[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
MANAGEMENT. PLANS FOR SIGNIFICANT PLANT AND WILDLIFE MARYLAND HABITAT AREAS INATURAL OF MARYLAND"S HERITAGE WESTERN SHORE.: PROGRAM CHARLES COUNTY Prepared by Katharine A. McCarthy Judith L Robertson Richard R Wiegand J." Christopher Ludwig Helonias bullata SWAMP PINK fN' T OF N, @,A QH 76.2 M3 95 M4337 1988 MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR SIGNIFICANT PLANT AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS OF MARYLAND'S WESTERN SHORE: CHARLES 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 311 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: CHARLES'COUNTY TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................. 1 SECTION 1: Procedures of site selection, methods of protection implementation, and the long-term framework established by this project Introduction ............... o ..................... 3 Site Identification .............................. 3 Field Inventory .................................. 5 Strategy for Selecting Significant Sites ......... 5 Site Protection Implementation Methods ........... 6 Long-Term Framework ............. o ................ 9 SECTION 2: Protection Area Summaries Introduction ..................................... 10 County Map ....................................... 12 Protection Area Summaries Brentland Woods ................ o .............. 14 Bryantown Swamp ............................... 17 Cat Pond ...................................... 20 County Line Trail Seep ........................ 23 Doncaster Forest .............................. 25 Maryland Point Swamp .......................... 28 REFERENCES ................................................... 31 APPENDIX A: Regulations under COMAR 08.03.08 Threatened and Endangered Species US DeDartment of commerce Lo:-.% coastal services Center Library 22Sd 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 devoted 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 existing 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 1 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 Project 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: I. 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 Quad(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 CHARLES COUNTY- Ma hall,a all2'227\''@-/ - ---T- - -- - - I @ @/ 3 allawbrna M@ 228 11,411 Q an@ oad 2% 4 228 Waldor POREST 4 Indi n V (aT. 382 2 Pac 925 2 ' Bea_ Malcolm i,\1 U S. NAVAL eights ,@to I I 1+3 u.S. GOvT. P R 3 H Pomonkey 0' RLE IROPELLANT \\4 224 227 White Mason springs 232 Aquasc PLANT Plains 5 2 3 Pomfret' 5 WO M'YR IL'E WHITE INS I, I 'AA T 2) ao@,; T91 %QK 5 03 REG P@ 0- - 301 / Matt 3 PAL o 484 ENV MEN TA Oil son A Bryantownj Ri 225 6 -4 Pisgah ij LaPlata 488 SV`A[-'@VC)CD - uxent @-"E'111 I ort Burnt 224 1 3 HughesVALe Store \ Benedict. cco t,--c @2il n 3 3 425 3 Q4 M- Ma 4 Doncaster McConchie -,,oil Newtown 232 C-D Hill 6 3 b Sip harlotte Tool GIt BE- T RUN 3 i i i r f4 !i Hall Ironsidesk, A K 2 ONCASER me ot 6 Welco Dentsville DUb stf Newmar S TATE FCPES Ch 1, 4 7 Nan!emoy APEL PT Bel Alton, 425 %5 ; k Sr E PA JS. \% Faulkner Gravto .1@1 232 n 0 301 Newport f0 1\ 24 OLOSS MZNT 2 PROVING 6 s Fres Mi,", B/Osso Pope sh Pt 2 I iverside. Creek I Newburg Gov WCE C-D Md. Pt. W, 811, 2 Moun -,'@icTor or o n 257 1!2 4 Tomp@knlie 2 is ue SCALE 2 Rock Point o 254 Cobb Island 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.) CHARLES COUNTY: Protection Area Locations Site on Protection Area County Map Brentland Woods..; ....................... 5 Bryantown Swamp ......................... 3 Cat Pond ................................ 2 County Line Trail Seep .................. 1 Doncaster Forest ........................ 4 Maryland Point Swamp .................... 6 Site # on CountV Map Protection Area 1 ................... county Line Trail Seep 2 ................................. Cat Pond 3 .......................... Bryantown Swamp 4 ......................... Doncaster Forest 5 .......................... Brentland Woods 6 ..................... Maryland Point Swamp 13 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Brentland Woods County: Charles USGS Quad: Mathias Point SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Diverse habitats, including bottomland forest, mesic deciduous woods, and xeric deciduous woods, occur in the ravine and adjacent uplands of Brentland Woods. Many large, old trees remain in the forest, especially north of the main stream. The upland woods, dominated by oaks, Beech, and American Holly, are as fine an example of this habitat as remains in the county. Much of the watershed of the stream remains forested. Most areas of similar habitat in Charles County have been destroyed by clearing for residential and commercial development, agriculture, and silviculture. The spring herbaceous cover is unusually lush and diverse, especially along the floodplain of the stream and on the moist lower slopes. Among the numerous wildflowers is a species that, in Maryland, is known from only three sites in Charles County. None of these sites is protected. This population appears vigorous; hundreds of flowering and fruiting plants were observed. Because the population is large and the rare species' habitat is extensive, Brentland Woods provides an excellent opportunity to preserve this species in Maryland. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: This large, contiguous tract of forest provides excellent habitat for forest interior birds. Sightings and signs of fox, deer, woodchuck, squirrels, and owls were noted, indicating that the area is rich in wildlife. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats, Logging is the most immediate threat to this area. Portions of the slopes on the south side of the stream have already been logged. The intrusion of non-native, weedy species, such as Japanese Honeysuckle, is a problem on these southern slopes. If logging continues, these weedy species may exclude the rare species and other native plants. Erosion of the logged slopes could cause sedimentation of the rare species' floodplain habitat and could destroy the rare species' population. 14 Recently, residential and commercial development have increased dramatically in Charles County. The clearing of land for development within the protection area poses threats similar to those of logging, erosion and the invasion of weedy plants. Development poses additional threats to the rare species, including pollution of the stream caused by runoff from the uplands and trampling and destruction of the vegetation caused by increased use of the area by local residents. Management Needs Clearing of the forest for timber harvest or other purposes should not occur within the protection area. Trash and garbage should be removed from the protection area. Roads providing access into the area should be blocked, thereby assuring more trash will not be dumped after cleanup is completed. The size and reproductive success of the rare species population should be monitored regularly. The spread of non- native, weedy species into the area should also be watched carefully. The removal of these weedy plants may be recommended after further observation. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary includes the main stream and its tributaries, the bottomland forest habitat of the rare species, and the adjacent uplands that drain into the stream. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: The 483 acre stream/ravine complex is composed of diverse habitats and plant communities. The focal point is the floodplain of an unnamed stream. This bottomland forest is dominated by Tulip Tree, Red Maple, and Sweet Gum; the lush understory is dominated by Spicebush, Pawpaw, and numerous herbs. The rare plant species occurs in several areas along the floodplain of this stream and its tributaries. The lower slopes of the ravine are covered by rich deciduous woods dominated by Tulip Tree, Sweet Gum, and various shrubs. The drier upper slopes are dominated by oaks, Beech, and American Holly. Few shrubs and herbaceous species inhabit the dry upland. Numerous small seeps and springs occur along the ravine slopes, creating lush patches where Skunk Cabbage, Jack-in-the-pulpit, and Touch- me-not are common. 15 Although parts of the area were recently selectively logged, many large trees remain and the scenic quality is exceptional. Many non-native, weedy species are invading these logged areas and Japanese Honeysuckle is particularly aggressive. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: October 1988 16 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Bryantown Swamp County: Charles USGS Quad: Hughesville SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Scattered within this large swamp forest are shrub swamps, emergent marshes, and wet, grassy meadows. The area is uncommonly diverse in its habitats and wetland plant communities. Emergent marsh borders a slightly higher, drier floodplain forest; open areas dominated by herbaceous growth intermingle with wooded swamp. A rare plant species occurs in several of the more open, grassy meadows. Although this species is known from fourteen other sites in Maryland, only five populations are known on the Upper Coastal Plain. The other four populations known on the Upper Coastal Plain occur in vulnerable sites and will be difficult to maintain. This protection area provides the greatest potential for successfully preserving this rare species on the Upper Coastal Plain. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: It is likely that other rare species occur in this wetland complex. A second rare plant species was reported from this area but was not observed in 1988. Because the plant species differ from one season to the next, several more visits are required to complete a species list. This diverse wetland complex provides fine habitat for migratory and resident songbirds, amphibians, reptiles, deer, and other mammals. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats Recent road construction at the southern border of the protection area may change the hydrology of this site. If the water table is lowered or raised, or if the seasonal water regime is altered by this construction, the vegetative composition of the swamp will change. It is likely that hydrological change will be detrimental to the rare plant species. Any activity that alters the area's hydrology, such as ditching, drainage, damming, or channeling, would be detrimental to the rare species. 17 AS t4 Logging of the protection area, especially with heavy machinery, would disrupt the water regime. This activity would also disturb the soil and open the canopy, creating ideal conditions for the invasion of non-native, weedy plants. Runoff of salts, chemicals, petroleum residues and other pollutants from the road on the southern edge of the protection area could have long-term, adverse effects on the water quality ,and vegetation, especially in those areas nearest the road. Runoff of pesticides and sediments from cultivated fields to the west could compromise water quality. Management Needs Logging or clearing should not be conducted within the wetlands. Plans for logging or clearing on the adjacent uplands should be reviewed to assess the potential impacts on the rare species. Only selective cutting should be permitted. Plans should be designed to prevent the erosion of soil into the wetlands. Any activity that would alter the hydrology or reduce the water quality of the protection area should not be conducted. Hydrology of the wetland complex should be monitored at intervals to determine what effects, if any, road construction is having on water level and quality. The rare plant species should be monitored regularly to determine the population's size and reproductive success. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary incorporates all of the area known to harbor the rare plant species, adjacent areas of potential habitat for the rare species, and a forested buffer required to protect the hydrology of the swamp. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: This 133 acre protection area is bounded on the south by a road and on the east and west by cultivated uplands. The variety of wetland habitats within this relatively small area supports a wide variety of plants. Scattered meadows dominated by Rice Cut- grass, sedges, and Stinging Nettle are surrounded by shrub swamps of Smooth Alder and Buttonbush. Intermingled with these are bottomland hardwood forests dominated by Red Maple, Sweet Gum, and River Birch. Along the streams are areas of emergent marsh dominated by Broad-leaved Arrowhead, Lizard's-tail, Slender Bur- reed, sedges, and grasses. A rare plant species is scattered in several of the meadows and marshes. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1988 19 e PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Cat Pond County: Charles USGS Quad: La Plata SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This is the only seasonal pond dominated by herbaceous vegetation that is know on the Western Shore, and it is a superb example of this habitat. In Maryland, the majority of seasonal ponds occur on the Eastern Shore and are dominated by woody vegetation. Approximately two acres of Cat Pond is dominated by grasses, sedges, and other herbaceous plants. Shrubs and deciduous forest border this grassy area. During the fall, winter, and spring the pond fills with water. This long period of flooding discourages the growth of most woody species. In late spring, the water recedes and exposes mud flats along the pond edge. By late summer there is very little water in the pond. The exposed flats are covered by plants that germinate after the water recedes and complete their life cycles before the pond refills. The fluctuating water regime creates a unique habitat in which plants must endure long period of both flooding and drought. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: Although no rare species were observed in 1988, the pond provides suitable habitat for rare species of plants and amphibians. Further survey may reveal populations of these species at Cat Pond. Similar ponds on the Eastern Shore harbor several rare plants and two rare amphibians. Because the flora and fauna of the pond vary seasonally, several visits are required to obtain a complete species list for the site. Cat Pond provides excellent resting and feeding grounds for migratory waterfowl. The pond also provides habitat for amphibians. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats The unique herbaceous cover of this seasonal pond is maintained by the fluctuating water table. Any hydrological changes that alter the frequency or amplitude of the groundwater fluctuations may destroy this unique habitat by allowing the 20 establishment of woody species or preventing the growth of herbaceous species. Logging the forest surrounding the pond could adversely alter the hydrology and compromise water quality. It would also open the canopy and disturb the soil, creating ideal conditions for the invasion of non-native, weedy species into the area. . Numerous non-native, weedy plant species inhabit the ..roadside at the-southeastern end of the protection area. Some of these species, such as Long-bracted Beggar-ticks, are extremely aggressive and may outcompete the native vegetation if they become established in the pond. Management Needs It is imperative that the pond's hydrology be protected. Ditching, logging, or the clearing of forest should not be conducted within the protection area. Any proposed logging, forest clearing, development, or road construction in the immediate vicinity of the protection area should be reviewed and plans should be designed to prevent effects on the pond's water regime and water quality. Runoff of salts, chemicals, petroleum residues, and other pollutants from the adjacent road should be minimized. A drainage barrier could be constructed on the bank between the road and pond, diverting runoff from the road into an existing ditch near the northeast corner of the pond that drains away from the pond. A monitoring plan should be implemented to check water quality, water level, and the encroachment of non-native, weedy plant species. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary includes the pond, the perimeter of shrubs and lowland woods and a 1000 ft. forested buffer needed to protect the pond's water regime. A 300 ft. buffer on the southeast side of the pond is included to protect the pond's hydrological regime. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: This 105 acre protection area encompasses a 1.5-2 acre seasonal pond, its border of shrubs, and adjacent lowland woods. The herbaceous cover in the pond is dominated by numerous sedges, grasses, and a few wildflowers such as Virginia Meadow-beauty and Water Purslane. The thin border of shrubs is dominated by 21 Buttonbush and Sweet Pepperbush. The shrub border is more extensive on the north side of the pond. This complex is surrounded by lowland woods dominated by Red Maple and Sweet Gum. During years of normal rainfall, a small section of the pond approximately 15 ft. by 30 ft., maintains shallow standing water throughout the year. An old ditch originates in the forest across the road to the east and drains into the northeast corner of the pond. This ..ditch is elevated slightly above the level of the pond and probably effects the water level only when the pond is full. A paved road borders the pond to the southeast and represents the most obvious unnatural influence on the site. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1988 22 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: County Line Trail seep Counties: Charles, Prince Georges USGS Quad: Brandywine SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: At least three hydrologically different wetland types occur within this mature Tulip Tree-Red Maple Forest. These wetlands provide habitat for diverse vegetation. The absence of non- native species in this forest is particularly significant. Seepage from adjacent gravelly slopes raises the water level locally in small depressions. These groundwater-fed wetlands are excellent examples of a community that is more common in the mountains. They have received little artificial disturbance recently, and the soil is rich in nutrients. Two rare plant species inhabit the seepage wetlands. These are disjunct populations of both species; both plants usually occur in the mountains. This is Maryland's only known population of one species. The population appears to be stable and successfully reproducing. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: The forested swamp and adjacent slope provide habitat for native and migratory songbirds. The swamp also provides habitat for amphibians and reptiles. Numerous deer inhabit the forest. THREATS AND MANAGEMENTS NEEDS: Threats Hydrological change, either increasing or reducing the water level of the swamp, would destroy the rare species and alter the vegetative composition of the site. The rare species are intolerant of extended flooding but require very wet, boggy soil. The clearing of trees on adjacent uplands and subsequent erosion would produce sedimentation of the wetland and may destroy the rare species. In addition, the cutting of trees on the upland or in the wetlands would increase the amount of sunlight available to shrubs and herbaceous species. This increase in sunlight would promote the establishment of non- native, weedy species and may exclude the rare, native species. 23 Management Needs Any activities that would alter the hydrology of wetlands within the protection area should not be permitted. Activities proposed near the protection area should be reviewed for potential effects on the rare species' habitat. The cutting of trees and clearing of vegetation should not occur within the protection area. The size and reproductive success of the rare species should be monitored regularly to assess the stability of the populations. Similar habitat in nearby wetlands should be surveyed for rare species. If more plants of these or other rare species are found, steps should be taken to protect those plants. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The population of the rare species and adjacent potential habitat are included within the protection area. Associated wetlands and uplands that drain into this habitat are included in order to protect the hydrology of the site. A forested buffer extending 100 feet west from the crest of the slope is recommended for the slope nearest to the rare species' populations. The purpose of this buffer is to protect the wetlands from sedimentation and the intrusion of non-native species that would occur if trees were cut. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: Two streams flow through the Tulip Tree-Red Maple Forest within this 87 acre protection area. Sweet Pepperbush and Southern Arrowood are abundant in the wetlands along the streams. Sedges and New York Fern are frequent near the streams. Small depressions fed by groundwater are scattered near the streams and are much wetter than surrounding wetlands. Sphagnum and Skunk Cabbage dominate those seepage wetlands. Ferns are abundant, including Cinnamon Fern, Netted Chain Fern, and Virginia Chain Fe-rn. Red Maple is more abundant in these wetlands than in the surrounding forest. Nearby, oaks and American Holly inhabit the upland. Pine is abundant in the eastern portion of the protection area. To the west of the protection area is a pine plantation. Dirt roads form the borders of the protection area to the south and east. The protection boundary follows a stream and a road to the north. Nearly all of the surrounding land is forested. Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy Date: November 1988 24 PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Doncaster Forest County: Charles USGS Quad: Nanjemoy SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: A mature forest of Sweet Gum, Tulip Tree, and Red Maple borders the stream that flows through the protection area. The adjacent uplands support a mature forest of oaks and hickory with Virginia Pine dominant in two areas. Trees greater than two feet in diameter inhabit these forests. The presence of large well- decayed logs and the developing structure of the forest canopy also reveal the maturity of the forests. Forests of similar age are rare on the Upper Coastal Plain. The clearing of forests for commercial and residential development and for agriculture has nearly eliminated mature forests from this region. The mature forests within this protection area provide a variety of habitats that are absent from young forests. Cavity- nesting birds such as woodpeckers inhabit large, old trees. Insects thrive on the decaying logs and dead standing trees, and provide food for a variety of forest-dwelling birds. Warblers and other songbirds feed on the insects that inhabit the well- developed canopy. the decaying logs and leaf litter return nutrients to the soil. If allowed to mature further, a greater diversity of herbaceous species, including numerous wildflowers, will grow in the developing soil of this forest than will inhabit repeatedly cleared, young forests. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: The mature forests provide excellent opportunities for hiking, birdwatching, and natural history education. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats The cutting of trees in or near the mature forests would promote the growth of non-native, weedy species within the forest to the exclusion of native species. These weedy species thrive in the light of the canopy openings created by cutting trees. Already, weedy species are invading the northern edges of the forest adjacent to clearcuts. The cutting of trees in the mature forests would eliminate the deep shade, well-developed canopy structure, and nesting cavities, and inhibit the decaying 25 process; these are essential elements contributi ng to the diverse, uncommon habitats of the forests. The clearing of land surrounding the mature forests would reduce access to the forest for wildlife. If all or most of the surrounding land is cleared, species of wildlife that require large forested tracts will be unable to survive in the mature forest. ..Management Needs The cutting of trees should not occur within the protection area. I In order to maintain habitat for species of wildlife that require large, forested tracts, it is essential to maintain a large tract of forest adjacent to the protection area so that the area is never surrounded by cleared land. The large tract of continuous forest should be shaped so as to minimize edge effects in order to maintain high quality habitat for forest interior species. BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area includes the mature forest plus a forested buffer a minimum of 500 ft. wide surrounding the mature forest. This forested buffer is required to prevent the establishment of non-native, weedy species in the mature forest and to insulate the mature forest from impacts of activities on the surrounding land. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: Several intermittent streams flow through this 76 acre protection area. The adjacent bottomlands are dominated by Red Maple, Tulip Tree, and Sweet Gum. Spicebush, New York Fern, and Club-moss are abundant near the streams. The forest is mature along the western-most stream and younger along other streams in the protection area. Mature oaks and hickory inhabit the adjacent uplands. Virginia Pine is abundant in two upland sections of the protection area. Blueberry is scattered on the uplands. There is little herbaceous cover in the dry, upland forest. The forest at the northeastern edge of the protection area was cleared recently. Also, trees were cleared recently at the western border of the protection area. Pine plantations are 26 i present nearby. Most of the immediately surrounding land is managed for timber harvest. Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy Date: November 1988 27 z PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY Protection Area Name: Maryland Point Swamp County: Charles USGS Quad: Nanjemoy SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This diverse wetland complex contains fine examples of forested swamp, shrub swamp, emergent marsh, and bottomland forest. Six rare plant species inhabit these wetlands. Three of these species are known from fewer than six sites in Maryland. The dominant aquatic plant in most of the shrub swamp and emergent marsh is an extremely rare species known from no other site in the State. Growing on the northern fringe of its range, the presence of numerous flowering and fruiting plants indicates that this is a thriving and viable population of this rare species. This wetland is, at least in part, influenced by beaver activity, which aids in maintaining consistent water levels throughout the growing season. Historically, beaver played an important role in the creation of freshwater wetlands required by many rare species. Unfortunately, the decline of beaver populations has resulted in the loss of many of these important habitats. Many more have been destroyed by drainage for logging, development, and agricultural purposes. OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE: Further survey of the area will likely reveal additional rare plant species in this wetland complex. The potential for rare amphibians is also high. This wetland provides excellent habitat for resident waterbirds and migratory waterfowl. Signs of recent beaver and deer activity provide evidence that varied forms of wildlife inhabit this area. THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS: Threats Potential disturbance of the hydrology is the foremost concern for this site. Removal of the beaver, ditching, or draining of the wetland would change the water regime with potentially devastating effects on the rare species found here. These plant species require saturated to inundated conditions and would not survive in a drier environment. 28 Logging of the wetlands, especially with heavy machinery, would rut the surface, alter the drainage pattern, and result in detrimental changes to the hydrology. Opening of the forest canopy in the swamp and bottomland forest areas would be deleterious to at least one of the shade-loving rare species. It would also create ideal conditions for invasion of non-native, weedy species. New road construction or improvement to the road that crosses the southern end of the protection area could alter the hydrology of the entire area. Deepening or dredging of the roadside ditch would destroy the rare plant populations found there and threaten the groundwater level. Runoff of salts, chemicals, petroleum residues and other pollutants from the adjacent roadside could compromise water quality, at least in the areas immediately adjacent to the road. Incursion of non-native, weedy plant species from the roadside could also pose a threat to native species. The encroachment of woody vegetation, particularly trees, into the areas of open marsh could eventually reduce the populations of the rare species. Already some areas are being invaded by Red Maple saplings. Management Needs Plans for ditching or drainage in close proximity to this area should be reviewed for potential adverse effects on the groundwater table. Plans should be designed to prevent hydrological change in the protection area. Logging or clearing should not occur in the wetlands. Plans for logging or clearing on uplands should be reviewed to determine the effects on the rare species, only selective cutting should be permitted within the protection area. Plans should be designed to prevent hydrological change in the protection area, to prevent the erosion of sediment into the wetland, and to maintain high water quality in the wetlands and their tributaries. The water level of the wetlands should be monitored to determine the effects of beaver activity on the rare species. A management agreement with the State Highway Administration should be implemented to ensure that the dredging of the adjacent ditch does not harm the rare species habitat. A monitoring program for this site should be established. The rare plant species should be checked regularly to assess the size and vigor of the population. The intrusion of woody or non- native vegetation in the open marsh should be monitored. Measures to maintain an open canopy may be necessary in the future. 29 BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS: The protection area boundary incorporates all rare species habitat, including emergent marsh, shrub swamp, forested swamp, and bottomland forest. In addition, the adjacent forested uplands have been included to insure that logging or clearing will not result in siltation, hydrological changes, or reduced .water quality of the wetland complex. It is likely that further survey will reveal additional populations of rare plants south of the protection area. If more rare plants are found, the protection boundary will be expanded to include those populations. SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: This 160 acre non-tidal wetland complex includes a large shrub swamp, areas of open marsh, and small waterways fringed by emergent marsh. Smooth Alder and Buttonbush, mixed with Red Maple saplings, are the dominant shrubs in the more open areas. The waterways and pools are dominated by a rare species found nowhere else in Maryland, in association with Water-shield, Humped Bladderwort, and Southern Pond Lily. Four of the rare species at this site occur in the shrub swamp, pools, and waterways. Surrounding this extensive unforested wetland are a swamp forest and bottomland woods dominated by Red Maple and Sweet Gum. Two rare species inhabit the bottomland forest. The lowland woods give way to upland hardwood forest on the northern boundary of the area. The diversity of wetland types here has resulted in a variety of wetland plant communities and a remarkable diversity of herbaceous vegetation. A two-lane highway bounds much of the wetland complex on the south. Areas of the wetland near this highway were logged recently. Several houses and trailers are located on the south side of the highway a short distance west of the protection boundary. Cultivated fields and private residences occur near the western and eastern borders of the swamp. Prepared by: Richard H. Wiegand Date: November 1988 30 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. Bushman, E.S. and G.D. Therres. 1988. Habitat management guidelines for forest interior breeding birds. Wildlife Tech. Publ. 88-1. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. 50 pp. Fernald, M.L. 1970. Gray's manual of botany. Eighth ed., Corrected Printing. D. Van Nostrand Co., New York. 1632 pp. Glaser, J.D. 1968. Coastal Plain geology of Southern Maryland. Guidebook No. 1. Maryland Geologic Survey, Baltimore, MD. 56 pp. 1971. Geology and mineral resources of Southern Maryland. Report of Investigations No. 15. Maryland Geologic Survey, Baltimore, MD. 85 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. 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. 31 U.S. Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey. U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, DC. (available for each Maryland county). Whitcomb, R.F. 1977. Island biogeography and "habitat islands" of eastern forest. American birds 31:1, pp.3-23, 91-93. et al. 1981. Effects of forest fragmentation on avifauna of the eastern deciduous forest. Vol 41: 125-292 in Forest island dynamics in man-dominated landscapes. R.L. Burgess and D.M. Sharpe, eds. Springer-Verlag, New York. 32 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. DEPARTMENT OF TORREY C. BROWN, M.D. HUMAN RESOURCES 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 Codef Maryland and Floodplains Notice of Final Action Authority: Natural Resources Article, ��8-801 - 8-814, [87-1 10-F) Annotated Code of Maryland On Mav 26, 1987, the Secretary of Human Resources Notice of Final Action adopted amendments to Regulations .09 and .11 under [87-060-F] CONIAR 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 COMAR 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 101A'. 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 S. 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 flood hazard areas. Regulation .03 restates this limi- tation on the State's jurisdiction. Notice of Final Action .03 Requirements for a Permit. 187-061-F] A. - C. (proposed text unchanged) On June 9, 1987, new Regulations .01 - .11 under a new D. Exemptions. The following activities are exempted chapter, COMAR 08.03.08 Threatened and Endangered from the requirements for a permit from the Administration Species, were adopted by the Secretary of Natural Resourc- under this chapter: es. Existing Regulations .01 and .02 under COMAR N) - (2) (proposed text unchanged) 08.03-08 Nongame and Endangered Species were re- (3) A person who proposes to change in an 'v 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(l) and (2) of this regulo. tion does not need a permit from the Administration t/ the: MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL. 14, ISSUE 13 FRIDAY, JUNE 19,1987 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 719 required to give the Department 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 Specles 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 Annotated Code of Maryland the Critical Areas Commission in the protection of these Areas. Before Areas are designated the Department will no- Notice of Proposed Action tify all landowners of the proposed designation. There will (87-061-P) 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 chaet4odon), 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 game or 1. Summary 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 Impacts: 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: areissued. 1. Increased staff and sup- port for threatened and endan- Maryland. law authorizes the Secretary to prohibit cer- gered species Profam $193,497 tain acts with respect to threatened and endangered plants 2. Increased and 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- ment that section of the law for th' D. On other industries or trade e 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- III. Assumptions. adentified 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 otherwise adversely affecting the species. al staff time for which the new resources will 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 1988. 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 FY 1987. A similar 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 ration, receiver, trustee, guardian, executor, administrator, of these costs may be attributable to that portion of the work in- volving threatened and endangered species. fiduciary, or representative. El. and E2. There is presently no trade in Maryland in any of 1. "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Department of the listed species, 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 wildlife, and wildlife species in neeed of conservation, the ing finfish: Enneacanthus chaetodon, Etheostoma sellare, regulation prohibits only directed efforts to take the species; inci- Etheostoma vitreurn, Percina notogruma, Perropsis 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 flora orfau- 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 1973, 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 Definitions. dangered pursuant to the federnl Endangered Species Act of A. "Director" means the Director of the Maryland Forest, 1973, 16 U&C 01531 - 1543, any interested person may Park and Wildlife Service. petition the Director to add or remove a species or natural R "Endangered extirpated species" means any species 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 State but for which no naturally occur-Ting populations are make 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. R In a petition to list or delist a natural heritage area, C "Endangered species" means any species whose contin- the following information shall be provide& ued existence as a viable component of the State's flora or (1) A map of the proposed natural heritage area. fauna is determined to be in jeopardy including any species (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. pecies Act of 1973, 16 U.S. C. ��1531 - federal Endangered S (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 flora 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 restricted 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 orpopulation. 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 whichjeopardize 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 tiphlops). er life history information pertinent to its status. (2) Mollusks. Ancient Floater (Alasmidonta heter-odon). (6) The species shall be presently recognized as a valid (3) Crustaceans. species, or infraspecific taxa of regional or national signifi- (a) Dearolf's Cave Amphipod (Crangonyx dearolff),- 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. lipes). (c) Shenandoah Cave Amphipod (Stygobromus graci- A. Permits to take, transport, possess, sell, offer for sa (4) Insects. export or import any listed species may be obtained from the (a) Northeastern Beach Tiger-Beetle (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 TYger-Beetle (Cicindela puritanal; 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). ky 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 Coal Skink (Eumeces anthracinus); (a) P@-ivate lands; (d) Atlantic Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys kempi),- (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. f F Violation of any provision or restriction of the permit b) Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus); shall constitute a violation of this regulation and may re- (c) Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus); sult, at the discretion ofthe Director, in the revocation ofthe (d) Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus): permit and confiscation of the species taken or possessed. (e) Bewick's Wren (Thryomanes bewickii). (9) Mammals. .04 Endangered Species of Wildlife, Reptiles, (a) Black Right Whale (Balaena glacialis); Amphibians, Mollusks, Crustaceans and Finfisk (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 ph.ysalusk MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 722 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS (e) Humpback Whale (Megapteru 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 cinerrus); (30) 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-Bructed 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 brachycer-a), (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 by 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 (55) Canby's Lobelia (Lobelia canbvi),- species without a special permit from the Director, the feder- (56) (Ludwigia glandulosa); al government, or another state government; (57) Hairy Ludwigia (Ludwigia hirtella); (b) Take any endangered plant species from State (58) Sessile-Leaved Water-Horehound (Lycopus amplec- property except by special permit from the Director; and tens),- (c) Take any endangered plant species from private (59) Erect Water-Hyssop (Mecar-donia acurninata); 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-Milfbil (Myriophyllum humile); throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is indicated: (62) Floating-Heart (Aymphoides cordata); (1) Sensitive Joint-Vetch (Aeschynomene virginica); (63) Virginia False-Gromwell (Onosmodium virginia- (2) Sandplain Gerardia (Agalinis acuta); n u m),- (3) (Agalinis fasciculata); (64) Canby's Dropwort (Oxypolis canbyi),- (4) Thread-Leaved Gerardia (Agalinis setacea),- (65) Tall Swamp Panicgrass (Panicum scabriusculum); (5) Woolly Three-Awn (Aristida lanosa), (66) Wright's Panicgrass (Panicum 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 (Paronychia virginica); (9) Tickseed Sunflower (Bidens coronata),- (69) Walter's Paspalum (Paspalum dissecturn); (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 buxbourni); (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), (20) Dark Green Sedge (Carex venusta); (77) Short-Beaked Baldrush (Psilocarya nitens); (21) Marsh Wild Senna (Cassia fasciculata var. macros- (78) Long-Beaked Baldrush (Psilocarya scirpoides); perma), (79) Harperella (Ptilimnium nodosum); (22) Spreading Pogonia (Cleistes divaricata); (80) One-Sided Pyrola (Pyrola secunda); (23) Wrinkled Jointgrass (Coelorachis rugosa),- (81) Yellow Water-Crowfoot (Ranunculus flabellaris)- (24 Wister's Coralroot (Corallorhiza wisteriana), (82) (Rhynchosia tomentosa); (25) Fraser's Sedge (Cyrnophyllus fraseri), (83) Short-Bristled Hornedrush (Rhynchospora cornicu- (26) Smooth Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium laevigatum),- lata), (27) Linear-Leaved Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium lineaturn); (84) Thread-Leaved Beakrush (Rhynchospora filifolia); (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 glomeruta), (33) Chaffweed (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 (Coreopsis rosea), (90) Sessile-Fruited Arrowhead (Sagittaria rigida); (37) Pigmyweed (Crassula aquatica); (91) Sandbar Willow (Salix exigua); (38) Hazel Dodder (Cuscuta coryli); (92) Canby's Bulrush (Scirpus etuberculatus); (39) (Cyperus plukenetii); (93) Water Clubrush (Scirpus 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) (Eleochars 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 (Xyris smalliana). (47) Tall Rattlesnake Master (Eryngium yuccifolium); .06 Endangered Extirpated Species. (48) (Festuca paradoxa); A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (49) Pumpkin Ash (Fraxinus profunda); ered for listing a species as endangered extirpated: (50) Small Bedstraw (Galium trifidum); (1) The species was once a viable component of the (51) (Gentiana puberula); State's flora and fauna and there are no records of it natu- (52) Sea Milkwort (Glaux maritima), rallv occurring in Maryland after 1950; or (53) Sharp-Scaled Mannagrass (Glyceria acutiflora); (2) The species was once a viable component of the (54) Dwarf Rattlesnake-Plantain (Goodyera repens), State's flora or fauna and recent scientific investigations ta),- (55) Tesselated Rattlesnake-Plantain (Goodyera tessela- have documented the loss of its habitat or disappearance of (56) (Gratiola rumosa); its population in Maryland. (57) Rough Heuchera (Heuchera villosa), B. Permits. Upon the discovery of a viable, naturally oc- (58) Sea-Beach Sandwort (Honken a peploides); curring population of any species in ��C - H, that species will be considered an endangered species and shall require (59) Nits-and-Lice (Hypericurn drummondii); the permits and conditions afforded to that status. (60) Clasping-Leaved St. John's- Wort (Hypericum gym- C The following plant species are considered endangered nanthum), extirpated throughout Maryland: (61) Great St. John's- Wort (Hypericum pyramidatum), (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 militaris); (5) Canada Anemone (Anemone canadensis); (68) Torrey's Rush (Juncus torreyi); (6) Great Angelica (Angelica atropurpurea); (69) Common Juniper (Juniperus communis); (7) Filmy Angelica (Angelica triquinata), (70) Narrow-Leaved Pinweed (Lechea tenuifolia), (8) Arethusa (Arethusa bulbosa), (71) Catchfly-Grass (Leersia lenticularis); (9) Lake Cress (Armoracia aquatica); (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); Aster spectabilis); (13) Showy Aster ( (75) American Lovage (Ligusticum canadense); (14) (Axonopus furcatus), (76) American Frog's-Bit (Limnobium spongia); (15) Mat-Forming Water-Hyssop (Bacopa stragula), (77) Twinflower (Linnaea borealis); (16) Sea Ox-Eye (Borrichia frutescens), (78) Florida Yellow Flax (Linum floridanum); (17) Triangle Grape-Fern (Botrychium lanceolatum); (79) Heartleaf Twayblade (Listera cordata); (80) (Lobelia glandulosa), (18) Leathery Grape-Fern (Botrychium multifidum); (81) Carolina Clubmoss (Lycopodium carolinianum); (19) Small Grupe-Fern (Botrychium simplex), (82) Large-Flowered Barbara's Buttons (Marshallia (20) Blue-Hearts (Buchnera americana); grandiflora); (21) Great Indian-Plantain (Cacalia muhlenbergii); (83) (Matelea decipieas); (22) (Carex careyana), (84) (Matelea obliqua); (23) Cypress-Knee Sedge (Carex decomposita); (85) Broad-Leaved Bunchflower (Mellanthium latifoli. (24) (Carex foenea), um), (25) (Carex glaucescens), (86) Nuttall's Micranthemum (Micran them u m micran- (26) Lake-Bank Sedge (Carex lacustris); themoides); (27) New England Sedge (Carex novae-angliae); (87) Evergreen Bayberry (Atyrica heterophylla); (28) Variable Sedge (Carex polymorpha); (88) Thread-Like Naiad (Najas gracillima-),- (29) (Carex striatula); (89) Northern Panicgrass (Panicum boreale): (30) (Carex tenera); (90) Mav 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 cupido). (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 stipulatus),, (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 zosteriformis), .07 Threatened Species of Wildlife, Reptiles, Amphibi- (103) Pale Mannagrass (Puccinellia pallida), ans, Mollusks, Crustaceans, and Finfish. (104) Awned Mountain-Mint (Tycnanthemum setosum), A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (105) Greenish-Flowered Pyrola (Pyrola virens); ered for listing species other than plant species as threat- (106) (Ranunrulus hederaceus); ened: (107) Bristly Crowfoot (Ranunculus pensylvanicus); (1) Whether the species has experienced a steady, sub- (108) Awned Meadow-Beauty (Rhexia aristosa),- stantial decline in Maryland, and if the decline continues, (109) Tiny-Headed Beakrush (Rhynchospora microce- the species is likely to become endangered; phala), (2) Whether there has been steady, widespread loss of (110) Few-Flowered Beakrush (Rhynchospora rariflora),- the species' essential habitat; or (111) Wild Black Currant (Ribes americanum); (3) Whether protection measures already taken have sig- (112) Hairy Wild Petunia (Ruellia humilus), (113) Pursh's Ruellia (Ruellia purshiana), nificantly reduced the chances of the species becoming extir- (114) Slender Marsh Pink (Sabatia campdnulata),- 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) Trailing 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 (Tofteldila racemosa); advance of the change in land use or other action by a pri- (133) Auricled Gerardia (Tomanthera auriculata), vate landowner which shall result in the incidental taking. (134) Buffalo Clover (Trifolium reflexurn), 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 americana); (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-Perch (Per-copsis 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 designed 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 public 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- R 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. indicated: (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) Henslow's Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii), property without the written permission of the landowner. (b) Short-Eared Owl (Asio /7ammeus), 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 Q@stercatcher (Haematopus palliatus), (4) Maryland Bur-Marigold (Bidens bidentoides); (h) Least Bittern (Ixobrychus exilis); (5) Button Sedge (Carex bullata); (i) Black Rail (Laterallus jamaicensis); (6) Shoreline Sedge (Carex hyalinolepis); (j) Swainson's Warbler (Limnothlypis swainsonii), (7) Inflated Sedge (Carex vesicaria); (k) Least Tern (Sterna antillarum). (8) Leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata),- (6) Mammals. (9) Red Turtlehead (Chelone obliqua), (a) Porcupine (Erethizon dorsaturn4- (10) Goldenseal (Hydrastis canadenis),- (b) Bobcat (Lynx rulus); (11) Deciduous Holly (Ilex decidua); (c) Least Weasel (Mustela nivalis); (12) Narrow-Leaved Bushclover (Lespedeza angustifo- (d) Small-Footed Bat (Mvotis leibii),- lia); (e) Southeastern Shrew (Sorex longirostris). (13) Wild Lupine (Lupinus perennis); .10 Natural Heritage Areas. (14) Climbing Fern (Lygodium palmatum); A. Listing Criteria. In order to qualify as a natural heri- (15) American Lotus (Nelumbo lutea); tage area a natural community shall: (16) Red Bay (Persea borbonia); (1) Contain one or more threatened or endangered spe- (17) Pale Green Orchis (Platanthera flava),- ct .es or wildlife species in need of conservation; (18) Purple Fringeless Orchis (Platanthera peramoena); (2) Be a unique blend of geological, hydrological, clima- (19) Spongy Lophotocarpus (Sagittaria calycina); talogical or biological features; and (20) Engelmanns Arrowhead (Sagitttaria engelmanni- (3) Be considered to be among the best Statewide exam- ana), ples of its kind. (21) Northern Pitcher-Plant (Sarracenia purpurea); B. The Forest, Park and Wildlife Service shall prepare (22) Virginia Mallow (Sida hermaphrodita); maps describing the location of all natural heritage areas. (23) Featherbells (Stenanthium gramineum),- The maps shall be filed in the office of the Director of the (24) Mountain Pimpernel (Taenidia montana), Forest, Park and Wildlife Service, Department of Natural (25) Steele's Meadowrue (Thalictrum steeleanum); Resources, Tawes State Office Building, Annapolis, AID (26) Kate's-Mountain Clover (Trifolium virginicum); 21401. (27) Dwarf Trillium (Trillium pusillum),- C. The following areas are designated natural heritage ar- (28) Purple Bladderwort (Utricularia purpurea). eas: .09 Species in Need of Conservation. (1) Kasecamp Shale Barrens ......... Allegan.), Cou n A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (2) Maple Run ...................... Allegany Count 'v, ered for listing a species as in need of conservation: (3) Outdoor Club Shale Barrens ...... Allegan 'V Count 'v; (1) Whether the population is limited or declining with- (4) SidelingHill Creek ..Allegany, Washington Count%,; in Maryland; and (5) Cypress Creek Swamp ....... Anne Arundel County; (2) Whether the species may become threatened in the (6) Eagle Hill Bog .............. Anne Arundel CountN,- 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 County.- forth in Regulation .03. The following apply: (8) Black Marsh ................... Baltimore Countv: (1) Except by special permit, a person may not take, ex- (9) Robert E. Lee Park .............. Baltimore Couniy.- port, possess, process, sell, offer for sale, deliver, carry, truns- (10) Camp Roosevelt Cliffs ............ Calvert Countv., port, or ship by any means any species in need of conserva- (11) Cove Point Marsh ................ Calvert Couniv: tion. (12) Flag Ponds ...................... Calvert County: (2) Permits to take species in need of conservation shall (13) Randle Cliff Beach ............... Calvert Countv; be issued only for: MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987 726 - PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS (14) Grove Neck ........................ Cecil County; II* Typesof (15) Plum Creek ........................ Cecil County; Economic Impacts. Revenue Expense Magnitude (16) Allen's Fresh .................... Charles County, (17) Chicamuxen Creek ............... Charles County; A. On issuing agency: (18) Popes Creek ..................... Charles County" The Department expects an in- (19) Upper Nanjemoy Creek ... crease in workload as a result of ........ Charles County; the deletion of certain exemp- (20) Chicone Creek ................ Dorchester County; tions. $141,000 (21) Mill Creek .................... Dorchester County; B. On other State or local (22) Savanna Lake ................ Dorchester County, agencies affected: (23) Upper Black water River ....... Dorchester County; Additional cost to prepare sub- mittals to the Department for re- (24) Upper Nanticoke River, Marshes view and approval. Indeterminable. and Swamps ...... Dorchester, Wicomico County; Depends on (25) High Rock ...................... Garrett County; amount of (26) Toliver Run ..................... Garrett County; applications received from (27) Great Falls ................. Montgomery County- other agencies. (28) Irish Grove .................... Somerset County; C. On regulated industries or (29) Hickory Point Cypress Swamp ... Worcester County,, trade groups: (30) Lower Nassawango Creek ....... Worcester County; I.. Additional cost to prepare engineered submittals to the (31) Mattaponi .................... Worces ter County; Department for review and ap- (32) North Sinepuxen t Bay Dunes .... Worcester County. proval. $500,000 2. Cost to persons obtaining .11 Violation ofRegulations. 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 delays could be 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 tracle 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 II): [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 1 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.1. 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 C.3. This cost is based on a minimurn 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 $100 per permit. Resources. The regulatory changes proposed at this time are neces- D. Depending on the amount of detailed submittals required for sarv 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 L V. Ir , t 3 6668 -14103 2815- A 11 V, I , I