[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR SIGNIFICANT PLANT AND WILDLIFE MARYLAND HABITAT AREAS NATURAL OF MARYLAND"S HERITAGE WESTERN SHORE: PROGRAM CECIL COUNTY -don. Jm Prepared by Katharine A. McCarthy Judith L. Robertson Richard R Wiegand J.,Christopher Ludwig Helonlas bullsta SWAMP PINK @,ACNT OF N QH 76.2 -M3 M433784 1988 pvi@ IDO MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR SIGNIFICANT PLANT AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS OF MARYLAND'S WESTERN SHORE: CECIL COUNTY FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED TO: Coastal Resources Division Tidewater Administration SUBMITTED BY: Katharine A. McCarthy Judith L. Robertson Richard H. Wiegand J. Christopher Ludwig Maryland Natural Heritage Program Forest, Park and Wildlife Service Department of Natural Resources December 31, 1988 Preparation of this report was partially funded by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR SIGNIFICANT PLANT AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS OF MARYLAND'S WESTERN SHORE: CECIL COUNTY TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................. 1 SECTION 1: Procedures of site selection, methods of protection iinpleraentation,' and the long-term framework established by this project Introduction ..................................... 3 Site Identification .............................. 3 Field Inventory ..................... : ............ 5 Strategy for Selecting Significant Sites ......... 5 Site Protection Implementation Methods ........... 6 Long-Term Framework .............................. 9 SECTION 2: Protection Area Summaries Introduction ..................................... 10 County Map .......................................... 12 Protection Area Summaries Bald Friar Ravine ............................. 14 Camp Rodney Swamp ............................. 16 Cecil Bog ..................................... 19 Charlestown West Seeps ........................ 22 Goat Hill Serpentine Glade .................... 25 Horseshoe Woods.. .... ***'**** 28 Log Cabin Sedge Meadow ..... .................. 30 Octoraro Slopes ............................... 33 Richardsmere Powerline ........ ................. 36 Rock Springs Powerline ........................ 38 Stone Run Millpond ............................ 41 Whitaker Swamp ................................ 44 Wildcat Ravine ................................ 47 REFERENCES .................................................... 49 APPENDIX A: Regulations under COMAR 08.03.08 Threatened and Endangered Species TJS Department of commerce ter Library NOAA Coastal servicco Cen @234 South Hobson Avenue Charleston, SC 29405-2413 INTRODUCTION In 1986 this project was initiated by the Coastal Resources Division of the Department of Natural Resources' Tidewater Administration. The task was designed to develop the information base and to determine the management mechanisms needed to implement an alternative approach to the State Critical Area Program for addressing the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act's requirement to designate Geographic Areas of Particular Concern (GAPC) and Areas for Preservation and Restoration (APR). Under the GAPC requirements, coastal states are to inventory and develop management measures to protect the integrity of "areas,of unique, scarce, fragile or vulnerable natural habitat" and "areas of high natural productivity or essential habitat for living resources, including fish, wildlife, and endangered species and the various trophic levels in the food web critical to their well-being." Under the APR requirement, coastal states are to include in their Coastal Zone Management Programs "provisions for procedures whereby specific areas may be designated for the purpose of preserving or restoring them.for their conservation, recreational, ecological or aesthetic values." This project covers the Coastal Plain Counties of Maryland excluding land within the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area. To accomplish this task, a contract was awarded to the Maryland Natural Heritage Program, a division of the Forest, Park and Wildlife Service. The mission of the Natural Heritage Program is to identify and help preserve the biological and ecological diversity of Maryland. Since 1979, this program has been dev oted to the collection of information about the State's rare, threatened, and endangered species and habitats. The program's extensive data base provided the basis for the identification of outstanding habitat examples on Maryland's Eastern and Western Shores. By January 1987, the Coastal Resources Division and the Maryland Natural Heritage Program established specific objectives to accomplish the first phase of this project. These objectives were: 1. identify criteria for the selection of significant plant and wildlife habitat areas; 2. undertake field inventory of areas identified in exist "n studies and data files of the Maryland Natural Heritage Program that are likely to be of ecological significance, in order to identify species and habitats associated with each site; 3. undertake field inventory of potentially significant habitats not previously identified in the database of the Maryland Natural Heritage Program in order to determine if rare species or habitats are associated with these sites; 4. determine threats to each area and determine management mechanisms for protecting the integrity of these areas; 5. determine protection boundaries for each site including needed buffer areas; and 6. collect other locational information needed in order to implement management mechanisms for each site. These objectives combine to produce a protection package in which significant habitats (referred to as areas or sites) are assigned management mechanisms within a designated boundary. In accordance with the Natural Heritage Program's methodology, this area is-then labeled a protection area. In December 1987, the Natural Heritage Program reported on protection areas identified on Maryland's Eastern Shore from Kent County south. With financial assistance from the Coastal Resources Division, Baltimore and Harford Counties hired personnel in 1987 and 1988 to identify protection areas in their counties. In 1988, Prince Georges County funded a staff member (with financial assistance from the Coastal Resources Division) to identify protection areas on private property. Therefore, the Natural Heritage Program did not include Baltimore and Harford Counties in its survey and report of protection areas on the Western Shore, and focused only on public land in Prince Georges County. Section 1 of this report provides a detailed description of the project methodology, scope of work, and the long-term framework established through the project. Section 2 provides Protection Area Summaries for significant habitat areas which have been identified. The Protection Area Summary contains information needed for site protection. A selection of applicable references follows Section 2. Appendix A contains a copy of'the Department of Natural Resource's Regulations [COMAR 08.03.08) concerning the State's Threatened and Endangered species. 2 SECTION 1 Procedures of Site Selection, Methods of Protection Implementation, and the Long-term Framework Established by this Prolect INTRODUCTION: This section provides all technical information on the project procedures from the planning stages, when habitat areas were selected for field survey, through the site visit, to the selection of the site for protection. Following this information, the report presents methods of implementing protection for selected sites. Finally, the long-term framework established by this project is discussed. SITE IDENTIFICATION: Sites identified for inventory were located throughout the Coastal Plain Counties excluding the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area. Significant plant and wildlife habitats were identified from the following categories of sites employing the methods described for each type. 1. Sites potentially inhabited by State Endangered or Threatened Species. Methods: Data concerning the habitat, phenology, and taxonomy of each listed species were gathered from regional floristic surveys and scientific literature. Sites were located by using the habitat data in conjunction with National Wetland Inventory maps, aerial infrared photographs, and county soil surveys. These sites were surveyed when the rare species potentially inhabiting the sites could be identified accurately. 2. Sites with historical occurrences (reported prior to 1980) of species determined to be rare by the Natural Heritage Program and found in their publication, Threatened and Endangered Plants and Animals of Maryland (Norden et al., 1984). Methods: For each species, data were gathered concerning habitat, phenology, and taxonomy. Many of the historical records provided only general locations for rare species. For these records, 3 more specific locations for survey were selected based upon habitat data supplemented by National Wetland Inventory maps, aerial infrared photographs, and county soil surveys. The field staff surveyed sites when the rare species could be accurately identified if found. 3. Non-tidal wetlands. Methods: National Wetland Inventory maps and aerial infrared photographs were used to locate non-tidal wetlands. Particular attention was given to wetlands in State Parks, Forests and Wildlife Management Areas. Based upon the findings of "The Functional Assessment of Non- tidal Wetlands," a report completed for the Coastal Resources Division by the Maryland Natural Heritage Program (Bartgis 1986), these wetlands were assigned priorities for survey. High and intermediate priority wetlands listed below were candidates for intensive survey. a. Non-tidal Wetland Complex, i.e., two or more contiguous wetland communities with one of the following traits: i. For complexes under 10 acres, presence of at least two wetland communities; ii. For 10- to 100-acre complexes, presence of at least four wetland communities; or iii. For complexes greater than 100 acres, presence of at least six communities. b. Seasonal Ponds: wetlands occurring mainly on Pocomoke soils in centripetally-drained, seasonally flooded basins dominated by Walter's Sedge or Twigrush. C. Bogs: highly acidic wetlands characterized by highly organic soils and/or sphagnum. d. Palustrine Forested Deciduous Wetlands (PF01) with at least one of the following characteristics: i. seeps ii. Vernal pools iii. Well-developed stratification 4 e. Palustrine Forested Evergreen Wetlands (PF04) dominated by Bald Cypress or Atlantic White Cedar. FIELD INVENTORY: Observations and data were collected in the field concerning the general character of each site, the degree of unnatural disturbance, and, if present, the condition of the rare species populations. Prior to surveying sites on private land, permission was obtained from landowners. First, the natural features of each site were described, noting the dominant vegetation, aquatic features, physical relief, and natural disturbances (such as insect defoliation or trees felled by high winds). A list of the common plant species was developed and unique communities were identified and mapped. when rare species were found, the size and extent of their populations were estimated. Staff members also estimated the proportion of the population that was flowering and fruiting, and marked the population on the general map of the site. The microhabitats of the rare species were described. If a population was large, voucher specimens of the rare species were collected and deposited with the Natural Heritage Program. Small populations of rare species were photographed for verification. If rare species were absent from historical locations, the habitat was assessed to determine if it could still support the species or if the habitat had been altered such that the species could no longer survive. Finally, the habitat integrity of each site was assessed. Staff members recorded unnatural disturbances and their current and potential future effects on the habitat. For example, the presence of ditches in non-tidal wetlands was reported, and the effects of the ditches on wetland hydrology and vegetation were reviewed. Threats to the integrity of the habitat were discussed. Current and potential future uses of surrounding land were considered. In light of these threats, staff members recommended management activities intended to maintain the habitat and sustain the populations of rare species. STRATEGY FOR SELECTING SIGNIFICANT SITES: The selection of ecologically significant sites for protection was based on the following criteria which were assessed during the field inventory: 5 1. Site contains species that are considered by the Maryland Natural Heritage Program as Rare, Threatened or Endangered in Maryland (see Norden, -et Al, 1984). Many of these species are listed in the revised Department of Natural Resource's Regulations under COMAR 08.03.08. 2. site contains one or more rare or ecologically unique natural communities. 3. overall ecologic integrity of the site is high. Unnatural disturbances must be minimal or must be such that their effects simulate natural forces of disturbance. 4. Human-induced threats which could lead to the loss of the rare species or habitat(s) must be minimal. 5. Regulation and monitoring must be feasible so that activities (both on-site and nearby) can be limited to those that do not negatively impact the rare species and natural habitat(s). Required buffer zones must be available to ensure site protection. 6. Ecologic, scenic, or historic values other than those related to rare species and habitat protection may be present. SITE PROTECTION IMPLEMENTATION METHODS: Protection may be implemented in a variety of ways depending upon ecological significance of the site, type of ownership (public vs. private), seriousness of threats, degree of management required, and landowner preference. The various options confer varying degrees of protection security and of landowner control. They range from designations that afford no legal protection to acquisition by a conservation organization. The following list describes the available options and the degree of protection that they provide. Because the significance and consequences of each mechanism vary, some sites may be protected by a combination of methods. Natural area protection may be accomplished by several types of organizations. Federal, State, and local governments (at the County as well as the municipal levels) have specific tools and mechanisms by which they may set aside or regulate land for conservation purposes. In addition, there are private organizations that can either protect lands on their own or 6 facilitate the efforts of the public sector. Many of the protection mechanisms listed below may be implemented by any of the aforementioned conservation organizations, while others may only be available to certain agencies or organizations. The following methods afford protection to rare species habitat by outlining and assigning management responsibilities to a particular party: 1. Voluntary management agreement - landowner informally agrees to protect the rare species and habitat by not disturbing the site. 2. Registration - landowner signs a written, nonbinding agreement with the State's Department of Natural Resources, a county government, The Nature Conservancy, or another private conservation organization, officially recognizing the ecological significance of the site. Management needs are outlined and the landowner agrees to perform specified tasks to protect rare species and habitat. 3. Legally binding protection agreement - landowner enters a legally binding management agreement or leases the land to a conservation organization for management purposes. Conservation easements granted by the Maryland Environmental Trust, local government, and other private trusts (including The Nature Conservancy) impose certain land-use restrictions while conferring tax benefits to the landowner. 4. Zoning - the site may be zoned or rezoned as a conservation area in which land-use is restricted. Development may be highly regulated or prohibited. Such protection is usually accomplished on a county level through local ordinances. 5. 'Bequest or Right of First Refusal - landowner agrees to will land or give right of first refusal for acquisition to a State, county, or private conservation organization at some undetermined time in the future. 6. Acquisition - landowner conveys property.to a conservation organization or public agency. The transfer may be a donation, a bargain sale (i.e., below market value) or a fee simple (i.e., full market value) transaction. The first two types of transaction confer tax benefits to the landowner. All rights to the land belong to the buyer and 7 management is directed toward the protection of rare species and habitat(s). In some cases, acquisition may occur with the retention of a life estate for the owner. This allows the landowner to continue to live on and have restricted use of the property until death, at which time the buyer obtains full control. The following methods are designations which afford no current protection but which serve to acknowledge the ecological significance of a site and which may be used to stimulate further protection efforts: 1. National Registry of Natural Landmarks - land which is determined to be a nationally significant example of the Nation's natural heritage may be designated a National Natural Landmark by the Secretary of the Interior. 2. Sensitive Management Areas - land within the State Park System which is considered in need of special protection because of its unique and fragile physiography, flora, and fauna may be designated a "Sensitive Management Area" and is reserved for only those activities compatible with preservation. 3. Maryland Wildlands Preservation System - land which has retained its wilderness character or which has rare species or similar features of interest worthy of preservation for use of present and future residents of the State may be termed "wildland.11 4. Natural Heritage Area - land which meets all three of the criteria listed in the revised Regulations under COMAR 08.03.08 Threatened and Endangered Species may be designated a Natural Heritage Area subject to the approval of the Secretary of Natural Resources. Information provided in the Protection Area Summaries of this report is used to assess the degree of protection needed. 8 LONG-TERM FRAMEWORK: This project provides a foundation for tasks to begin in 1989. These tasks, described below, involve the further identification and protection of significant habitats within the coastal zone. In 1989 the focus of this project will be the protection of significant habitats identified in 1987 and 1988. Efforts were initiated in 1988 to protect significant habitats imminently threatened by development or other human-induced habitat alterations. These efforts will be expanded in 1989 to include additional significant habitats of highest priority for protection. Substantial effort will be required to protect each site, and this task should continue into the 1990s. Next year the methodology developed in this project will be used to continue to identify significant plant and wildlife habitats in the Coastal Plain of Maryland. Protection Area summaries identical in format to those prepared in 1987 and 1988 will be completed for significant habitats. These sites will be candidates for protection within the framework of this project. 9 SECTION 2 Protection Area Summaries INTRODUCTION: The remainder of this report contains site-specific protection information for all selected areas. Each of these areas is reviewed in a Protection Area Summary (PAS) that describes the protection area, its values, and its protection needs. The PAS is composed of several parts, each of which is discussed below. Format and content are best understood with the insight provided in this section. Protection Area Name - An identifying name has been assigned to each protection area. This is usually based on the site's location and/or habitat type. County - The county in which the protection area is located is given. USGS Ouad(s) - Identifies the United States Geological Survey topographic map(s) on which the protection area occurs. SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE - States the major reasons for protecting the site. The features of greatest ecological significance are described, such as the presence of rare species or unique habitat. OTHER SIGNIFICANCE AND VALUES - This section describes other important aspects of the protection area. The value of the protection area to wildlife and for ecosystem maintenance may be discussed. In setting aside rare species habitat (which includes additional buffer land), a safe haven is provided for wildlife and for the perpetuation of the natural processes that sustain the ecosystem. Many of the proposed protection areas are adjacent to or part of designated management areas. They may overlap with or abut State Forests or Parks, State Scenic Rivers, Natural Heritage Areas or Nature Conservancy preserves. By increasing the size and/or protection of these areas, their ecologic and scenic values may be enhanced. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS - Both potential and current threats to the rare species or to the natural habitat are described. These are generally related to human-induced habitat alterations, such as forest cutting, hydrologic alteration, vehicular traffic, or powerline maintenance practices. In some cases, however, 10 there are natural threats such as insect infestation or natural succession. Specific management recommendations are then given. Voluntary management agreements are often suggested. In some cases, monitoring of rare species populations is recommended. Such studies are needed in order to learn more about the demographics and ecological requirements of the rare plants and to provide warnings of serious population declines. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS - The proposed protection area is delineated by a line termed the protection area boundary. The habitats to be included within this boundary are described and the reasons for their inclusion are given. Within this boundary the threats listed in the previous section should be avoided to protect the significant habitat and rare species. Land within the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area is not included within the boundaries of the protection areas. Within the protection area boundary, a buffer has been placed around the core rare species habitat. This zone consists of adjacent land needed to protect the critical habitat from the impacts of land use in surrounding areas. When the critical habitat is a wetland, lands which drain into it are included as buffer. Surrounding forest may be designated for many reasons. These include maintaining canopy cover to prevent the invasion of weedy or non-native species, stabilizing soils to prevent sedimentation of waterways, filtering out chemicals or excess nutrients, and maintaining hydrology. The delineation of buffers varies depending on the type of habitat, surrounding land use, habitat requirements of the rare species, local hydrology, and possible future threats. Reasonable and effective buffers were determined after careful consideration of these factors. Maps (with a scale of 1:24000) and additional information concerning boundary locations are available from the Natural Heritage Program. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY - Finally, a general description of the protection area is given. Each natural community is discussed and its relationship to surrounding communities is described. Often the hydrologic regime of the community and the range of seasonal variability of water table depth are provided. Dominant trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants are listed. Note: Common names for species are used throughout the Protection Area Summary except when no common name is available. When a specific species is named, the common name is capitalized. 11 CECIL@ COUNTY- 77 76; F a I, H 4 p P I e 3 n, 4": ising Sun RESOURCE .., MGT.-@j Farmington 3\, e2 :@-INIE ora Vill! 1 , 272 3AREA E Ilk , 2 Pleasant f 2 Mill nowing!o ?76 C 0 111 e e g H e Liberty, ? 3 274 y Grov C- Childs 277 3 Woodlawn 6Bayview U, cot 2 16 545 Elkton 279 95 , See Enlargement I 275 'r 281 0 w 1 cra,gt I o t S Depo it ?S ;4 Nor East@ Aiken 4@O ELK 267 :, NECK. P-rincipi h lestown 5 1 F@ STATE Y."" 272 Riw qhesaDeake p e: FOREST City ?85 q ICarpen er ST.11 V A. Medlci Ct, (Perry Pr.) Pt. A SUSOUEHANNA C- )86 '.1 Elk Herm n NATIONAL i COURTH"')"sEl-, 342 2 WILDLIFE REFUGE 6 Neck PT W M A ELK To 'C ayots St.-Augl@stine NECK STATE PARK EARLEV L MA Mid Turkey i282 4 P'. STEMmERS RUN W Earleville Warwick Grove Pt "@- @@, @2'8'2 . ........... C ecilton----, S-. r-20 ;Ar 4kt -n SCALE 0 6 12 MILES 0 0 20 KILOMETERS 04 Locations of Protection Areas of significant habitat. Sites are numbered in order from north to south. (See page 13 for Protection Area names corresponding to numbers given above.) CECIL COUNTY: Protection Area Locations Site on Protection Area County Map Bald Friar Ravine ........................ 6 Camp Rodney Swamp ........................ 13 Cecil Bog ................................ 7 Charlestown West Seeps ................... 12 Goat Hill Serpentine Glade ............... 1 Horseshoe Woods .......................... 8 Log Cabin Sedge Meadow ................... 5 Octoraro Slopes .......................... 2 Richardsmere Powerline ................... 10 Rock Springs Powerline ................... 3 Stone Run Millpond ....................... 9 Whitaker Swamp ........................... 11 Wildcat Ravine ........................... 4 site # on County Map Protection Area 1 ................ Goat Hill Serpentine Glade 2 ........................... Octoraro Slopes 3 .................... Rock Springs Powerline 4 ............................ Wildcat Ravine 5 .................... Log Cabin Sedge Meadow 6 ......................... Bald Friar Ravine 7 ................................. Cecil Bog 8 ........................... Horseshoe Woods .9 ........................ Stone Run Millpond 10 .................... Richardsmere Powerline 11 ............................ Whitaker Swamp 12 .................... Charlestown West Seeps 13 ......................... Camp Rodney Swamp 13 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Bald Friar Ravine County: Cecil USGS Quad: Conowingo Dam SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The lower slopes and stream banks of this ravine support a lush deciduous forest with an exceptionally diverse herbaceous layer. The soil is rich in nutrients and much less acidic than most soils of this county. An outstanding display of spring wildflowers thrives in this rich, loamy soil. Because the slopes are extremely steep and stony, the ravine is unsuitable for ' cultivation and there is little evidence of recent disturbance. A rare species and a rare form of a fairly common species grow.in the luxuriant herbaceous layer of the forest. The rare species usually inhabits rich, cool forests in the mountains. This may be the eastern-most occurrence of this species in Maryland, and it is the only reported site in Cecil County. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: The rich, cool slopes of the ravine in conjunction with the adjacent forest provide excellent feeding and breeding habitat for migratory songbirds. Several species of warblers were observed during the spring field survey. The marsh and pond at the mouth of the ravine provide habitat for amphibians. Local residents fish in the pond. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats Logging is the greatest threat to this forested ravine. The increase in available sunlight created by cutting trees would dry the soil and favor the growth of non-native, weedy species to the exclusion of the shade-loving native plants. Soil erosion caused by logging on the steep slopes would prohibit the regrowth of the luxuriant herbaceous layer. Portions of the adjacent uplands that were cleared less tha *n 50 years ago are overgrown with non- native species such as Japanese Honeysuckle and Henbit. The herbaceous layer in these areas includes only a small fraction of 14 the species that inhabit Bald Friar Ravine. The rare species do not grow in the areas recently cleared. Management Needs Logging or clearing of the forest should not occur within the protection area. The encroachment of weedy species should be monitored. Based upon the results of monitoring, it may be decided that weedy species should be controlled in order to preserve the rare species. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary incorporates the ravine, a forested buffer on the adjacent uplands,, and a forested buffer upstream along the stream in order to protect water quality and reduce the potential for erosion and encroachment of weedy species. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: Tulip Tree dominates the ravine's moist slopes within this 35 acre protection area. Bladdernut and Pawpaw are abundant in the understory. Blue Cohosh and May-apple dominate the herbaceous layer in a few areas, but generally the herbaceous layer is so diverse that no species is dominant. Among the many herbaceous species are Rue Anemone, Black Snakeroot, and Bloodroot. Near the remains of a small building, Periwinkle and Japanese Honeysuckle are abundant. An old, overgrown road leads from the upland to the site of this old-building. The upland forest adjacent to the ravine is dominated by oaks with patches of Pawpaw in the understory. Wild Sarsaparilla is the most abundant herbaceous species, but the herbaceous cover is not well-developed. Japanese Honeysuckle is abundant throughout the dry uplands and on the upper portion of the south- facing slope of the ravine. The small stream at the base of the ravine is a tributary of the Susquehanna River. The stream flows through culverts under a railroad bank just before entering the Susquehanna. This restriction in flow created a small pond along the railroad bank. Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy Date: December 1988 15 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY .Protection Area Name: Camp Rodney Swamp County: Cecil USGS Quad: North East SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This freshwater wetland complex is unusual both in size and species diversity. At the center of the complex is an exceptionally large shrub swamp that is dotted with emergent marsh in the wettest areas. Water level differs between the shrub swamp and the adjacent swamp forests. In addition, variations in topography and upland soil types produce hydrological differences in the swamp forests. Within the wetland complex, the great diversity of plant species may be attributed to this hydrological variation. Sphagnum hummocks within the swamp produce acidic conditions that favor the growth of unusual plants. Two rare plant species inhabit the swamp. This is the only known site in Maryland for one of the rare plants. This rare species occurs in an emergent marsh, while the other grows in openings among shrubs. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: With further survey, it is likely that other rare species will be found in these extensive wetlands. The various types of wetlands in this protection area provide resting and feeding grounds for migratory waterfowl and songbirds and nesting habitat for resident waterbirds and songbirds. The wetlands and adjacent upland provide an outstanding outdoor educational opportunity in conjunction with the natural history courses taught at this camp. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats Alteration of the hydrology of the wetland complex through drainage or filling would drastically alter the vegetation composition of this site. The rare wetland plant species would be eliminated. 16 The clearing of trees along the uplands would cause erosion of the slopes and sedimentation of the swamp. Changes in wetland hydrology could result. In addition, it is likely that the sediment load would destroy the rare species inhabiting the edge of the swamp. Manaciement Needs In order to maintain the populations of rare species and the diversity of wetland vegetation, maintenance of the current wetland hydrological conditions is essential. Activities that would alter the wetland hydrology should not be conducted. The cutting of trees should not occur on the slopes within 500 ft. of the wetlands. Only selective removal of trees should be permitted in the remainder of the protection area. Maintenance of the roads within the protection area should be conducted so as to minimize runoff into the wetland and its tributaries (including the runoff of sediment or of any substances applied to the surface or shoulder of the road.) It is strongly recommended that these roads remain unpaved. Disturbance of the soil and the addition of fill soil during paving would introduce numerous non-native, weedy species that would eliminate native species, could threaten the rare species, and would detract from the exceptionally natural, undisturbed character of the protection area. Further survey of the wetland complex should be conducted. The size and extent of the rare species populations should be determined. The size and reproductive success of these populations should be monitored. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary encompasses the wetland complex, adjacent slopes, and a forested buffer required to protect the water quality of the wetlands. After further survey of the vegetation on adjacent uplands, we may recommend that the boundary be extended to include additional rare species or communities if found. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: A large shrub swamp dominated by Red Maple lies in the center of this 432 acre protection area. Hummocks of sphagnum, Tussock Sedge, and Royal Fern surround the Red Maple saplings. Areas of emergent marsh occur within the shrub swamp and are dominated by Swamp Loosestrife. The rare species.inhabit these marshes and the marshy edges of the shrub swamp. Sweet 17 Pepperbush and Winterberry are abundant along the edges of the shrub swamp. Forested wetlands radiate from the shrub swamp. The water regimes of these swamp forests vary with elevation and soil type, ranging from semipermanently to temporarily inundated, In general, the canopy of these forests is dominated by Sweet Gum and Red Maple. Arrowood, Sweet Gum, Sweet Pepperbush, and Winterberry are common in the wettest portions of the forested swamps. Spicebush is abundant in all other sections of these forests. Skunk Cabbage and ferns are common throughout the forested swamps. on the slopes surrounding the swamp, the upland forest is dominated by Tulip Tree, oaks, Red Maple, and Beech. Narrow, dirt roads along the uplands cross small, perennial streams that feed the shrub swamp. Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy Date: November 1988 18 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Cecil Bog County: Cecil USGS Quad: Conowingo Dam SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Chrome soils and the lack of woody vegetation are the two unusual ecological features of this rare wetland habitat. Although chrome soils are scattered throughout northwestern Cecil County, these soils are most often well-drained and seldom occur in wetlands. Historically, fire suppressed the growth of woody vegetation of dry chrome soils and in wetlands surrounded by these dry soils. However, the modern practice of 'fire suppression has nearly eliminated these open, sparsely forested habitats. Without fire, woody vegetation slowly encroaches. The rare grasses and forbs that inhabit the openings do not survive under the canopy of the invading trees and shrubs. The most open portion of Cecil Bog occurs in a powerline right-of-way. The artificial exclusion of woody vegetation from this powerline simulates the effect of fire and maintains an unforested area similar to, Although not identical to, the naturally open habitats that were more common historically. The unusual plant communities that occur on this rare habitat include four species that are rare in Maryland. These populations of rare species are vigorous. Numerous flowering and fruiting plants are present, suggesting that the populations are stable. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: Additional rare species are likely to occur in this unusual habitat. Further survey is required to complete a species list for this site. Deer rest and feed in the wetland and surrounding forest. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats Disturbance of the hydrology, either in the wetland or uphill where groundwater emerges to the surface, would change the vegetation composition of the wetland and destroy the rare species. Ditching, channeling, or damming the small stream that 19 flows at the base of the bog area could adversely effect the water regime of the wetland. Unless implemented with consideration of the rare species requirements, powerline maintenanc 'e practices, either mowing or *herbicide application, could have devastating effects on the bog and its rare species. Logging the woods in or around the gravelly seepage slope .would promote the growth of non-native, weedy species. of greater concern, however, is the possibility that heavy machinery would rut the surface, rechannel the surface water, and essentially change the drainage pattern of the entire slope. This would alter the hydrological regime of the rare species habitat and could eliminate the rare species' populations. There is ample evidence of heavy All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) activity in areas immediately adjacent to the bog. If these vehicles cross the wetland, they will crush the rare plants and alter the hydrology by creating new paths for the surface water to follow. Soil compaction caused by the ATVs may inhibit the germination and growth of the rare species and other wetland vegetation. Management Needs A management agreement with the utility company should be implemented to assure that maintenance practices are consistent with rare plant protection. Woody vegetation should be controlled by selective cutting or hand-applied, foliar herbicide. Because of potential rutting by maintenance equipment, the wetland should not be mowed. Logging or clearing of the forest should not occur within the protection area. The use of heavy machinery and vehicles should not occur in the forested uplands and in the wetland. Ditching, channeling, or damming the small stream at the base of the seepage slope should not occur within the protection area. This site should be visited regularly to monitor the rare species populations and to monitor the encroachment of woody vegetation and non-native, weedy plants. The removal of woody vegetation and weedy plants may be recommended based upon the collected data. The effects of ATV traffic should be monitored. Further restrictions of ATV traffic may be needed. 20 BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary incorporates the sedge meadow .and adjacent gravel seepage slope, including the bog and rare species habitat. A wooded buffer is included on the southwest and northeast sides of the powerline to protect the supply of water to the wetland. ,SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: The feature of greatest ecological significance in this 10 acre protection area is an unusual, non-tidal wetland including a boggy meadow and gravel seepage slope. The meadow lies in an actively maintained powerline right-of-way. The upper portion of the meadow is dominated by grasses and sedges, including four rare species. The lower portion of the meadow is a mixture of open areas and shrubby areas with Meadowsweet as the dominant woody plant. A continuous supply of moisture is supplied to both areas by groundwater seeping from the adjacent slopes. Sphagnum, orchids, and carnivorous plants are scattered throughout the meadow. The gravel seepage slope is adjacent to the meadow but outside the actively maintained area of the powerline. This slope is dominated by Red Maple saplings and shrubs! including Smooth Alder, Common Greenbrier, and Mountain Laurel. Open areas exist along the major seepage courses where small rivulets form and carry the surface water to a small stream below. The herbaceous vegetation of these open areas is very similar to the vegetation in theboggy meadow. The uplands adjacent to the powerline are wooded with pines, oaks, and Red Maple. Numerous trails cross the uplands ,surrounding the powerline. Private residences occur near the protection area to the east and west. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1988 21 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY .Protection Area: Charlestown West Seeps County: Cecil USGS Quads: Havre de Grace, North East SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Charlestown West Seeps Protection Area contains a small, meandering stream and its tributary which is fed by a rich, sphagnous seepage slope. The seepage slope is dominated by sphagnum moss, Sweet Bay, and Skunk Cabbage, and supports a diverse array of native wetland plants, including a rare herbaceous species. This undisturbed spring-fed, sphagnous wetland habitat which the rare plant requires is increasingly rare throughout its range. Urban development and agriculture have led to direct loss or alteration of this habitat due to draining, ditching, and filling of wetlands, channelization of waters for flood control, and sedimentation from building construction. The rare plant is known from just three other sites in Maryland. One site is voluntarily protected by the landowner. The other two sites are not protected. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: This freshwater wetland supports a diverse array of herbaceous species, including ferns, flowering shrubs, and herbs. It may be found to harbor additional rare plant species not identifiable at the time of the recent survey. The permanent, spring-fed seeps and a large woodland pond on the site provide excellent habitat for amphibians. The wetlands as well as the relatively mature, undisturbed uplands provide suitable habitat for many wildlife species, including songbirds, waterbirds, and deer. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats . The greatest threat to the site is the potential for direct habitat loss from mining or development. Surface mining activity has been extensive less than 1/4 mile north of the site. The rare species at this site is an obligate freshwater wetland plant which is sensitive to changes in hydrology even at a distance from the population. Thus, alteration of the groundwater table from activities such as removal of trees from 22 the upland or draining of the pond upstream from the seep would also pose a severe threat to the rare species. Increased use or expansion of the dirt road immediately upstream from the rare species population could cause increased pollution, sedimentation, and changes in groundwater table. Additionally, either changes in hydrology or increased sunlight from tree removal upstream would increase the likelihood of invasion by non-native, weedy plant species that may exclude the rare species. Finally, the rare plant is an attractive wildflower which is long-lived and reproduces slowly. This species is susceptible to collection by casual observers, wildflower gardeners, and scientific collectors. Management Needs No removal of vegetation, construction, or mining should be conducted within the protection area. The pond should not be drained or altered. The dirt road should remain unimproved and should be closed to vehicular traffic. Landowners upstream from the site should be contacted to insure that their activities do not result in changes in the quality or quantity of water at this site. For example, no new culverts draining surface mine sites should be created, and no sediment or pollutants should be allowed to drain into the protection area through the existing culverts. To protect the rare species from collection, the location of the plants should be revealed only to those individuals who need the information in order to protect this site. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary includes the rare species habitat, the adjacent upland which maintains groundwater supply to the seep, and a forested-buffer for the wetland. West of the stream the buffer extends to the crest of the hill in order to protect the site from invasion by non-native, weedy species and to preserve potential habitat for the rare species. Downstream from the rare species habitat the forested buffer extends 1000 ft. on each side of the stream in order to protect potential habitat. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: This 222 acre protection area contains a groundwater- influenced seep on the lower slopes of a small stream and its tributary. Low areas of the seep are dominated by sphagnum moss and Skunk Cabbage, and hummocks support the rare species as well 23 as diverse herbaceous species such as Cinnamon Fe rn, Marsh Blue Violet, Larger Blue Flag, and Jack-in-the-Pulpit. Sweet Bay dominates the overstory and is accompanied by other wetland trees .and shrubs such as Tulip Tree, Smooth Alder, and Swamp Azalea. Northeast of the seepage swamp is a little-used dirt road which serves as a dam for a 1/2 acre pond upstream. The meandering stream below the seep flows through areas of bottomland hardwood forest, large thickets of Smooth Alder, Sweet ..Pepperbrush, and greenbrier, and small openings,of sphagnum and grasses. The surrounding upland forests of oak and Mountain Laurel contain some weedy, non-native species but are relatively mature and undisturbed. The site.is bounded on the north by railroad tracks and on the south by a highway. Prepared by: Judith L. Robertson Date: November 1988 24 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Goat Hill Serpentine Barren County: Cecil USGS Quad: Rising Sun SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Goat Hill Serpentine Barren is an important example of a dry serpentine plant community. In Maryland, serpentine soils occur only in a narrow belt traversing the state. These soils are unusual because they contain high quantities of minerals such as chromium, magnesium, and nickel which are toxic to many plants. For this reason, serpentine areas support unique botanical communities that include many plants found nowhere else. Historically, woody vegetation was scarce in dry serpentine communities because of poor, thin soils and frequent fires. Fire suppression and quarrying for decorative and crushed.stone have destroyed many examples of herbaceous serpentine communities in Maryland. Fewer than ten of these communities are now known in Maryland. The artificial removal of woody vegetation for powerline maintenance at this site has helped to maintain a suitable habitat for herbaceous serpentine communities.. Maintenance of the right-of-way has produced habitat that is similar, although not identical, to the openings created by fire in pre-colonial times. Six rare plants occur in this protection area. Two of these species are found in only one other location in Maryland. A third rare species is found in only two.additional locations in Maryland. This species is found only in serpentine areas and the total number of populations in the world is very small. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: Goat Hill Serpentine Barren Protection Area is adjacent to a Nature Conservancy preserve in Pennsylvania that protects rare serpentine habitat. The proposed protection area in Maryland will serve as an excellent buffer, offering additional protection to that.important preserve. In addition, the Pennsylvania preserve provides a permanent seed source that helps to maintain the rare plant populations in Maryland. 25 THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats Closure of the forest canopy would be detrimental to the rare species populations. The open areas that support the rare species occur in the powerline rights-of-way and in a nearby opening. The rare herbaceous species would not survive in the shade of trees or dense shrubs. However, certain methods of ,powerline maintenance would be detrimental to the rare species. Application of non-selective herbicides would harm the rare . herbaceous species. Frequent mowing could inhibit reproduction of the rare plants. Soil compaction by the machinery may inhibit root growth and seed germination of the rare species. Another potential threat is invasion of the rare species habitat by weedy, non-native species. Several weedy species are abundant near the southern edge of the protection area. A portion of the site may be threatened by clearing for agriculture. Clearing and cultivation of this land would destroy the tare species and promote the growth of weedy species in the remaining habitat. Management Needs Selective removal of tree species should be employed to keep the powerline and the rare species habitat open. If herbicides must be used, they should be applied by hand and only applied to woody vegetation. Infrequent mowing with light equipment (one time per year, in early spring) may also be compatible with rare species maintenance, but heavy machinery should not be used. The effect of powerline maintenance on rare species populations should be monitored'. No forest clearing should be conducted within the protection area boundary. A forest buffer should be maintained around the rare species habitat except within the powerline. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary includes the rare species habitat, adjacent potential habitat, and a forested buffer. The forested buffer extends approximately 500 ft. east and west of the rare species populations. To the north the protection area extends to the Pennsylvania line, where it borders a Nature Conservancy preserve. On the south and east the boundary extends to the edge of cultivated fields. To the west it extends to the edge of residential areas. 26 SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: The 23 acre protection area contains dry woods dominated by .Pitch Pine, Red Maple, and several species of oaks. The woods are broken by a powerline right-of-way and by several herbaceous openings on serpentine soils. Rare plant populations are found on a sparsely forested, north-facing slope and on the edges of a dirt road beneath the powerline. West of the powerline the woods are thin and composed predominately of Pitch Pine. In grassy. ,openings within the pine glades additional rare species grow.- A deer blind is located near one of the grassy openings. Prepared by: Judith L. Robertson Date: November 1988 27 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Horseshoe Woods County: Cecil USGS Quad: Rising Sun SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This slope above Octoraro Creek supports a mixed deciduous forest. The slope is very steep near the base but gradually becomes more gentle towards the crest. Large Tulip Trees are scattered along the slope. The soil is rich in nutrients and supports a lush understory with a wide variety of shrubs. The herbaceous layer is diverse. Among the many spring wildflowers is a rare plant species known from just four other sites in Maryland. The plants grow on the more gentle, upper slope. Two populations of this species occur on public land, but management plans have not been established in order to protect and maintain these populations. The other two populations are not protected. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: other rare species may inhabit this forest. Further survey is needed to develop a complete species list for this site. The area harbors a wealth of wildlife, including reptiles, deer, woodchuck, squirrels, and birds. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats The greatest threats to this rich forest are logging and forest clearing for development. The rare species is particularly vulnerable because it grows on a fairly gentle slope. The increase in available sunlight and disturbance to the soil produced by logging or clearing will promote the growth of non-native, weedy species. Japanese Honeysuckle is already established at this site, and further encroachment by this or other weedy species may eliminate the rare species. All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) traffic along well-worn trails in the immediate area of the rare species poses a serious threat to the rare species. 28 management Needs Logging or clearing of the forest within the protection area .should not be conducted. The size and vigor of the rare species population should be monitored. The intrusion of non-native plant species also should be monitored. All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) traffic could be controlled, either by diverting it to nearby fields or roads, or by constructing barriers across existing trails. This would reduce the potential for ATVs to destroy the rare plants.' BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary includes the rare species population, additional potential habitat for the rare species, and a wooded buffer to protect the rare species from invading non-native weedy plants. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: Tulip Tree and Red Maple dominate the mixed, deciduous forest on the slopes of Octararo Creek in this 24 acre protection area. The understory is well-developed with many saplings and shrubs, including Pawpaw, Flowering Dogwood, and Pinxter Flower. The rich, loamy soil supports a diverse and lush herbaceous layer, including Bloodroot, Wild Geranium, Jack-in-the-pulpit, Trout Lily, May-apple, and several violets. A narrow band of floodplain forest occurs along the creek, and a dirt road parallels the stream course. A private residence with pasture-land abuts the protection area to the south. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1988 29 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Log Cabin Sedge Meadow County: Cecil USGS Quad: Conowingo Dam SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This unusual sedge meadow occurs on chrome soil and lacks woody vegetation. Chrome soils are usually well-drained, and seldom occur in wetlands as in this site. Historically, fire created open, sparsely forested habitats such as this sedge meadow. However, the modern practice of fire suppression has nearly eliminated these habitats. The lack of woody vegetation in this sedge meadow is partially maintained by groundwater seepage. Maintenance of the adjacent powerline right-of-way also eliminates woody vegetation along the edge of the sedge meadow. In addition, the shallow, chrome soil in portions of the adjacent forest inhibits the growth of trees and shrubs, and supports only a thin cover of woody vegetation. Three rare species grow among the sedges and forbes of this unusual habitat. The most rare of these species is abundant at this site and grows both in the sedge meadow and along a stream in the adjacent right-of-way. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: The meadow is used as a bedding and feeding area by deer, and several hawks were observed in flight during the site visit. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats The recent, non-selective application of herbicides to eliminate woody growth along the stream also killed much of the herbaceous vegetation. This practice has probably reduced the population size of the most rare species. If continued, this application method may eventually destroy the populations of rare species. Logging the pine-oak woods adjacent to the sedge meadow, especially on the upper slope where the seepage emerges, could adversely alter the hydrology. If hydrological changes cause the meadow to dry, woody species will encroach and eventually exclude the rare species. 30 Non-native, weedy species, already dominant along the stream and beneath the powerline, threaten to invade the sedge meadow and seeps. So far these wetter areas are relatively free of non- .native plants. Management Needs The broadcast application of herbicides to eliminate woody growth along the stream and seeps should be discontinued. Selective application of herbicides by hand or selective cutting should be considered as alternatives. Logging and forest clearing should not occur within the protection area. Plans for logging or development on adjacent land should be thoroughly reviewed to ascertain their impact on hydrology and the rare species habitat. Rare plant populations should be monitored regularly to ascertain if maintenance practices along the powerline adversely affect the rare species. Incursion of woody plants or non-native plants into the rare species habitat should be observed carefully. Active maintenance may be required to control the growth of woody and non-native species. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary encompasses the stream and seeps beneath the powerline, the sedge meadow adjacent to the powerline, and a wooded buffer 200 ft. wide around the meadow. This buffer is required to protect the meadow's essential hydrology. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: The focal point of this 53 acre protection area is a sedge meadow containing three.rare species. Nearby, in seeps and along a small stream beneath the powerline, several smaller populations occur. The sedge meadow is situated outside of, though adjacent to, the powerline right-of-way. Except for the stream and seeps, .which are situated in depressions, and a shallow ravine, areas beneath the powerline are maintained by regular mowing. Woody vegetation in the stream course is controlled by the broadcast application of herbicides. only the lower portion of the sedge meadow, where it enters the powerline right-of-way, is actively maintained. Areas beneath the powerline are therefore dominated by herbaceous vegetation, including many non-native, weedy species such as Japanese Honeysuckle, Chickory, and Wild Carrot. The sedge meadow is dominated by grasses and sedges with some 31 flowering herbs scattered throughout. Woods dominated by a mixture of deciduous and pine trees occur adjacent to the powerlines. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1988 32 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Octoraro Slopes County: Cecil USGS Quad: Rising Sun SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Steep, wooded slopes and rich ravines characterize this picturesque site overlooking Octoraro Creek. Dry serpentine soils at the northern end of the protection area give way to rich, loamy soils near the southern end, and the corresponding change in vegetation is dramatic. The dry serpentine soil supports pine-oak woods with a sparse herbaceous layer. The moist, more fertile soil supports a diverse deciduous woods with a lush herbaceous layer. The spring wildflower display is unusually colorful and diverse. A rare plant species occurs infrequently in the northern portion of the area on semi-open outcrops of serpentine soil. Rock slides and talus slopes are frequent, interspersed with moist ravines and seeps. The upland hardwood forest blends into mesic deciduous woods on the lower slope near the creek. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: The moist and dry forests of the protection area provide excellent habitats for a variety of wildlife. Numerous birds, reptiles., deer, and small mammals were observed during the field survey. The scenic beauty of this slope is unmatched elsewhere along Octoraro Creek, where similar areas have been logged or developed. Because the protection area includes a variety of habitats, it is likely that further survey will reveal other rare species at this site. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats The primary threats to this area are logging and clearing for development. Already some logging has occurred on the more gentle slopes and uplands. The increase in available sunlight and the soil disturbance caused by logging and clearing promote the growth of non-native, weedy species to the exclusion of native species. The shade-loving,.rare species would not survive 33 in the openings created by logging. Logging on the steeper slopes would cause severe erosion and nutrient leaching. Several hiking trails traverse the slope, both laterally and vertically. Although evidence indicates they are little used, erosion is already pronounced. Increased foot traffic on these trails would result in further erosion and excessive damage to the vegetation. .Management Needs Logging and clearing of the forest should be prohibited within the protection area. Foot traffic on the slopes should be minimized to prevent soil erosion. A regular program for monitoring the site is recommended in order to check the size and vigor of the rare species population; to evaluate the condition of the habitat, particularly by the amount of erosion; and to ascertain the level of threat represented by non-native, weedy species. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: Included within the protection area boundary are the rare species' habitat, the adjacent steep slopes, the diverse deciduous woods, and a wooded upland buffer. The upland buffer is required to prevent erosion of the slopes and to prevent encroachment by non-native, weedy plants. SITE DESCRIPTION AND SUMMARY: The 105 acre site offers scenic views of Octoraro Creek and includes diverse habitats and plant communities. The slopes are very steep and rocky with many seeps, small ravines and lightly shaded rock outcrops. on the lower, mesic slopes Red M aple and Tulip Tree dominate a mixed deciduous woods. The herbaceous layer is lush with numerous native plant species, including Skunk Cabbage, Wild Ginger, Bloodroot, May-apple, Jack-in-the-pulpit, Rue Anemone, and many ferns. The understory is also rich in shrubs including Spicebush, Pawpaw, Bladdernut, Northern Arrowwood, Maple-leaved Viburnum, Wild Hydrangea, and Mountain Laurel. The xeric upper slopes and areas of serpentine soil are dominated by pine-oak woods and a thin herbaceous cover of Field Chickweed, Large Summer Bluets, Hairy Skullcap, Lyre-leaved Rock-. cress, and Slender Knotweed. At the base of the slope, along the creek, is a floodplain forest dominated by Sycamore, Silver Maple, and Box Elder. Tawny 34 Day-lily, Stinging Nettle, and Beefsteak Plant are among the non- native, herbaceous species common in the floodplain. A dirt road parallels the creek, passing the old foundation of a paper mill, @mill race, and dam near the southern boundary of the area. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1988 35 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY 'Protection Area Name: Richardsmere Powerline County: Cecil USGS Quad: Conowingo Dam SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The slopes and swales of this powerline right-of-way are kept free of woody vegetation by active management. Historically, wet, open areas were created naturally by fires, floods, and beaver activity. As a result of human intervention, these natural processes are suppressed, and open non-tidal marshes are rare. The rights-of-way simulate these open, unforested areas and provide habitat for species that require those conditions. Among the many herbaceous species in the r"ight-of-way is a rare plant known from just three other sites in Maryland. Only one of these populations is protected. The rare plants in this right-of-way appear vigorous; more than one hundred flowering plants were observed. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: Due to the loss of natural habitat, actively managed powerlines have become significant habitat for rare species. Further searching of this area may reveal additional rare plant populations. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats Powerline maintenance practices may be detrimental to the rare species. Mowing of the plants while flowering would prevent the plants from reproducing and could destroy the population. Broadcast application of herbicide on woody plants also kills much of the herbaceous vegetation and would kill the rare plants. The invasion and proliferation of non-native, weedy species, already abundant in some areas, could exclude the rare species from this site. Management Needs Current powerline management practices should be reviewed to determine the degree of threat they represent to the rare 36 species. A management agreement with the utility company should be instituted to assure maintenance practices are consistent with rare plant protection. If herbicides are used, a foliar herbicide should be selectively applied to the right-of-way within the protection area. This will greatly reduce the impact on rare plants. A monitoring plan should be implemented to ascertain the population size and vigor of the rare plant species. The .encroachment of non7native, weedy vegetation should also be monitored to determine its impact on the rare species. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary includes the managed right-of- way harboring the rare species. Creeks border the protection area to the southwest and northeast. Additionally, wooded slopes adjacent to the powerline on the northwest and southeast are included to protect rare plant populations occurring there. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: This 55 acre site is centered around an actively maintained powerline right-of-way. Oriented on a northeast/southwest axis, the powerline traverses steep slopes, swales, and seeps. Slopes dominated by rich, deciduous woods abut the powerline to the northwest and southeast. These woods, dominated by maples, oaks and Tulip Tree, are rich, rocky, and moist. they support a luxuriant growth of herbaceous plants, including Wild Ginger, Solomon's Seal, Turk's-cap Lily, and Wild Geranium. Vegetation beneath the powerline is dominated by herbaceous species, both native and non-native. The riverine vegetation along the creek to the southwest is strikingly different from that of the powerline; sunflowers, coneflowers, lobelias, smartweeds, and Water Willow dominate the creek side. A dirt road parallels the powerline and is deeply rutted and severely eroded, especially on the steeper slopes. A second dirt road parallels the creek to the southwest, intersecting the powerline from the north, and continuing southward along the creek as a foot trail. Fishermen use this road for access to the creek. Trash has been dumped along the road, and abandoned cars lie along the road near the creek. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1988 37 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Rock Springs Powerline County: Cecil USGS Quad: Conowingo Dam SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE This protection area is an open-canopy, powerline right-of- way located on serpentine spil. Several plant species able to tolerate this chrome-rich soil are rare or uncommon in Maryland. Two such rare species inhabit the maintained area of the powerline and the adjacent forest. One of these is rare throughout its range and is known from only four other sites in Maryland. Historically, herbaceous openings and semi-open glades on serpentine soil were created by sporadic, naturally occurring fires. The modern practice of fire suppression has nearly eliminated these habitats. Without fire, woody vegetation encroaches. Many of the rare serpentine species are herbaceous and cannot survive in the shade of the trees and shrubs. The actively-maintained herbaceous cover of powerlines simulates naturally occurring glades and provides habitat for some of these rare species. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: Historical records suggest that three rare plant species inhabited this area. Furthur survey may reveal these species within the protection area. The herbaceous openings provide resting and feeding grounds for deer. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats Powerline maintenance practices may destroy the rare species. Mowing when the rare plants are flowering or fruiting would prevent these species from reproducing. Broadcast application of herbicides may eliminate the rare plants. All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) traffic, heavy over part of the area, physically damages the rare plants. In addition, ATV traffic disturbs the shallow soil and may inhibit the germination .of seeds. Non-native, weedy plant species are numerous in 38 disturbed areas. If these species spread more uniformly across the area, they may exclude the rare species. Management Needs A management agreement with the utility company is recommended. Mowing should be timed so as not to interfere with rare species reproduction. Broadcast application of herbicides to control woody growth should be avoided. A more selective ..application method, such as hand-application of foliar herbicide, is recommended. This protection area should be monitored regularly to assure that powerline maintenance practices are consistent with rare plant protection. Woody vegetation and non-native plants should be controlled in order to maintain the open glades essential for the rare species. 'The ATV traffic should be eliminated or, this failing, at least confined to existing trails. Landowners in the surrounding area should be informed of the uniqueness and importance of this habitat. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary includes the rare species populations and additional potential habitat. This includes the regularly maintained powerline right-of-way from the road downhill for approximately one half mile to the crossing of a private driveway. Also included is a gasline right-of-way running perpendicular to and intersecting the powerline just below the road. A fallow field adjacent to and north of the powerline is included to protect a large population of a rare plant species. .SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: Rock Springs Powerline Protection Area encompasses 103 acres in a 1/2 mile long, 50 yard wide, narrow band of powerline and gasline right-of-way. Several small seeps, rivulets, and streams cross the area and a dirt road parallels the powerline. Management of these utility lines maintains herbaceous cover with few woody plants. Grasses dominate the right-of-way. The adjacent dry uplands are dominated by pine-oak woods and thickets of greenbrier. Adjacent to and north of the powerline is a fallow field dominated by grasses and non-native, weedy plants. Several ATV trails traverse the open area beneath the powerline, and an old quarry is.located adjacent to the powerline near the 39 northwest corner of the protection area. Many private residences are located near the protection area. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1988 40 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Stone Run Millpond County: Cecil USGS Quad: Rising Sun SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Stone Run Millpond is a wetland complex of open water, emergent marsh, shrub swamp, and wooded swamp created by the impoundment of Stone Run. A rare plant species occurs on the northeastern side of the area. It is known from only ten other sites in Maryland, and only two of these sites are protected. Historically, natural freshwater ponds in this area were created almost exclusively by beaver activity. However, as a result of trapping and habitat destruction, beaver are much less common. This artificial pond is similar to a naturally occurring habitat that is now uncommon on the Upper Coastal Plain. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: The variety of wetland habitats within the protection area supports remarkably diverse native vegetation. The wetland complex also provides ideal feeding and resting grounds for resident waterbirds and songbirds and migratory waterfowl. Many ,reptiles and amphibians were observed during the field survey, especially along the shoreline of the pond and in the emergent marsh. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats A large development on the slopes north of the pond threatens the water quality of the wetlands with runoff of sediments, chemicals, petroleum residues, and trash. Fields and pastures surround the pond on the other three sides. Although fallow and of no immediate threat, the fields are likely to be developed in the near future. Water quality is also threatened by the logging in progress on the slopes above Stone Run. Erosion of the cleared slopes will cause siltation of Stone Run and the wetland complex. Fallow fields and pastures adjacent to the wetland on the west, south, and east support many non-native, weedy plant species. Already this weedy vegetation predominates on the 41 drier, disturbed soil at the west end of the pond. If the water table is lowered, or the soil of the wetlands is disturbed, these non-native, weedy species will soon invade and @may exclude the rare species. Any failure of the dam to impound the water of Stone Run would eliminate the wetlands and drastically change the vegetation of the protection area. Management Needs Development on the slopes above and along the streams feeding into the pond should be designed to reduce adverse impacts to the wetlands and streams. Logging on the slopes above Stone Run should be halted. Runoff of pollution into the three feeder streams should be reduced. Only through a stringent program of sediment and pollution control can water quality be maintained. Landowner cooperation is imperative if the runoff of pollutants into the pond is to be controlled. A program to inform the local residents concerning the value of wetlands is recommended. The size and reproductive success of the rare species should be monitored. Water quality and the encroachment of non-native, weedy plants also should be monitored. The removal of weedy plants may be recommended after further observation.. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary includes the rare species. habitat and a wooded buffer along the two streams that flow into this habitat. The buffer incorporates an area 1000 ft. upstream from the rare species population and 50 ft. on either side of the two streams. This buffer is required to protect water quality and to maintain the essential hydrology of the area. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: The Stone Run Millpond Protection Area encompasses 17 acres of wetlands and adjacent buffer. A large,stone dam impounds the stream. Open water with scattered aquatics, such as Southern Pond Lily and pondweeds, occurs in the central portion of the complex. Areas of emergent marsh with Broad-leaved Cat-tail and Slender Bur-reed, and shrub swamp with Buttonbush and Smooth Alder, are scattered along the fringe of the open water. Where eroded sediment has already accumulated, the emergent marsh and shrub swamp are rather extensive. Areas of swamp forest, dominated by Red Maple and Sweet Gum, occur along Stone Run and 42 an unnamed stream which enters the complex from the east. The wooded slopes above Stone Run are dominated by a mixture of oaks, maples, and Tulip Tree. Another unnamed stream enters from the ,.south after passing through pastures and fallow fields. This stream lacks a forested buffer and may act as an artery for pollutants and sediments into the pond. These fields are dominated by non-native, weedy plants. 1, Overlooking the wetlands from adjacent slopes to the north Js a housing development. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1488 43 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Whitaker Swamp County: Cecil USGS Quads: Bay View, Havre de Grace, North East SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Whitaker Swamp Protection Area contains a prime example of a mature, deciduous, swamp forest. Swamp forests of this size and age are rare due to clearing and drainage for development or logging. The high water quality of groundwater seeps feeding this swamp is maintained by the undisturbed, forested slopes that border the swamp. The soil of the forest is much less acidic than is usual in this county and supports a particularly high diversity of herbaceous species. Wildflowers carpet the swamp in spring and early summer. Three rare plants grow among the numerous herbaceous species in the swamp. Two of these species are known from fewer than four other sites in Maryland. None of these other sites is protected. The population of one of these species is unusually large and appears to be reproducing well at this site. The third rare species is known from only five locations in Maryland. This population is among the largest in the State. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: The large freshwater wetland at this site provides excellent feeding and nesting habitat for migratory songbirds and amphibians. In addition, such non-tidal wetlands are increasingly valued for their role in protecting the water quality of the rivers they feed and, ultimately, the Chesapeake Bay. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats The rare plant populations occur close to a surface mining operation. Although existing informal agreements with the landowner offer some protection from direct loss of plants and their immediate habitat, mining, logging, or similar activities in the surrounding upland may cause sedimentation and changes in hydrology that would be detrimental to the rare species. One of the rare wetland species is particularly vulnerable to 44 hydrological changes. The population may already have been adversely affected by the influence of nearby surface mining.on the groundwater table. The existing berm appears to be adequately controlling sediment from upstream activities. Unless sediment from the pond behind the berm is regularly removed, continued sedimentation could fill the pond. Subsequently, heavy rainfall would release a devastating pulse of sediment on the rare species population. Removal of forest cover would promote the invasion of non- native, weedy species. At the southwestern corner of the site, the clearing of land for mining has already resulted in the growth of weedy species on the lower slopes near the wetland. A large volume of trash along the banks of the road that bisects the site poses the threat of pollution to the wetlands below. In the past, beaver dams along the stream threatened to flood the rare plant species. The beaver were trapped by the landowner and moved elsewhere to protect the rare species. If beaver return to the area the rare plants in the wetland could be threatened once again. Management Needs No mining, logging or other disturbance of the vegetative cover should be permitted within the protection area boundary. The grassy, reclaimed mining area just southwest of the rare plant population should be allowed to revert to forest in order to limit the encroachment of weedy, non-native species. The water level and vegetation composition of the wetland should be monitored in order to provide warning of hydrologic changes that may be detrimental to the rare species. The size and reproductive success of the rare species population should be monitored. The sediment pond behind the berm should be emptied periodically in order to prevent sedimentation of the wetland. In cooperation with the landowner, cleanup efforts should be undertaken on both sides of the road to remove trash. If dumping persists, signs or alternative means of discouraging this activity should be considered. The site should be monitored for the return of beaver. Further removal may be needed if these animals threaten the rare species habitat. 45 BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS The recommended boundary includes the rare species populations, adjacent potential habitat, and a forested buffer. To the north the boundary extends to the crest of the slopes. To the southwest, a portion of the grassy, reclaimed mining area is included to allow forest regrowth. The forested buffer extends uphill to nearby roads to the south and east. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY This 297 acre site contains a wetland complex consisting of a meandering stream, a hardwood swamp forest, rich seepage slopes, old beaver ponds, and emergent marshes. The stream flows roughly from southwest to northeast and is flanked by numerous seepage slopes dominated by Skunk Cabbage, sphagnum moss, and a rare herbaceous species. The same.species dominate portions of the bottomland where the ground is so wet that a single stream course cannot be distinguished. Three beaver,dams create small ponds, and five breached dams have produced areas of emergent marsh dominated by sedges and rushes. Several thickets of Smooth Alder and Sweet Pepperbush border the stream. Dominant trees in the hardwood swamp are Red Maple and Sweet Bay. The circumneutral soils have produced a rich herbaceous cover in the wetland and mesic forest, including Hellebore, Golden Club, large cinnamon Ferns, and two additional rare species. Oaks, Beech, and Tulip Tree are common higher on the slopes. Prepared by: Judith L. Robertson Date: November 1988 46 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Wildcat Ravine County: Cecil USGS Quad: Conowingo Dam SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Large Hemlock and Tulip trees overhang the stream in this steep, narrow ravine. Trees of similar size are rare in Cecil County, and seldom is Hemlock a dominant species as it is here. The presence of large, decaying logs and fallen trees suggests that the forested slopes have not been logged for many years. The steep slopes and rocky soil are unsuitable for cultivation. Except for a small plot of young Hemlock that appears to have regenerated after a recent clearing or fire, there is no sign of .recent disturbance to the ravine slopes. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: A rare species of fern was reported historically from this area. Further survey is required to determine if the species survives in the ravine. Because there has been little disturbance in the area, it is possible that the fern still grows here. The scenic stream and Hemlock forest provide opportunity for hiking and birding. The ravine provides habitat for resident and migratory songbirds. The pond and marsh at the mouth of the ravine provide habitat for waterbirds. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats Logging is the greatest threat to this ravine. cutting trees increases the available sunlight which promotes the growth of non-native, weedy species, such as Japanese Honeysuckle, to the exclusion of native species. In addition, logging would cause extensive soil erosion on the steep slopes. It is likely that these changes produced-by logging would result in the regeneration of a forest of different composition, possibly without the abundant Hemlock. 47 Management Needs Logging and clearing of the forest for any purpose should .not occur within the protection area. The encroachment of weedy species should be monitored at the western border of the site near the railroad bank. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary includes the slopes of the ravine and a narrow, forested buffer on the adjacent uplands. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: A clear, rocky stream flows through the narrow ravine of this 26 acre protection area. Beneath the ravine's canopy of Tulip Tree and Hemlock is an understory of Pawpaw and Spicebush. Ferns are abundant on the lower slopes. Canada Mayflower grows along the stream banks. The ravine is particularly scenic. The understory is deeply shaded by the dense canopy. Seeps emerge from the steep slopes and are lush with herbaceous species. The stream flows over thick slabs of rock as it winds down to the Susquehanna. At the mouth of the stream is a culvert that channels the flow through a railroad bank. A pond has formed behind the railroad bank and emergent vegetation grows in areas of shallow water. The gently sloped uplands adjacent to the ravine are farmed. Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy Date: December 1988 48 REFERENCES The following general references are provided as background material and suggested reading to supplement this report. Bartgis, R.L. 1986. Functional assessment of non-tidal wetlands. Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Unpublished report to Coastal Resources Division. Brooks, R.R. 1987. Serpentine and its vegetation: a multidisciplinary approach. Dioscorides Press, Portland Oregon. 454 pp. Fernald, M.L. 1970. Gray's manual of botany. Eighth ed., corrected printing. D. Van Nostrand Co., New York. 1632 pp. Gleason, H.A. 1952. The new Britton and Brown illustrated flora of the northeastern United States and Canada. Vols. 1-3. Hafner Press, New York. 1732 pp. Godrey, R.K. and J.W. Wooten. 1979. Aquatic and wetland plants of the southeastern"United States, Monocotyledons. Univ. of Georgia Press, Athens, GA. 712 pp. 1981. Aquatic and wetland plants of the southeastern United States, Dicotyledons. Univ. of Georgia Press, Athens, GA. 933 pp. Norden, A.W., D.C. Forester, and G.H. Fenwick, eds. 1984. Threatened and endangered plants of Maryland. Natural Heritage Program Spec. Publ. 84-1. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. 473 pp. Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Univ. of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp. Tatnall, R.R. 1946. Flora of Delaware and the Eastern Shore. Soc. of Nat. Hist. of Delaware, Lancaster, PA. 313 pp. Tiner, R.W. Jr. 1988. Field guide to nontidal wetland identification. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, MA; Cooperative Publication. 283 pp. + plates. U.S. Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey. U.S. Govt. Printing office, Washington, DC. (available for each Maryland county). 49 APPENDIX A Final Action On Recrulations 1471 For information concerning Final Action on Regulations, see inside front cover. Symbol Key Roman type indicates text already existing at 'the time of the proposed action. Italic @ype indicates new text added at the time of proposed action. A single underlin indicates text added at the time of final action. [Single brackets] indicate deleted text. (Double brackets]] indicate text deleted at the time of final action. 14:6 Md. R. 719 - 726 (March 13, 1987), have been adopted Title 07 as proposed. - Effective Date: June 29, 1987. DEPARTIOVIENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES TORREY C. BROWN, M.D. Secretary of Natural Resources Subtitle 03 INCOME MAINTENANCE ADMINISTRATION 07.03.05 General Public Assistance to Em- Subtitle 05 WATER RESOURCES ployables ADMINISTRATION Authority: Article 88A. ��17. 17A-1 - 17A-3, 65B. 08.05.03 Construction on Non-Tidal Waters Annotated Code of Maryland and Floodplains Notice of Final Action Authority: Natural Resources Article, ��8-801 - 8-814. [87-1 10-F) Annotated Code of Maryland On May 26, 1987, the Secretary of Human Resources Notice of Final Action adopted amendments to Regulations .09 and .11 under [87-060-F) COMAR 07.03.05 General Public Assistance to Employ- ables. These amendments, which were proposed for adop- On June 9, 1987, amendments to Regulation .03 under tion in 14:8 Md. R. 941 (April 10, 1987), have been adopted COINIAR 08.05.03 Construction on Non-Tidal Waters as proposed. (DHR Transmittal 'Number 87-12) and Floodplains, were adopted by the Secretary of Natu- Effective Date: June 29, 1987. ral Resources. These amendments, which were proposed for adoption in 14:6 Md. R. 726 - 728 (March 13, 1987), have RUTH MASSINGA been adopted with the non-substantial changes shown be- Secretary of Human Resources low. Effective Date: June 29, 1987. Attorney General's Certification 'Title 08 In accordance with State Government Article, �10-113, Annotated Code of Maryland, the Attorney General certi- DEPARTMENT OF fies that the following changes do not differ substantively from the proposed text. The nature of each change and the NATURAL RESOURCES basis for this conclusion are as follow: Regulation .03D(3)(b): The new language is added to re- Subtitle 03 WILDLIFE state the fact that tidal floodplains are not covered by this regulation and precludes any misunderstanding by prospec- 08.03-08 Threatened and Endangered Species tive applicants on this issue. The State's regulatory authori- ty pursuant to Natural Resources Article, Title 8. is specifi- Authority: Natural Resources Article. �� 4-2A-01 - 4-2A-09, cally limited to the 100-year floodplain of free flowing 10-2A-01 - 10-2A-09. streams and does not encompass federally designated tidal Annotated Code of Maryland special flocd hazard areas. Regulation .03 restates this limi- tation on the State's jurisdiction. Notice of Final Action .03 Requirements for a Permit. [87-061-F] A. - C. (proposed text unchanged) On June 9, 1987, new Regulations .01 -.11 under a new D. Exemptions. The following activities are exempled chapter. COMAR 08.03.08 Threatened and Endangered from the requirements for a permil from the Administration Species. were adopted by the Secretary of Natural Resourc- under this chapter: es. Existing Regulations .01 and ._02 under COA4AR (1) - (2) (proposed text unchanged) 08.03.08 Nongame and Endangered Species were re- (3) A person who proposes to chan.-e in anY manner the pealed. These actions, which were proposed for adoption in Course, current. or cross-section of an *v waters of the State other than those relerenced in �D(D and (21 of this reguln. tion does not need a permit ftom the Administration il the: MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 13 FRIDAY. JUNE 19,1987 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 719 required to give the Departmentl,,30 days notice before start- Title 08 ing any action which,would result in an "incidental tak- ing." Within that 30 day time period the Department must DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL either salvage the species or issue a permit for the "inciden- tal take." The other added prohibitions are simply the same RESOURCES, acts prohibited by statute with respect to endangered spe- cies. Subtitle 03 WILDLIFE This proposal defines for the first time what criteria are considered for designating Natural Heritage Areas. These 08.03.08 Threatened and Endangered Species Areas are an integral feature of the Critical Areas Criteria Authority: Natural Resources Article, ��4-2A.01 - 4-2A-09 and (set forth under COMAR 14.15.01 -.11) and by adding this ��10-2A-01 - 10-2A-09, regulation the Department hopes to aid the counties and the Critical Areas Commission in the protection of these Annotated Gode of Maryland o Areas. Before Areas are designated the Department will no- Notice of Proposed Action tify all landowners of the proposed designation. There will [87-061-Pj be maps made available along with other pertinent and useful information. The Department hopes to work out The Secretary of Natural Resources proposes to repeal management agreements with the landowners or buy con- existing Regulations .01 and .02 under COMAR 08.03.08 servation easements for property included in an Area if nec- Nongame and Endangered Species and to adopt new essary. Regulations.01 - .11 under COMAR 08.03.08 Threatened The Critical Areas Criteria rely heavily on the Depart- and Endangered Species. ment's Threatened and Endangered Species Program to aid The proposed action does not affect any threatened and the counties in determining which species within the Crit- endangered species regulation or designations under ical Area need protection. The Department has available COMAR 08.02.12 Tidewater Administration. The pro- maps which locate listed species by planning zones and will posed action includes an increase in the number of wildlife make all this information as readily available as possible. species on the lists and for the first time includes plants. In The Department has always considered cooperative man- addition, some species which meet the statutory definition agement agreements with private property owners to be the of fish because they spend part of their life cycle in water, best way to preserve and protect habitat critical to threat- namely, amphibians, reptiles, crustaceans, mollusks and ened and endangered species, and intends to continue to use only those finfish of the species Blackbanded Sunfish (En- these agreements and other mutually agreeable manage- neacanthus chaetodon), Maryland Darter (Etheostoma ment arrangements as much as possible. sellare), Glassy Darter (Etheostoma vitreum), Stripeback Darter (Percina notograma) and Trout-Perch (Percopsis om- Estimate of Economic Impact iscomaycus) are added. The latter species are not garne or I. Slornmary of Economic Impact. Administrative costs for sport fish, therefore, are of no commercial significance. The units of the Department of Natural Resources will increase in lists also contain, for the first time, the names of all those terms of more staff time to address protection of these species, and species which are federally listed and, therefore, are re- some land acquisition costs will be incurred. Local governments quired by Maryland law to be listed in Maryland. will bear some costs in addressing protection of the listed species as The criteria for -listing and delisting species are set out part of their Critical Areas programs. and the process for petitioning the Department to list and 11. Types of Revenue delist a species as allowed by law is specified. The proposal Economic bnpacts: Expense Amount also clarifies how to apply for the various permits which are allowed by law and what factors are considered before they A. On issuing agency: are issued. 1. Increased staff and sup- port for threatened and endan- Maryland law authorizes the Secretary to prohibit cer- gered species Program $193,497 tain acts with respect to threatened and endangered plants 2. Increased land acquisition in addition to those set out in the statute. The added prohi- staff and support $74,106 bitions are: taking threatened and endangered plants from . 3. Additional acquisition of interests in land Indeterminable private property without the permission of the owner and B. On other State or local from State property without the permission of the Director; agencies affected: and exporting, possessing, processing, selling, offering for Local jurisdictions protect sale, delivering, carrying, transporting or shipping threat- threatened and endangered spe- cies as part of Critical Areas pro- ened plant species. The latter acts are already prohibited by grams $40.000- statute with respect to endangered plants. $100,000 Maryland law also authorizes the Secretary to prohibit by C. On regulated industries or regulation certain acts with respect to all other threatened trade groups: NONE species besides plants. Since there were no threatened spe- Benefit(+) cies listed in the previous regulation, there were no addi- Cost Amount tional prohibitions specified; thus, these regulations imple- D. On other industries or trade ment that section of the law for the first time. Included in groups affected: NONE the added prohibitions is an "incidental taking." This is a taking of a species which is caused by another otherwise lawful act, for example, the killing of a pond dwelling spe- cies by filling in a pond for other reasons. The landowner is MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 720 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS E. Direct and indirect effects D. "Incidental taking" means takings of listed species on public: that are incidental to, and -not the purpose of, the carrying 1. Prohibition on taking en- dangered wildlife may affect out of an otherwise lawful activity conducted by a person on some real estate development Indeterminable private property- 2. Protect species' diversity Indeterminable E. "Jeopardize the continued existence of" means to en- Ill. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact Letter and Number gage in an action which reasonably would be expected, di- from Section ID: rectly or indirectly, to reduce appreciably the likelihood of Al. The amount indicated is a budget enhancement request for either the survival or recovery of a listed species in the wild six new positions plus support for the Threatened and Endangered Species program. While not all attributable to the listing of species by reducing the reproduction, numbers, or distribution of a represented by this regulation, a significant portion of the addition- listed species or other-wise adversely affecting the species. al staff time for which the new resources wUl be needed is to meet F. "Listed species" means a species of flora or fauna the needs of an expanded list of threatened and endangered species. deemed endangered, threatened or in need of conservation in A2. The amount indicated is a budget enhancement request for this chapter due to any of the following factors: two new positions plus support for acquisition of interests in land (1) Present or threatened destruction, modification, or that may prove necessary to protect threatened and endangered curtailment of the species'habitat or range; species. (2) Overutilization for commercial, sporting, scientific, A3. At this time, it is impossible to calculate how much could be educational, or other purposes, spent for acquisition of interests in land. The figure indicated is the amount budgeted in FY 1987 for acquisition of interests in property (3) Disease or predation, for protection of lands that support diverse ecological communities (4) Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms, or of plants or animals, including forestlands, habitats of rare, threat- (5) Other natural or manmade factors affecting the spe- ened or endangered species, and areas necessary for watershed pro- cies'continued existence within the State. tection. A similar amount has been requested for FY 1998. G. "Natural heritage area" means any natural communi- B. The costs of local governments to develop Critical Area pro- ty of species designated in Regulation .10 in this chapter. grams will be approximately $2.150,000 for FT 1987. A simiiar H. "Person" means any county, municipal corporation, or amount has been requested for FY 1988. The Director of the Crit- otherpolitical subdivision of the State, an individual, corpo- ical Areas program estimates that between 2 percent and 5 percent ratiM receiver, trustee, guardian, executor, administrator, of these costs may be attributable to that portion of the work in- volvina threatened and endangered species. fiduciary, or representative. El. and E2. There is presently no trade in Maryland in any of L "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Department of the listed soecies, and therefore no impact is anticipated as a result Natural Resources. of prohibiting such commerce. The prohibition on taking endan- J. "Service" means the Maryland Forest, Park and Wild- gered species of wildlife in any manner will have some localized life Service. impacts on land use, but the impacts are indeterminable at this K. "Species" means any species of wildlife or plant and time. As to endangered or threatened species of plants, threatened reptiles, amphibians, crustaceans, mollusks and the follow- species of v6rildlife, and wildlife species in neeed of conservation, the ing finfish: Enneacanthus chaetodon, Etheostorna sellare, regulation prohibits only directed efforts to take the species; inci' Etheostoma vitreurn, Percina notograma, Percopsis omisco- dental impacts on the species from legitimate uses of land are not prohibited. Therefore, the listing of these species will not have an maycus or any part, egg, offspring, or dead body of any of impact. Finally, there will be a long-term, positive, but incalculable them. benefit to the people of Maryland by protecting the diversity of L. "Species in need of conservation" means any species de- species in the State. termined by the Secretary to be in need of conservation mea- sures for its continued ability to sustain itself successfully. Opportunity for Public Comment M. "Take" means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, Written comments may be sent to James Mallow, Forest, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in Park and Wildlife Service, Department of Natural Resourc- any such conduct. es, Tawes State Office Building, Annapolis, MD 21401 or N. "Threatened species" means any species of florn or fau- call 974-3771 Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Pub- na which appears likely, within the foreseeable future, to lic comment must be received not later than April 20, 1987 become endangered including any species determined to be a at 4 p.m. "threatened species" pursuant to the federal Endangered If sufficient interest is shown a public hearing will be Species Act of 29 73, 16 US. C ��1531 - 1543. held. Copies of this proposal are available from James Mal- .02 Petitioning. low at the address given above. A. Except for species determined to be threatened or en- .01 Deffnitions. dangered pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act of A. "Director" means the Director of the Maryland Forest, 1973, 16 US.C ��1531 - 1543, any interested person may Park and Wildlife Service. petition the Director to add or remove a species or natural B. "Endangered extirpated species" means any spect .es heritage area to or from a list in this chapter. The Director that was once a viable component of the flora or fauna of the shall review the evidence regarding the requested action and or which no naturally occurring populations are Ma State but f ke a recommendation to the Secretary whether or not to known to exist in the State. Most of these species have not list or delist the species or natural heritage area. been recorded in Maryland since 1950. B. In a petition to list or delist a natural heritage area, C "Endangered species" means any species whose contin- the following information shall be provided: ued existence as a viable component of the State's florn or (1) A map of the proposed natural heritage area. fauna is determined to be in jeopardy including any spect .es (2) A description of the physical boundaries of the pro- determined to be an "endangered species" pursuant to the posed area, total acreage, landowner name and address. federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. ��1531 - (3) A description of the biological community represent- 1543. ed by the natural heritage area including, as far as practi- cal, a list of the fauna and florn there. and other geologic, MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 721 hydrologic@ or other features which blend together to make (1) Whether the species is res'tricted to a minimal geo- this area unique. graphic area within Maryland; (4) A description of all major threats to the continued (2) Whether the species has experienced a rapid, sub- existence of the area, or if petitioning to delist an area, a stantial decline in Maryland, and if the decline continues, description of how the natural features and species composi- the species'extirpation from Maryland is imminent; tion of the area have changed so it is no longer suitable to be (3) Whether the species' essential habitat has been rap, designated as a natural heritage area. idly lost and that loss is likely to continue; (5) A statement indicating why the area should or (4) Whether the species'biology makes it highly suscep- should not be considered as among the best statewide exam- tible to changes in its environment; or ples of its kind. (5) Whether -the species' essential habitat is easily al- (6) Other relevant information which might assist the tered by even relatively minor activities. Director in making a determination. B. Permits. The permit procedures. to be followed are set C All sites used for evidence of current abundance shall forth in Regulation .03. The following apply: be extant and all sitings shall be documented with appropri- (1) Permits shall be issued only for scientific research ate vouchers. In a petition to list or delist a species, the fol- designed to enhance the recovery of the species or population. lowing information shall be provided: (2) A person may not take, export, possess, process, sell (1) A description of the biological distribution of the or offer for sale, deliver, carry, transport, or ship by any species in Maryland. means any endangered wildlife, reptile, amphibian, mol- (2) Its life needs and habitat requirements. lusk, crustacean or finfish species except by special permit (3) Evidence of its decline or evidence that it is more from the Director. common than previously believed and documented. C, The following wildlife, reptile, amphibian, mollusk, (4) All known threats which jeopardize its continued ex- crustacean and finfish species are considered endangered istence. throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is indicated: (5) Other relevant biological and ecological data or oth- (1) Platyhelminthes. A Planarian (Procotyla @vphlops). er life history information pertinent to its status. (2) Mollusks. Ancient Floater (Alasmidonta heterodon). (6) The species shall be presently recognized as a valid (3) Crustaceans. species, or infraspecific taxa of regional or national signift- (a) Dearolfs Cave Amphipod (Crangonyx dearolfi), cance. There shall be adequate documentation that it occurs (b) Greenbriar Cave Amphipod (Stygobromus emargi- naturally and is permanently established in Maryland. natus); .03 Permits. (c) Shenandoah Cave Amphipod (Stygobromus graci- A. Permits to take, transport, possess, sell, offer for sale, lipes). (4) Insects. export or import any listed species may be obtained from the (a) Northeastern Beach Tiger-Beelle (Cicindela dor- Director only after written application on a form provided by salis),- the Service, and upon payment of a fee of $25. (b) Puritan Tiger-Beetle (Cicindela puritanai; B. Each permit shall be subject to an expiration date and (c) Six-Banded Longhorn-Beetle (Dryobius sexnota- other limitations as may be prescribed by the Director. tus),. C. Each permit application requesting permission to take (d) Regal Fritillary (Speyeria idalia). a listed species from private property shall be accompanied (5) Fish. Maryland Darter (Etheostoma sellare). by a signed statement from the landowner granting the ap- (6) Amphibians. plicant permission to enter the property to take the species. (a) Eastern Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum]; D. A permit application shall describe the purpose of the (b) Green Salamander (Aneides aeneus), request in such detail that the Director can determine (c) Hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis); whether it is in the best interest of the species and the State (d) Eastern Narrow-Mouthed Toad (Gastrophryne to issue it. carolinensis). E. The Director shall consider, but not be limited to, the (7) Reptiles. following information: (a) Atlantic Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelvs coria- (1) The number of other known occurrences of the spe- cea); cies in the State, (b) Atlantic Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbrica- on: (2) Which of the occurrences of the species in �E(1) exist ta), (c) Northern CDal Skink (Eumeces anthracinus); (a) Private lands; (d) Atlantic Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys kernpi),- (b) Public lands; and (e) Mountain Earth Snake (Virginia valeriae pul- (c) What protection there is for the species' continued chra). existence. (8) Birds. (3) The number of individuals in the occurrences of the (a) Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus); species in �E(1) and the relative state of ecological stability. (b) Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus); F. Violation of any provision or restriction of the permit (C) Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus),- shall constitute a violation of this regulation and may re- (d) Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus): sult, at the discretion of the Director, in the revocation of the (e) Beivick's Wren (Thryomanes bewickii) permit and confiscation of the species taken or possessed. (9) Mammals. .04 Endangered Species of Wildlife, Reptiles, (a) Black Right Whale (Balaena glacialis); Amphibians, Mollusks, Crustaceans and Finfish. (b) Sei Whale (Balaenopteru borealis); A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (c) Blue Whale (Balaenoptera musculus); ered for listing any species other than plants as endangered: (d) Finback Whale (Balaenoptera phYsalus).- MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 722 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS (e) Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), (28) Cream-Flowered Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium ochro- (f) Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis); leucum), (g) Sperm Whale (Physeter catodon); (29) Rigid Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium rigidum), (h) Delmarva Fox Squirrel (Sciurus niger cinereus); (3O) Pineland Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium strictum); (i) Water Shrew (Sorex palustris). (31) Pink Sundew (Drosera capillaris); .05 Endangered Species of Plants. (32) Log Fern (Dryopteris celsa); (33) Knotted Spikerush (Eleocharis equisetoides); A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (34) Black-Fruited Spikerush (Eleocharis melanocarpa); ered for listing a plant species as endangered: (35) Robbins' Spikerush (Eleocharis robbinsii); (1) Whether only a few populations are known in Mary- (36) Water Horsetail (Equisetum fluviatile), land and they cover only a small portion of land; (37) Bent-Awn Plumegrass (Erianthus contortus); (2) Whether the species is restricted to a minimal geo- (38) Parker's Pipewort (Eriocaulon parkeri); graphic area; (39) White-Bracted Boneset (Eupatorium leucolepis), (3) Whether the species has experienced a substantial (40) Darlington's Spurge (Euphorbia purpurea), decline in Maryland, and if the decline continues, the spe- (41) Harper's Fimbristylis (Fimbristylis perpusilla), cies'extirpation from Maryland is imminent; (42) Box Huckleberry (Gaylussacia brachycera), (4) Whether the species' essential habitat has been rap- (43) Swamp-Pink (Helonias bullata); idly lost and that loss is likely to continue, (44) Featherfoil (Hottonia inflata), (5) Whether the species' biology makes it highly suscep- (45) Creeping St. John's-Wort (Hypericum adpressum); tible to changes in its environment; or (46) Coppery St. John's-Wort (Hypericum denticulatum); (6) Whether the species' essential habitat is easily al- (47) Dwarf Iris (Iris verna), tered bv even relatively minor activities. (48) Red-Root (Lachnanthes caroliana); B. Permits. The permit procedures to be followed are set (49) (Leersia hexandra); forth in Regulation .03. The following apply: (50) Star Duckweed (Lemna trisulca); (1) Permits shall be issued only for scientific research (51) Downy Bushclover (Lespedeza stuevei), designed to enhance the recovery of the species or population; (52) Mudwort (Limosella subulata); (2) A person may not: (53) Sandplain Flax (Linum intercursum); (a) Export, possess, process, sell, offer for sale, deliver, (54) Pondspice (Litsea aestivalis), carry, transport, or ship by any means any endangered plant species without a special permit from the Director, the feder- (55) Canby's Lobelia (Lobelia canbYi), al government, or another state government; (56) (Ludwigia glandulosa), (b) Take any endangered plant species from State (57) Hairy Ludwigia (Ludwigia hirtella); property except by special permit from the Director; and (58) Sessile-Leaved Water-Horehound (Lycopus amplec- (c) Take any endangered plant species from private tens), (59) Erect Water-Hyssop (Mecardonia acuminata), property, without the written permission of the landowner. (60) Torrey's Dropseed (Muhlenbergia torreyana); C. The following plant species are considered endangered (61) Low Water-Milfoil (Myriophylium humile); throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is indicated: (62) Floating-Heart (Nymphoides cordata); (1)Sensitive Joint-Vetch (Aeschynomene virginica); (63) Virginia False-Gromwell (Onosmodium virginqia- (2)Sandplain Gerardia (Agalinis acuta), num), (3)(Agalinis fasciculata); (64) Canby's Dropwort (Oxypolis canbyi), (4) Thread-Leaved Gerardia (Agalinis setacea); (65) Tall Swamp Paniegrass (Panicum scabriusculum), (5) Woolly Three-Awn (Aristida lanosa), (66) Wright's Panicgrass (Panqicum wrightianum), (6) Virginia Heartleaf (Asarum virginicum); (67) Kidneyleaf Grass-of-Parnassus (Parnassia asarifo- (7) Red Milkweed (Asclepias rubra); lia), (8) Serpentine Aster (Aster depauperatus); (68) Yellow Nailwort (Paronvchia virginica); (9) Tickseed Sunflower (Bidens coronata); (69) Walter's Paspalum (Paspalum dissectum), (10)Small Beggar-Ticks (Bidens discoidea); (70) Canby's Mountain Lover (Paxistima canbyi), (11)(Bidens mitis); (71) Blue Scorpion-Weed (Phacelia ranunculacea); (12)Aster-Like Boltonia (Boltonia asteroides); (72) Jacob's-Ladder (Polemonium van-bruntiae), (13) Grass-Pink (Calopogon tuberosus); (73) Cross-Leaved Milkwort (Polygala cruciata); (14) Long's Bittercress (Cardamine longii); (74) Dense-Flowered Knotweed (Polygonum densiflo- (15) Barratt's Sedge (Carex barrattii),- rum); (16) Buxbaum's Sedge (Carex buxbaumi),- (75) Slender Rattlesnake-Root (Prenanthes autumnal- (17) Coast Sedge (Carex exilis); is), (18) Giant Sedge (Carex gigantea); (76) Alleghany Plum (Prunus alleghaniensis), (19) (Carex joorii), (77) Short-Beaked Baldrush (Psilocarya nitens); (20) Dark Green Sedge (Carex venusta), (78) Long-Beaked Baldrush (Psilocarya scirpoides); (21) Marsh Wild Senna (Cassia fasciculata var. macros- (79) Harperella (Ptilimnium nodosum, perma), (80) One-Sided Pyrola (Pyrola secunda), (22) Spreading Pogonia (Cleistes divaricata); (81) Yellow Water-Crowfoot (Ranunculus flabellaris); (23) Wrinkled Jointgrass (Coelorachis rugosa), (82) (Rhynchosia tomentosa); (24) Wister's Coralroot (Corallorhiza wisteriana); (83) Short-Bristled Hornedrush (Rhynchospora cornicu- (25) Fraser's Sedge (Cymophyllus fraseri); lata); (26) Smooth Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium laevigatum); (84) Thread-Leaved Beakrush (Rhynchospora filifolia); (27) Linear-Leaved Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium lineatum); (85) Grass-Like Beakrush (Rhynchospora globularis); MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL. 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 723 (86) Clustered Beakrush (Rhynchospora glomerata); (33) Chafweed (Centunculus minimus), (87) Drowned Hornedrush (Rhynchospora inundata), (34) Purple Clematis (Clematis occidentalis); (88) Torrey's Beakrush (Rhynchospora torreyana); (35) Curly-Heads (Clematis ocroleuca); (89) Sacciolepis (Sacciolepis striata), (36) Rose Coreopsis (Coreopsqis rosea); (90) Sessile-Fruited Arrowhead (Sagittaria rigida); (37) Pygmyweed (Crassula aquatica); (91) Sandbar Willow (Salix exigua); (38) Hazel Dodder (Cuscuta coryli), (92) Canby's Bulrush (Scirpus etuberculatus), (39) (Cyperus plukenetii); (93) Water Clubrush (Scirpas subterminalis); (40) Showy Ladies' Slipper (Cypripedium reginae); (94) Slender Nutrush (Scleria minor), (41) Few-Flowered Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium pauciflo- (95) Pink Bog-Button (Sclerolepis uniflora); rum); (96) Halberd-Leaved Greenbrier (Smilax pseudo-china), (42) (Digitaria villosa), (97) Red-Berried Greenbrier (Smilax walteri); (43) (Eleocharis halophila); (98) Showy Goldenrod (Solidago speciosa), (44) Three-Ribbed Spikerush (Eleocharis tricastata), (99) Two-Flowered Bladderwort (Utricularia biflora), (45) Downy Willowherb (Epilobium strictum); (100) Fringed Yelloweyed-Grass (Xyris fimbriata); (46) Seven-Angled Pipewort (Eriocaulon septangulare), (101) Small's Yelloweyed-Grass (Xqyrqis smalliana). (47) Tall Rattlesnake Master (Eryngium yucciqfolium); .06 Endangered Extirpated Species. (48) (Festuca paradoxa); (49) Pumpkin Ash (Fraxinus profunda); A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (50) Small Bedstraw (Galium trifidum); ered for listing a species as endangered extirpated. (51) (Gentiana puberula); (1) The species was once a viable component of the (52) Sea Milkwort (Glaux maritima); State's flora and fauna and there are no records of it natu- (53) Sharp-Scaled Mannagrass (Glyceria acutiflora); rally occurring in Maryland after 1950; or (54) Dwarf Rattlesnake-Plantain (Goodyera repens), (2) The species was once a viable component of the (55) Tesselated Rattlesnake-Plantain (Goodyera tessela- State's flora or fauna and recent scientific investigations ta), have documented the loss of its habitat or disappearance of (56) (Gratiola ramosa), its population in Maryland. (57) Rough Heuchera (Heuchera villosa); B. Permits. Upon the discovery of a viable, naturally oc- (58) Sea-Beach Sandwort (Honkenya peploides), curring population of any species in ��C -H, that species (59) Nits-and-Lice (Hypericum drummondii), will be considered an endangered species and shall require (60) Clasping-Leaved St. John's-Wort (Hypericum gym- the permits and conditions afforded to that status. nanthum); C The following plant species are considered endangered (61) Great St. John's-Wort (Hypericum pyramidatum); extirpated throughout Maryland: (62) Bloodleaf (Iresine rhizomatosa), (1) Pine-Barren Gerardia (Agalinis virgata); (63) Small Whorled Pogonia (Isotria medeoloides); (2) Rough-Stemmed Wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycau- (64) Small-Headed Rush (Juncus brachycephalus); lum), (65) New Jersey Rush (Juncus caesariensis); (3) Golden Colicroot (Aletris aurea); (66) (Juncus megacephalus); (4) Beach Pigweed (Amaranthus pumilus), (67) Bavonet Rush (Juncus militarqis); (5) Canada Anemone (Anemone canadensis), (6) Great Angelica (Angelica atropurpurea); (68) Torrey's Rush (Juncus torreyi); (7) Filmy Angelico (Angelica triquinata), (69) Common Juniper (Juniperus communis); (8) Arethusa (Arethusa bulbosa); (70) Narrow-Leaved Pinweed (Lechea tenuifolia); (9) Lake Cress (Armorucia aquatica (71) Catchfly-Grass (Leersia lenticularis); (72) Long-Awned Diplanche (Leptochloa fascicularis); (10) Bradley's Spleenwort (Asplenium bradleyi), (73) Fall Witchgrass (Leptoloma cognatum), (11) Steele's Aster (Aster concinnus); (74) Scaly Blazing-Star (Liatris squarrosa); (12) Silvery Aster (Aster concolor); (75) American Lovage (Ligusticum canadense); (13) Showy Aster (Aster spectabilis); (76) American Frog's-Bit (Limnobium spongia); (14) (Axonopus furcatus); (77) Twinflower (Linnaea borealis); (15) Mat-Forming Water-Hyssop (Bacopa stragula), (78) Florida Yellow Flax (Linum floridanum); (16) Sea Ox-Eye (Borrichia frutescens); (79) Heartleaf Twayblade (Listera cordata); (17) Triangle Grape-Fern (Botrychium lanceolatum); (80) (Lobelqia glandulosa); (18) Leathery Grape-Fern (Botrychium multifdurn); (81) Carolina Clubmoss (Lycopodium carolinianum); (19) Small Grape-Fern (Botrychium simplex), (82) Large-Flowered Barbara's Buttons (Marshallia (20) Blue-Hearts (Buchnera americana); (21) Great Indian-Plantain (Cacalia muhlenbergii); grandiflora); (22) (Carex careyana), (83) (Matelea decipiens), (84) (Matelea obliqqua); (23) Cypress-Knee Sedge (Carex decomposita); (85) Broad-Leaved Bunchflower (Melathium latifoli- (24) (Carex foenea), um); (25) (Carex glaucescens); (86) Nuttall's Micranthemum (Micranthemum micran- (26) Lake-Bank Sedge (Carex lacustris); themoides); (27) New England Sedge (Carex novae-angliae); (87) Evergreen Bayberry (Myrica heterophylla); (28) Variable Sedge (Carex polymorpha), (88) Thread-Like Naiad (Najas gracillima); (29) (Carex striatula); (89) Northern Panicgrass (Panicurn boreale); (30) (Carex tenera); (90) May Grass (Pharlaris caroliniana); (31) (Carex tetanica); (91) (Phlox carolina); (32) Wood's Sedge (Carex woodii); MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 724 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS (92) (Phlox glaberrima); (5) Red-Cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis), (93) Mountain Phlox (Phlox latifola); (6) Roseate Tern (Sterna dougallii); (94) Downy Phlox (Phlox pilosa), (7) Greater Prairie Chicken (Tympanuchus cupid) (95) Heart-Leaved Plantain (Plantago cordata); H. The following mammal species are considered endan- (96) Slender Plantain (Plantago pusilla); gered extirpated throughout Maryland. (97) (Poa saltuensis), (1) Gray Wolf (Canis lupus); (98) Clammyweed (Polansia dodecandra), (2) American Elk (Cervus canadensis); (99) America Ipecac (Porteranthus stipuqlatus), (3) Eastern Mountain Lion (Felis concolor); (100) Redheadgrass (Potamogeton richardsonii), (4) Snowshoe Hare (Lepus americanus), (101) Robbins'Pondweed (Potamogeton robbinsii), (5) Marten (Martes americana) (102) Flatstem Pondweed (Potamogeton zosteriqformis); (103) Pale Mannagrass (Puccinellqia pallqida), .07 Threatened Species of Wildlife, Reptiles, Amphibi- (104) Awned Mountain-Mint (Pycnanthemum setosum); ans, Mollusks, Crustaceans, and Finfish. (105) Greenish-Flowered Pyrola (Tqyrola virens); A. Listing Criteria, The following factors shall be consid- (106) (Ranunculus hederaceus); ered for listing species other than plant species as threat- (107) Bristly Crowfoot (Ranunculus pensylvanicus); ened: (108) Awned Meadow-Beauty (Rhexia aristosa); (1) Whether the species has experienced a steady, sub- (109) Tiny-Headed Beakrush (Rhynchosporn microce- stantial decline in Maryland, and if the decline continues, phala); the species is likely to become endangered, (110) Few-Flowered Beakrush (Rhynchospora rariflora); (2) Whether there has been steady, widespread loss of (111) Wild Black Currant (Ribes amerqicanum), the species' essential habitat; or (112) Hairy Wild Petunia (Ruellia humilus); (3) Whether protection measures already taken have sig- (113) Pursh's Ruellia (Ruellia purshiana); nificantly reduced the chances of the species becoming extir- (114) Slender Marsh Pink (Sabatia campanulata); pated from Maryland (115) Lance-Leaved Sabatia (Sabatia difformis), B. Permits. The permit procedures to be followed are set (116) Slender Arrowhead (Sagittaria teres), forth in Regulation .03. The following apply. (117) Shining Willow (Salix lucida), (1) Except by special permit from the Director a person (118) (Salvia urticifolia), may not take, export, possess, process, sell, offer for sale, de- (119) Hard-Stem Bulrush (Scirpus acutus); liver, carry, transport or ship by any means any threatened (120) Torrey's Clubrush (Scirpus torreyi); wildlife, reptile, amphibian, mollusk, crustacean or finfish (121) Shining Nutrush (Scleria nitida), species. (122) Veined Skullcap (Scutellaria nervosa), (2) Permits to take threatened species shall be issued (123) Small Skullcap (Scutellaria parvula); only for: (124) Sand Blueeyed-Grass (Sisyrinchium arenicola); (a) Scientific research designed to enhance the recov- (125) Mountain Goldenrod (Solidago roanensis); ery of the species or population; (126) Rock Goldenrod (Solidago rupestris), (b) Other valid scientific research; or (127) (Sorghastrum elliottii), (c) Educational purposes designed to further public (128) Indian-Pink (Spigelia marilandica), awareness regarding the species. (129) (Stachys aspera), (3) Incidental taking of a threatened wildlife, reptile, (130) Trading Stitchwort (Stellaria alsine); amphibian, mollusk, crustacean or finfish species shall be (131) (Tephrosia spicata); allowed only after the Director has been notified 30 days in (132) Coastal False Asphodel (Tofieldila racemosa); advance of the change in land use or other action by a pri- (133) Auricled Gerurdia (Tomanthera auriculata); vate landowner which shall result in the incidental taking. (134) Buffalo Clover (Trifolium reflexum); The Maryland Forest, Park and Wildlife Service, upon re- (135) (Triglochin striatum); ceipt of the application for an incidental takingpermit from (136) Tall Cornsalad (Valerianella umbilicata); the landowner, shall within 30 days either: (137) Purple Vetch (Vicia amerqicana), (a) Take action to salvage the threatened species; or (138) Wolffiella (Wolffiella floridana). (b) Issue to the landowner an incidental taking per- D. The following fish species are considered endangered mit authorizing the landowner to proceed with the action extirpated throughout Maryland: which will result in the incidental taking of the species. (1) Glassy Darter (Etheostoma vitreum), C. The following species are considered to be threatened (2) Stripeback Darter (Percina notograma); throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is indicated: (3) Trout-Percrh (Perropsis omiscomaycus). (1) Crustaceans. Allegheny Cave Amphipod (Stygobro- E. The following amphibian species is considered endan- mus allegheniensis). gered extirpated throughout Maryland: Greater Siren (Siren (2) Insects. Rare Skipper (Problema bulenta). lacertina). (3) Reptiles. F. The following reptile species is considered endangered (a) Atlantic Loggerhead Turtle (Caretta caretta); extirpated throughout Maryland: Rainbow Snake (Farancia (b) Atlantic Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas). erytrogramma). (4) Birds. Black Skimmer (Rynchops niger). G. The following bird species are considered endangered .08 Threatened Species of Plants. extirpated throughout Maryland: A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (1) Bachman's Sparrow (Aimophila aestivalis), ered for listing a plant species as threatened: (2) Ivory-Billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis); (1) Whether the species has experienced a substantial (3) Lark Sparrow (Chondestes grammacus); decline in Maryland, and if the decline continues, the species (4) Eskimo Curlew (Numenius borealis), is likely to become endangered; MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 725 (2) Whether there has been a steady widespread loss of (a) Scientific research des@gned to enhance the recov- the species' essential habitat; or ery of the species or population; (3) Whether the species has been listed as endangered (b) Other valid scientific research; or but it has been shown that protection measures taken have (c) Educational purposes designed to further publi .c significantly reduced the chances of the species becoming ex- awareness regarding the species. tirpated from Maryland. (3) Incidental taking permits are not required for spe- B. Permits. The permit procedures to be followed are set cies in need of conservation. forth in Regulation .03. The following apply. C. The following species are considered to be in need of (1) Permits shall be issued only for scientific research conservation throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is designed to enhance the recovery of the species orpopulation. indicate& (2) A person may not: (1) Insects. King's Hairstreak (Satyrium kingi). (a) Export, possess, process, sell, offer for sale, deliver, (2) Fish. Blackbanded Sunfish (Enneacanthus chaeto- carry, transport, or ship by any means any threatened plant don). species except by a special permit from the Director; (3) Amphibians. Carpenter Frog (Rana virgatipes). (b) Take any threatened plant species from. State prop- (4) Reptiles. Map Turtle (Graptemys geographica). erty except by special permit from the Director; and (5) Birds. (c) Take any threatened plant species from private (a) Henslows Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii),- property without the written permission of the landowner. (b) Short-Eared Owl (Asio flammeus), C. The following plant species are considered threatened (c) American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus),- throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is indicated: (d) Sedge Wren (Cistothorus platensis); (1) Single-Headed Pussytoes (Antennaria solitaria); (e) Little Blue Heron (Egretta caerulea),- (2) Giant Cane (Arundinaria gigantea); (f) Common Moorhen (Gallinula chloropus), (3) Glade Fern (A thyrium pycnocarpon); (g) American Oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus),- (4) Maryland Bur-Marigold (Bidens bidentoides), (h) Least Bittern (Ixobrychus exilisk (5) Button Sedge (Carex bullata),- ' W Black Rail (Lateralius jamaicensis); (6) Shoreline Sedge (Carex hyalinolepis); 0) Swainson's Warbler (Limnothlypis swainsonid; (7) Inflated Sedge (Carex vesicaria); (k) Least Tern (Sterna antillarum). (8) Leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata),- (6) Mammals. (9) Red Turtlehead (Chelone obliqua); (a) Porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum.@- (10) Goldenseal (Hydrastis canadents),- (b) Bobcat (Lynx rufus); (11) Deciduous Holly (Ilex decidua); (c) Least Weasel (Mustela nivalis); (12) Narrow-L--aved Bushclover (Lespedeza angustifo- (d) Small-Footed Bat (Alyotis leibii),- lia); (e) Southeastern Shrew (Sorex longirostris). (13) Wild Lupine (Lupinus perennis); (14) Climbing Fern (Lygodium palmaturn); .10 Natural Heritage Areas. (15) American Lotus (Nelumbo, lutea); A. Listing Criteria. In order to qualify as a natural heri- (16) Red Bay (Per-sea borbonia); tage area a natural community shall: (17) Pale Green Orchis (Platanthera flava); (1) Contain one or more threatened or endangered spe- (18) Purple Fringeless Orchis @Platanthera peramoena); cies or wildlife species in need of conservation; (19) Spongy Lophotocarpus (Sagittaria calycina),- (2) Be a unique blend of geological, hydrological, clima- (20) Engelmann's Arrowhead (Sagitttaria engelmanni . talogical or biological features; and ana); (3) Be considered to be among the best Statewide exarn- (21) Northern Pitcher-Plant (Sarrucenia purpurea); ples of its kind. (22) Virginia Mallow (Sida hermaphrodita),- B. The Forest, Park and Wildlife Service shall prepare (23) Featherbells (Stenanthium gramineum); maps describing the location of all natural heritage areas. (24) Mountain Pimpernel (Taenidia montana); The maps shall be filed in the office of the Director of the 25) Steele's Meadowrue (Thalictrum steeleanu , Forest, Park and Wildlife Service, Department of Natural (26) Kate's-Mountain Clover (Trifolium virginicum); Resources, Tawes State Office Building, Annapolis, MD (27) Dwarf Trillium (Trillium pusillum), 21401. (28) Purple Bladderwort (Utricularia purpurea). C. The following areas are designated natural heritage ar- eas: .09 Species in Need of Conservation. (1) Kasecamp Shale Barrens ......... Allegan), Count.%,; A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (2) Maple Run ...................... A Ilegani, Coun 0111 ered for listing a species as in need of conservation: (3) Outdoor Club Shale Barrens ...... A llega n y Cou n tv: (1) Whether thepopulation is limited or declining with- (4) SidelingHill Creek ..Allegany, Washington Count 'I", in Maryland; and (5) Cypress Creek Swamp ....... Anne A rundel County.- (2) Whether the species may become threatened in the (6) Eagle Hill Bog .............. Anne Arundel County,* foreseeable future, if current trends or conditions persist. (7) Upper Patuxent B. Permits. The permit procedures to be followed are set Marshes.. Anne Arundel, Prince George's Countv: forth in Regulation .03. The following apply: (8) Black Marsh ................... Baltimore Count'y: (1) Except by special permit, a person may not take, ex- (9) Robert E. Lee Park .............. Baltimore Count 'v: port, possess, process, sell, offer for sale, deliver, carry, tra ns- (10) Camp Roosevelt Cliffs ............ Calvert Count *v: port, or ship by any means any species in need of conserva- (11) Cove Point Marsh ................ Calvert Count '%,.* tion. (12) Flag Ponds ...................... Calvert CountY; (2) Permits to take species in need of conservation shall (13) Randle Cliff Beach ................ Calvert Count.y; be issued only for.. MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 726 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS (14) Grove Neck ........................ Cecil County'. 11. Types of (15) Plum Creek ........................ Cecil County; Economic Impacts. Revenue Expense Magnitude (16) Allen's Fresh .................... Charles County; (17) Chicamuxen Creek ............... Charles Count)",* A. On issuing agency: (18) Popes Creek ..................... Charles County; The Department expects an in- (19) Upper Nanjemoy Creek ........... Charles County; crease in workload as a result of the deletion of certain exemp- (20) Chicone Creek ................ Dorchester County; tions. $141,000 (21) Mill Creek .................... Dorches ter County; B. On other State or local (22) Savanna Lake ................ Dorchester County- agencies affected: Additional cost to prepare sub- (23) Upper Blackwater River ....... Dorchester Couni@; mittals to the Department for re- (24) Upper Nanticoke River, Marshes view and approval. Indeterminable. and Swamps ...... Dorchester, Wicom ico. County, Depends on (25) High Rock ...................... Garrett County; amount of (26) ToliverRun ..................... Garrett County; applications (27) Great Falls ................. Mon tgornery Coun ty; received from (28) Irish Grove .................... Somerset County; C. On regulated industries or other agencies. (29) Hickory Point C),press Swamp ... Worcester County- trade groups: (30) Lower Nassawango Creek ....... Worcester Coun@v" I.. Additional cost to prepare engineered submittals to the (31) Mattaponi .................... Worcester County; Department for review and ap- (32) North Sinepuxent Bay Dunes .... Worcester County. proval. $500,000 2. Cost to persons obtaining .11 Violation ofRegulatiorts. a permit due to processing Violation of.these regulations is a misdemeanor punish- time. $87,250 able under Natural Resources Articles, ��10-2A-07, 10-1101 3. Time delay for those proj- ects that require an adminis- et seq.. 4-2A-07, and 4-1201 et seq., Annotated Code of Mary- trative opportunity for a pub- land. lic hearing. $105,000 D. On other industries or TORREY C. BROWN, M.D. trade groups affected: Certain delays in starting the Secretary of Natural Resources intended works mav be incurred to the permit applicant as a re- sult of the regulatory process. These deiavs could @e borne by trade groups or subcontractors as a result of scheduling prob- Subtitle 05 WATER RESOURCES lems. Determined on ADMINISTRATION a case-by-case basis but could result in lost 08-05.03 Construction on Non-Tidal Waters earnings to and Floodplains E. Direct and indirect effects trade groups. Authority: Natural Resources Article ��8-801 thru 8-814, on public: Could be very Annotated Code of Maryland large. III. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact Letter and Number Notice of Proposed Action from Section 11): [87-060-P) A. A 20 percent increase in applications received is anticipated which would bring the total number of files reviewed by WRA to The Secretary of Natural Resources proposes to amend 1,200 yearly. Each engineer reviews an average of 174 files per year Regulation .03 under COMAR 08.05.03 Construction on and an inspector inspects an average of 72 waterway permit proj- Non-Tidal Waters and Floodplains. The purpose of this ects yearly. Based upon the current staff available, it is projected amendment is to delete certain exemptions for projects in that I engineering and 2 inspector positions will be required. environmentally sensitive areas of the State's waterways. B. An estimated expense to other State and local agencies would be based upon the time and material required to prepare permit applications. . Estimate of Economic Impact C.l. Given an estimated increase in permit applications of 200 1. Summary of Economic Impact. Natural Resources Article, per year, an estimated project cost of $25,000, and an average appli- �8-803, Annotated Code of Maryland, requires that any person cation preparation fee of 10 percent of the project cost. wishing to change in any manner the course, current. or C.2. This cost is based on a minimum time to obtain a permit of cross-section of any stream or body of water, first obtain a permit one month and interest of 12 percent per annum on an average from the Department. Permits are obtained following the submittal project cost of $25,000. of an application and accompanying documentation prescribed in CA This cost is based on a minimum time delay of 2 additional COMAR. Regulations governing these activities have existed since months in permit processing time due to an expected 50 percent the 1930's and have been amended from time-to-time in order to increase in the number of applications received. Also included is an keep pace with goals and objectives of the Department of Natural average hearing notice publication cost of $1DO per permit. Resources. The regulatory changes proposed at this time are neces- D. Depending on the amount of detailed submittals required for 6ary in order to incorporate those items the General Assembly rec- a particular project, time delays will result to the construction in- ognized as necessary in order to preserve and enhance the quality dustry. In addition, improper implementation of the construction of the State's water resources as they relate to the Chesapeake Bay. drawings, which cannot be anticipated, can result in time delays to the contractor. MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL. 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 a 61 13 6668 14103 2831 @ It .4