
         unknowingly destroyed.   The program is operated by the Virginia
         Department of Conservation and Recreation, an agency which is
         devoted   to   the    identification   and   protection    of    the
         Commonwealth's most significant natural areas.

                        WHAT AREAS QUALIFY FOR THE REGISTRY?

         To be eligible for placement on the Registry of Natural Areas, a
         property must support significant natural heritage resources for
         Virginia, such as:
         1)  habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered plants or
             animals.
         2   rare or state significant natural communities.
         3)  significant geologic landmarks.


           WHAT SAY DOES THE LANDOWNER HAVE IN THE REGISTRATION PROCESS?

         The decision to register belongs entirely to the landowner. This








         is a voluntary and nonbinding agreement and may be terminated by
         either party at any time.

             DOES REGISTRATION OF A NATURAL AREA PERMIT PUBLIC ACCESS
                                TO PRIVATE PROPERTY?

         No. Registration of a  Natural area provides no rights of public
         access to private property.    As with any private land, visitors
         must receive permission from the landowner before entering the
         property.     Locations of registered natural areas are not
         publicized unless the owner so desires.

                     WHAT COMMITMENT DOES THE LANDOWNER MAKE?

         Landowners who participate in the Virginia Registry of Natural
         Areas commit to the following:

         1) to voluntarily preserve and protect the natural heritage
         resources on their land to the best of their ability;
         2) to notify the Virginia Department of Conservation and
         Recreation of any potential threats to these resources, such as
         pollution, clearing of land, etc.;
         3) to notify the Virginia Department of Conservation and
         Recreation of any intent to sell or transfer ownership of the
         property.



         WHAT RECOGNITION DOES THE LANDOWNER RECEIVE FOR THIS COMMITMENT?

         In honor of the voluntary commitment to protect the natural area,
         the landowner will receive a plaque recognizing the land for its
         significant features and the owner for their stewardship
         commitment.


                  DOES THE OWNER RECEIVE ANY FINANCIAL INCENTIVES?

         No. However, there are other protection methods available, such
         as conservation easements and natural area dedication which could
         offer tax incentives.


          IS MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE TO THE OWNER OF A REGISTERED
         AREA?

         Yes. Management assistance will be provided upon the landowner's
         request.







                                                              APPENDIX D






                       VIRGINIA'S REGISTRY OF NATURAL AREAS
                                  AGREEMENT FORM


        I,                    owner of the                    Natural Area
        agree to include the area described and bounded on the enclosed
        map in Virginia's Registry of Natural Areas. I agree not to take
        any intentional action which could destroy or degrade the natural
        area so long as the property is registered.

        I agree to allow qualified representatives of the Department of
        Conservation and Recreation to visit the property a minimum of
        once per year with prior notice to examine the condition of the
        natural area and the natural heritage resources within. Should I
        observe any significant change in the condition of the natural
        area or any of the resources within, I agree to notify the
        Department of Conservation and Recreation.

           agree to notify the Department of Conservation and Recreation
        at least 30 days before I transfer by any means the title to the
        riegistered property or decide f or any reason to withdraw f rom
        this agreement.

        It is understood that this agreement involves no change of title
        or loss of ownership rights. The agreement solely expresses the
        landowner's sincere intention to protect certain natural heritage
        resources and the Department of Conservation and Recreation's
        desire to recognize the importance of the property and the
        landowner's civic gesture by awarding a plaque.     Neither party
        shall incur any liability for any injury to persons or property
        on the land.






        B
           Property owner                               Date


        By Director                                     Date
           Department of Conservation and Recreation







                                                                                                                             OAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR L1114ARY



                                                                                                                            3 6668 14111128 8