[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Task 9 FINAL PRODUCT GBL4P FY 1993 Polecat Creek Water Quality Monitoring POLECAT CREEK WATER QUALITY MONITORING including: Purchase and Instaflation of Equipment for Surface and Raingages, Two Seasons of Trend Biological Monitoring and Freshwater Mussel Survey and Natural Heritage Survey Rec'd. by Dept. of Environmertal Qual!ty Project Report Compiled by: MAY 15 1995 Jean N. Tingler Darryl Glover C. Scott Crafton Public & Inter- governmental Affairs Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department 805 East Broad Street, Suite 701 Richmond, Virginia 23219 May 15, 1995 This project was funded, in part, by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA370A0360-01 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of NOAA or any of its subagencies. Final Report on Installation of Monitoring Stations in Polecat Creek Waterifie'd by Saied Mostaghirni and Phillip W. McClellan The goal of the Polecat Creek Watershed Monitoring Project is to describe the efficacy of emerging landuse regulations and policies in protecting water quality during urban development activities. A water quality monitoring network was established, which consists of 5 runoff monitoring stations, 9 raingages and a coniplete weather station. The monitoring network was designed in order to evaluate the spatial contribution of nonpoint source pollutants originating from various major tributaries of the Polecat Creek. The locations of all monitoring stations are indicated in Figure 1. A listing of equipment and instrumentation installed at each monitoring station is given in Table 1. A brief explanation of monitoring components is given in the following sections. Runoff Monitoring Stations: Each runoff monitoring station consists of a stilling well, intake pipes, water level recorders, a gauge house, and automatic water samplers. The runoff monitoring stations were located in straight, uniform reaches of streams, with smooth bed and banks of permanent nature, whenever possible. The stilling wells are located on one side of the stream, so that they do not interfere with the flow pattern. In many cases, the stilling well is located at a minimum distance of 10 feet from the center of the stream. The sizes of the stilling wells were chosen, based on factors such as the required rigidity, height, type of material, and water level in the stream. Based on these factors, 24" diameter stilling wells were installed at QPA, QPB and QPC, and 48" stilling wells were used at QPD and QPE. Two intake pipes of 3" diameter in size were installed at each of the stations. Although the minimum requirement is one pipe, the second intake pipe was installed, because one may become plugged. These pipes were installed at different elevations with provisions made for flushing out the possible accumulated silt in the stilling well. All seams were brazed and treated in order to make the stilling well watertight. The wells were placed on a concrete base, with the top of the base located a few inches below the lowest intake pipe. Detailed cross-sectional surveys of all sites were conducted prior to installation of the monitoring equipment (Figure 2). A schematic diagram of a typical installation of a stilling well and intake pipe is presented in Figure 3. Each runoff monitoring site was equipped with a strip-chart, as well as the electronic stage sensors for continuous recording of the water level in the stream. In addition, a staff gage (non-recording) was installed at each site and is read regularly by the field observer. The schematics of a typical staff gage and its installation is presented in Figure 4. An instrument shelter (6'w x 81 x Th) was installed at each of the monitoring stations, which houses the stage recorder, automatic water samplers and miscellaneous supplies. The information provided by Brakensiek et al (1979) for the design and installation of a shelter house, as well as the stilling wells, were used as a guideline in the design of these stations. Access to all shelter houses was provided by a walkway (catwalk). These walkways 2 would provide for servicing of the stations in all weather conditions. Safety and structural stability were the two main factors considered when designing these walkways. Diagrams of the site plan for QPA - QPE, which show the location of the gagehouse and catwalk are presented in Figures 5 - 9. ISCO automatic water samplers are installed at each of the monitoring stations. These samplers are progranmr,d to take composite water samples during storm events, based on the volume of the water flowing in the stream. CR10 data loggers are installed at each site (Figure 10) to control the samplers, as well as record the water level and the time of each sampling. In developing the sampling protocol, months of data were collected to detern-iine the hydrologic response of each watershed. Shifts in the base flow associated with changes in the water table, possible beaver activities, as well as shifts due to precipitation events were observed. These shifts are significant when trying to identify the beginning and end of a runoff event. To account for the shifts, a digital filter, specifically a moving window average, is applied to the stage data. A four-hour window width is set for each watershed. The start of a runoff event is determined when the current stage value exceeds the average by a fixed amount. Once a runoff event is deten-nined, 200 ml samples are collected with each passing of the set volume of flow. The set volume was determined by evaluating expected high flows, the water sampler sampling response time, and the capacity of samplers with regard to maximum number of samples (96). Table 2 shows the current setting for each watershed (note that these values will likely change as we are able to better describe the watersheds' hydrologic behavior). Samples are collected until the end of the runoff event is determined. The end of the event is identified when there is an increasing trend in the difference between the stage and the average stage, and the stage is less than the average." Figure 11 shows a typical hydrograph with runoff events 3 identified. It should be noted that for large storms the end of the runoff event is shifted toward the peak (Figure 1 1B). This is attributed to the filtering technique and the slow response of QPE. This shifting has not been shown to be a problem at the other gaging stations. A comprehensive erosion control plan was developed and approved by the State of Virginia prior to construction of the monitoring stations. The procedures used for minimizing site disturbance and erosion during construction of gage houses are detailed in Figure 13. Precipitation Monitoring Network: A network of 9 precipitation gages were installed in PoIcat Creek Watershed. These stations (PPI- PP9) are located throughout the watershed to enable an assessment of the spatial variability of precipitation. Tipping bucket raingages along with data loggers are located at each site. The schematic of a typical tipping bucket raingage is presented in figure 12. The raingages are powered by a 12 V, deep cycle battery and a solar panel installed at each site. ne location of all raingage is indicated in Figure 1. Weather Station: A complete weather station was installed at the Waste Water Treatment Facility located in the Polcat Creek Watershed. The data collected at the weather station will greatly facilitate the interpretation of the water quality data being collected at various sites in the watershed. In addition, this infori-nation would be invaluable in the future modeling works in an effort to expand the results from 4 PoIcat Creek Watershed to larger basins. The parameters collected at the weather station include: � Precipitation � Ambient Air Temperature � Ambient Air Humidity � Wind Speed and Direction � Pan Evaporation - � Solar Radiation - Soil Moisture (6" and 12" depths) Soil Temperature (6" and 12" depths) Snow Depth QA/QC Plan: A comprehensive quality assurance/quality control project plan was developed and submitted to the sponsor for review. All field installations were performed following standard procedures in order to provide data compatible with other similar projects. The QA/QC activities for the project is being closely followed in order to ensure proper data collection, handling and analysis. 5 Table 1. Polecat Creek Watershed monitoring sites. Site Location Equipment Description Name PP1 Smith sand and Precipitation, one digital and one std. gage, solar panel and gravel quarry deep cycle battery. PP2 Coleman farm Precipitation, one digital and one std. gage, solar panel and deep cycle battery. PP3 Caroline Co. Middle Precipitation, one digital and one std. gage, solar panel and School deep cycle battery. PP4 Smith farm Precipitation, one digital and one std. gage, solar panel and deep cycle battery. PP5 Lake Caroline Precipitation, one digital and one std. gage, solar panel and deep cycle battery. PP6 Lake Land'Or Precipitation, one digital and one std. gage, solar panel and deep cycle battery. PP7 On cut over forest Precipitation, one digital and one std. gage, solar panel and land off of Cedar deep cycle battery. Fork Road PP8 Mount Olympus Precipitation, one digital and one std. gage, solar panel and deep cycle battery. PP9 Waste water Precipitation, one digital, one analog, one std. gage, one treatment facility (the snow depth, and rain quality sampler, solar panel and deep weather station) cycle battery. TP9 (the weather station) Ambient air temperature, one analog and digital gage, and a max/min thermometer BP9 (the weather station) Ambient air humidity, one analog and one digital gage DP9 (the weather station) Wind direction, one digital gage WP9 (the weather station) Wind speed, one digital gage EP9 (the weather station) Pan evaporation, one analog and one digital gage SP9 (the weather station) Solar radiation, one digital gage CP9 (the weather station) Soil Moisture at .5 foot depth Table I (cont.) Polecat Creek Watershed monitoring sites. site Location Equipment Description Name CPA (the weather station) Soil Moisture at 1.0 foot depth TP1 (the weather station) Soil Temperature at .5 foot depth TP2 . (the weather station) Soil Temperature at 1.0 foot depth QPA On Cedar Fork Road Stream stage ( one analog, one digital, one staff gage) and (rt. 601) water quality sampling (one automatic water quality swnpler), solar panel and deep cycle battery QPB Close to Smith farm, Stream stage ( one analog, one digital, one staff gage) and off of rt. 601, water quality sampling (one automatic water quality between US rL 1 and sampler), solar panel and deep cycle battery US Interstate 95 QPC On Mr. Atkinson's Stream stage ( one analog, one digital, one staff gage) and farm close to water quality sampling (one automatic water quality interstate 95, sampler), solar panel and deep cycle battery accessed from rt. 652 QPD On Mr. Atkinson's Stream stage.( one analog, one digital, one staff gage) and farm off of rt. 652 water quality sampling (one automatic water quality sampler), solar panel and deep cycle battery QPE Watershed outlet, off Stream stage ( one analog, one digital, one staff gage) and of rt. 601 water quality sampling (one automatic water quality sampler), solar panel and deep cycle battery LPA Located at station Campbell Scientific model CR10 data logger, 2400 baud QPA modem and telephone serviceand deep cycle battery LPB Located at station Campbell Scientific model CR10 data logger, 2400 baud QPB modem and telephone serviceand deep cycle battery LPC Located at station Campbell Scientifi model CRIO data logger, 2400 baud QPC modem and telephone serviceand deep cycle battery LPD Located at station Campbell Scientific model CR10 data logger, 2400 baud QPD modem and telephone serviceand deep cycle battery LPE Located at station Campbell Scientific model CRIO data logger, 2400 baud QPE modem and telephone serviceand deep cycle battery Table I (cont.) Polecat Creek Watershed monitoring sites. site Location -Equipment Description Name LPF Located at the Campbell Scientific model 21X data logger, 2400 baud weather station modem and telephone service, solar panel and deep cycle battery Table 2. The Sampling Protocol for Various Runoff Stations Station Runoff Flow Volume Event per sample Beginning (cubic yards Offset *1000) (feet) QPA 0.05 2 QPB 0.05 3 QPC 0.05 2 QPD 0.05 2 QPE 0.05 90 LoAt 033 tole 683 55 601 601 724 to Got 7 ?64 D o/ece cr 652 Wap Fork 705 642 7to 0 C 64 WOO Cathy calnot 857 on r 207 C."A" An 0 b, n A 11 Rainglge@ 1-9 731 746 8, Stream Gages A -E Ruther Glen Polecat Creek Watershed FIGURE 1 P@L[[AT IRIEK STRIAM 010@ SITE NPA SITE NP0 WATER LEVEL WATER LEVEL - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - w Vol 17.40 is IM It ft) 7.30 (ft) SITL R SITE H- - - - - - - - - VAUR LEVEL - - - - - - - - - WATER LEVEL w CUM IS 1.25 It It ft) - - - - - - - - - - NOTE: NUMDERS AT POINTS ALM STREAM DEDS REPRESENT TIIE- DATA POINTS GIVEN IN TAOI-1 1. FIRIPF @, Frncc,-@pFtinnc, n-( @trpom npck, stilling I f t cubed concrete block 3 inch dioneter VA Tech. TITL TYPICAL INSTALLATION FOR INTAKE PIPE DATE: 5- 11-04 REFERENCE PAG. Ao E-n9ineering NO. -L of Z % I ___j FIGURE 3 2 2x6 Trea Led M Oracings Strean Donk Treated Post; 2 Guide wires TWF GAGE 5 WAIER DEP111 VA Tech TITLE: Staff Gage for Measuring Water Depth DATE: 10-26-94 REFERENCE PAGE Dio, Systens Engineering Nil. L of -L FIGURE I 00-foot Buffer N=: All trees to be preserved except where marked with an X on the site plan. Remove the 20" Cedar and one of the 6" Red Maples near the 3" Holly O.Lt if additional access is needed. Stabilize all disturbed areas immediately upon completion of work. See gage house plan for specific erosion and sediment clontrol measures to be implemented during construction and subsequent 0 site stabilization. 24" Red 0 y1aple 6" Red bo 1 0 Maple 24" Red Maple > Construction 18" Red Maple Access --- TO X 0 Z-, -Gage House - (finished floor approx. Yabove 6" Sweet 6" Red 20" R@@ 0" Cedar grade - contractor to provide steps) Gum Maple Maple- -51. Dewatering Basin H Ily (approximate location) Polecat Creek 110 ft. Fenceline Mapley Polecat Creek Water Quality Monitoring Project Station A - Site Plan Scale: 1 30' 30 15 0 30 FIGURE 5 100-foot Buffer Existing Woods Existing Road Clear Hedge for Access r 20"o, dbl, Oak -<- Catwalk 6" Ironwd Gage House - (finished floor to be level with bridge, 0 approx. 4' above grade) 24" dbl n,@ Dewatering Basin 00 Poplar ....... (approximate location) Stevens Mill Run Bridge N=: All trees to be preserved at this site except 60 ft. the 8 - 10 feet of hedge along road to be cut for access. Stabilize all disturbed areas immediately upon completion of work. See gage house plan for specific erosion and sediment control measures to be implemented during construction and subsequent site stabilization. Polecat Creek Water Quality Monitoring Project ILExisting Woods 2 0"@ dbl Oak Scale: 1 30' Station B - Site Plan 30 15 6 30 FIGURE 6 Polecat Creek ite Oak marked with a Silver Square on the Creek Side, N21rd: All trees to be preserved, except three smal I Ironwood trees marked with an A near the gage house. The 20" leaning River Birch will need to be trimmed and may need to be removed to prevent it from falling on the gage house. Stabilize all disturbed areas immediately upon completion of work. See gage house plan for specific erosion and sediment control Dewatering Basin measures to be implemented during construction and (approximate location) subsequent site stabilization. Ed Top of Slope 0" River Birch/ ft. t i 8 ft. Catwalk to Gage House I 00 - foot Buffer X Path fro r Parking m 8' Area -4" Ironwd Sweet cko 2 0 5" Hi ry Gum River Birch F4 94 Polecat Creek Water Quality Monitoring Proiect S La - Site Plan Scale: 1 30' 30 15 0 30 FIGURE 7 hWZ: All trees to be preserved at this site. Trim up lower limbs of 5" dbl. Ironwood to clear for path. Do not disturb swales except to install culvert pipe. Gage House - (finished floor to be Stabilize all disturbed areas immediately upon level with bridge, approx: 4'above completion of work. See gage house plan for grade - contractor to provide steps) specific erosion and sediment control measures to be implemented during construction and subsequent site stabilization. Install silt fence only if land 13 ft. disturbance activities will last overnight. _K Polecat Creek Path to Gage House Rock Check Dam (approx. location - locate 7_0 (class I rip-rap) around existing trees) 22 ft. Hophombeam Clump Swale W 20" Sweet 1 5" Dogwood Oum *,- 1 *0 1 1 Dewatering 24" dbl. 8 0 OQ " Hickory 00 0 Basin 15" Culvert Parking Area 130 ft. Bridge Route 652 100-foot Buffer Polecat Creek Water Quality Monitoring Project Station D - Site Plan Scale: I" = 30' 30 15 0 30 FIGURE 8 Swale Ro .ute 601 6 R aplex 50 ft. X 6" Red -5" Red 9 Maple Maple Shrub Catwalk Bridge Holl 24" River Birch 5" River 0 Birch Gage House Rock Check Dam (class 1 Birch Clump rip-rap) 4" Holly. Dewatering 5" Swe et 91 Basin Polecat Creek gum 16" River N 5" River I Birch Birch 0 0 N_=: All trees to be preserved at this site except the shrub holly and where marked with an X on'the site plan. Stabilize all disturbed areas immediately upon completion of work. See gage house plan for (jage House location is approx. 90 ft. from the specific erosion and sediment control measures to edge of Route 601 at the catwalk. Finished floor be implemented during stilling well and intake pipe of gage house to be level with bridge, approx. 5' construction and subsequent site stabilization. above grade. Polecat Creek Water Quality Monitoring Proiec Station E - Site Plan Scale: I"=20' 20 10 0 20 FIGURE 9 Logger Code: IP! Vutersiled: Volecol, (reek line: rile: I-PIL&PRI Pgnr: H P ANALOG IL AG- I NPUT AT- MICH 2L- AG L I CR 10 AG 411 4L AG L Thernister 91 D< 5L Anbient Tenp AG STAGE EXCITATION E2- AG- E3 PULSE INPUTS pl- P2 G IF ILI push fkj CONTROL G 12 Colibrotion (DIGITAL) G (3 Switch G C4 (5 16 G C7 CONSTANTIANALOG D[ITPUT 5v 12T POWER SUPPLY. 12V 12V DC zs Sulor Chorger 12V T VA Tech TITLE: Polecat Creek Goge Station DATE: IEIIIINIE PAII Rio, Systens Fnqineerinq [Into Logger KRIO) No. 5-9-04 of FIGURE 10 QPE Storm Quick responses to storms 7- A Beginning o Ending 6.8 ----------- --- -- 7- - - - - - - - - --- ------ ------------------------------------------------ 6.6 - - - - - (D 0 6A - - -------- ----------------------------------------------- C zM 6.2 -------------------- -------------------------- - --------------- Cz B 4-j 60 6 ------------------------------ - ---------- --- ---- D -------- 5.8 -------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- 5.6-- 2n W 2110 Date Figure 11A QPE Storm Slow response to a storm 7 -- 6.8 Beginning Ending ,-6.6 ---------------------- 6.4 ---------------------- --------------- ---------------------- a)6.2 -------------- --------------------------------------- 0 A-j U) 6 ----------- ---------------------------------------------------- 5.8 ------ ------------------------------------------------------- 5.6 1/7 1/8 1/9 1/10 ------------- ------------------------ --------- ---------------------------------------------------- IV ----------------- I------------------ Date Figure 11B TIPPING.DURIT PAINGAGF IIPPlNf) DICKET rmml DATA LOGGER ME 10 INCLI]SIRE DATA LOMER 2 WIRES TO DATTERY 2 INCH MIND SIEEL POST 31 INCIES LONG rr7= 12Y DC 00111 TIPPING DUCKET AND DATA LOCU-2 ENCLOSURE ARE AITACIC-0 usiNG tj on-is, -TI n2 VA Jech TITLE: TIPPING 011KET RAINGAGE DATE: 3-30-94 REFERENCE VAGE Aq Ingineering FIGURE 12 hLOW: Any additional land disturbance Limits of Disturbance' occuring as a result of access path Trench extends into. stream construction shall be stabilized with r no more than half o .f appropriate erosion and sediment stream width at each site. control measures. Install silt fence only if land disturbance activities will last overnight. X Spoil Pile Sandbag Barrier (no more than 50% of stream will be Mulch und er catwalk and Jr )t Silt Fence obstucted) gage house Path Catwalk (length varies) Gage House Trench (length varies) 0 \N1 ,/Stak@excelsi6ir blanket over entire disturbed area (except stream bank) after seeding wi annual rye grass. Plant partridgeberry through blanket 16" o.c. Stabilize bank using Fiber-Schine Fiber-Schine biolog source: L= biologs. Stack on top of each other at same angle as existing bank. Creative Habitat Corp. Dewatering structure to be located Stake logs'as shown on attached 253 Old Tarrytown Road in an existing open area on the specification. White Plains, N.Y. downstream side of excavation on Dewatering 81 each site. Construct according to Basin 10 (914) 948-4389 0 0 VESCH92 specification 3.26. S il Pile po Polecat Creek Water Quality Monitoring Project Gage House Plan Scale: 3/16" = 1' 4 2 0 4 FIGURE 13 1.3d smith- 601 001 17:1 7245 -6 ow M 2. . dot 704 C.48 A F.6 042 C C 710 031 059 1857 a 14 W Stream Gazes A -E Ruther Gen 464 176 -VVATERSHED/WATER QUALITY MONITORING FOR THE POLECAT CREEK 'WATERSHED Semiannual Report September - December,1994 Report No. P-94H2-9504 By: Biological Systems Engineering Department Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Bl,.q.cksburg, Virginia 24061-0303 For: Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Departmet Virginia Department of Biological Systems Engineering UUTech qW VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE College of Agriculture and Life Sciences AND STATE UNIVERSITY Blacksburg, Virginia 24061-0303 (703) 231-6615 Fax: (703) 231-3199 Celebrating Our Department's 75th Anniversary 1920-1995 Data Report (September - December 1994) Polecat Creek Watershed A total of 207 mm of precipitation occurred on the Polecat Creek Watershed for the period between September - December 1994. A runoff/rainfall ratio of 0. 18 was resulted at QOA (the watershed outlet) for this period. A summary of rainfall amounts, runoff volume and peak runoff rates for all monitoring stations for the reporting period is presented in Tables I and 2 . Tables 3 through 12 summarize the sediment and nutrients concentrations and loading for all 5 stations in the watershed. The concentrations of sediment and nutrients at all stations were small and much lower than those from typical agricultural watersheds, such as Owl Run and Nomini Creek. Nitrate concentrations were always lower than the 10 pprn standard set by EPA for drinking water. It should be noted that the values reported in Tables I - 12 may change when the runoff rating curves for the stations are finalized. Currently, 5 data points have been taken for runoff rate measurements at each station. Most of these data points were taken during low to medium flow rates. For the purpose of this report, the rating curves were extrapolated to determine the flow rates for all events which occurred during this reporting period. It also should be noted that the attached data tables follow the same format developed for the Owl Run and Nomini Creek A Land-Grant University- The Commonwealth Is Our Campus An Equal Opportunity lAffirmative Action Institution Watersheds, to facilitate the comparison among different watershed with different landuse activities. A copy of rating curves developed for various runoff stations is attached. A monthly summary of precipitation, humidity, temperature and evaporation data collected at the weather station is presented in Table 13. Table 14 presents a summary of rainwater quality data collected from the watershed. It is interesting to note that nitrate concentrations in the rainwater are, in many instances, greater than those measured in the stream, indicating that the watershed acts as a filter to reduce selected pollutants concentrations. Summaries of bacteriological data collected during the reporting period are presented in Table 15 - 18. The data are presented for fecal coliform, total coliform, and fecal streptococcus. Geometric and arithmetic means, as well as standard deviations are reported. In many instances, the bacteria count are lower than the health standards set by EPA. A ratio of fecal coliform to fecal streptococci (FC/FS) of greater than 0.7 is indicative of contamination by domestic waste, such as septic tanks. This ratio exceeded 0.7 in two instances at QOB. Closer examination of landuse activities in QOB subwatershed is recommended in order to assess the sources of contamination. Table 1. Polecat Creek Watershed Storm Summa Y (Sep. - Dec., 1994). Storm QPA QPB QPC Dates Avg. Rainfall Runoff Peak- Runoff Runoff Peak Runoff Runoff Peak Runoff (mm) (mm) (mm/hr) (mm) (mm/hr) (mm.) (mm/hr) 9/22 - 9/23 41.25 0.185 0. 0 12) 0.238 0.011 0.000 0.012 9/26 - 9/26 10.09 1.723 0.049 0.074 0.009 2.391 0.029 10/14- 10/14 16.64 0.612 0.012 0.939 0.045 1.524 0.038 10/20 - 10/21 12.31 0.222 0.020 0.819 0.062 1.252 0.052 10/23 - 10/23 15.40 1.995 0.035 0.141 0.057 0.000 0.047 101126- 10,126 6.40 0.927 0.028 0.123 0.007 0.000 0.046 11 '/10- 11/10 7.05 0.467 0.028 0.077 0.006 1.462 0.044 11/16- 11/17 7.41 2.618 0.033 0.076 0.004 3.029 0.057 I 1 /21 - 11/21 30.88 2.846 0.056 0.159 0.041 3.544 0.248 11/227 - 11/27 12.53 1.854 0.024 0. 1121 0.006 4.078 0.224 12i 4 - 12/ 5 6.99 1.332 0.020 0.082 0.005 1.804 0.044 STORMS 168.69 14. 7 82 0.056*** 2.840 0.128*** 19.085 0.248*** AMBIENT 38,147 19.927 0.007* 26.460 0.010* 53.499 0.021 * TOTAL 206.84 34.709 0.012** 29.300 0.0 11 72.584 0.029** *Average ambient flow **Averaec 6-month flow ***Maximum peak runoff rate Table 2. Polecat Creek Watershed Storm Summar@, (Sep. - Dec., 1994). Storm QPD QPE Dates Avg. Rainfall Runoff Peak Runoff Runoff Peak Runoff (mm.) (mm) (mm/hT) (mm) (mm/hr) 9/22- 9/23 41.25 6.976 0.150 2.054 0.031 9/26- 9/26 10.09 1,191 0.089 1.206 0.019 10/14 - 10/14 16.64 1.563 0.079 1.889 0.028 101120 - 10/21 12.31 0.000 0.079 0.726 0.024 10/23 - 10/23 15.40 0.647 0.057 1.960 0.032 10/126- 10/26 6.40 0.503 0.016 5.276 0.047 11/10- 11/10 7.05 0.566 0.011 -2. 3 7 7 0.042 11/16- 11/17 7.41 1.443 0.025 O@413 0.028 11/21 - 11/21 30.88 2.688 0.142 4.284 0.069 11/27/ - 111127 12. 5 3 2.097 0.069 1.561 0.024 12.14 - 12/ 5 6.99 1.043 0. 0211 1.064 0.023 STORMS 168.69 8.717 0. 150 22.811 0.069*** AMBIENT 38.147 67.159 0. 022 3 35.666 0.014* TOTAL 206.84 85.875 0.030** 58.47/ 0.023" *Averasze ambient flow **Average 6-month flow ***Maximum peak runoff rate Table 3. Nutrient Concentration from Polecat Creek )Watershed (Q PA), Sep. - Dec.. 1994. Storm Runoff TSS NH4 N03 TKN' TN TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered (I x 101) (g/1) (ppm) (ppm), (ppm) (ppm) (ppm-) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) 9/22 - 9/23 0.6 0.006 0.086 0.050 0.397 0.447 0.411 0.000 0.047 0.000 9/26 - 9/26 5.4 0.007 0.000 0.146 0.000 0.146 0.000 0.003 0.045 0.000 10/14 - 10/14 -@. 1 0.007 0.000 0.146 0.000 0.146 0.000 0.003 0. 041 5 0.000 10/20 - I 0'121 0.9 0.007 0.000 0.146 0.000 0.146 0.000 0.003 0.045 0.000 10/23 - 10/23 6.4 0.008 0.000 0.140 0.000 0.140 0.000 0.000 0.065 0.000 10/26 - 10/26 3.3 0.008 0.000 0.140 0.000 0.140 0.000 0.000 0.065 0.000 11/10 - 11/10 3.6 0.003 0.099 0.285 0.050 0.335 0.000 0.000 0.026 0.000 11/16 - I I'/17 10.1 0.0@5 0.000 0.000 3.857 3.857 0.000 0.000 0.235 0.000 I I' /21- I 1 /21 9.5 0.004 0.045 0.055 2.018 2.073 0.000 0.000 0.016 0.000 11/27 - 11/27 6.0 0.000 0.015 0.041 1.366 1.407 0.897 0.001 0.000 0.000 12/ 4 - 12/ 5 4.2 0.001 0.030 0.045 1.018 1.063 1.712 0.000 0.000 0.000 Storm 51.9 0,014 0.020 0.088 1.366 1.454 0.246 0.001 0.070 0.000 Ambient 56.9 0.013 0.030 0.115 0.929 1.045 0.127 0.000 0.071 0.007 Total 108.7 0.014 0.025 0.102 1.138 1.240 0.184 0.000 0.070 0.004 Table 4. Nutrient Loading from Polecat Creek Watersbed (QPA), Sep. - Oct., 1994. Storm TSS NH4 N03 TKN TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered ---------------------------------------------------------------- Kg ---------------------------------------------------------------- 9/122- 91123 3.3 0.05 0.03 0.23 0.26 0.24 0.00 0.03 0.00 9/26- 9/26 37.7 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.02 0.24 0.00 10 '/14- 10/14 14.4 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.00 10/20 - 10/21 6.4 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 10 '123 - 10 /23 50.9 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.00 10/26- 10/26 26.1 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 11/10- 11/10 11.5 0.35 IM 0.18 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 11/16- 11/17 554.4 0.00 0.00 38.88 38.88 0.00 0.00 2.37 0.00 11/21 - 11/21 35.9 0.42 0.52 19.1') 19.64 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 11 '127- 11/27 0.0 0.09 0.24 8.1@ 8.43 5.37 0.01 0.00 0.00 12/ 4 - 12! 5 4.2 0.12 0.19 4.24 4.43 7.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 Storm 744.8 1.0 4.6 70.8 75.4 12.7 0.0 3.6 0.0 Ambien-, 762.2 1.7 6.5 52. 9 59.4 7.2 0.0 4.0 0.4 Total 1506.9 2.8 11.1 123.77 134.8 20.0 0.0 7.7 0.4 Table 5. Nutrient Concentration from Polecat Creek Watershed (QPB), Sep. - Dec., 1994. Storm Runoff TSS NH4 NO, TKN T NI TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered (I x 101) (2/1) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) 9/22- 9/23 6.3 0.001 0.399 0.008 0.285 0.292 0.000 0.000 0. 076 0.000 9/26 - 9/26 2.0 0.041 0.153 0.093 0.000 0.093 0,000 0.000 0.040 0.000 10/14- 10/14 26.2 0.041 0.153 0.093 0.000 0.093 0.000 0.000 0.040 0,000 10/20 - 10/21 22.0 0. 04 f 0.153 0.093 0.000 0.093 0.000 0.000 0.040 0.000 10/23 - 10/23 4.31 0.041 0.153 0.093 0.000 0.093 0.000 0.000 0.040 0.000 10,126- 10/26 4.0 0.041 0.153 0.093 0.000 0.093 0.000 0.000 0.040 0.000 11/10 - 111,10 2.3 0.004 0.000 0.0-)-) 0.000 0.022 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 11/16- 111/1-1 2. 1 0.002 0.047 0.009 0.771 0.780 1.260 0.000 O.OOQ 0.000 11/21 - 11/21 4.5 0.035 0.039 0.028 1.464 1.492 1.156 0.000 0.058' 0.000 11/2-1 - 11 /27 3.3 0.000 0.043 0.015 1.102 1.117 1.276 0.000 0.002 0.000 12/4 - 12/ 5 4.1 0.000 0.010 0.019 0.524 0.543 1.136 0.001 0.000 0.000 [ Storm 81.3 0.032 0. 147 0.072 0.194 0.266 0.206 0.000 0.038 0.000 Ambient 698.3 0.029 0.109 0,069 0.088 0.157 0.120 0.000 0.034 0.014 Total 779.6 0.029 0.113 0.069 0.099 0.169 0.129 0.000 0.034 0.013 Table 6. Nutrient Loadincy from Polecat Creek Watershed (QPB), Sep. - Dec., 1994. C Storm TSS NH4 N03 TKN TN TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered ---------------------------------------------------------------- Kg ---------------------------------------------------------------- 9/22 - 9/123 8.5 2.53 0.05 1.81 1.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 91126- 9126 83.9 0.31 0.19 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 16/14- 1101114 1076.1 4.02 2. 44 0.00 2.44 0.00 0.00 1.05 0.00 10/20 - 10/121 901.4 3.36 2.04 0.00 2.04 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.00 10/23 - 10 '/23 175.5 0.65 0.40 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 10/26 - 10/26 165.4 0.62 0.38 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 11/10 - 11/10 9.3 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11/16- 11/17 4.1 0.10 0.021 1.59 1.61 2.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 I 112 1 - 11/21 157.0 0.18 0.13 6.59 6.71 5.20 0.00 0.26 0.00 11/27 - I I / 217 0.0 0.14 0.05 3.66 3.71 4.24 0.00 0.01 0.00 12/4 - 11/ 0.0 0.04 0.08 2. 17 2.25 4.70 0.00 0.00 2. 0.00 Storm 2581.3 12.0 5.8 15. 21.6 16.7 0.0 3.1 0.0 Ambient 19938.2 76.4 48.3 ) 61.4 109.7 83.6 0.1 23.5 9.9 Total 212519.4 88.3 54.1 77.2 131.4 100.4 0.1 26.6 9.9 Table 7. Nutrient Concentration from Polecat Creek Watershed (QPC), Sep. - Dec., 1994. Storm Runoff TSS NH4 NO,, T KN TN TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered (I x 101) (g/1) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (Ppm) (PPM) (ppm) (Ppm) (ppm) 9/122- 9/23 2.7 0.008 0.064 0.008 0.528 0.536 0.436 0.060 0.055 0.015 9/26- 9/26 24.0 0.007 0.000 0.008 0,000 0.008 0.000 0,021 0.055 0.000 10/14- 10/14 13.6 0.007 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.021 0.055 0.000 10/20 - 10/21 11.1 0.007 0.000 0.009 0.000 0.008 0.000 0.021 0.055 0.000 10/23 - 10/23 0.0 0.000 0,000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10 '116 - 101/26 0.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 11/10 - 11/10 13.1 0.005 0.000 0.056 0.059 0.115 0.716 0.004 0.020 0.000 11/16- 11/117 27.3 0.000 0.020 0.000 1.389 1.388 1.630 0.034 0.025 0.000 11 '121 - 11/21 31.7 0.008 0.021 0.032 1.073 1.105 2.304 0.027 0.038 0.065 111127 - 11/27 36.4 0.00@ 0.047 0.090 0.032 0.122 0.083 0.037 0.001 0.003 -12/ 4 - 12/ 5 16.8 0.003 0.000 0.091 0,000 0.093 0.000 0. 106 0.000 0.000 Storm 176.7 0.005 0.017 0.040 0.425 0.465 0.741 0.035 0.028 0.012 Ambient 475.5 0,007 0.006 0.036 0.264 0.299 0.492 0.025 0.047 0.016 Total 652.1 U06 0.009 0.037 0.308 0.344 0.559 0.027 0.042 0.015 Table S. Nutrient Loading from Polecat Creek Watershed (QPC), Sep. - Dec., 1994. Storm TSS A7H, N03 TKN TN TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered ---------------------------------------------------------------- Kg ---------------------------------------------------------------- 9/22- 9/23 21.3 0.17 0.02 1.40 1.43 1.16 0.16 0.15 0.04 9/126- 9/26 168.0 0,00 0,19 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.50 132 0.00 10/14- 10/14 95.2 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.29 0.75 0.00 10/20- 10/21 78.3 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.23 0.62 0.00 10/23 - 10/23 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10/26 - 10/26 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11/10 - 11/10 65.3 0.00 0.73 0.77 1.50 9.35 0.05 0.26 0.00 11 '/16- 11/17 0.0 0.55 0.00 37.83 37.83 44.42 0.93 0.68 0.00 11/21 - 11 /21 253.9 0.67 1.01 33.98 34.99 72.95 0.86 1.20 2.04 11/27 - 11 /27 179.7 1.70 3.28 1.16 4.44 3.04 1.34 0.04 0.09 -12/4- 12/ 5 50.5 0.00 1.57 0.00 1@57 0.00 1.78 0.00 0.00 Storm 912.1 3.1 7.0 75.1 8 '121. 1 130.9 6.1 5.0 2.2 Ambient 3131.7 2.9 16.9 125.4 142.3 233.7 11.7 22.1 7.8 Total 4043.8 6.0 23.9 200.6 224.5 364.6 17.9 2-17.2 10.0 Table 9. Nutrient Concentration from Polecat Creek Watershed (QPD), Sep. - Dec., 1994. Storm Runoff TSS NH4 N03 TKIN, TN TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered (I x 101) (g/1) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) 9/22 - 9/23 185-2) 0.013 0.017 0.016 0.355 0.371 0.051 0.028 0.046 0.009 91126- 9/26 32.1 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.059 0.064 0.248 0.010 0.030 0.000 10/14- 10/14 41.1 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.059 0.064 0.248 0.010 0.030 0.000 10/20 - 101/21 37.0 0.000 0,000 O.M 0.059 0.064 0.248 0.010 0.030 0.000 10/23 - 10/23 16.9 0.006 0.000 0.006 0.825 0.831 0.000 0.013 0.075 0.000 10/26 - 10/26 14.3 0.006 0.000 0.006 0.825 0.831 0.000 0.013 0.075 0.000 11/10 - 11/10 15.2 0,006 0.000 0.009 0.000 0.009 0.000 0.091 0.097 0.055 11/16 - 11'/ 17 37-9 0.009 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.040 0.000 0.000 11/21 - 111121 70.1 0.013 0.003 0.007 0.392 0.400 0.064 0.025 0.052 0.015 11/27 - 11/127 57.1 0.000 0.050 0.009 0.466 0.475 0.773 0.023 0.071 0,001 12/4- 12/ 5 29.1 0.000 0.045 0.019 0.845 0.864 0.512 0.018 0.065 0.000 storm 536.0 0.007 0.014 0.010 0.330 0.340 0.187 0.025 0. 04 7 0.007 Ambient 1703.6 0.002 0.004 0.026 0.331 0.357 0.357 0.014 0.138 0.138 Total 2239.7 0.004 0.007 0. 0 22) 0.331 0.353 0.317 0.016 0.116 0.107 Table 10. Nutrient Loadina from Polecat Creek Watershed (QPD), Sep. - Dec., 1994. Z@ Storm TSS NH4 N03 TKN TN TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered --------------- ------------------------------------------------ Kg ---------------------------------------------------------------- 91122- 9/23 2371.3 3.08 3.02 65.73 68.75 9.40 5.22 8.45 1.61 9/26 - 9/26 0.0 0.00 0.16 1.89 2.05 7.98 0.32 0.96 0.00 10 '114- 10/14 0.0 0.00 0.21 2.41 2.62) 10.19 0.41 1.23 0.00 10/20 - 10/21 0.0 0.00 0.19 2.17 2.36 9.19 0.37 1.11 0.00 10/23 - 10/23 101.7 0.00 0.10 13.98 14.08 0.00 0.22 1.27 0.00 10/26 - 10/126 85.6 0.00 0.09 11.76 11.85 0.00 0.19 1.07 0.00 111110 - I I' /10 94.6 0.00 0.14 0.00, 0.14 0.00 1.37 1.46 0.84 11/16- 11/17 342.8 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 1. 52) 0.00 0.00 11/21 - 11/21 906.0 0.21 0.51 27.51 28.03 4.49 1.72 3.61 1.03 11/27 - 11/127 2.0 2.89 0.53 26.60 27.13 44.17 1.31 4.06 0.06 121/4- 12/ 5 0.0 1.31 0.55 24.55 25.10 14.87 0.52 0,00 Storm 3904.0 7.5 5.5 176.6 182.1 100.3 13. 2 25.1 3.5 Ambient 4096.2 7.6 44.7 563.6 608.3 608.8 23.1 234.9 235.7 Total 8000.3 15.1 50.2 740.2 790.4 709.1 36.2 260.1 239.2 Table 11. Nutrient Concentration from Polecat Creek Watershed (QPE), Sep. - Dec., 1994. Storm Runoff TSS NH4 N03 TKN TN TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered (1 x 101) (g/1) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) 9/22 - 91123 248.1 0.006 0.033 0.042 0.118 0.160 0.092 0.067 0.049 0.064 9/26 - 9/26 149.9 0.000 0.000 0.030 0.000 0.030 0.000 0.071 0.050 0.035 10/14- 10/14 228.9 0.000 0.000 0.030 0.000 0.030 0.000 0.071 0.050 0.035 10120 - 10"21 141.7 0.001 0.000 0.036 0.000 0.036 0.000 0.057 0.083 0.014 0.105 0.000 10/23 - 10/23 237.0 0.002 0.000 0.040 0.000 0.040 0.000 0.047 10/26- 10/26 647.4 0.001 0.000 0.048 0.000 0.048 0.000 0.051 0.113 0.039 11 '/10 - 11' 110 297.3 0.044 0.000 0.019 0.803 0.833 0.445 0.029 0.176 0.021 11/16- 111/17 65.5 0.048 0,000 0.030 1.668 1.698 0.749 0,041 0.215 0.000 11/21 - 11 /21 519.9 0.025 0.000 0.047 1.752 1.799 0.344 0.032 0.166 0.002 11/27 - 11/27 189.1 0.000 0.025 0.156 1.425 1.581 0.416 0.069 0.095 0.067 12/ 4 - 1211 5 153.3 0.003 0.016 0.091 0.768 0.858 0.167 0.077 0.088 0.066 Storm 286S.2 0.011 0.005 0.051 0.581 0.632 0.168 0.052 0.113 0.030 Ambient 4198.7 0.013 0.007 0.11i 0.527 0.642 0.239 0.060 0.129 0.058 0.007 Total 7056.9 0.013 0.089 0.549 0.638 0.211 0.057 0.122 0.046 Table 12. Nutrient Loading from Polecat Creek Watershed (QPE), Sep. - Dec., 1994. Storm TSS NH4 N03 TKN TN TKN filtered OP TP TP filtered ---------------------------------------------------------------- Kg ---------------------------------------------------------------- 9/22- 9/23 1474.3 8.08 10.43 29.30 39.73 22.82 16.74 12.18 15.99 9/26 - 9/26 0.0 0.00 4.50 0.00 4.50 0.00 10. 64 7.49 5.24 10/14 - 10/14 0.0 0.00 6.97 0.00 6.87 0.00 16.26 11.45 8.01 10/20 - 10/21 170.1 0.00 5.10 0.00 5.10 0.00 8.02 11.76 1.98 10/23 - 10/23 473.9 0.00 9.48 0.00 9.48 0.00 11.14 24.88 0.00 10/26 - 10/26 795.7 0.00 31.39 0.00 31.39 0.00 32.92 72.97 24.96 11/10 - 11/10 12600.9 0.00 8.47 230.80 239.27 127.98 8.21 50.61 5.96 11/16 - 11/17 3144.5 0.00 1.97 109.27 111.24 49.09 2.69 14.08 0.00 11/21 - 11/21 13192.1 0.00 24.32 910.74 935.06 178.83 16.79 86.13 1.01 11/27 - 11/27 19.9 4.66 29.57 269.56 299.12 78.74 12.99 17.97 12.69 12/4- 12/ 5 455.6 2.43 13.90 117.69 131.59 25.56 11.84 13.42 10.06 Storm 32327.0 15.2 146.0 16617.4 1813.3 483.0 148.2 322.9 85.9 Amb'ent 56155.6 30.8 481.2 2206.1 2687.3 1003.0 253.2 539.9 241.4 Total 88482.6 45.9 627.2 3873.4 4500.6 1486.0 401.4 862.9 327.3 Table 13. Polecat Creek Watershed Weather Parameters: Sep. - Dec., 1994. Month Precip. Humidity, % Temperature, C Evaporation (mm) avg. min. max. ave. min. max. (mm) SEP 64.82 75.7 32.0 100.0 17.3 11.11 221. 2 OCT 53.16 81.3 21.0 100.0 14.7 1.1 25.0 NOV 67.36 76.7 13.0 100.0 13.9 7.2 23.3 DEC 21.50 77.0 14.0 100.0 10.4 -6.1 20.6 SEP-DEC 206.84 62.1 13.0 100.0 14.1 6.1 25.'0 Evaporation pan winterized Table 14. Rain Water Quality Data for Polecat Creek Watershed, (sampling station - PP9), Sep. - Dec., 1994. Filtered Filtered Sample Collection TSS NH4 N03 TKN TKN TP OP TP Date (g"l) (ppm) (PPM) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) 9/13/94 0.003 0.038 0.083 0.9404 9/23/94 0.003 0.068 0.099 - - - I 0 /21 2,19 4 - 0.42 0.462 0.4417 - 0.135 10./28@94 0,162 0.4 1.5066 - 11/12/94 - - - 0.4416 - 0.055 11/21/94 0.003 0.201 0.378 0.3224 - - 121! 3/94 0.014 0.069 0.056 - - - 12/12'194 0.018 0.762 0.672 1.2139 0.6387 - 12/19/94 0.003 0.366 0.815 0.2648 0.4128 - Non-Detectable Table 15. Number of Fecal Coliforms and Fecal Streptococci per 100 ml of Water Sample, Sep. - Dn. 1994, ('11olec--t Creek Watershed). Site Date QPA QPB QPC QPD QPE QPA QPB QPC QPD QPE Fecal Coaorm Fecal Streptococci --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09/21/94 < 200 170* -)0 < 200 40 230 172* 2-70 360 80 10/20/94 < 200 230 * 40 so < 20 54 45* 54 270 162 11/17/94 < 2100 < 200 < 200 < 200 < 200 /0 16 430 230 18 12/15/94 < 200 < ?00 < 200 < 200 < 200 8 0 36 29 20 *FC/FS ratio -exceeds 0.7 for these samples. Table 6. Summary of fecal coliforms per 100 ml for all samples. Colony counts outside of the acceptable range axe not included in these statistics. Polecat Creek Wa@tershed, Sep. - Dec. 1�94. Site -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- QPA QPB QPC QPD QPE Geometric 198 -)8 80 40 Mean Arithmetic 200 30 so 40 Mean Standard 42 14 Deviation Sample Size Samples could not be collected. No quantitative data for determining means. Table 17. Summary of fecal streptococci per 100 ml for all samples. Colony counts outside of the acceptable range are not included in these statistics. Polecat Creek Watershed, Sep. - Dec. 1994. Site -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- QPA QPB QPC QPD QPE Geometric 51 50 123 160 47 Mean -Arithmetic 91 58 198 222 70 Mean 9@ Standard 70 188 140 68 Deviation Sample Size 4 4 4 4 4 Samples could not be collected. Table I S. Summary of total bacterial counts ( -c 10-4@) per 100 ml for all samples. Colony counts outside of the acceptable range are not included in these statistics. Polecat Creek Watershed, Sep. - Dec. 1994. Site -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- QPA QPB QPC QPD QPE Geometric 517 654 229 256 Mean Arithmetic 1000 1143 767 233 340 Mean Standard 1039 1608 551 58 314 Deviation Sample Size 3 3 3 Samples could not be collected. 4 OPA Rating Curve 3.5 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- c/) 1.5 ------------------------------------ -------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- 0.5 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 Flow (cfs) Rating Curve - Fit to field data V DEQ stream measurements upto 3/28/95 QPB Rating Curve. 6 5 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------- 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- QD 3 ------------------------------------------------------------ ---------- cz 2 --------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ 0 1 E-1 0 1 E-8 1 E-6 1 E-4 0.01 1 100 1 E4 Flow (cfs) Rating Curve - Fit to field data V DEQ stream measurements upto 3/28/95 QPC Rating Curve 5 4 ------------------------------------------------------------ ------- 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------- CD F 2 ------------------------------------------------- ------------------ n ------------------------------ V V, -V ---------------------- 1-11 H111111 1 11111111 0 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 Flow (cfs) Rating Curve - Fit to field data V DEQ stream measurements upto 3/28/95 QPD Rating Curve 3.5 3 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---- 2.5 ------------------------------------------------------------ ------ 4-0 %4.- *%.00102 --------------------------------------------------------- --------- QD cm 1.5 -------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------------------------------------------- ----------------- 1 0.5 ------------------------------------ ------------------------------ 0 i HHH i i i HHII 1 1 1 !111!! 1 1 1 1!11!1 1 1! 1!11!1 !!!11111 i i i Wid i i HM 1 E-5 1 E-4 0.001 0.01. 0.1 1 10 100 1000 Flow (cfs) Rating Curve - Fit to field data V DEQ stream measurements upto 3/28/95 8 QPE Rating Curve 7 ----------------------------------------------------- -------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 ---------I---------------------------- ------------------------------ C/) V 4 ----------------------------- ------------------------------------- 0.1 1 10 100 1000 Flow (cfs) - Rating Curve - Fit to field data V DEQ stream measurements upto 3/28/95 Section No. 12 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 1 12.0 REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT The Project Director will submit a Quarterly Report (January 15, April 15, July 15, and October 15) to the sponser. Each Quarterly Report will address the following topics: � performance and system audits conducted � evaluation of compliance with QA/QC Project Plan � evaluation of data quality measurement trends � identification of problems, needs, and recommendations for solutions. Copies for Quarterly Report will be sent to the Grant Project Manager, the QA officer and Project Engineer/Manager. The final quarterly status report following completion of the project will provide a summary of the items listed above. 33 Section No. 11 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 1 11.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION If a calibration check shows that an equipment is not preforming within the accuracy stated in the objective, then a problem will be considered to exist. If the equipment should be repaired or recalibrated. the field and laboratory personnel will be notified of any changes and will be provided a copy of the new calibration forrn and other information as necessary. 32 Section No. 10 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 1 10.0 PROCEDURES USED TO DEVELOP ACCURACY AND PRECISION DATA 10.1 Field Data: Detail procedure and methods used to calculate precision and accuracy for field equipment is given in Appendix C. 10.2 Laboratory Data: Ile procedures for calculating and reporting precision and accuracy for laboratory data are given in Appendix D- 13. 31 Section No. 9 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 1 9.0 PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE Preventative maintenance is described under section 4.0 of this report. Following is a list of field and laboratory equipment that would require preventative maintenance during the projects life: Automatic Water Quality Samplers Staff Gages Rain Gages Stage Recorders Current Meter Auto Analyzer Laboratory Balances Bloc Digester Dattaloggers TRACS 800 Drying Ovens Stills GC 30 Section No. 8 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 1 8.0 AUDIT PROCEDURES A system of semi-annual audits will be established to review and assess the ongoing quality assurance practices for compliance with the quality assurance program. These audits will be conducted by a conurdttee whose members include the Laboratory Liaison Officer, Project Manager, Field Technician, and Project Quality Assurance Officer. This Comrmittee win be responsible for verifying both compliance and perfon-nance and to identify discrepancies when they exist. During these initial audits control charts will be reviewed to assure that a) they are up-to-date and that control samples are being measured at the specified intervals in the lab, b) all field and laboratory equipment and instrumd.ntation are checked and calibrated according to the specified procedures, c) a log book of problems encountered and the corrective actions taken is maintained, d) there is a high degree of cooperation between the various components of the project, e) uncertainty limits for all data is enforced, and f) all reports to the sponsoring agency are screened for QA aspects. 'Me field and laboratory Quality Assurance Audit form (Appendix F) will be used by the Audit's Committee for internal audits to be conducted during June and December each year. The committee will report on the progress of the project and make recommendations for corrective actions as required. 29 Section No. 7 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. I 7.0 INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL Internal quality control is an integral part of determining the quality of both field and laboratory data. Quality control check for field instrumentation are included in Section 6.0 of this report. The HAS data management system examines the important quality control checks. The laboratory internal QC checks for the. nutrient data and biological analysis are explained in Appendix D and Appendix E, respectively. 28 Section No. 6 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 1 6.0 DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION AND REPORTING Data reduction, validation, and reporting procedures for this project will be according to the data management system, HAS, which was designed and adapted in the Water Quality Laboratory of the Biological Systems Engineering Department at Virginia Tech to manage hydrologic and water quality data from the watershed monitoring projects (Mostaghimi, 1989). A flow diagram of the data management system is given in Figure 6. 1. 'Me Project Director will be responsible for submitting quarterly activity reports. A brief summary of activities including progress made, problems encountered, QC check, internal audit records, and steps taken to rectify the potential problems will be outlined in quarterly activity reports. Copies of these reports will be provided to other project investigators, laboratory and field personnel. 27 Section No. 5 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 4 on the data collected from other instruments located at the logger sited which is used for error checking. Raw data are archived on the diskettes as well as on the Virginia Tech Biologial Systems Engineering Department Micro-Vax Mini Computer. Data are transferred into the HAS data management system. At this point, the DOS filenames are converted to the mainframe file naming convention. For exw-nple above (QPA100188.007), the mainf@ame name would be "QPAIRAW88 L001007A" as discussed under section 10.2.2 of this report. 5.3.2 Field Transfe 0 All electronic data collection devices not accessible by phone lines are serviced weekly by the Field Observers. Data from these devices are transferred to a portable computer and stored on diskettes. Diskettes are mailed to the Project Engineer at Virginia Tech on a weekly basis. Upon receiving diskettes, data is inventoried and the procedures outlined in the last two steps of section 5.3.1 are followed. 26 Section No. 5 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 3 5.2 Bacteroological Samples: Bacteriological samples are collected on a monthly basis. Sample infon-nation is recorded on the field tracking form WQS-3 (Appendix A) and the information for all samples are logged into the HAS data management system 5.3 Electronic Data 5.3.1. Telecommunication Transfe Data recording devices accessible by telephone lines are transferred twice a week, to a personal computer at Virginia Tech. Immediately following data transfer, all output files are edited by a full screen editor for visual inspection and to verify the beginning and ending data collection dates. KEDIT, developed by Mansville Software (1987), is used for this process and was selected because it is compatible with the mainframe editor (XEDIT) used at Virginia Tech. The collection dates obtained during the editing step provide information for the naming convention used to properly identify the permanent output storage files form each site. The files are stored directly from KEDIT onto diskettes in a DOS sub-directory named Logger. An example of the DOS file naming convention used would be QPA100188.007 for a stream flow site on Polecat Creek Watershed. The '001'and'007'afe the beginning and ending collection period Julian days, January I through January 7, respectively. The'88'is the collection year (1988) and the'QPA! is location of the logger collection site. These permanent storage files are referred to as raw data logger files and the file naming convention is compatibile with the HAS system as the files are processed during the data reduction, phase. 'Me file name and date printed is recorded on form HD-5 (Appendix B). After transfer and editing, a SPLIT program, part of the Campbell Scientific PC206 package (1986), is executed with each of the site storage files. This program scans and displays selective information from the logger data files. Ile main objective for executing this routine is to provide hardcopy of the water quality sample event dates and times that were sensed by the 21 x loggers.. These sample events are needed to establish proper correspondence between stream flow measurements and water sampling during the data reduction phase. The hardcopy output also provides additional infon-nation 25 Section No. 5 Revision No. -1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 2 Upon sample delivery, laboratory personnel inventory them and sign off the tracking form. The discrepancies, if any, are noted and discussed with the Field Technician. The discrepancies are resolved by the Project Engineer in consultation with the Field Observer and Field Technician. Tracking sheets are separated by the laboratory manager by sites, each sample is assigned a separate laboratory number, and all samples are assigned a group number. All water samples have a letter prefix before their laboratory number. The samples are numbered by site and in numerical order by field number. The laboratory numbers are recorded on the log-in-shects. If there are more than 120 samples in a shipment, the samples are separated into two groups. Group numbers consist of two letters (i.e., BA). Sarnples are retrieved from the cooler and brought to the laboratory. The samples are separated by site and a laboratory number is recorded on the top and side of each sample. Samples are checked off on the log sheets as they are numbered. If there is more than I bottle for a sample (I field number) a composite sample is needed. A portion from each bottle is added to a clean sample container, the laboratory number, site, and field number are recorded on the new bottle (Detail procedures are included in Appendix D-1) Any sample irregularities are recorded in the laboratory log-in notebook. After all samples for each shipment have been logged in, the log sheets are assigned a laboratory delivery date and initialed by laboratory personnel. Copies of the original log sheets are made and the originals are passed on to the project engineer. At this time, sample problems are discussed with the Project Engineer, and all decisions on sample status are finalized. Sample numbers and reasons for non-analysis are recorded in the laboratory log-in notebook. After the samples are analyzed, they are stored in a walk-in cooler at 4*C for up to 6 months. The reason for such storage period is to enable the cros's-checking of the information recorded on bottles with laboratory, log-in sheets, and electronically collected information (data loggers), if needed. After each semiannual report to the sponsor is completed, the samples are discarded. Sample custody procedures for water quality samples are discussed in detail in Appendix D-1. 'Me tracking information for all samples are logged into the HAS data management system. 24 Section No. 5 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 1 5.0 SAMPLE CUSTODY PROCEDURE Sample custody procedures for various types of samples and data are described in this section. These procedur .es are designed to ensure accountability and sample custody responsibility so that there is a clear and documented method for the transfer of samples and data between the various laboratories involved in sample analysis. 5.1 Nutrient Water SampleE: AR water quality samples are connected to data loggers which record the sampling time. 'Me Field Observer, who lives on the watershed, visits all the monitoring stations within 24 hours after a rainstorm and: � Removes all water quality samples collected within 24 hours of sampling time. � Labels aH samples using the Pre-prepared WQS-L labels (Appendix A). � Completes field sheets. For nutrient samples, complete field tracking form WQS-1 (Appendix A). � Transfer samples to the appropriate laboratories. In situations where major storm events occur, the field observer immediately notifies the field technician who makes a trip solely for transporting the samples to Virginia Tech. Before shipping, all samples are inventoried and checked-off against the appropriate field tracking forms by the field technician. Appropriate actions are taken to resolve discrepancies between inventories and field tracking records by Field Observer and field technicians. All samples are packed in insulated coolers, iced down, and transported with the original copy of the field tracking form by surface transportation (usually by the University truck used by the field technician, in some cases, for example the biological samples, express overnight mail is used.) Nutrient samples and tracking forms are delivered to the Virginia Tech Water Quality Laboratory at 400 Seitz Hall in Blacksburg. Ms. Carol Ivey of the Water Quality Laboratory is responsible for inventorying and receiving nutrient samples. 23 Table 4.1 (Continued) Fecal Colifonn Grab Monthly 100 n-11 Nalgene Cool 40C 24 hours (MPN Tube) Total Coliform Grab Monthly 100 n-d Nalgene Cool 4*C 24 hours (MPN Tube) Fecal Grab Monthly 100 Ml Nalgene Cool 4'C 24 hours Streptococci (Membrane filtration) z LAP Table 4.1 Sampling Method, Fr@guency, Preservation, and Holding Times Analytical Collection Collection Volume Container Preservation Method Maximum Holding Time Parameters Method Frequency Required Type Immediately After Sampling Prior To Analysis (polyethylene) Ammonia Automatic Every 15 cm 500 ml Isco Cool 4'C 28 days change in stage Grab Bi-weekly Nalgene Nitrate & Nitrite Automatic Every 15 cm 500 ml Isco Cool4*C 28 days change in stage Grab Bi-weekly Nalgene Nitrate Automatic Every 15 cm 500 ml Isco Cool 4'C 14 days change in stage Grab Bi-weekly Nalgene 48 hours TKN Automatic Every 15 cm 500 ml Isco Cool 4'C 28 days change in stage Grab Bi-weekly Nalgene Orthophosphate Automatic Every 15 cm 500 ml Isco Filter, cool 4 C 14 days changein stage Grab Bi-weekly Nalgene 48 hours Total-P Automatic Every 15 cm 500 ml Isco Cool4*C 28 days change in stage Grab Bi-weekly Nalgene COD Automatic Every 15 cm. 500 ml Isco Cool4*C 28 days change in stage Grab Bi-weekly Nalgene TSS Automatic Every 15 cm 500 ml Isco Cool 4'C 14 days change in stage Grab Bi-weekly Nalgene 7 days Pd Cn 0 (jQ 0 Z LA '0 :5 0 z Lon P Section No. 4 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 3 sampling and analyzed within 24 hours of sampling. The original copy of the field tracking form is shipped with samples to the laboratory personnel. Upon samples arrival, laboratory personnel will inventory them assign lab number, and sign off the tracking form. Any discrepancies are discussed with the Field Observer. Appendix E details the field procedure for biological sampling and retrieval, and laboratory analysis developed for Nomini Greek and Owl Run watershed monitoring projects and will be adapted to this project (Mostaghimi, 1989). 4.4.3 Hydrologic Data: Stream water level recording charts are removed weekly by the Field Observer. The removal date and time and any equipment malfunctions are noted on each chart. Water quality samples identification (i.e. numbers) collected during that chart period is recorded on the back of the stream water level chart. All charts collected are mailed to the project manager. 4.5 Analytical Procedures: The analytical methods for nutrients and biological analysis are described in Appendix D, and E, respectively. These methods are based on the procedures listed in the US EPA Methods of the Examination of Water and Wastes and the Standard Methods for the Exan-dnation of Wastewater. 20 Section No. 4 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 2 4.4 Sample, Identiricafion and Submission to Laboratory: Standard procedures developed for the Water Quality Laboratory in the Biological Systems Engineering Department at Virginia Tech will be followed. Methods for the calibration and maintenance of equipment used in the Water Quality Laboratory are documented--in Appendix C. The purpose of these procedures are to define a regular schedule for equipment calibration and to instruct laboratory personnel in the correct maintenance of the laboratory instruments so that all tests can be preformed quickly and correctly. All calibration and maintenance operations are to be recorded in each piece of equipment's calibration/maintenance log book. 4.41 Nutrient, Sediment, and COD analysis: The Field Observer labels all samples using the pre- prepared labels and completes field log sheets (Appendix A). and stores all samples collected by the automated water samplers and delivers them to VPI&SU soon after their collection. Grab samples are collected on a weekly basis. Grab samples are placed in a cooler (4'C) immediately after collection and transported to the Water Quality Laboratory at Virginia Tech. All collected samples are inventoried and checked-off against the appropriate field tracking forrns by the Field Observer before being transferred to the Water Quality Laboratory. Appropriate action is taken to resolve discrepancies between inventories and field tracking records. All samples are packed in insulated coolers, iced down, and transported with the original copy of field tracking forrn by surface transportation to the Water Quality Laboratory, Biological Systems Engineering Department, Virginia Tech. When samples arrive in the Water Quality Laboratory, they are logged in and assigned a laboratory number for sample tracking. The Allowable sample holding times, for nutrients, sediment, and COD are given in Table 4. 1. Detailed information for nutrient analysis, data collection, reporting, and storage are given in Appendix D. 4.4.2 Bactetiological Sampl : The Field Observer labels all samples using the pre-prepared labels. All samples are placed in an insulated container and transported to the laboratory irnmediately after 19 Section No. 4 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. I 4.0 PROJECT OPERATING PROCEDURES 4.1 Meld Sampling: Water will be sampled at all stations for sediment and nutrient analysis. Sampling for bacteria analysis will be conducted at all stations on a monthly basis. At all stations samples will be collected by both grab sampling and by automatic water samplers,'on a weekly basis and during major rainfall events, for sediment and nutrient analysis. At all stations two sampling schedules will be followed for sediment and nutrient measurement. The first sampling schedule will be initiated by the Field Observer on a weekly basis through the data loggers. The second sampling schedule will be based on the volume of water flowing in the stream during storm events.. The da ta logger will be programmed to signal the automatic sampler to take a composite sample during each rainfall/runoff event. 'Me sampling date and time and the corresponding stream stage is recorded by the data logger. The Field Observer will collect the samples within 24 hours of a storm event and send them to the appropriate laboratory at VPI&SU. 4.2 Sampling Containers, Preservation, and Hold*ng Tomes: Standard procedures established for the Water Quality Laboratory in the Biological Systems Engineering at Virginia Tech (Mostaghimi, 1989) and approved by U.S. EPA will be followed for the proposed project. These procedures are outlined in Tables 4. 1, and are presented in Appendix D. 4.3 F*eld Testing, Calebration, and Preventative Ma*ntenanc : Calibration and maintenance procedures for field equipment are explained in detail in Appendix C. In general, calibration is preformed on all equipment at installation time and every six months, thereafter. More frequent calibration may be. performed if examination of data suggests an equipment malfunction. Equipment maintenance, on the other hand, is performed weekly by the field observer and monthly by the project personnel. Equipment are maintained at a level of or better that the stated QA accuracy (Table 3. 1). Calibration and maintenance operations are recorded in a notebook. 18 Section No. 3 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 5 ble 3.2 (Continued) Fecal Strep 0.0 95% )85% 1 dup. for each sample APRA 9230 (Membrane colonies/100 ml. confidence I blank per 5 samples filtration) limit Tbe QAprotocol was designed as a minimum allowed QC procedures to Wow based on the data quality objectives for this project. 'Mis plan was developed using t4e references listed below. Detection limits are lab values based on the height of recorder noise at maximum sensitivity. (Gas ChromatogrVI, Dr. H. McN* 1985 ACS Shortcourse publication). Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Water and WastewatQr Laboratories, USEPA, 1979. Handbook of Quality Assurance fQr the Ana]Zical Chemistry LaboratoU, J. P. Dux (VNR Co. Inc.), 1986. Quality Assurance of Chemical Measurements, J. K. Taylor (Lewis Publ. Inc.), 1987. 17 Section No. 3 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 4 Table 3.2 Data Quality Standards for Laboratory Data Detection Percent Parameter Limit Recovery Precision QC Pwtoc0l* Method (m KA) (-9/1) Ammonia 0.01 98 - 1029/a 0.06 1 dup. per 20 samples EPA (NH3 - N) recovery I EPA QA-QC standards 350.1 per 40 samples I spike per 40 samples I blank run daily Nitrate 0.05 96-100% 0.026 1 dup. per 20 samples EPA (NO, - N I EPA QA-QC standards 353.2 per 40 samples I spike per 40 samples I blank run daily Orthophosphate 0.01 89-94% 0.013 1 EPA QA-QC standards per 40 EPA (POI - P) samples 365.1 1 spike per 40 samples I blank run daily TKN 0.1 97-101% OA26 I dup. per 17.5 samples EPA 2 EPA QA-QC standards per 35 351.2 samples I blank per 35 samples I spike per 35 samples Total-P 0.05 91-94% 0.056 1 dup. per 17.5 samples EPA 2 EPA QA-QC standards per 35 365.1 samples I blank per 35 samples I spike per 35 samples Total Suspended 0.02 5% 0.74 1 dup. per 40 samples EPA Solids relative I blank per 40 samples 160.2 error I EPA standard r 200 samples -------- pe Hardness, total 0.1 95-100% � 0.5 1 dup. per 40 samples EPA 130.2 T`OC (Carbon, total 0.5 95-100% � 0.5 1 dup. per 40 samples EPA organic) Compatible Method Fecalfrotal 0.0 95% 95% 1 dup. for each sample. APHA 9221 Coliform WN Tube) MPN/100ml confidence I blank per five samples limit -jI 16 Table 3.1 Data Quality Standards for Field Data. Measurement Reference Used for Parameter Accuracy Precision Completeness Accuracy Calculations Rainfall 4% 0.01 inch 80% laboratory calibrated weights graduated pipette (with an equivalent 0.0 1 rainfall graduation) it Stage 0.01 foot 0.005 foot 95% land surveyor's level Stream Temperature 2.0*C 0.1*C 80% laboratory grade Stream thermometer with 0.2-C resolution Time Data Archival 10 minute 1 minute 95% digital watch referenced to University mainframe clock and observed to be accurate within 1 minute per month Time of Rainfall samples 10 minutes 1 minute 90% same as above Wet Weather Stream 5 minutes I minute 90% same as above Samples @O C/I e. CV . .0 0 Section No. 3 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 2 systems in order to ensure data comparability (Young, 1985; Mitchel, 1984, Beasley, 1985). Standard techniques recommended by Blakensiek et al. (1979) for the initiation and maintenance of hydrologic/water quality research project is followed. All data collected is reported in units consistent with other institutions reporting similar information to allow comparability of data bases among various organizations. The hydrologic/water quality data management system designed for the watershed will provide data that could be used by other researchers and organizations in evaluation of nonpoint source pollution control strategies. 3.4 Data Completeness: Data completeness goal, defined as the percent of valid data obtained from a monitoring station, compared to the amount that is expected to be obtained under non-nal situations are given in Table 3.1 and 3.2. If the completeness goal is not met, the missing data is either estimated form nearby stations, or by regression equations developed for some sites based on the historical data. In most cases, however, the data collected by the "backup" instrument is used to fill the data gap. When a decision is made to fill these gaps by estimating values (i.e. from closest alternate station or regression equations) such infon-nation will be tagged as estimated rather than observed in our data base management system. 14 Section No. 3 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 1 3.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE OBJECTIVES 3.1 Data Accuracy and Precision: The purpose of the QA Plan for the Polecat Creek Watershed project is to provide data of known accuracy and precision. Standard techniques established for initiation and maintenance of hydrologic/water quality monitoring project were described in detail by Mostaghimi (1989) for the Nomini Creek watershed. The QA plan developed for the Nomini Creek watershed project, which was reviewed and approved by EPA, will be followed for the Polecat Creek project. Data Quality Standards for field and laboratory data are presented in Tables 3. 1 and 3.2, respectively. The Quality Assurance Procedures are discussed in more detail in Appendix D. Accuracy is estimated by calculating the standard deviation of the differences between the measured and referenced values over a typical range of data (Appendix C). Table 3.1 indicates the reference used in evaluating precision values for various parameters. Precision is calculated in terms of the standard deviation for various rneasurements (Appendix C). The precision and accuracy of field data are deternlined on a semi-annual basis. When the established limits (QA/QC established values) are not met, the instrumc-nt is recalibrated. according to the guidelines provided by the manufacturers and subsequent checks are made to ensure that the instrumentation is functioning properly. 3.2 Data Representativ : Station QPE was established to describe the overall water quality draining the Polecat Creek Watershed. Stations QPA, QPB, QPC, and QPD were selected at the outlet of major tributaries in the watershed in order to evaluate the relative contributions of NPS pollutants originating from various areas within the Polecat Creek watershed. Once sufficient large numbers of biological and water chemistry samples are collected at these stations, multivariate analysis of the relationship between biological and chemical water quality will be preformed and predictive equations will be developed. Other sampling sites such as locations selected for precipitation, and raingages were chosen according to the guidelines provided by Brakensiek et al (1979) in order to adequately represent the spatial variability within the watershed. 3.3 Data Comparabilit : The monitoring strategy and analytical approach for the Polecat Creek Watershed were selected based on the investigator's experience in watershed/water quality monitoring 13 Section No. 2 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 4 plan, b) ensure that all missing data is identified and replaced in accordance to procedures outlined in the QA plan, and c) to archive A data in accordance with the QA plan. 12 Section No. 2 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 3 2.1 Responsibilities: Dr. Mostaghimi of the Department of Biological Systems Engineering, VPI&SU will serve as the Project Director and Quality Assurance Officer for the project. Dr. Mostaghimi is a specialist in the areas of nonpoint source pollution control, hydrology, and water quality engineering. He has authored over 220 technical publications related to various aspects of soil and water conservation engineering. He will be responsible for conducting quality assurance program and for taking or recommending corrective actions as required. Dr. Mostaghin-ii's other responsibilities will be: a) develop and implement quality control programs, including statistical procedures and techniques which will meet the desired quality standards, b) monitor quality assurance activities and determine conformance with policy and procedures and with sound practices, c) conduct system audits and make appropriate recommendations for corrective actions and improvements as may be necessary, and d) evaluate data quality and monitor other pertinent performance information. P.W. McClellan and Mr. A.D. Davis of the Department of Biological Systems Engineering at VPI&SU will serve as the Quality Control Officers for the field data collection. Both Mr. McClellan and Mr. Davis will ensure the maximum integrity of all hydrologic and water quality data collected by following the procedures outlined in the QA/QC Plan for the project. Their specific responsibilities will be to ensure that: a) all field equipment is calibrated routinely, b) field technicians and field observers are trained on the proper procedures to be followed for sampling and recording, c) all field equipment calibrations, sarr4)le handling and shipping are documented and available to the QC officer for his review, d) all field data is transferred 'and validated according to procedures outlined in the QA plan, and e) all data is reduced according to the QA Plan and reported to the QA officer on a regular basis. Mr P.W. McClellan and Mr. J.C. Carr of the Department of Biological Systems Engineering at VPI&SU will serve as the Quality Control Officers for data reduction and analysis. Both Mr. McClellan and Mr. Carr have extensive backgrounds in hydrologic data reduction and analysis. They are responsible for ensuring the integrity of all processed data. Their specific responsibilities will be to: a) ensure that all hydrologic data is processed in accordance to procedures outlined in the QA Section No. 2 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 2 Data Analysis Laboratory Virginia Tech 307 Seitz Hall Biological Systems Engineering Department Blacksburg, VA 24061 Office Phone: (703)231-9432 WATER QUALITY MONITORING (Nutrients/Bacterial) Blake Ross, Laboratory Director Virginia Tech Seitz Hall Biological Systems Engineering Department Blacksburg, VA 24061 Office Phone: (703)231-4702 Carol Ivey, Laboratory Manager Vi rginia Tech 400 Seitz Hall Biological Systems Engineering Department Blacksburg, VA 24061 Office Phone: (703)231-4334 Home Phone: (703)382-1445 Julie Jordan, Laboratory Technician Virginia Tech 400 Seitz Hall Biological Systems Engineering Department Blacksburg, VA 24061 Office Phone: (703)231-4334 WATERSHED FIELD OBSERVERS Polecat Creek Art Griffen 11468 Brown Lane Ruthers Glenn, VA 22546 Home Phone: (804) 994-5040 Office Phone: (804) 448-0922 10 Section No. 2 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 1 2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS Saied Mostaghimi (703)231-7605 P. W. McClellan (703)231-7602 PROJECT DIRECTOR Saied Mostaghin-d Virginia Tech 308 Seitz Hall Biological Systems Engineering Department Blacksburg, VA 24061 Office Phone: (703)231-7605 Home Phone: (703)961-0611 PROJECT MANAGER Phil McClellan Virginia Tech 306 Seitz Hall Biological Systems Engineering Department Blacksburg, VA 24061 Office Phone: (703)231-7602 Home Phone: (703)951-0965 HYDROLOGIC MONITORING Jan Carr Virginia Tech 306-A Seitz Hall Biological Systems Engineering Department Blacksburg, VA 24061 Office Phone: (703)231-7607 Home Phone: (703)951-2189 Dexter Davis Virginia Tech 106 Seitz Hall Biological Systems Engineering Department Blacksburg, VA 24061 Office Phone: (703)231-4606 Home Phone: (703)552-7118 9 Section No. 1 Revision No.- 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 7 1.7 Products Produced: Data summaries will be compiled and progress reports will be submitted to the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department on a semi-annual basis. Intermediate findings will be presented through research reports and presentations will be made at professional meetings. A final report will be submitted within six months after the project's completion. 8 Section No. I Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 6 Maintenance of all monitoring stations and collection and shipment (delivery) of samples will be the responsibility of the Field Observer. The Field Observer will be trained and his/her specific responsibilities will be outlined in a comprehensive field manual. A complete description of sites' locations and the equipment in use at each of the sites is given in Table 3.1. 1.4 Schedule, of Tasks: 1.5 Data Evaluation: Water samples will be collected from each site,weekly and during each major storm event, with the exception of bacteria samples which will be collected once a month from all sites. A database management system developed at the Biological Systems Engineering Department will be used for storage, manipulation, and retrieval of the collected information. 'Me system includes routines for error checking, data reduction, data summary, graphics and report generation. Interactive programming techniques is used to allow rapid access to any data type for selected time periods. 'Me data collected from Polecat Creek Watershed will be organized in standard formats and archived for future use. Appropriate statistical procedures will be used to identify trends in the water quality data collected over the life of the project. 7 Section No. 1 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 5 Table 1.1 (continued) Polecat Creek Watershed Monitoring Sites Site Location Equipment Description Name TP1 (the weather station) Soil Temperature at 0.5 foot depth TP2 (the weather station) Soil Temperature at 1.0 foot depth QPA On Cedar Fork Road (Rt. Stream gage (one analog, one digital, one staff gage) 601) and water quality sampling (one automatic water quality sampler) QPB Close to Smith Farm, off Stream gage (one analog, one digital, one staff gage) of Rt. 601, between Us and water quality sampling (one automatic water Rt. I and US Interstate 95 quality sampler) QPC On Mr. Atkinson's Farm Stream gage (one analog, one digital, one staff gage) close to US Interstate 95, and water quality sampling (one automatic water accessed from Rt. 652 quality sampler) QPD On Mr. Atkinson's Farrn Stream gage (one analog, one digital, one staff gage) off of Rt. 652 and water quality sampling (one automatic water quality sampler) QPE Watershed outlet, off of Stream gage (one analog, one digital, one staff gage) Rt. 601 and water quality sampling (one automatic water quality sampler) 6 Section No. 1 Revision No. 1 Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 4 Table 1.1. Polecat Creek Watershed Monitoring Sites Site Location Equipment Description Name PPI Smith sand and gravel Precipitation, one digital and one standard gage quarry PP2 Coleman Farm Precipitation, one digital and one standard gage PP3 Caroline Co. Middle Precipitation, one digital and one standard gage School PP4 Smith Farm Precipitation, one digital and one standard gage PP5 Lake Caroline Precipitation, one digital and one standard gage PP6 Lake Land Or' Precipitation, one digital and one standard gage PP7 On cut over forest land off Precipitation, one digital and one standard gage of Cedar Fork Road PP8 Waste water treatment Precipitation, one.digital and one standard gage facility (the weather station) PP9 (the weather station) Precipitation, one digital, one analog, one standard gage, one snow depth, and rain quality sampler TP9 (the weather station) Ambient ait tempreture, one analog and digital gage, and a max/min thermometer HP9 (the weather station) Ambient air humidity, one analog and one digital gage DP9 (the weather station) Wind direction, one digital gage VVT9 (the weather station) Wind speed, one digital gage EP9 (the weather station) Pan Evaporation, one analog and one digital gage SP9 (the weather station) Solar radiation, one digital gage CP9 (the weather station) Soil Moisture at 0.5 foot depth CPA (the weather station) Soil Moisture at 1.0 foot depth 5 b LOAr DOPSWISIrz 692 033 LoAr 1 767 712 96 010 LZ (I -Smith, 683 5 1 SO I 7 4 5 0 7 14 F, 161 697 OA 2. "im 01 0 7 764 o/ecs 652 . . . . . . f ,.s4# she., 16A War Fork 4 705 642 Coleminj 4D 55B 716 2.- Mill 0 852 .1, C 11 u r Coffiry Cotner 0, coulf 657 Q 659 Q a 6 -.0 Mo 207 1 .-v c=,,@ fins 0 8 o Raincraae@ 1-9 731 J. 4); 6 7 Stream Gaaes A -E Ruther Glen c 56 Polecat'Creek Watershed Section No. 1 Revision No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. 2 will be collected on a weekly basis. In addition, composite samples from storm events will also be collected from all stations. All samples will be analyzed for sediment and various forms of nutrient listed in the following paragraph. Samples Will also be collected from all stations, on a monthly basis for analysis of bacteria. The following analysis will be conducted on the samples collected form the watershed: 1. Total suspended solids 2. Nitrate and nitrite nitrogen 3. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen 5. Total nitrogen 6. Ortho-phosphorus 7. Total phosphorus 8. Carbon, total organic (TOC) 9. Hardness, total 10. Fecal coliform bacteria 11. Fecal streptococci bacteria 12. Total coliform bacteria 13. pH (field monitoring) 14. Dissolved Oxygen (field monitoring) 15. Temperature (field monitoring) 16. Conductivity (field monitoring) Automatic water quality samplers will be installed at each runoff monitoring site to evaluate the NPS pollutant loadings during storm events. Cross-sectional survey of all sites will be performed and stream gauges (analog and digital) as well as staff gages will be installed to estimate the quantity of water flowing at all stations. 'Me staff gages will be read by the Field Observer on weekly basis. Nine precipitation (rainguage) monitoring stations will also be installed at different locations within the watershed to monitor the rainfall amounts and intensity during the life of the project. 3 Section No. 1 Revisiorf No. I Date: 5/12/95 Page No. I 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Need for PrQitct 'Me Polecat Creek Watershed, located in south-central Caroline County of Virginia, was selected for this project due to its Rely conversion from a rural watershed to predominantly urban watershed with in the n6xt ten years. The 30,000 acre basin is located within the Interstate 95 corridor between Richmond, Virginia and Washington, D.C. as well as at headwaters of the Mattaponit River which is part of the York River system. Currently, the predominant land cover in the watershed is forest, followed by open fields and pastureland, but two thirds of the watershed is designated a primary growth area in the Caroline County comprehensive plan. The Polecat Creek Watershed also includes some environmentally sensitive areas including wetlands and potential habitat for endangered species. Approximately, 2,433 acres of wetlands and waterbodies are located within the watershed, as wen as 5,234 acres of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas (Resource Protection Areas) buffering the wetlands and waterbodies. The watershed presents the habitat requirements for three plant species listed by the U.S. Federal Government as threatened or endangered species. lberefore, there is a great need to describe the efficacy of existing and en-verging land use regulations and policies in protecting adjacent water quality during urban development activities. 1.2 Qbjectives: 'Me goal of the Polecat Creek Watershed monitoring project is to describe the efficacy of existing and emerging land use regulations and polices in protecting adjacent water quality during urban development activities. A nonpoint source monitoring system is designed and established in the watershed to facilitate the achievement of the above-stated goal. 1.3 Expedmental Design: A nonpoint source monitoring program is established in the watershed. Ile system consists of 5 runoff, 9 rainfall and one weather monitoring station(s) and are described in Table 1. 1. The location of various monitoring stations are indicated in Figure 1. 'Me monitoring system is designed to identify spatial contribution of NPS pollutants from various tributaries within the Polecat Creek watershed. Automatic and Grab water quality samples from all 5 runoff stations LOCATORPAGE QAMS - 005/80 Element Project Plan Section Title Page Table of Contents ..............................................................................i Project Description ............................................................................ 1.0 Project Organization .......................................................................... 2.0 Quality Assurance Objectives ............................................................ 3.0 Project Operating Procedures ............................................................ 4.0 Sample Custody Procedure ............................................................... 5.0 Data Reduction, Validation and Reporting ......................................... 6.0 Internal Quality Control ...................................................................... 7.0 Audit Procedures .............................................................................. 8.0 Preventative Maintenance .................................................................. 9.0 Procedures Used to Develop Accuracy and Precision Data ................ 10.0 Corrective Action .............................................................................. 11.0 Reports to Management ............................... .................................... 12.0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number ii. Locator Page ..................................................................................... ii 1.0 Project Description ............................................................................ 1 2.0 Project Organization ........................................................................... 6 3.0 Quality Assurance Objectives ............................................................ 10 4.0 Project Operating Procedures ............................................................ 15 5.0 Sample Custody ................................................................................ 20 6.0 Data Reduction, Validation and Reporting ......................................... 24 7.0 Internal Quality Control ...................................................................... 25 8.0 Audit Procedures ............................................................................... 26 9.0 Preventive Maintenance ..................................................................... 27 10.0 Procedures Used to Develop Accuracy and Precision Data ................ 28 11.0 Corrective Action .............................................................................. 29 12.0 Reports to Management .................................................................... 30 Appendices Appendix A. Field Operation Manual Appendix B. Hydrologic Data Analysis Forms Appendix C. Calibration and Maintenance of Field and Laboratory Equipment. Appendix D. Standard Operating Procedures for Nutrients Sample Analysis Appendix E. Standard Operating Procedures for Biological Sample Analysis Appendix G. Internal Performance Procedures for Field and Laboratory Operations. Appendix H. References Cited QUALITY ASSURANC E OFFICER: Saied. Mostaghimi TITLE: Professor, Biological Systems Engineering Department, VP1&SU` Signature: Date: PROJECT SUPERVISOR: Saied Mostaghimi TITLE: Professor, Biological Systems Engineering Department, VPI&SU Signature: Date: PROJECT ENGINEER / MANAGER: Phillip W. McClellan TITLE: Systems Analyst, Biological Systems Engineering Department, VPI&SU Signature: Date: GRANT PROJECT MANAGER: Jean N. Tingler TITLE: Virginia Council on the Environment, Richmond, VA Signature: Date: QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL PROJECT PLAN for POLECAT CREEK WATERSHED MONITORING PROJECT Prepared by Saied Mostaghimi Phillip W. McClellan Biological Systems Engineering Department Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University April 1995 POLECAT CREEK INVESTIGATION BIOLOGICAL MONITORING October 1, 1994 through March 30, 1995 Virginia Commonwealth University Dr. Leonard Smock Dr. Greg Garman Mark King Anne Wright March 30, 1995 T11is project was funded, in part, by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA370A0360-01 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of NOAA or any of its subagencies. EVMODUCTION This report details work conducted from October 1, 1994 through March 30, 1995 on the biornonitoring network of the Water Quality Monitoring Program designed by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department (CBLAD) for the Polecat Creek watershed. Quarterly samples will be continued through the spring and summer of 1995 under a 1994 NOAA Coastal Zone Management Program grant. The data presented in this report will be added to those additional data collected for an annual assessment of biotic integrity. The objective of the work was to provide a biological assessment, utilizing macroinvertebrate and fish communities, as well as an assessment of channel and riparian habitat of existing water quality in streams throughout the watershed. Ultimately, the study will provide a data base to enable detection of changes in water quality brought about by changes in land use. Meeting these objectives will enhance our ability to determine the efficacy of landuse regulations designed to protect water quality from changes that might occur during and after altered land use in the watershed. SITE DESCRIPTIONS Trend monitoring sites (Table 1) exhibited physico-chemical characteristics that were typical of streams of the lower piedmont and upper coastal plain in the mid-Atlantic region (Smock and Gilinsky 1992; Garman and Nielson 1992). The substrate at most sites was a mixture of sand and gravel, with occasional cobble and bedrock in areas of moderate gradient. Sites ranged in size from first- (e.g. site A; YOPIA) to fourth-order (Mattaponi River, R;YOP4R). Two sites (Reedy Swamp, F; YOP217 and site W;YOP2W) exhibited extensive nontidal wetlands, and were selected to represent this potentially important habitat type. Reference sites Crable 1) were chosen to represent "least impaired* conditions (Karr et.al. 1986) across a range of stream orders, based on extensive field surveys for relatively undisturbed locations. In one case (site H: Higgins Stream), a suitable first- order reference stream could not be located within the York River drainage and a site in Surry County was selected. In order to manipulate data within a computer database, each site was given a standardized, hierarchical code that uniquely identified collections. 'Me first two characters identify the drainage name (e.g. YO=York rive Table 1. Study site descriptions for biological/habitat trend monitoring and reference locations. The CBLAD and VCU site codes are provided in parentheses following the site name; interpretation of site codes is provided in the text. Stream Description Monitoring Sites Polecat Creek at Rt. 601, south of I.Ake Caroline; first order (A; YOPIA) Stevens Mill Run at Rt. 601, outfall from Lake Caroline; second order (B; YOP2B) Unnamed tributary on Atkinson property and adjacent to 1-95; second order (C; YOP2C) Polecat Creek at Rt. 652; third order (D; YOP3D) Polecat Creek at Rt. 601 near Penola, Virginia; third order (E; YOP51)) Reedy Swamp at Rt. 601, a tributary of Polecat Creek exhibiting extensive nontidal wetlands; second (F; YOP2F) order Mattaponi River at the confluence with Polecat Creek; fourth order (R; YOP4R) Reference Sites Higgins Stream southeast of Waverly, Surry County, Virginia; first order (H; CHHIA) Unnamed tributary at Rt. 658, north of Partlow, Virginia; second order stream exhibiting extensive nontidal (W; YOP2W) wetlands; Spotsylvania County South River at Rt. 603, second order (S; YOP2S) Matta River at Rt. 632, third order (M; YOP3M) drainage), the third character identifies the steam name within that drainage (e.g. YOP=Polecat Creek), and the fourth character indicates steam order (e.g. YOPI = lst order), and the final character provides the site name (e.g. YOPIA=site A of the Polecat Creek system). A date string (mmMdlyy) follows the site designation and uniquely identifies an individual collection (e.g. YOPIA060294). Throughout the appendices, collections are identified by these codes. BENTHIC MACROEWMTEBRATES METHODS Methodology for the analysis of benthic macroinvertebrate communities followed the procedure of the Environmental Protection Agency's Rapid Bioassessment Protocol III (RBP; Plafkin et al. 1989) with some enhancements. RBP HI was chosen because its greater level of taxonomic resolution (genus versus family level) provides a better discrimination of degrees of water quality among sites. The PRB IR protocol calls for sampling benthic invertebrates in the most productive habitat in a set of streams. This usually is the riffle-run habitat. Not all of the streams in the Polecat Creek drainage, however, have a well developed riffle-run geomorphology. In such cases, the protocol and subsequent modifications for low- gradient streams suggest sampling submerged wood, which provides a stable substrate and often supports high invertebrate productivity (Benke et al. 1984, Smock et al. 1985). In order to provide the most complete biomonitoring data within the framework of the RBP protocol, we sampled both riffles-runs (hereafter referred to as the sediment) and submerged wood and analyzed the data from each separately. We thus have two independent estimates of water quality using benthic invertebrates. SaWling Protocol Sampling was conducted quarterly over the year, thereby providing a comprehensive seasonal baseline data set. Sampling of the sediment was accomplished with a net (mesh size = 425 am) in both riffles, when present, and in cobble and pebble runs. 'Me top layer of rocks was disturbed and large rocks were then rubbed by hand to remove closely attached organisms. All samples from the sediment at a given station were composited into one sample. Wood samples consisted of invertebrates adhering to the surfaces of logs submerged in the stream. Logs that clearly had been only recently submerged were avoided. The surfaces of the logs were washed into a bucket and a visual examination for adhering organisms was made. All samples from individual logs at a given station were composited into one sample. Sampling of coarse particulate organic matter (CPOM) is required for one of the RBP metrics. We sampled leaf packs in debris dams and on the sediment surface. Recently submerged leaves were avoided. During the summer, when leaf packs were rare, we sampled whatever aggregations of processed leaf litter were present. All samples (sediment, wood and CPOM) were preserved in the field with isopropyl alcohol. Invertebrates were removed from the sample under a stereo-microscope after addition of Rose Bengal to facilitate the sorting process. Ile first 200 organisms randomly picked from the samples were identified and thus constituted the data base for calculating the metrics for a given station. Invertebrates in the CPOM samples were simply designated as shredders or non-shredders. All functional feeding group designations were made according to information in Merritt and Cummins (1984) and Pennak (1989). There are no standard protocols for rapid bioassessment in wetlands using benthic invertebrates. Problems encountered in the bioassessment of wetlands include the lack of any tested metrics using invertebrates and the necessity for a standard habitat that is easily sampled but also is representative of substrates in the wetlands system. We used an artificial substrate to provide a common substrate in both the reference and study wetlands. Since macrophytes: are an important substrate for invertebrates in marsh wetlands, we used artificial macrophytes based on the design of Gilinsky (1984). They were constructed of braided polypropylene rope (6 mm diameter) that floats within the water column. Each substrate, consisting of 144 strands of 41 cm long rope attached to a base of netting, was held in the water column on a metal frame driven into the sediment. Four substrates were placed at each wetland site for several months prior to the initial sampling. The substrates were sampled by lifting them out of the water column, washing the rope strands into a bucket, passing the material through a sieve and preserving the sample. The substrate was then placed into the wetland for sampling the following quarter. Data Analysis The RBP III uses eight criteria for the analysis of stream condition at a site. All eight metrics were calculated for the sediment samples. Metric #8, which used the data from the CPOM samples, was not included in the analysis of the wood samples. Using those data for both the sediment and wood analyses would violate the assumption of independence of the data for future statistical analyses comparing the sediment and wood samples. 1. Taxa richness - the total number of taxa identified. 2. Modified Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) - provides a quantitative assessment of the tolerance of each invertebrate taxon to general water quality degradation. HBI = E (x, ti/n) where xi = number of individuals of taxon i in a sample; tj tolerance value for taxon t n total number of organisms in the sample. The RBP document (Plafidn et al. 1989) provides tolerance values for some species, but they were derived for species in the western Great Lakes states and New York. To provide tolerance values that are regionally more accurate, we primarily used values developed and tested by the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (Lenat 1993). Tolerance values for some taxa not listed by Lenat (1993) were taken form Platkin et al. (1989); values for a few rare taxa for which no values have been published were estimated based on the PI's experience in using invertebrates for water quality assessment. 3. Ratio of scrapers to collector-filterers - the total number of individuals of taxa designated as scrapers divided by the total number of individuals of taxa designated as collector-filterers. 4. Ratio of EPT's to chironomids - the total number of individuals of taxa of Ephemeroptera (mayflies, Plecoptera (stoneflies) and Trichoptera (caddisflies) divided by the total number of Chironmidae. S. Percent contribution of the dominant taxon - the number of individuals of the most abundant taxon divided by the total number of individuals. 6. EPT index - the total number of taxa of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Tichoptera. 7. Community loss index - a measure of community similarity, measuring the difference in the taxonomic composition between the study station and the reference station: Community Loss Index = b - a c where a = number of taxa common to both stations; b = total number of taxa in the reference station sample; c = total number of taxa in the test station sample. 8. Ration of shredders to total taxa - the number of shredders divided by the total number of individuals in the CPOM sample. Following calculation of the eight metrics, a Biological Condition Score is assigned to each metric based on comparison of the metric score for the study station to that of the reference station (Table 3). Biological Table 3. Biological condition scoring criteria for RBP III metrics (Plafldn et al. 1989). Biological Condition Scoring Criteria Metric 6 4 2 0 1. Taxa Richness* >80% 60-80% 40-60% <40% 2. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index >85% 70-85% 50-70% <50% (modifiedr 3. Ration of Scrapers/Filterers >50% 35-50% 20-35% <20% Collectors- 4. Ratio of EPT and Chironon-@d >75% 50-75% 25-50% <25% Abundancesw S. % Contribution of Dominant <20% 20-30% 30-40% >40% Taxonlo 6. EPT Index" >90% 80-90% 70-80% >70% 7. Community Loss Index" <0.5 0.5-1.5 1.5-4.0 > 4.0 8. Ratio of Shredders/Total >50% 35-50% 20-35% <20% N Score is a ratio of study site to reference site X 100. M Score is a ratio of reference site to study site X 100. 0 Determination of Functional Feeding group is independent of taxonomic grouping. M Scoring criteria evaluate actual percent contribution, not percent comparability to the reference station. Range of values obtained. A comparison to the reference station is incorporated in these indices. A Condition Scores for each metric are then summed and a Biological Condition Category is assigned for the study station based on the percent comparability with the reference station score (Table 4). Only a subset of the eight metrics are appropriate for analysis of the data from the wetlands station: taxa a richness, percent contribution of dominant taxon, community loss index and the BEL Those four metrics were sued to compare the study station to the reference wetlands station. Quality Assurance Quality assurance protocols followed those detailed by Tingler (1993). Appropriate chain of custody procedures were employed for the samples. All samples are permanently archived at the Aquatic Ecology Laboratory at Virginia Commonwealth University. All data were checked for transcriptional errors following their entry into the computer data base. Copies of the field and laboratory data sheets are archived in files at Virginia Commonwealth University. Replicate sampling and sample processing were conducted to check the accuracy of the field collection efforts. A 10% acceptance criteria was used for those samples. Data from the replicate sampling were used solely to meet quality assurance objectives; they are included in the archived data base but were not used as part of the metric assessment calculations. Additionally, a laboratory audit, with an acceptance criteria of 10 %, was conducted on 5 % of the benthic samples, thereby validating taxonomic identification and numbers of individuals in those samples. Table 4. Bioassessment categories based on percent comparability of study stream to reference stream (Plafkin et al. 1989). BIOASSESSMENT % Comparability to Reference Score " - Category Attributes >83% Nonimpaired Comparable to the best situation to be expected within an ecoregion. Balanced trophic structure (composition and dominance) for stream size and habitat quality. 54-79% Slightly impaired Community structure less than expected. Composition (species richness) lower than expected due to loss of some intolerant forms. 21-50% Moderately impaired Fewer species due to loss of most intolerant forms. Reduction in EPT index. < 17% Severely impaired Few species present. If high densities of organisms, then dominated by one or two taxa. Percentage values obtained that are intermediate to the above ranges will require subjective judgement as to the correct placement. Use of the habitat assessment and physicochemical data may be necessary to aid in the decision process. STREAM FISH ASSESSMENTS METHODS Methodology for the analysis of stream communities generally followed the procedures of the Environmental Protection Agency's Rapid Bioassessment Protocol, and specifically the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI; Karr 1981; Plaflcin et al. 1989). Because of regional differences in fish assemblage structure and zoogeography, IBI metrics were modified to be most appropriate for the Polecat Creek watershed (York River drainage), but are equivalent in approach and design to those originally proposed by Karr (1981) and Karr et al (1989). The following fish community metrics and scoring criteria for the IBI were developed using a variety of sources, including distributional references (e.g. Hocutt et al 1986; Garman and Nielsen 1992; Jenkins and Burkhead 1994; Weaver and Garman 1994) and were reviewed by regional fishery biologists and ichthyologists: Metric I Species richness Total number of native species in the sample, not including hybrids or introduced species. A total of 49 nonmigratory species and 13 diadromous/estuarine species are possible within the drainage; sampling by VCU has already collected 40 species from Polecat monitoring and reference sites. The number of introduced (i.e., non-native) species will be considered in another metric. Score 1 2 5 lst/2nd order --,:,4 5-7 8 3rd/4th order :98 9-11 12 Metric 2 Total individuals Total number of individuals in sample, expressed as catch per unit effort (CPUE), where effort is backpack electrofishing time (minutes). Score 1 2 5 all orders :!@r. 30 31-60 @t 61 Metric 3 Darter Mecies Total number of darter (Etheostoma & Percina spp. only for York drainage) species per sample. Four species are possible. Score 1 2 5 lst/2nd order 0 1-2 @:3 3rd/4th order 1 2-3 4 Metric 4 Sunfish �Recies Total number of centrarchid species, exclusive of.Micropterus spp.; 12 species (native and introduced) possible from the York drainage. Score 1 2 5 Ist/2nd order 1 2-4 5 3rd/4th order :5 2 3-7 ;2:8 Metric 5 Sucker gpecies Total number of catastomid species in the sample; four species possible form the York drainage. Score 1 2 5 lst/2nd order 0 1-2 @-3 3rd/4th order 1 2-3 4 Metric 6 Intolerant species Total number of species, per sample classified as "intolerant" of degraded stream conditions. Intolerant species will include: LaMpetra apRendix, L. goy northern hogsucker (Hypenteliu nijericans , tadpole madtom, shield darter, stripeback darter. Score 1 2 5 I st/2nd order 0 1-2 @:3 3rd/4th order 1 2-3 > 4 Metric 7 Tolerant Mgcies Percentage of individuals classified as *tolerant" of degraded conditions. This metric will use the relative abundance of a guild of species to replace "green sunfish" metric of Karr (1981), as suggested by Karr et al. (1986). Tolerant species will include: golden shiner, pumpkinseed sunfish, bluegill, creek chubsucker, brown bullhead, yellow bullhead, and tesselated darter. Score 1 2 5 Ist/4th order <10 10-2S >25 Metric 8 Omnivorous Mecies Percentage of individuals per sample classified as omnivorous; species will include: common carp (Cyprinus carpio), Nocomis spp., white sucker (Catastomous commersoni), channel catfish, and bluntnose minnow. Score 1 2 5 Ist/4th order > 45 20-45 <20 Metric 9 Insectivorous cyprinids Percentage of cyprinid individuals per sample classified as insectivorous; species will include: satinfin shiner, swallowtail shiner, common shiner, comely shiner, rosyface shiner, bridle shiner, rosyside dace. Score 1 2 5 1st/4th order <20 20-45 >45 Metric 10 Piscivores Percentage of individuals per sample classified as facultative piscivores (apex predators); species will include: redfin pickerel, chain pickerel, smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, black crappie. Score 1 2 5 Ist/4th order < 1 1-5 >5 Ok Metric 11 Introduced species Percentage of individuals per sample classified as non-indigenous species. Hocutt and Wiley (1986) report 12 introduced species form the York drainage. This metric replaces the "hybrid" metric of Kaff (198 1) because hybrid identifications are often problematic, especially in the field. Moreover, the numerical dominance of exotic taxa in disturbed ecosystems is well-documented in the literature. Both the new "introduced' metric and the old "hybrid" metric influence the overall IBI score most significantly under "poor" and "fair" stream conditions. Score 1 2 5 Ist/4th order >5 1-5 < I Metric 12 Anomalies Percentage of individuals per sample exhibiting external parasites, infections, or skeletal abnormalities. Score 1 2 5 I st/4th order >5 2-S <2 Stream fish communities were sampled by backpack and modified boat electrofishing during Fall 1995, following standard fisheries protocols. Fish were identified to species in the field by Mr. Mark King or Dr. Greg Garman; small voucher collections for each species were placed into VCU's Fish Collection. Data were entered into VCU's computer data base, which has been developed to calculate IRI metrics and scores for individual collections. All activities followed the Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared by CELAD (Tingler 1994). LITERATURE CITED Benke, A.C., T.C. Van Arsdall, Jr., D.M. Gillespie and F.K. Parrish. 1984. Invertebrate productivity in a subtropical blackwater river: the importance of habitat and life history. Ecological Monographs 54:25-63. Gilinsky, E. 1984. The role of fish predation and spatial heterogeneity in determining benthic. community structure. Ecology 65:455-468. Garman, G. and L. Nielsen. 1992. Medium-sized rivers of the Atlantic coastal plain. Pages 315-349 in C. Hackney, S. Adams, and W. Martin, editors. Biodiversity of the southeastern United States - Aquatic Communities. Wiley, New York. Karr, J. 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries 6:21-27. ,Karr, J., and four other authors. 1986. Assessing biological integrity in running waters, a methods and its rationale. Illinois Natural History Survey Special Publication 5. Lenat, D.R. 1993. A biotic index for the southeastern United States: derivation and list of tolerance values, with criteria for assigning water-quality ratings. Journal of the North American Benthological. Society 12:279- 290. Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins. 1984. An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America. Kendall/Hunt Dubuque, IA. Permak, R.W. 1989. Fresh-water invertebrates of the United States. Protozoa to Molluska. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Plafkin, J.L., M.T. Barbour, K.D. Porter, S.K. Gross and R.M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers: benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Document 440/4-89-001. Smock, L.A., E. Gilinsky and D.L. Stonebumer. 1985. Macroinvertebrate production in a southeastern United States blackwater stream. Ecology 66:1491-1503. Tingler, J.N. 1993. Quality assurance project plan for Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department Polecat Creek water quality monitoring project. Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department, Richmond, VA. Weaver, A. and G. Garman. 1994. Urbanization of a watershed and historical changes in a stream fish assemblage. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 123:162-172. V APPENDIX A Numbers of macroinvertebrates collected I Table 1. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter SP= spring; SU= summer. STATION A SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA W1 SP SU FA WI SP SU Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. Leptophlebiidae Paraleptophlebia sp. Plecoptera Nemouridae Amphinemura wui Prostoia'sp. Perlodidae (immature) Trichoptera Limnephilidae Pycnopsyche spp. Phryganeidae Ptilostomis SP. Polycentropodidae Polycentropus sp. Psychomylidae Lype diversa Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila sp. Lepidoptera Coleoptera Elmidae Dubiraphia sp. Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis sp. SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Diptera Chaoboridae Chaoborus sp. Chironomidae 143 36 123 Ceratopogonidae 2 Pa/pomyia spp. 3 Culicidae Cuiex sp. Empididae 1 Hemerodromia sp. Ephydridae Simuliidae 207 Tabanidae Tabanus sp. 1 Tipulidae Antocha sp. 2 Limonia sp. 3 Pilaria sp. Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea sp. 2 5 Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus sp. 4 10 3 Decapoda Cambaridae I Hydracarina 1 Gastropoda Planorbidae Gyraulus sp. Bivalvia Sphaeriidae Pisidium sp. Annelida Oligochaetae 2 2 Hirudinea Table 2. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter; SP= spring-, SU= summer. STATION B SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. 1 Ephemerelfidae Eurylophella temporalis 1 Heptageniidae Stenonema sp. 91 66 30 1 Odonata Corduliidae Helocordula sp. Plecoptera Nemouridae Prostoia sp. 1 Perlidae Perlesta sp. Perlodidae Isoperfa spp. Taeniopterygidae Taeniopteryx spp- 4 1 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Chematopsyche sp. 12 13 40 1 Hydropsyche sp. 8 6 Hydroptilidae - Hydroptila sp. Oxythira sp. 11 Lepidostomatidae Lepidostoma sp. Philopotamidae Chimarra sp. 35 5 57 SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Tricoptera Polycentropodidae Polycentropus sp. Coleoptera Elmidae Ancyronyx sp. Dubiraphia sp. Macronychus glabratus Diptera Ceratopogonidae Culicoides sp- Chaoboridae 2 Chaoborus punctapenni 2 Chironomidae 46 35 27 89 Empididae Hemerodromia sp. 2 Simuliidae 10 55 4 4 Tipulidae Tipula abdominalis 3 2 3 Isopoda Asselidae Caecidotea sp. 1 Amphipoda Gammarldae Gammarus sp. 2 Decapoda Cambaridae 1 Ostracoda Hydracarina 2 Gastropoda Physidae Physa sp. Planordidae Gyraulus sp. I( i, SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Bivalvia Sphaeriidae Pisidium sp. Sphaerium sp. 1 Annelida 1 Oligochaetae 4 Table 3. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter; SP= spring; SU= summer. STATION C SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis sp. Odonata Coenagrionidae Plecoptera Capniidae Allocapnia sp. 1 Chloroperlidae Suwallia sp. Leuctridae Leuctra sp. Nemouridae Amphinemura wui Prostoia sp. 7 Perlidae Eccoptura Xarithenes 1 Perlodidae 1 Isoperta spp. Taeniopterygidae Taeniopteryx sp. 2 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Chematopsyche sp. 11 Hydroptilidae Hydroptila sp. Leptoceridae Ceraclea Nectopsyche sp. 1 Polycentropodidae Polycentropus sp. SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SID SU Tricoptera Psychomyiidae Lype diversa 20 Coleoptera Elmidae Ancyronyx sp. 2 Macronychus glabratus 2 1 Stenelmis sp. Megaloptera Sialidae sialis sp. 1 Diptera Ceratopogonidae Palpomyia spp. Chironomidae 119 146 167 Empididae Simuliidae 7 Tipulidae Hexatoma sp. Tipula abdominalis 2 4 Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus sp. 3 1 7 Ostracoda Hydracarina 4 Gastropoda Physidae Physa sp. 3 Bivalvia Sphaeriidae Pisidium sp. 4 8 Sphaerium sp. 1 Unionidae Elliptio complanata Annelida Oligochaetae 1 Nematoda Table 4. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter; SP= spring; SU= summer. STATION D SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baeffs spp. 5 10 2 Pseudoctoeon sp. Caenidae Caenis sp. 3 ,Ephemerellidae Ephemerelia sp. 22 9 Eurylophella temporalis 11 12 Seratella sp. Heptageniidae Stenonema modestum 1 1 Leptophlebiidae Paraleptophlebia sp. Oligoneuridae Isonychia sp. 1 Odonata Calopterygidae Calopteryx sp. 1 Plecoptera Capniidae Allocapnia sp. 2 Chloroperlidae Haploperla sp. 3 Leuctridae Leuctra sp. Nemouridae Amphinemura wui Prostoia SP. Perlidae Eccoptura xanthenes 2 6 Perlesta sp. Perlinella sp. 1 SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA Wl SP SU Plecoptera Perlodidae 2 Clioperla clio 1 Isoperla spp. 3 2 Taeniopterygidae Taeniopteryx spp. 7 1 3 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Chematopsyche sp. 10 12 Hydropsyche sp. 2 2 Hydroptilidae Hydroptila sp. Lepidostomatidae Lepidostoma sp. Leptoceridae Ceraclea sp- 1 2 Nectopsyche sp. 1 Oecetis sp. 1 Odontoceridae Psilotreta sp. 1 Philopotamidae Chimarra sp. 1 Polycentropodidae Nyctiophylax sp. 1 1 Polycentropus sp. Psychomyiidae Lype diversa 1 21 10 Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila sp. 1 Coleoptera Elmidae Ancyronyx variegatus 2 Dubiraphia sp. 4 Macronychus glabratus 5 Stenelmis sp. Culimnius sp. 1 SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Megaloptera Corydalidae Nigronia serricornis Sialidae sialis sp. 1 Diptera Ceratopogonidae Culicoides sp. 3 Palpomyia spp. 7 1 Chironomidae 81 16 195 62 Empididae Simuliidae 226 126 Tipulidae Antocha sp. Hexatoma sp. 1 Tipula abdominalis 1 Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus sp. 2 1 1 2 Decapoda Ostracoda Hydracarina 3 Gastropoda Planorbidae Gyraulus sp. 1 Physidae Physa sp. 4 1 Bivalvia Sphaeriidae Pisidium sp. Sphaerium sp. 1 Table 5. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter; SP= spring; SU= summer. STATION E SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. 1 Ephemerellidae Ephemerella sp. 1 Eurylophella temporalis 1 2 1 Heptageniidae Stenonema modestum Leptophlebiidae* Leptophlebia sp. 5 Paraleptophlebia sp. 7 Odonata Co6nwionidae (immature) Plecoptera Nemouridae Nemoura sp. Prostoia sp. Perlidae Clioperla clio Taeniopterygidae Taeniopteryx spp. Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Chematopsyche sp. Hydropsyche sp. Hydroptilidae Hydroptila sp. Lepidostomatidae Lepidostoma sp. Leptoceridae Oecetis sp. SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA Wl SP SU FA WI SP SU Tricoptera Limnephilidae Pycnopsyche spp. Philopotamidae Chimarra sp. Polycentropodidae Neureclipsis sp. Nyctiophylax sp. Polycentropus sp. 5 3 1 Psychomyiidae Lype diversa 5 Coleoptera Dytiscidae Hydroporous sp. 10 7 Elmidae Ancyronyx variegatus 4 Duberaphia sp. 1 Macronychus glabratus Stenelmis sp. 1 1 Gyrinidae Dineutus sp. Gyrinis sp. Megaloptera Sialidae sialis sp. 1 Diptera Ceratopogonidae Culicoides,sp. 2 Palpomyia spp. 4 1 1 Chironomidae 83 112 86 169 Empididae Simuliidae 1 1 4 Tabanidae Chrysops sp. 1 Tabanus sp. 1 Tipulidae Tipula abdominalis SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Isopoda AWlidae Caecidotea sp. Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus sp. Decapoda Cambaridae Hydracarina Gastropoda Physidae Physa sp. Bivalvia Sphaeriidae Sphaerium sp. 3 Pisidium sp. 5 Annelida 9 Oligochaetae 2 7 Table 6. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter; SP= spring; SU= summer. SITE F ARTIFICIAL SUBSTRATE TAXON FA W1 SP SU Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. 1 Heptageniidae Stenonemo modestum 12 Odonata Coenagrionidae Enallagma 1 Plectoptera Nemouridae Prostoia sp. 1 Perlodidae Clioperla c1lo I Taeniopterygidae Taeniopteryx SPP- 1 Dytiscidae Laccornis sp Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Chematopsyche sp. 2 Leptoceridae Ceraclea 1 Phryganeidae Ptilostomis SP. 3 Polycentropodidae Phylocentropus sp. 2 Polycentropus,sp. 1 Megaloptera Sialidae sialis SP. 3 ARTIFICIAL SUBSTRATE TAXON FA wl SID SU Diptera Chironomidae 124 282 Ceratopogonidae Culicoides sp. Palpomyia spp. 9 Simuliidae 50 Tipulidae Ormosia sp. Tipula sp. 1 lsopoda@ Asellidae Caecidotea sp. Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus sp. 2 4 Bivalvia Sphaeriidae Pisidium sp. Annelida 14 Oligochaetae Table 7. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter; SP= spring; SU= summer. SOUTH RIVER SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. 29 6 Caenidae Caenis sp. 1 Ephemerellidae Ephemerella sp- 1 Eurylophella temporalis 2 Heptageniidae Stenacron interpunctatum 35 Stenonema modestum 41 7 2 Oligoneuridae Isonychia sp. Odonata Calopterygidae Calopteryx sp. I Coenagrionidae Enallagma sp. 1 2 Gomphidae Progomphus obscurus Plecoptera Capniidae Allocapnia sp. 26 1 Chloroperlidae Leuctridae Leuctra sp. Nemouridae Amphinemura wui Prostoia sp. 1 SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA Wl SP SU FA WI SP SU Plecoptera Perlidae Beloneuria sp- Diploperia sp. 3 Eccoptura xanthenes 2 Taeniopterygidae Taeniopteryx spp. 1 Hemiptera Corixidae Tricorixa sp. Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Chematopsyche sp. 21 1 Leptocheridae Ocetis sp. 1 Philopotamidae Chimarra sp- 25 1 Polycentropodidae Nyctiophylax sp. 1 Psychomyiidae Lype diversa 15 2 Coleoptera Dryopidae Helichus sp. 1 Dytiscidae Hydroporous sp. 2 Elmidae Ancyronyx variegatus 4 1 Dubiraphia sp. Macronychus glabratus 1 4 Gyrinidae Gyrinus sp. 1 Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis sp. SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Diptera Ceratopogonidae Cuucoides sp. 2 Palpomyia spp. 2 1 Chironomidae 71 102 114 Psychodidae Pericoma sp. Simuliidae 2 Tipulidae Antocha sp. 3 Dicranota sp. Hexatoma sp. 2 Ormosia sp. Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus sp. 5 Decapoda Cambaridae Hydracarina Gastropoda Planorbidae Gyraulus sp. 1 Bivalvia Sphaeriidae Pisidium sp. 1 2 Sphaerium sp. 1 Anneiida Oligochaetae Table 8. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter; SP= spring; SU= summer. MATTA RIVER SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. 1 Baetiscidae Baetisca sp. 2 Caeni8ae Caenis sp- 3 1 Ephemerellidae Ephemerella sp. 31 48 Eurylophella Temporalis 1 Seratella sp. Heptageniidae Stenonema modestum 19 19 Oligoneuridae Isonychia sp- 1 Odonata Coenagrionidae Gomphidae Progomphus obscurus 1 Plecoptera Leuctridae Leuctra sp. Nemouridae Amphinemura wui Prostoia sp. Perlidae Beloneuria sp. Clioperla Clio 1 lsoperla spp. 2 Taeniopterygidae Taeniopteryx spp. 5 13 SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA Wl SP SU FA WI SP SU Trichoptera Brachycentridae Brachycentrus sp. 1 38 Hydrop sychidae Chematopsyche sp. 2 11 Hydropsyche sp. 1 Macrostemum sp. 1 Hydroptilidae Hydroptila sp- Leptoceridae Ceraclea sp. 2 1 Ocetis sp. 1 Lepidostomatidae Lepidostoma sp. Limnephilidae Pychnopsyche spp. 2 Philopotamidae Chimarra sp. 1 Polycentropodidae Nyctiophylax sp- Polycentropus sp. Psychomyiidae Lype diversa 6 Coleoptera Dryopidae Helichus sp. 1 Elmidae Ancyronyx variegatus 1 Macronychus glabratus Megaloptera Corydalidae Corydalus sp. 1 Sialidae sialis sp. SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Diptera Ceratopogonidae Palpomyia spp. 1 Chironomidae 16 57 Empididae Hemerodromia sp. Simuliidae 2 1 Tipulidae Tipula abdominalis Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus sp. Hydracarina 3 6 Gastropoda Physidae Physa sp. Bivalvia Corbiculidae Corbicula fluminia 110 4 Sphaeriidae Pisidium sp. 2 Sphaerium sp. Annelida Table 9. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter; SP=spring; SU= summer. MATTAPONI RIVER SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA Wl SP SU FA Wl SP SU Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. 2 6 3 1 Baetiscidae Baetisca sp. 7 Ephemereilidae Ephemerella sp. 1 4 Eurylophella temporalis 6 1 7 Heptageniidae 3 Stenonema modestum 6 2 5 Leptophlebiidae Leptophlebia sp. 2 Oligoneuridae Isonychia sp. Odonata Libellulidae Somatochlora sp. 1 Plecoptera Capniidae Allocapnia sp. 3 1 Nemouridae Prostoia sp. 7 12 Perlidae 2 Periesta sp. Perlodidae Isoperla spp. 3 2 Taeniopterygidae Taeniopteryx spp. 57 4 6 2 SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Trichoptera Brachycentridae Brachycentrus sp- Hydropsychidae Chematopsyche sp. 1 7 Hydropsyche sp. 7 Macrostemum sp. 1 Hydroptilidae Hydroptila sp. Lepidostomatidae Lepidostoma sp. Leptoceridae Ceraclea sp. Nectopsyche sp. Oecetis sp. Limnephilidae Pycnopsyche spp. Philopotamidae Chimarra sp. @ 2 5 Polycentropodidae Nyctiophylax sp. 1 1 Polycentropus sp. Coleoptera Elmidae Macronychus glabratus 3 5 3 Stenelmis sp. 5 Gyrinidae Dineutus sp. SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Diptera Ceratopogonidae Palpomyia spp. Chironomidae 14 48 113 160 Simuliidae 1 110 Tipulidae Tipula abdominalis 1 Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea sp. 1 Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus sp. Hydracarina 4 2 12 2 Gastropoda Ancylidae Ferrissia sp. Lymnaeidae Lymnaea sp. 3 Physidae Physa sp. Bivalvia Corbiculidae Corbicula sp. 76 Sphaeriidae Pisidium sp- 1 9 2 Sphaerium sp. 2 Annelida 1 Oligochaetae 5 5 Hirudinea 0 . # SEDIMENT WOOD TAXON FA WI SP SU FA WI SP SU Turbellaria Planariidae Dugesia tigrina Table 10. Numbers of individuals collected by substrate and season. FA= fall; WI= winter; SP= spring; SU= summer. WETLANDS REFERENCE SITE ARTIFICIAL SUBSTRATE TAXON FA WI SID SU Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp- 4 Centroptilum sp. Odonata Aeschnidae Epiaeschna sp. I Corduliidae Epitheca sp. 3 Coenagrionidae Enallagma sp. 1 Herniptera Beiostomatidae Beiostoma sp. 1 Tricoptera Psychomyiidae Lype diversa 2 Coleoptera Dytiscidae Hydroporous sp. 2 Hydrophilidae Berosus sp. Diptera Chaoboridae Chaoborus punctapennis 2 Chironomidae 260 Ceratopogonidae Palpomyia SPP. 5 Tipulidae Antocha sp. 3 Ormosia sp. ARTIFICIAL SUBSTRATE TAXON FA wl SID su Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea sp- 14 Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus sp. 26 Decapoda 1 Gastropoda Lymnaeidae Lymnaea sp- 2 Planorbidae Gyraulus sp. 1 Bivalvia Sphaeriidae Pisidium sp. 3 Annelida Oligochaetae 236 i A APPENDIX B Fish Community Metrics PAGE NO. 1 PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 HETRICS 1-12 REPORT FOR LOCATION CODE: YOP0101794 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL -- ---- --- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 12 6.96 3 3 0 1 0.09 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.06 0.22 SCORE: 5 5 3 3 1 1 1 5 5 1 1 1 32 PAGE NO. I PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 METRICS 1-12 REPORT FOR LOCATION CODE: YOP3MI01794 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL --- ---- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 11 6.53 3 2 1 1 0.07 0.01 0.48 0.00 0.01 0.03 SCORE: 3 5 3 1 1 1 1 5 5 1 5 3 34 PAGE NO. I PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 METRICS 1-12 REPORT FOR IDCATION CODE: YOP3EI11494 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL --- ---- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 9 1.06 2 0 0 0 0.29 0.06 0.06 0.12 0.00 0.12 SCORE: 3 1 3 1 1 1 5 5 1 5 5 1 32 PAGE NO. I PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 METRICS 1-12 REPORT FOR LOCATION CODE: YOP3D101994 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL --- ---- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 11 2.99 2 3 1 0 0.39 0.12 0.05 0.02 0.24 0.10 SCORE: 3 1 3 3 1 1 5 5 1 3 1 1 28 PAGE NO. I PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 METRICS, 1-12 REPORT FOR LOCATION CODE: YOP2W110494 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL --- ---- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 4 5.01 1 1 0 0 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 SCORE: 1 3 3 1 1 1 5 5 1 1 5 5 32 PAGE NO. I PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 METRICS 1-12 REPORT FOR LOCATION CODE: YOP2S101794 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL --- ---- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 13 14.4 2 3 2 0 0.55 0.06 0.25 0.01 0.05 0.10 SCORE: 5 5 3 3 3 1 5 5 3 1 1 1 36 ( 1, , i PAGE NO. 1 PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 METRICS 1-12 REPORT FOR LOCATION CODE: YOP2Flll494 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL --- ---- --- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 6 1.32 1 3 1 0 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 SCORE: 3 1 3 3 3 1 5 5 1 1 5 1 32 PAGE NO. I PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 METRICS 1-12 REPORT FOR LOCATION CODE: YOP2ClOl994 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL --- ---- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 11 4.07 2 1 0 0 0.09 0.42 0.09 0.02 0.00 0.11 SCORE: 5 3 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 5 1 28 PAGE NO. I PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 METRICS 1-12 REPORT FOR LOCATION CODE: YOP2B100694 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL --- ---- --- --- --- --- --- ---- -7 -- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 14 9.46 2 6 1 0 0.34 0.14 0.30 0.00 0.22 0.02 SCORE: 5 5 3 5 3 1 5 5 3 1 1 5 42 PAGE NO. I PRODUCED ON: 04/27/95 METRICS 1-12 REPORT FOR LOCATION CODE: YOPIA101994 METRIC NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL --- ---- --- --- --- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- VALUE: 7 2.18 1 2 1 0 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 SCORE: 3 1 3 3 3 1 3 5 1 5 5 5 38 4 @ j, APPENDIX C Physico-chemical Data PAGE NO. I DATE: 04/27/95 COLLECTION LOCATION REPORT LOCATION SITE HAB INVERT CODE DRAINAGE STREAM ORDER CODE -DATE TIME EFFORT TEMP CORD pH DO ASMT SAMPLE NOTES ---------- -------- ---------- ----- ---- -------- ---- ------ ---- ------ ------ ------ ---- -------- ----- CHHIA032594 CHOWAN HIGGINS I A 03/25/94 1200 1522 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X VERY HIGH FLOW AND UMIDITY AFTER A STORM EVENT. CHHIA042994 CHOWAN HIGGINS 1 A 04/29/94 1200 785 17.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X CHHIA053094 CHOWAN HIGGINS 1 A 05/30/94 1200 1057 15.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X CHHIA061494 CHOWAN HIGGINS 1 A 06/14/94 1200 782 19.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X Saipling done upstrean of bridge. CHHlAlOl593 CHOWAN HIGGINS 1 A IC/15/93 1200 1499 12.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOPlAC12694 YORK POLECAT 1 A 01/26/94 1200 0 2.00 22.00 4.30 15.00 T. YOPlAO40594 YORK POLECAT 1 A 04/05/94 1200 886 13.00 22.00 5.80 10.30 T. C K X Site length = 124 paces. YOPlAC71493 YORK POLECAT I A 07/14/93 1200 265 28.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X FLOW VERY LOW, ALMOST NONE. SHALLOW POOLS AND SLOW RIFFLES. OXIDE FLOC OVER MOST OF BOTTOM, SUGGESTING HYPOXIC CONDITIONS. ALL FISH OK- FEW JUVENILES-LGI,UPY. MOST BULLHEADS OF UNIFORM SIZE OF 6-8". VERY POOR PHYSIOCHEM. CONDITIONS. YOPIA071594 YORK POLECAT 1 A 07/15/94 1200 0 22.00 39.00 6.00 5.20 T. YOPlA101994 YORK POLECAT 1 A 10/19/94 1200 524 11.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOPIA111093 YORK POLECAT 1 A 11/10/93 1200 532 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. C K X YOPIA111893 YORK POLECAT 1 A 11/18/93 1200 0 10.00 5.80 6.10 8.40 T. X X X YOP2BO12694 YORK POLECAT 2 B 01/26/94 1200 0 4.00 35.00 5.70 15.00 T. YOP2BO40594 YORK POLECAT 2 B 04/05/94 1200 1136 16-00 37.00 7.10 10.60 T. X X X 69 PACES IN LENGHT YOP2BO71493 YORK POLECAT 2 B 07/14/93 1200 442 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP2BO71594 YORK POLECAT 2 B 07/1V94 1200 0 25-00 80.00 6.40 6.80 T. YOF2BlOO694 YORK POLECAT 2 B 10/06/94 1200 780 18.00 4.00 6.85 0.00 T. X X X YOP2B111893 YORK POLECAT 2 B 11/10/93 1200 592 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. C K X YOP2Blll893 YORK POLECAT 2 B 11/18/93 1200 0 12.00 61.00 6.10 9.10 T. X PAGE NO. 2 DATE: 04/27/95 COLLECTION LOCATION REPORT LOCATION SITE HAB INVERT CODE DRAINAGE STREAM ORDER CODE -DATE TIME EFFORT TEMP CORD pH DQ ASMT SAMPLE NOTES ---------- -------- ---------- ----- ---- -------- ---- ------ ---- ------ ------ ------ ---- -------- ----- YOP2CO20294 YORK POLECAT 2 C 02/02/94 1200 0 2.00 80.00 6.40 16.40 T. YOP2CO40894 YORK POLECAT 2 C 04/08/94 1200 935 11.00 40.00 5.70 9.90 T. X X X 95 PACES IN LENGTH YOP2CO71493 YORK POLECAT 2 C 07/14/93 1200 461 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP2CO72194 YORK POLECAT 2 C 07/21/94 1200 0 26-00 81.00 6.40 7.50 T. YOP2C101994 YORK POLECAT 2 C 10/19/94 1200 810 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP2C111793 YORK POLECAT 2 C 11/17/93 1200 626 14.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. C K X YOP2C111893 YORK POLECAT 2 C 11/18/93 1200 0 11-00 89.00 6.10 8.40 T. YOP2F020294 YORK POLECAT 2 F 02/02/94 1200 0 0.00 22.00 5.30 15.50 F. YOP2F050994 YORK POLECAT 2 F 05/09/94 1200 787 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X 11 SPACES SITE LENGTH, ARTIFICAL SUBSTRATE NOT REMOVED FOR SPRING SAMPLING YOP2PO71493 YORK POLECAT 2 P 07/14/93 1200 155 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X TYPICAL WETLANDS W. ARUN sp. SOME FL04 THRU CHANNEL. LOW EF EFFICIENCY-LOTS-0-FISH. MANY YOY UPY & ASY. RECENTLY NUKED BEAVERS? YOP2FO72194 YORK POLECAT 2 F 07/21/94 1200 673 25.00 35.00 5.80 1.20 F. X X X YGP2P111093 YORK POLECAT 2 F 11/10/93 1200 369 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 P. X X X YOP2F111494 YORK POLECAT 2 F 11/14/94 1200 819 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP2SO20294 YORK POLECAT 2 S 02/02/94 1200 0 1.00 28.00 6.80 16.20 T. YOP2SO40594 YORK POLECAT 2 S 04/05/94 1200 1321 11.00 30.00 6.50 10.60 T. X X X 105 PACES YOP2SO72194 YORK POLECAT 2 S 07/21/94 1200 0 24.00 81.00 6.40 7.40 T. YOP2SC72793 YORK POLECAT 2 S 07/27/93 1200 608 21.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP2SIO1794 YORK POLECAT 2 S 10/17/94 1200 479 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP2S111793 YORK POLECAT 2 S 11/17/93 1200 510 14.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. C K X YOP2SI20893 YORK POLECAT 2 S 12/08/93 1200 0 7.00 38.00 7.80 13.40 T. PAGE NO, DATE: 04/27/95 COLLECTION LOCATION REPORT LOCATION SITE HAB INVERT CODE DRAINAGE STREAM ORDER CODE -DATE TIME EFFORT TEMP CORD pH DO ASMT SAMPLE NOTES ---------- -------- ---------- ----- ---- -------- ---- ------ ---- ------ ------ ------ ---- -------- ----- YOP2WO51394 YORK POLECAT 2 W 05/13/94 1200 539 18.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X ARTIFICAL SUBSTRATE NOT REMOVED FOR SPRING SAMPLING YOP2WO72194 Y03K POLECAT 2 W 07/21/94 1200 0 27.00 71.00 6.30 5.20 F. YOP2WO80994 YORK POLECAT 2 W 08/09/94 1200 414 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP2W110494 YORK POLECAT 2 W 11/04/94 1200 802 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP3DO12694 YORK POLECAT 3 D 01/26/94 1200 0 4.00 40.00 4.70 15.00 T. X X X YOP3DO40894 YORK POLECAT 3 D 04/08/94 1200 905 12.50 30.00 5.60 10.30 T. X X X 91 PACES REACH LENGHT YOP3DO71493 YORK POLECAT 3 D 07/14/93 1200 474 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X FLOW VERY LOW. EXPOSED RIFFLES. LARGE LONG RUN/POOL. MISSED SEVERAL EOL'S IN THE ROCKS. YOP3DO71594 YORK POLECAT 3 D 07/15/94 1200 0 25.00 80.00 6.70 8.00 T. YOP3DIO1994 YORK POLECAT 3 D 10/19/94 1200 824 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP3D111093 YORK POLECAT 3 D 11/10/93 1200 652 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. C K X YOP3D111893 YORK POLECAT 3 D 11/18/93 1200 0 11.00 72.00 6.10 10.10 T. METRIC #3 WAS CHANGED FROM POOL CHARACTERIZATION TO GLIDE CHARACTERIZATION YOP3EO20294 YORK POLECAT 3 E 02/02/94 1200 0 3.00 41.00 6.80 16.40 T. YOP3EG40894 YORK POLECAT 3 E 04/08/94 1200 913 14.00 35.00 5.80 9.60 T. X X X YOP3EO71994 YORK POLECAT 3 E 07/19/94 1200 0 25.00 65.00 6.30 6.90 T. YOP3EO72093 YORK POLECAT 3 E 07/20/93 1200 1259 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X LOW BEAVER DAN HAD BEEN CONSTRUCTED UPSTREAM OF (-15M) STATE BRIDGE. LOW STREAM CONDITIONS PRESENT, MOST OF THE SITE COULD BE SHOCKED WITH CHEST WADERS @THESE WATER LEVELS.TWO DATA SHEETS; 926 CANOE AND 333 BACKPACK WHICH THE EFFORTS WERE ADDED TOGETHER. YOP3EO81194 YORK POLECAT 3 E 08/11/94 1200 1247 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP3E111494 YORK POLECAT 3 E 11/14/94 1200 960 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X PAGE NO. 4 DATE: 04/27/95 COLLECTION LOCATION REPORT LOCATION SITE HAB INVERT CODE DRAINAGE STREAM ORDER CODE -DATE TIME EFFORT TEMP CORD pH DO ASMT SAMPLE NOTES ---------- -------- ---------- ----- ---- -------- ---- ------ ---- ------ ------ ------ ---- -------- ----- YOP3Elll793 YORK POLECAT 3 E 11/17/93 1200 611 14.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. C L X YOP3EI11893 YORK POLECAT 3 E 11/18/93 1200 0 11.80 65.00 6.30 8.60 T. YOP3M020294 YORK POLECAT 3 M 02/02/94 1200 0 2.00 28.00 7.00 16.60 P. YOP3MO4O894 YORK POLECAT 3 M 04/08/94 1200 787 13.00 30.00 6.20 9.30 F. X X X 106 PACES YOP3MG71994 YORK POLECAT 3 M 07/19/94 1200 0 24.00 70.00 6.90 7.30 T. YOP3MO80994 YORK POLECAT 3 9 08/09/94 1200 964 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP3M101794 YORK POLECAT 3 M 10/17/94 1200 616 11.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP3Xlll793 YORK POLECAT 3 M 11/17/93 1200 568 14.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T. X X X YOP4R060794 YORK POLECAT 4 R 06/07/94 1200 942 24.00 64.00 0.90 7.20 T. X X X 106 PACES YOP4R060794 YORK POLECAT 4 R 06/07/94 1200 0 24.00 64.00 6.90 7.20 T. YOP0071693 YORK POLECAT 4 R 07/16/93 1200 804 27.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOPQ071994 YORK POLECAT 4 R 07/19/94 1200 0 26.00 62.00 6.90 7.60 T. YOPQ081194 YORK POLECAT 4 R 08/11/94 1200 1178 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X YOP0101794 YORK POLECAT 4 R 10/17/94 1200 681 13.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F. X X X COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA A Natural Heritage Inventory of the Polecat Creek Watershed, Caroline County-Nirginia and Preliminary Results of a M rk-Reca ture Study Final Report Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Natural Heritiage 1500 East Main Street, Suite 312 Richmond, VA 23219 Telephone (804) 786-7951 Natural Herltage Technical Document #95-12, March 1995 4 D '@ Department of Conservation & Recreation CR CONSERVING VIRGINIAS NATURAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES A NATURAL HERITAGE INVENTORY OF THE POLECAT CREEK WATERSHED, CAROLINE COUNTY, VIRGINIA AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF A MARK-RECAPTURE STUDY OF ELLIPTIO COMPLANATA FINAL REPORT By: Christopher S. Hobson, Dirk J. Stevenson and William H. Moorhead VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE 1500 East Main Street, Suite 312 Richmond, Virginia 23219 Natural Heritage Technical Report # 95-12 March, 1995 Prepared for: Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department 805 East Broad Street - Suite 701; 8th Street Office Building Richmond, Virginia 23219 This report should be cited as follows: Hobson, C.S., D.J. Stevenson and W.H. Moorhead. 1995. A Natural Heritage Inventory of the Polecat Creek Watershed, Caroline County, Virginia, and Preliminary Results of a Mark-Recapture Study of Elliptio complanata. Natural Heritage Technical Report # 95-12. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, Virginia. Unpublished report submitted to Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department. March, 1995. 60 pp. plus appendices. TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1. - NATURAL HERITAGE INVENTORY OF THE POLECAT CREEK DRAINAGE LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................ iii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................... V I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1 Introduction to the Inventory-Purpose, Methods and Procedures ..................................... 2 Explanation of the Natural Heritage Ranking System ................................................... 3 11. ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CAROLINE COUNTY .......................... 6 General Land Use Patterns ................................................................................... 7 Climate ........................................................................................................... 8 Physiography, Topography, and Geology ................................................................. 8 Hydrology ........................................................................................................ 9 Soils ............................................................................................................. 10 Principal Natural Community (Ecosystem) Types ....................................................... 10 Terrestrial (Upland) Communities ............................................................... 12 Palustrine (Wetland) Communities ............................................................... 13 Summary of Community Elements ............................................................... 16 Summary of Plant and Animal Elements ...................................................... 16 Ill. MATERIALS AND METHODS .......................................................................... 18 Overview of Natural Heritage Inventory Methodology ............................................... 19 Botanical Inventory ........................................................................................... 20 Zoological Inventory ......................................................................................... 21 Community Inventory ........................................................................................ 22 IV. SITE REPORTS ............................................................................................... 25 Introduction to the Site Reports ............................................................................ 26 Coleman's Mill Bog .......................................................................................... 28 Lower Polecat Creek ......................................................................................... 35 Penola Bottornland ............................................................................................ 39 V. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................... 44 VI. SUMMARY OF PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ........... 46 VII. INFORMATION SOURCE REFERENCES ............................................................ 50 SECTION 11: A MARK-RECAPTURE STUDY OF ELLIPY70 COMPL,4NATA ......................... 52 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 53 li. MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................ * ............................................. 54 III. SITE DESCRIPTIONS ...................................................................................... 54 IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................................... 55 V. SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 56 APPENDIX A: Classification of Virginia's Indigenous Biotic Communities APPENDIX B: Watchlist species found at Polecat Creek APPENDIX C: Data collected from mussels at Polecat Creek and Stevens Mill Run, sites B and D by species. LIST OF TABLES 1. Definition of Natural Heritage Rarity Ranks .............................................................3 2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species Status Codes ...................................................5 3. Generalized Successional Development of Flooded Wetlands .................................... 14 4. Species Monitored By Virginia Department Of Conservation And Recreation/Division Of Natural Heritage Found Within The Polecat Creek Watershed During 1994-1995 ...................................................... 17 LIST OF FIGURES 1. Location of Polecat Creek watershed within Virginia ............................................... 7 2. Physiographic Context of Polecat Creek watershed, Caroline County, Virginia ............... 9 3. Coleman's Mill Bog Conservation Planning Boundary .......................................................................... 31 4. Coleman's Mill Bog Location of Juncus caesatiensis ........................................................................... 32 5. Coleman's Mill Bog Location of Sarracenia purpurea .......................................................................... 33 6. Coleman's Mill Bog Location of Argia bipuncrulata ............................................................................ 34 7. Lower Polecat Creek Conservation Planning Boundary .......................................................................... 37 8. Lower Polecat Creek Location of Eutrophic Seasonally Flooded Forest ..................................................... 38 9. Penola bottomland Conservation Planning boundary .......................................................................... 41 10. Penola bottornland Location of Macromia illinoiensis georgina ............................................................. 42 11. Penola bottomland Location of Somatochlorafilosa ............................................................................ 43 12. Size measurements taken on Elliptio coniplanata ....................................................... 58 13. Frequency distribution histogram for sites B and D - total number of individuals ............. 59 14 Frequency distribution histogram and pie charts for sites B and D - percent of population ....................................................................................... 60 iv ACKNOVMEDGEMENTS This Natural Heritage Inventory of the Polecat Creek watershed was accomplished through the funding, expertise, and assistance of numerous individuals other than the primary author. These contributions are recognized here. This inventory was funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration through the Coastal Program of the Department of Environmental Quality. Personnel with the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department administered the contract, provided assistance in arranging access, and supplied information about natural resources and land use practices within the watershed. In particular, Jean Tingler, served as Polecat Creek project coordinator for this inventory and Darryl Glover assisted with various aspects of the project. Natural Heritage Inventories conducted by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation's Division of Natural Heritage (DNH) are a group effort. DNH field biologists, including the author, planned and conducted all field work. Surveys were conducted by the following DNH personnel: Steven M. Roble, Allen J. Belden, Gary P. Fleming, William H. Moorhead, and Dirk J. Stevenson. Field zoologist Christopher S. Hobson served as project leader. Data Management staff, including Steve Carter-Lovejoy, Harold Evans, and Megan Rollins, assisted in this survey from start to finish, providing lists of potential rare species for the area in the initial stages, and processing data on the rare species and significant communities found at Polecat Creek. Caren A. Caljouw reviewed management and protection recommendations. Leslie D. Trew was responsible for the overall administration and coordination of the contract, while Patricia Jarrell handled financial affairs. Finally, Faye McKinney assisted by securing vehicles, coordinating itineraries, completing our travel expense reports, and assisting in many other administrative tasks. We also thank Steven M. Roble, Gary P. Fleming, Leslie D. Trew, and Allen J. Belden for their assistance in reviewing portions of this manuscript. Some of the information used in this report was compiled by Gary P. Fleming and Nancy Van Alstine for use in previous natural heritage inventory reports. The use of this information was extremely helpful in many ways and is greatly appreciated. 0 I. INTRODUCTION 0 0 I INTRODUCTION TO TIRE INVENTORY PURPOSE, METHODS, AND PROCEDURES In March, 1993, the Coastal Program of the Department of Environmental Quality contracted with the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department (CBLAD) and the Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage (DCR-DNH) to conduct a natural heritage resource inventory and survey of freshwater mussels within the watershed of Polecat Creek, Caroline County, Virginia. Initially, this project included surveys for the federally endangered dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) at a proposed water quality monitoring station (site E) in compliance with United States Fish and Wildlife Service requirements for wedand permits. Four other proposed gauge station sites were surveyed during early 1994 by Phillip H. Stevenson (Stevenson, 1994). This portion of the project was completed during 1994. Additionally, three populations of the eastern elliptio (Elliptio complanata) were to be identified and marked so that the effects of nearby land development on the survival of these animals could be monitored during the ten year water quality monitoring project. This report includes results from the natural heritage resource inventory (Section 1) and preliminary data from the mark- recapture study (Section 11). The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation's Division of Natural Heritage (DNH) is the state agency responsible by statutory authority under the Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act (Section 10. 1-209 through 217, Code of ViMiRW for inventory, database maintenance, protection, and management of Virginia's natural heritage resources. Such resources are defined as the habitats of rare, threatened, or endangered plant and animal species, rare or state significant communities, and other natural features. The Department of Conservation and Recreation - Division of Natural Heritage represents the first comprehensive attempt to identify the Commonwealth's most significant natural areas through ongoing scientific biological survey. Data gathered during this state-wide survey are assembled and managed through a sophisticated Biological and Conservation Data System (BCD) in which information on ecosystems and species, their biology, habitats, locations, conservation status, and management needs is continually updated and refined. Ile DNH is part of an international network of natural heritage programs, coordinated by The Nature Conservancy, which uses standardized inventory methodologies and BCD technology. The intent of the Polecat Creek Natural Heritage Inventory is to verify and document the presence (or absence), distribution, and population status of specific elements of biological diversity: federally listed threatened or endangered species; proposed candidate species for federal listing; other rare plant and animal species monitored by DNH; and communities considered to be rare or exemplary by DNH. The practical goal of the inventory is to assist CBLAD personnel, private landowners, and local governments in decisions concerning land use, maintenance activities, public access, siting of facilities, and management of areas containing natural heritage resources. DNH work on the inventory began during the spring of 1994 with a comprehensive review of existing information about the Polecat Creek watershed area. Field surveys were initiated in May, 1994 and continued through March, 1995. During this period DNH botanists, zoologists and community ecologists carried out surveys in areas determined to have potential for rare species and significant communities. Overall coordination of the project was through Jean Tingler of the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department. A report summarizing the results of rare mussel surveys by DNH at gauging station E was completed during late 1994. All information collected during the project period is reported herein, and will be incorporated into the DNH Biological and Conservation Data System. 2 EXPLANATION OF THE NATURAL BERITAGE RANKING SYSTEM Each of the significant natural features (species, community type, etc.) monitored by DNH is considered an element of natural diversity, or simply an element. Each element is assigned a rank that indicates its relative rarity on a five-point scale (1 = extremely rare; 5 = abundant; Table 1). The primary criterion for ranking elements is the number of occurrences, i.e. the number of known distinct localities or populations. Also of great importance is the number of individuals at each locality or, for highly mobile organisms, the total number of individuals. Other considerations include the condition of the occurrences, the number of protected occurrences, and threats. However, the emphasis remains on the number of occurrences, so that ranks essentially are an index of known biological rarity. These ranks are assigned both in terms of the element's rarity within Virginia (its State or S-rank) and the element's rarity over its entire range (its Global or G-rank). Subspecies and varieties are assigned a Taxonomic (T-) rank in addition to their G-rank. Taken together, these ranks give a concise picture of an element's rarity. For example, a designated rank of G5/S I indicates an element which is abundant and secure range-wide, but extremely rare in Virginia. Ranks for community types are provisional, or in many cases lacking, due to ongoing efforts by the Natural Heritage network to classify community taxa. Rarity ranks used by DNH are not legal designations, and they are continuously updated to reflect new information. Table 1. Definition of Natural Heritage state rarity ranks. Global ranks are similar, but refer to a species' range-wide status. Note that GA and GN are not used and GX means extinct. Sometimes ranks are combined (e.g. S1S2) to indicate intermediate or somewhat unclear status. Elements with uncertain taxonomic validity are denoted by the letter Q, after the global rank. Ranks for most community types have not been generated due to ongoing community classification efforts. These ranks should not be interpreted as legal designations. S1 Extremely rare; usually 5 or fewer occurrences in the state; or may have a few remaining individuals; often especially vulnerable to extirpation. S2 Very rare; usually between 5 and 20 occurrences; or few occurrences with many individuals; often susceptible to becoming endangered. S3 Rare to uncommon; usually between 20 and 100 occurrences; may have fewer occurrences, but with a large number of individuals in some populations; may be susceptible to large-scale disturbances. S4 Common; usually more than 100 occurrences, but may be fewer with many large populations; may be restricted to only a portion of the state; usually not susceptible to immediate threats. S5 Very common; demonstrably secure under present conditions. SA Accidental in the state. SH Historically known from the state, but not verified for an extended period, usually more than 15 years; this rank is used primarily when inventory has been attempted recently. SN Regularly occurring migrants or transient species which are non-breeding, seasonal residents. (Note that congregation and staging areas are monitored separately). 3 Table 1. (continued) SU Status uncertain, often because of low search effort or cryptic nature of the element. Sx Apparently extirpated from the state The spot on the landscape that supports a natural heritage resource is an element occurrence. Occasionally, separate but nearby locations of a species or community element are treated as subpopulations (species) or sub-occurrences (community) of the same occurrence due to factors such as the probability of gene flow or hydrologic linkage. DNH has mapped over 7,400 element occurrences in Virginia. Information on the location and quality of these element occuff ences is computerized within the Division's BCD system, and additional information is recorded on maps and in manual files. In addition to ranking each element's rarity, each element occurrence is ranked to differentiate large, outstanding occurrences from small, vulnerable ones. In this way, protection efforts can be aimed not only at the rarest elements, but at the best examples of each. Species occurrences are ranked in terms of quality (size, vigor, etc.) of the population; the condition (pristine to disturbed) of the habitat; the viability of the population; and the defensibility (ease or difficulty of protecting) of the occurrence. Community occurrences are ranked according to their size and overall natural condition. These element occurrence ranks range from A (excellent) to D (poor). Sometimes these ranks are combined to indicate intermediate or somewhat unclear status, e.g. AB or CD, etc. In a few cases, especially those involving cryptic animal elements, field data may not be sufficient to reliably rank an occurrence. In such cases a rank of E (extant) may be given. Element occurrence ranks reflect the current condition of the species' population or community. A poorly-ranked element occurrence can, with time, become highly-ranked as a result of successful management or restoration. Element ranks and element occurrence ranks form the basis for ranking the overall significance of sites. Site biodiversity ranks (B-ranks) are used to prioritize protection efforts, and are defined as follows: BI Outstanding Significance: only site known for an element; an excellent occurrence of a G1 species; or the world's best example of a community type. B2 Very High Significance: excellent example of a rare community type; good occurrence of a G1 species; or excellent occurrence of a G2 or G3 species. B3 High Significanc : excellent example of any community type; good occurrence of a G3 species. B4 Moderate Significance: good example of a community type; excellent or good occurrence of state-rare species. B5 General Biodiversijy Significance: good or marginal occurrence of a community type or state-rare species. Note: sites supporting rare subspecies or varieties are considered slightly less significant than sites supporting similarly ranked species. 4 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is responsible for the listing of endangered and threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Federally listed species (including subspecific taxa) are afforded a degree of legal protection under the Act, and therefore sites supporting these species need to be highlighted. USFWS also maintains a review listing of potential candidate endangered and threatened taxa. Table 2 defines the various status categories used by USFWS and followed in this report. The status category of candidate species is based on the Service's current level of knowledge about the biological vulnerability of and threats to a species. In Virginia, two acts have authorized the creation of official state endangered and threatened species lists. One act (section 29.1-563 through 570, Code of Virginia), administered by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF), authorizes listing of fish and wildlife species, not including insects. The Endangered Plant and Insect Species Act, (section 3.1-1020 through 1030, Code of Virgini , administered by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS), allows for listing of plant and insect species. In general, these acts prohibit or regulate taking, possessing, buying, selling, transporting, exporting, or shipping of any endangered or threatened species appearing on the official lists. Species protected by these acts are indicated as either listed endangered (LE) or listed threatened (LT). Species under consideration for listing are indicated as candidates (C). Table 2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service species status codes, with abbreviated definitions. LE Listed endangered LT Listed threatened PE Proposed to be listed as endangered PT Proposed to be listed as threatened S Synonyms C1 Candidate, category 1: status data supports listing of taxon as endangered or threatened, but listing has been delayed by pending proposals of higher priority taxa. C2 Candidate, category 2: evidence of vulnerability, but insufficient status data exists. 3A Persuasive evidence exists that taxon is extinct. 3B Name that does not represent a distinct taxon, according to recently published revisions and monographs. 3C Taxon proven to be more abundant or widespread than previously believed and/or those that are not subject to any identifiable threat. 5 0 II. ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 0 POLECAT CREEK WATERSHED,, CAROLINE COUNTY 0 6 A brief discussion of the general environmental characteristics of the Polecat Creek watershed is important for understanding the context in which significant natural communities and rare biota occur. Unless otherwise cited, county-wide statistics cited in this section are from Lillywhite and Niemann (1993) and Thompson (1991). GENERAL LAND USE PATTERNS Polecat Creek is located in south-central Caroline County, approximately 30 miles north of Richmond, and approximately 70 miles SSE of Washington D.C. (Fig 1). The headwaters originate in the Piedmont, flow across the fall zone into the Coastal Plain and converge with the Mattaponi River. The Mattaponi is a major tributary of the York River, which flows into the southern portion of the Chesapeake Bay. Figure 1. Location of Polecat Creek watershed in Virginia 0 Caroline County is classified as 100% rural, with a total acreage of 342,695 and a population of 19,217 in 1990. Land use in the county as a whole is predominantly forestry-related, with forest lands comprising 76 Oo' of the total acreage. Only about 18 % of the county's acreage is utilized for agriculture (D. Eastham, U.S. Soil Conservation Service, pers. comm. to Gary P. Fleming, 1994). The predominant land cover in the watershed is forest, followed by open fields and pastureland. The principal crops in the county are soybeans, wheat, barley, and corn, with a very small amount of grazing land included. The remaining 6% of the county consists of miscellaneous residential, developed, and open wedand areas. There are no major industries and, at present, only a limited amount of commercial and residential growth occurring around the towns of Bowling Green and Port Royal, located just NNE and NE of the drainage respectively. Significant urban development activity is expected in the area over the next ten years as a large portion of the Polecat Creek watershed is designated as primary growth area in the Caroline County comprehensive plan. 7 CLIMA17E Ile climate of the Polecat Creek area is classified as humid subtropical. This term denotes a seasonal temperature pattern with warm to hot summers and mild winters, along with sufficient precipitation to 10 support forests (Woodward and Hofftnan, 1991). The average growing season length in this region is approximately 180 days and the average annual precipitation is 42.69 inches (Hoppe and Jones, 1989). PHYSIOGRAPHY, TOPOGRAPHY, AND GEOLOGY Western portions of the watershed including the headwaters, and several tributaries are located within the Piedmont physiographic province. Topography in this area can be described as hilly, with uplands dissected by deeply entrenched ravines caused by accelerated downcutting of streams. Although the overall character of this region is a gently sloping plain, relief is far from uniform. Soils found in this area are a complex of alluvial and fluvial deposits eroded from the Appalachian highlands to the west. Eastern sections of the creek and several tributaries lie within the Coastal Plain physiographic province, the youngest of Virginia's ecoregions. 'Me Coastal Plain is composed of unconsolidated sands, gravels, and clays eroded from the Appalachian highlands to the west and deposited along the continent margin as the Atlantic Ocean was formed. Over millions of years, changing sea levels, resulting from tectonic and climatic changes, have shaped a series of longitudinal, wave-cut terraces which characterize the province's current topography. North of the James River in Virginia, the Chesapeake Bay and the watersheds of four major rivers dissect the Coastal Plain into four peninsulas: the Eastern shore, the Northern Neck, the Middle Peninsula, and The Peninsula. The Polecat Creek watershed is considered to be in the extreme western portion of the Middle Peninsula. The topography in the watershed is basically a rolling plain bisected by the fall zone between the Coastal Plain and Piedmont physiographic provinces; therefore, characteristics of both can be found. Elevations range from approximately 70 feet above sea level near the Polecat Creek convergence with the Mattaponi River, to approximately 300 feet above sea level near the western edge of the watershed. Although the plain slopes gradually from west to east, relief is far from uniform. Within the Piedmont sections of the watershed, stream dissection is more pronounced with some ravines deeply dissected and entrenched due to the accelerated downcutting of streams. These areas reveal a more pronounced transition into upland habitats than is seen in lower areas of the watershed. Portions of the stream within the Coastal Plain are comparatively more flat and with little topographic relief, creating a fairly mild transition from bottomland habitats into adjacent uplands. This area is characterized by bottomlands which are typically wide and flat allowing the stream to expand into these areas during periods of high water, at times creating large areas of flooded forest and marshy habitats. Several major geological formations underlie this landscape (Mixon et. al., 1989). The Chesapeake Group (TC), which underlies much of the eastern portion of the watershed, consists of fine to coarse quartzose sand, silt, and clay deposited in shallow inner and middle shelf waters of the upper Pliocene and lower Miocene periods. Pliocene Sand and Gravel (TPSG) underlies higher topography, particularly drainage divides, in the western portions of the watershed. Lower Tertiary Deposits (TL) of glauconitic quartz sand and clay-silt underlies the broad, lower valleys and bottomlands within the watershed. Alluvial deposits of the Quaternary and Tertiary periods are common in the central portion of the watershed. Western portions of the watershed are underlain by more resistant bedrock typical of the Piedmont. This region is primarily underlain by the porphyroblastic garnet-biotite gneiss (Ym) complex of late Precambrian or early Paleozoic periods (Rader and Evans 1993). 8 0 Figure 2. Physiographic context of Polecat Creek watershed. (from Woodward and Hoffman, 1991 with copyright permission) 83-o 82-o 81-o 80-o 79-o 78-o 77-o 76-oW 39-o N 39-o was ap a Wildes Mt A 4 Mt APPALACHIAN PLATEALS A. 37-o 37 Beartown CUMBERLAND GAP RIDGE AND VALLEY BLUE RIDGE PIEDMONT PLATEAU COSTAL PLAIN 82-o 81-o 80-o 79-o 78-o 77-o 76-o HYDROLOGY Drainage patterns are more or less dendritic in the gentler topographic areas of the watershed, and distinctly of trellis form in the more deeply dissected areas. Lower elevation areas give way to slow moving backwaters, marshy areas and flooded pools. Major tributaries which drain the western portions of the watershed are Stevens Mill Run, Reedy Creek, De Jarnette Mill Run, and Hackett Creek. Major tributaries in the lower portions of the watershed include, Rafe Swamp, Saddle Swamp, and Millpond Swamp. Several of these tributaries are impounded forming ponds or lakes, most notably Lake Caroline along Stevens Mill Run. Little published information is available on groundwater resources in Caroline County. In neighboring Essex County, well water supplies are obtained from several strata between depths of 50 and 140 feet (Hoppe and Jones, 1989). In areas near the Piedmont, at least some of the deeper water-bearing strata may be located in crystalline rocks which dip steeply under the narrow wedge of sediments deposited at the inner edge of the Coastal Plain. Sand and gravel aquifers within the wedge are generally confined 9 by strata of silt and clay of variable thickness and permeability. The uppermost aquifer, commonly referred to as the water table, is influenced by the local permeability of soils and by topography. The direction of flow within the water table aquifer is generally toward surface water drainage features. SOILS A comprehensive soil survey of Caroline County is currently underway by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS), but is not yet published (G. Ways, pers. comm.). Soils within the watershed are generally moderate to strongly acidic in reactivity. Typic Hapludult soils predominate within the watershed, including the Remlik-Rumford units in upland habitats. Rumford series soils consist of very deep and somewhat excessively drained soils, formed in Coastal Plain sediments. Ile major wetland soil units of the watershed are classified as Bibb-Chastain, Roanoke, Tomotley and Altavista (D. Eastman, pers. comm., 1995). Bibb soils are typically very deep, poorly drained soils, moderately permeable and formed in loamy alluvium on floodplains. The Chastain series consists of deep, poorly drained, nearly level soils that have a clayey subsoil, typically formed in clayey and loamy alluvium on the floodplains. Roanoke series soils consist of deep, poorly drained, nearly level soils that have a dominantly clayey subsoil; these soils are formed in alluvium, mostly on terraces. Soils of the Tomotley series are very deep, nearly level and poorly drained forming in moderately coarse textured to moderately fine textured, fluviomarine sediments on the intermediate terrace. The deep, moderately well drained soils of the Altavista series, are nearly level to gently sloping with a loamy subsoil; these soils are formed in loamy alluvium, mostly on terraces. PRINCIPAL NATURAL COMMUNITY (ECOSYSTEM) TYPES Although much altered by three centuries of human disturbance, temperate broadleaf deciduous forest is the predominant natural vegetation over much of Virginia and the eastern United States. Within the deciduous forest formation, four major vegetation regions recognized by Braun (1950) include portions of Virginia. The Polecat Creek watershed lies within the Oak-Pine region, which includes the state's southern Piedmont and the Coastal Plain north of the James River. To the west, including the state's northern Piedmont and Appalachian Mountains, is the Oak-Chestnut region, which is now modified by the near elimination of American chestnut (Castdnea dentata) by disease. On the Coastal Plain south of the James River, the Southeastern Evergreen Forest region reaches its northern limits. The Oak-Pine region is generally considered a transition zone where pines characteristic of the southeastern states become more common in oak (Quercus spp.);.dominated forests east of the Appalachians. Pine species, including Virginia or scrub pine (Pinus Wrginiana), shortleaf pine (P. echinata), and loblolly pine (P. taeda), are considered much more abundant today than in pre-settlement times, occurring prolifically in early successional communities of abandoned fields and clearcuts. Moreover, loblolly pine is one of the most valuable timber resources, and plantations of this species are .a common and typical sight throughout much of the region. In the original forest, these species probably were scattered associates of oaks and other hardwoods, except in highly xeric habitats, areas of high fire incidence, and areas recovering from catastrophic disturbances (e.g. blow-downs), where they were more abundant and persistent. Small inclusions of mixed hardwoods, bottoniland hardwoods, and other wetland communities are found along streams throughout the Oak-Pine region. Although remnant hardwood stands in the region have undergone some successional modifications as a result of repeated cutting, they are considered somewhat stable - at least on the drier sites - due to vigorous sprout regeneration of dominant oaks. On the better upland sites, shade-intolerant species such 10 as tulip-poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) may become dominant following cutting, while shade-tolerant beech (Fagus grandifolia) usually assumes increasing dominance in the prolonged absence of disturbance. Within the Polecat Creek watershed, loblolly pine is abundant in monocultural plantings, while both loblolly and Virginia pines are dominant in natural early succession stands on many thousands of acres. Nevertheless, considerable upland areas and bottomlands remain forested in hardwoods, and among these, Natural. Heritage ecologists have identified one exemplary mature bottomland hardwood stand. Vegetation within the watershed is decidedly southern in overall character, although representative species from both Coastal Plain and Piedmont habitats can be found. Northern species may occasionally occur in areas with cooler microclimates, such as steep-sided ravines. Ile watershed is typical of other areas within this region of Virginia. Terrestrial (Upland) Communities: Division of Natural Heritage ecologists recognize two broad types of more or less stable, upland forest vegetation within the watershed: 1. Oligotrophic Forest 2. Submesotrophic Forest Oligotrophic forests occupy sites of low fertility and are characterized by an absence of nutrient- demanding species and the strong presence of members of the heath family. Submesotrophic forests are communities of only moderately infertile soil conditions, and are characterized by the presence of somewhat nutrient-demanding species. Because of the sandy, nutrient-poor soils which are common in the watershed, oligotrophic forests are by far the most widespread of these community types. These are oak-dominated forests with a very low diversity of shrub and herbaceous species. Characteristic canopy trees are white oak (Quercus alba), southern red oak (Q. falcata), black oak (Q. velutina), scarlet oak (Q. coccinea), post oak (Q. stellata), blackjack oak (Q. marilandica), hickories (Carya spp.), and some beech, often in mixture with Virginia and/or loblolly pines. Chestnut oak (Q. montana) often dominates on drier gravelly ridges and steep slopes. More or less dense strata of ericaceous (heath family) shrubs - mountain-laurel (Kalmia latifolia), black huckleberry (Gaylussacia baccata), blueberries (Vaccinium spp.) and, more locally, sheep-laurel (Kalmia angustifolia) -- are typical features of oligotrophic forests. Herbaceous growth is sparse, consisting of scattered pink ladyslipper (Qpripedium acaule), spotted wintergreen (Chimaphila maculata), trailing arbutus (Epigaea repens), poverty grass (Danthonia spicata), and a few other species. The exact floristic composition of these stands varies considerably with topography and soil conditions over the watershed and detailed plot sampling undoubtedly would delineate several well-defined associational segregates within the type, Submesotrophic forest communities occur somewhat locally on ravine slopes and non-hydric ravine bottoms. Here, soil nutrient status is slightly enriched by colluvial processes and the prevalence of sandy loam and clay loam strata in the Remlick-Rumford series. The canopy association in these submesotrophic forests is usually dominated by white oak, beech, and tulip-tree. Northern red oak (Quercus rubra), southern red oak, black oak, hickories, and red maple (Acer rubrum) also are present in many stands. In the understory and shrub layers, ericaceous species may be thinly scattered or absent, while flowering dogwood (Cornusflorida) and maple-leaved viburnum. (Viburnum acerifolium) are usually common. Diagnostic herbaceous species include christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), white wood aster (Aster divaricatus), naked-flowered tick-trefoil (Desmodium nudiflorum), violet wood sorrel (Oxalis violacea), wild comfrey (C@noglossum virginianum), short-leaved bluegrass (Poa cuspidata), wedgegrass (Sphenopholis nitida), and spreading sedge (Carex laxiculmis). No old growth upland forest was identified within the areas surveyed. This is not surprising, since mature stands which have escaped cutting (or at least extensive cutting) and the effects of beaver are decidedly rare in the Virginia Coastal Plain. On the other hand, thousands of acres of the watershed are representative of scrubby vegetation and secondary forest stands growing up on abandoned fields and clearcuts. The composition of these communities ranges from shrubby grasslands and pure stands of pine to variable mixtures of fast-growing, light-demanding deciduous tree sprouts, shrubs, and vines. Unless artificially maintained, such communities are temporary and will undergo rapid and inexorable development toward one of the more climax types of forest vegetation discussed above. Thouglivaluable 12 for wildlife habitat, watercourse and wetland buffer, soil stabilization, and nature study, among other things, these communities are neither uncommon nor exceptional from a biological or ecological point of view, and they therefore cannot be considered significant from a natural heritage perspective. Palustrine (Wetland) Communities: It is clear from field surveys that wetlands of the Polecat Creek watershed are dynamic ecosystems comprising an often shifting mosaic of vegetation types and biota. In these habitats, the nature of soils, hydrologic regimes, vegetation communities, and species populations may be frequently altered in a given locality by unpredictable flooding, various natural and artificial impoundments, establishment and abandonment of beaver ponds, and so forth. Moreover, large-scale or catastrophic alterations to one portion of a watershed may have secondary impacts on adjacent, unaltered portions. More than any other factor, the extensive activities of beavers, often stimulated by the construction of culverted roadways across drainages, are responsible for the creation and maintenance of open wetland habitats. While beavers have always been members of this region's fauna, their populations have increased dramatically in recent decades and have led to widespread vegetational and hydrologic changes. However temporal they may be, active or abandoned beaver ponds can be considered "natural" habitats and sometimes support significant communities or rare species. Within the Polecat Creek watershed's dynamically changing wetlands, the generalized (idealized) trend of vegetational development in seasonally to semipermanently flooded palustrine habitats is depicted in Table 3. A few species or genera typical of each successional stage are listed. 13 Table 3. Generalized Successional Development of Flooded Wetland Freshwater Emergent Aquatics -(Nontidal) -Palustrine -Palustrine Marsh Scrub Forest arrow-arum sedge spp. common alder river birch American bur-reed rush spp. black willow sweetgum, cat-tail grass spp. red maple red maple oaks Oater stages) Though it was beyond the scope of this survey to classify all wetlands in the survey area, several broad types of natural vegetated wetland communities were identified, in the course of field survey of accessible areas (refer to Appendix A for an explanation of the classification system used by Division of Natural Heritage ecologists). Field survey and analysis of secondary sources (aerial photographs, topographic maps, etc.) suggest that virtually all of the vegetated wetland communities in the watershed are one of the following types: 1. Eutrophic Seasonally Flooded Forest 2. Eutrophic Semipermanently Flooded Woodland 3. Eutrophic Semipermanently Flooded Scrub 4. Eutrophic Semipermanently Flooded Herbaceous Vegetation 5. Oligotrophic Saturated Forest 6. Oligotrophic Saturated Herbaceous Vegetation 7. Submergent/Floating-leaved Vegetation 0 Type 1, Eutrophic Seasonally Flooded Forest, is the natural climax community type that would occupy the majority of the bottomland sites outside the stream channel in the absence of disturbance by beaver and humans. Much of the bottomland presently supports early successional stages of this community type. The canopy is usually dominated by river birch (Betula nigra), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and red maple (Acer rubrwn). As this community matures, certain oaks tend to become more prevalent, as evidenced by the scattered, old individuals of basket oak (Quercus michauxii) and willow oak. (Quercus phellos). Heritage ecologists identified one significant occurrence of this community, in old growth condition, near the confluence of Polecat Creek and the Mattaponi River. Faunal associates of this community type are generally common and widespread species such as the swamp spreadwing (Lestes Wgilax), green ftog (Rana darnitans), eastern mud turtle (Kinosternon subrubrum), Carolina Wren (7hyrothorus ludoidcianus), northern cricket frog (Acris crepitans), Wood Duck (Aft sponsa), and the swamp darner (Epiaeschna heros). In the vicinity of the significant community, the carpenter frog (Rana Wrgatipes), a watchlist species, is known historically, and was recorded further upstream in a similar community during 1994. Types 2 through 4 above, and 7 in part, are open wetlands represented in the Polecat Creek watershed mostly by communities associated with beaver impoundments, and are seral stages dependent on beaver activity to prevent or reverse succession to forest, as discussed at the beginning of the section above. Type 5 above, Oligotrophic Saturated Forest, is the prevalent wetland community in the watershed outside of the Polecat Creek bottomlands. It is one of the more interesting forested wetland community types 14 of the watershed, and is rarely, if ever, inundated by flooding. Commonly referred to as "seepage swamps", such communities occupy the bottoms of headwaters streams and their tributaries, where abundant groundwater seepage is the primary hydrological influence. Drainage in these habitats is typically diffuse with braided channels interlaced around saturated hummocks in a sandy or peaty substrate. Classified as oligotrophic saturated forest, the vegetation which occupies undisturbed habitats of this type is widely but somewhat locally distributed in the Coastal Plain. The dominant canopy species of this community type are red maple (Acer rubrum) and Blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica), with tulip- poplar (Liriodendron tulip@fera) and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) of occasional importance in the stand. Characteristic shrubs are sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), sweet pepperbush (Gethra alnifolia), highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), swamp azalea (Rhododendron viscosum), and possumhaw viburnum. (Viburnum nudum). Herbaceous plants which could be considered "indicator" species of the community include skunk-cabbage (Symplocarpus foetidus), kidneyleaf grass-of-parnassus (Parnassia asarifolia), Collins' sedge (Carex collinsii), and twining bartonia (Bartoniapaniculata). At ground level, sphagnum mosses (Sphagnum spp.) cover the hummocks with expansive mats. Oligotrophic saturated forests have become increasingly fragmented and threatened by the recent expansion of beaver populations in the upper portions of many drainages in Caroline County. Several rare odonates are typical of seepage swamp habitats including the gray petaltail (Tachopteryx thoreyi), sphagnum sprite (Nehalennia gracilis), and occasionally the seepage dancer (Argia bipunctulata). Other species which may be associated with this habitat include the spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata), four-toed salamander (Hemidacrylium scutatum), northern dusky salamander (Desmognathusfuscus), and the erroneus biddie (Cordulegaster erronea). The federally listed swamp-pink (Helonias bullata) has been found near the Polecat Creek watershed in this community type. Within the watershed, it was not found in those areas which could be accessed for this survey., However, one of the areas that could not be accessed for field survey, comprising the headwaters of Saddle Swamp near McBryant Comer, appears to have potential for this community type and Helonias bullata, based on map and aerial photograph analysis, and reconnaissance from public roads. Type 6 above, Oligotrophic Saturated Herbaceous Vegetation, are open wetlands that are represented in this watershed only by communities created by beaver or man-made disturbances, such as old pond bottom wet meadows, and wet meadows maintained by mowing or grazing, in yards, pastures, and right- of-ways. In most cases the original natural climax vegetation in these areas was Oligotrophic Saturated Forest, or seepage swamp. Naturally open oligotrophic seepage communities are extremely rare, but a number of light-demanding rare plant species that are native to these communities can sometimes occur in artificially maintained open communities, depending in large part on the nature of the disturbance that is keeping these communities open. Ile two rare plants confirnied by this survey, Juncus caesariensis and Sarraceniapurpurea, are found in thiscommu type in a powerline right-of-way, which appears to be kept open by occassional "bushhogging". Also found in this community type was the seepage dancer (Argia bipunctulata), a denizen of sphagnous seeps with emergent vegetation. Other species such as the eastern red damsel (Amphiagrion sauclum), the four-toed salamander, southern bog clubmoss (Lycopodiella appressa), and the citrine forktail (Ischnura hastata) can be found in these habitats. Type 7, Submergent/Floating-leaved Vegetation, is the community type into which fall the perennial watercourses and shallow impoundments and portions of impoundments in the watershed. Within the drainage this habitat supports a variety of common and widespread species such as the eastern elliptio (Elliptio complanata), larvae of the fawn darner (Boyeria vinosa) and the common whitetail (Libellula lydia). Several rare or watchlist species are associated with this habitat including the least brook lamprey 15 (Lampetra aepypetra), mud sunfish (Acantharcuspomotis), squawfoot (Strophitus undulatus), and Georgia river cruiser (Macromia illinoiensis georgina), among others. Lactistrine Communities: Those portions of the impoundments in the watershed which are too deep to support vegetation fall into the Lacustrine System, which has not yet been subdivided in the current Division of Natural Heritage ecological classification. All occurrences of this community type in the watershed are man-made. The largest, and perhaps the only, occurrence is in Lake Caroline. There is a historic record for low water- milfbil (Myriophyllwn humile) from Lake Caroline. However, the lake is currently thought to be too eutrophic for this species to occur. Summary of Community Elements: One community occurrence considered to be significant by Division of Natural Heritage ecologists was documented in the watershed: a stand of bottomland forest in old-growth condition, classified as Eutrophic Seasonally Flooded Forest. Refer to the Lower Polecat Creek site report for a complete description. Summary of Plant and Animal Elements: A total of two plant element occurrences and three animal element occurrences were documented in the watershed. All of the animals are members of the insect Order Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies). Summary lists are provided in Table 4, which includes all federal candidate species and other species monitored by DNH. Global and state ranks, and legal statuses are included. Several watchlist species were also recorded during this inventory, a summary is provided in Appendix B. A historic occuff ence of low water-milfbil (Myriophyllum hwnile) is known from Lake Caroline, but is not included based on current conditions in the lake. 16 Table 4. SPECIES MONITORED BY VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATTON/DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE FOUND WITHIN THE POLECAT CREEK WATERSHED DURING 1994-1995. GLOBAL STATE VA NUMBER RARrrY RARrrY USFWS LEGAL OF ELEMENT NAME RANK RANK STATUS STATUS OCCURRENCES Plants: Juncus caesariensis G2 S2 C2 C 1 New Jersey rush Sarracenia purpurea G5 S2S3 I Northern pitcher plant Animals: Argia bipundulata G4 S2S3 I seepage dancer Macromia iflinoiensis G5T5 SIS2 1 georgina Georgia river cruiser Somatochlora flosa G5 S2 I fine-lined emerald 17 9 III. MATERIALS AND METHODS 46 0 18 OVERVIEW OF NATURAL HERITAGE INVENTORY METHODOLOGY Staff of the DCR-DNH conduct natural heritage inventories in a systematic and prioritized manner. In general, the most threatened geographic areas, habitats, and species receive inventory priority. Adequately funded inventories carried out over several months or even years, typically allow for very intensive sampling of potential habitats. This may be carried a step further if sampling is confined to a restricted geographic area providing for a more focused survey. Areas within the watershed to which access could be gained during the study period were surveyed. Unfortunately, several areas which held potential for rare species or exemplary communities were not surveyed during 1994-1995. Natural heritage inventories usually are conducted in six basic stages: 1. Review of aerial photographs and maps. Aerial photographs of the entire survey area are reviewed in detail to identify potential natural areas to be studied in subsequent stages. When possible, both the oldest available photographs and the most recent ones are examined. Comparing these two sets of photographs helps determine how long forests and other vegetation types have been in their current condition. To aid in their interpretation, the photographs are cross-referenced with topographic, wetlands, and soils maps. 2. Review of existin2 information. Museum collections are visited by DNH staff, and specimen label information is recorded for rare species. Published and unpublished information on natural areas within the inventory area is collected and assimilated in conjunction with the review of aerial photographs. Maps of lands within the survey area are gathered, BCD databases are accessed, and the known distribution of natural heritage resources is examined. Local naturalists, soil conservationists, foresters, and college faculty often are consulted for additional information. During this stage, some potential natural areas are eliminated from further consideration while others are added. 3. Aerial reconnaissance. When possible, selected potential natural areas are studied in more detail by aerial reconnaissance using small aircraft. 4. Initial ggound survey. Initial ground reconnaissance is conducted in targeted, high priority sites. During this stage, land use activities are assessed, conspicuous element occurrences are documented, and, if necessary, follow-up visits are planned. 5. Thorough inventory of the site. During this stage, detailed information is collected on the rare species and exemplary natural communities present at a site. Portions of a site not visited on foot are evaluated on the basis of aerial photographs and other information. The area of land needed to protect the special biological features is determined. Threats and past or present disturbances are also evaluated. Element occurrence data are transcribed onto DNH maps and entered into the BCD system. Throughout this stage of concentrated field inventory, continual communication between DNH project team members (botanists, zoologists, and ecologists) is emphasized to ensure that all significant natural areas are visited by appropriate specialists and that data are coordinated. In addition, some flexibility is built into the process so that priorities can be adjusted when unexpected elements are encountered. 19 6. Cowilation of resul!@i and ingparation of final rgport. As field work is completed, DNH biolog ists review the information gathered and rank sites according to their ecological significance. Maps are drawn showing preliminary conservation planning boundaries, and protection and management recommendations are written. These are combined with site reports and other required information in preparing a final report. The materials and methodology employed by the major disciplines in carrying out the Polecat Creek inventory are summarized below: BOTANICAL INVENTORY For purposes of this study, rare plants are defined as the rarest known species in the Commonwealth. They include species with global ranks of Gl, G2, and G3, and state ranks of S1, S2, S3, SH, SX, and SU. Data on species with state ranks of S1, S2 (or S2S3), SH, and SX are maintained in the BCD system and summarized annually on a master list of Virginia's rare plants. Species with state ranks of S3 and SU are not tracked using BCD, but maintained on a separate "watchlist." Only general information about watchlist species is recorded in the field and maintained in manual information files. To initiate the inventory of rare plants within the Polecat Creek watershed, existing data on element occuff ences within and near the area to be surveyed were obtained from the BCD database and reviewed. Additional information was gathered from botanical literature and from examination of collections at the following institutions: College of William and Mary, George Mason University, Longwood College, Lynchburg College, National Arboretum, Old Dominion University, University of Richmond, U.S. National Herbarium (Smithsonian Institution), University of North Carolina, Virginia Commonwealth University, and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. This preliminary research indicated that three rare plants were known from the watershed, New Jersey rush (Juncus caesariensis), was known from a collection near Coleman's Mill Crossing within the Polecat Creek drainage. Low water-milfbil (Myrlophyllwn humile) was known from Lake Caroline which was briefly surveyed during 1993 by DNH botanists, and dwarf chinquapin oak (Quercus prinoides) is known from two sites along the drainage divide near Peatross, this species was not found within the watershed. Information on the watershed landscape was gathered through examination of aerial photographs, geologic maps, and topographic maps. These sources were examined to delineate the distribution of plant habitats and to identify sites with high potential for rare species occurrences. Data compiled on the area's rare plants, along with information on the distribution of plant habitats, was used to formulate field plans and prioritize field investigations. In early spring of 1994, DNH botanists met to develop field plans for the c orning season. During planning meetings, aerial photographs were re-examined to ensure that those areas most likely to support rare plants were checked. During the field investigations, communication between field botanists, ecologists, zoologists, and CBLAD personnel ensured that new data were shared and that all significant rare plant habitats were investigated. Botanical field work began in August 1994. Habitat for potential rare plant species within the watershed was surveyed during the appropriate season for the target species. Field botanist Allen J. Belden was responsible for the field work, with considerable contributions also coming from DNH ecologists Gary P. Fleming and William H. Moorhead. Jean Tingler, Polecat Creek project coordinator, provided much logistical assistance and contributed to some of the survey work. 20 During the botanical investigation, field data were recorded during each site survey and were coordinated with data collected from the same site by ecologists and zoologists. These data included the site location, directions, and a site description, as well as comments on land use, potential hazards, exotic flora and fauna, and off-site considerations. When rare plant occurrences were located, additional data were recorded, including the date(s) when the species was found, population boundaries and concentrations within those boundaries, approximate number of individuals, reproductive and phenological status, and species viability. Habitat factors such as moisture, light, and associated species, as well as any apparent immediate or long-term threats to the rare species population were also noted. Photographs were taken or voucher specimens were collected to verify the identity of all rare species, and each occurrence was ranked on the basis of all available data. ZOOLOGICAL HWENTORY For the purposes of this study, rare animals are defined as the rarest known species in the Commonwealth. They include species with global ranks of G1, G2, and G3, and state ranks of S1, S2, S3, SH, SX, and SU. Data on species with state ranks of S 1, S2 (or S2S3), SH, and SX are maintained in the BCD system and summarized annually on a master list of Virginia's rare animals. Most species with state ranks of S3 and SU are not tracked using BCD, but maintained on a separate "watchlist." Only general information about watchlist species is recorded in the field and maintained in manual information files. To initiate inventory of rare animals at Polecat Creek, existing data on element occurrences within and near the installation were obtained from the BCD database and reviewed. Additional information was gathered from zoological literature and from examination of selected collections at the following institutions: U.S. Museum of Natural History, the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Lord Fairfax Community College, Eastern Mennonite College, Old Dominion University, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia Commonwealth University, and the Virginia Muse-am of Natural History. This preliminary research indicated that no rare animal occurrences were known from the Polecat Creek drainage. However, surveys conducted at Fort A.P. Hill, in Caroline County during 1992, 1993, and 1994 revealed several rare odonates (dragonflies and damselflies), one rare crustacean, and two amphibian species which could potentially occur within the drainage. Also, a number of DNH watchlist species are known from the vicinity of Polecat Creek including the carpenter frog (Rana virgatipes), rainbow snake (Farancia erytrogramma), mud sunfish (Acantharcus poinotis), American brook lamprey (Lainpetra appendix) and several odonate species. During the spring of 1994, aerial photographs and various map sources were consulted to determine the extent of potential rare animal habitats. Subsequently, a field plan, based on all of the available preliminary information, was developed to direct investigation of potential rare species habitats for all animal groups. Field work was initiated in May, 1994 and continued through March, 1995. These investigations, which covered birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, fish, mussels, odonates (dragonflies and damselflies), butterflies, and other invertebrates, required repeated visits to several sites and potential habitats at different seasons. DNH zoologists Christopher S. Hobson, Dirk J. Stevenson, and Steven M. Roble were responsible for the work. Jean Tingler (CBLAD), Polecat Creek project coordinator, provided much logistical assistance and contributed to the survey work. 21 A variety of inventory and sampling methods were employed by the team's zoologists: SweQ nets - lepidopterans, odonates, tiger beetles, and other flying invertebrates were sampled in terrestrial and aquatic habitats using sweep nets. Dil) nets - amphibians, fish, aquatic reptiles, and aquatic invertebrates were sampled using dip nets. Hand collection - reptiles and amphibians, as well as some invertebrates, were collected by hand. Transects were walked through terrestrial habitats, where various cover objects were overturned in search of cryptic species. Minnow Ms - small fish, aquatic amphibians and reptiles, and aquatic invertebrates were sampled with minnow traps. Minnow traps were standard two-piece, dual-funnel, cage-type traps with small mesh. Aguascope - mussel surveys were conducted using aquascopes made of 5-gallon buckets with see-through bottoms; these were used to see below the surface in riffle areas and deep or murky water. Mussels were removed from the substrate for identification and subsequently returned to the substrate in proper orientation. Shell material was collected by hand ftoin muskrat middens, sand bars, and the stream bed when appropriate. Further information concerning mussel survey methods is provided in the accompanying mark-recapture project report. Transects - transects were surveyed in various terrestrial and aquatic habitats for rare lepidopterans and odonates. As. in the botanical inventory, complete data were recorded for each site surveyed and additional data were recorded when rare animal occurrences were located. In cases where these sites were also visited by botanists and ecologists, the data were coordinated. All occurrences were ranked on the basis of available field data. COMMUNITY INWNTORY The need to protect rare species is generally well understood and appreciated, but the need to protect indigenous biotic communities sometimes requires explanation. Community classification, inventory, and protection should be regarded as an essential complement to rare species inventories. Communities represent functioning units of the landscape which: 1. support myriad life forms too cryptic or poorly known to be catalogued and prioritized individually; 2. provide the nurturing environment for both rare and common species; 3. contribute to the maintenance of larger ecosystems; and 4. possess unique intrinsic scientific, educational, and aesthetic values. 22 It is therefore important to locate, classify, and evaluate these communities as part of any comprehensive inventory of natural heritage resources. For purposes of this study, significant communities are defined to include both outstanding examples of common community types (e.g. old-growth mixed hardwood forest) and all examples of rare community types (e.g. certain seepage-influenced, fire-maintained wetlands). Refer to Appendix A for the preliminary DNH classification of indigenous biotic communities. Data collection began in early 1994 with a review of BCD database information and scientific literature. No existing information was available on natural communities of the Polecat Creek area, and rare species locations, which often indicate significant community occurrences, were also lacking. Therefore, staff ecologists relied heavily on aerial photographs, topographic maps, geologic maps, and soil surveys to identify potential sites for significant communities. No previously documented significant communities were identified by this preliminary research, but large, tracts of bottomland forest and floodplain wetlands proved to be of interest. Ecological field work began in August, 1994 and continued through March, 1995. During this period, sampling of high potential habitats was carried out in potentially significant areas of the watershed. As field work progressed and additional information became available, priorities and field plans were adjusted to ensure that all potential exemplary natural communities were surveyed. Close communication was maintained with botanists and zoologists.- working on the project, and concurrent multidisciplinary investigation of highly significant sites was ftequently arranged. Ecologist William H. Moorhead was responsible for most of the work, with contributions by field ecologist Gary P. Fleming and other DNH staff members. During the course of investigations, Jean Tingler of CBLAD provided additional community leads, helpful information on the land use history of potential sites, assistance with landowner contacts, and assistance in the field. Complete standard information was collected from each site visited by ecologists and was coordinated with data collected by botanists and zoologists when necessary. When significant communities were located, additional data were collected on occurrence size, condition, boundaries, biotic and abiotic factors, floristics, evidence of disturbance, successional trends, and immediate or long-term threats. Community occurrences were ranked primarily by their quality and size. INVENTORY RESULTS The. results of the field inventory (Section 1) are presented in the following pages of this report. In part IV, site reports and maps for three areas determined to be conservation-worthy natural areas are presented. In part V, the overall findings of this inventory are summarized, and in part VI, preliminary protection and management recommendations are summarized. As a result of this inventory, our knowledge of the fauna, flora and natural communities within the Polecat Creek watershed and surrounding areas has been increased significantly. Several new element occurrences were documented within the watershed including three animals, one plant, and one natural community as well as several watchlist species (Appendix B). The scope of this project gave insight into the overall character of the watershed; unfortunately, some of the best habitats, especially those with potential for swamp pink, were not accessible during the study period. Further survey within the 23 watershed is warranted to obtain a more thorough understanding of the potential and existing natural heritage resources. 0 is 24 0 IV. SITE REPORTS 0 25' INTRODUCTION TO THE SITE REPORTS To facilitate management and enhance protection of biodiversity within the Polecat. Creek drainage, boundaries have been provided for landscape units which merit practical and justifiable recommendation as conservation sites. A conservation site is a natural area that includes one or more element occurrences and has been assigned a biodiversity rank of at least B5. Reports follow for three conservation sites identified during the natural heritage resource inventory. The following standard reporting format is used for each conservation site identified within the survey area. SITE NAME: Site names typically reflect a geographic locality and, in some cases, a prevalent landscape feature. SIZE: The approximate acreage within the conservation planning boundary, as determined by planimeter, is given. BIODIVERSITY RANK: The overall significance of the natural area, in terms of the rarity of natural heritage resources and the quality of their occurrences, is indicated. As described on page 4, these ranks range from 131 (very high significance) to 135 (general biodiversity significance). LOCALITY: The county (or counties) containing the site is listed. All sites within the Polecat Creek drainage are in Caroline County. QUADRANGLE: The name of the USGS 7.5' quadrangle map(s) that includes the site is listed. QUADRANGLE CODE: The code used by DNH for the quadrangle is listed. 'Me first five digits of the code represent latitude and longitude (in degrees) of the quadrangle. LOCATION: Location of the site within the drainage and distance from some geographic landmark is given. NATURAL IEERITAGE RESOURCE SUMMARY TABLE: This field provides a synopsis of the natural heritage resources (rare species and significant communities), together with their status ranks (global, state, USFWS and Virginia legal) and element occurrence ranks. SITE DESCRIPTION: A brief narrative describing the site, its significant elements, vegetation, habitat, and current land use is presented. The first reference to a species in a narrative is by scientific name, followed by common name in parentheses. Subsequent references to the same species are by common name only. BOUNDARY JUSTIFICATION: The preliminary conservation planning boundary delineated in this report contains all known occurrences of natural heritage resources and adjacent lands required for their immediate protection. This information field explains the basis for the specific site boundaries. THREATS: Threats to the site and its natural heritage resources are described. These may include both real, imminent threats and potential threats posed by types of land use activities or other factors that currently are not impacting the site. 26 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: This field is a summary of the major issues and factors that should be considered in management of the site for its biodiversity and natural heritage resource values. As a rule, generalized recommendations are provided based on potential threats identified during the survey work. The expertise of inventory biologists familiar with each site, as well as input from DNH natural areas program biologists has been utilized in preparing these recommendations. However, within the context of a relatively short-term (one year) inventory effort on large sites, it may be difficult to identify highly specific management strategies. In addition, the management needs of some natural heritage elements are so obscure that additional study by experts may be needed. In many cases, monitoring of natural heritage elements or site factors is recommended to determine the best long-term management practices. In all cases, if land use changes or specific high-impact actions are proposed within a site's boundary, consultation with DNH staff is recommended to assess impacts on the natural heritage resources. PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS: A summary of the actions and priority needed to ensure long- term protection of the site and its elements is provided. REFERENCES: Pertinent literature and sources cited within the site report are listed. SITE MAP: The site map, drawn on a copy of the USGS 7.5' quad(s), shows the preliminary conservation planning boundary which contains all known element occurrences and the land determined to be important for long-term maintenance of the elements. The following factors are considered when drawing these boundaries: - the extent of current and potential habitat for rare species and exemplary natural communities; - species movement and migration corridors; - maintenance of surface water quality within the site and the surrounding watershed; - maintenance of the hydrologic integrity of groundwater resources; - land intended to mitigate a wide variety of off-site impacts; - land or activities necessary. to preclude or minimize exotic species; and - land necessary for management activities, e.g. prescribed burning. The boundaries are intended for conservation planning purposes and, at the very least, should prevent inadvertent damage to the natural areas. ELEMENT LOCATION MAPS: Maps showing the exact location of each element occurrence within a site are included following the Site Map. In the case of animal elements, which are often highly mobile organisms, the maps indicate where actual collections were made and/or specimens were observed. These location maps are intended to provide resource managers, and landowners with requisite site-specific information. However, since rare species are often sensitive to disturbance or may be sought out by collectors, we strongly recommend that this information not be shared with the general public or with persons not directly involved in the stewardship of these sites. 27 COLEMAN'S MILL BOG SIZE: ca. 14.2 acres BIODIVERSITY RANK: B3 LOCALITY: Caroline County QUADRANGLE: Ruther Glen QUADRANGLE CODE: 3707784 LOCATION: Acidic hillside seepages along a powerline right of way at the crossing of two unnamed tributaries of Polecat Creek, from 0.6 to 1.0 miles ESE of Coleman's Mill Crossing. NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES SUMMARY TABLE GLOBAL STATE VA ELEMENT RARITY RARITY USFWS LEGAL OCCURRENCE ELEMENT NAME RANK RANK STATUS STATUS RANK Plants: Juncus caesafiensis G2 S2 C2 C C New Jersey rush Sarracenia purpurea G5 S2S3 BC Northern pitcher-plant Animals: Argin b@punduWa G4 S2S3 C seepage dancer SITE DESCRIPTION: This site encompasses two small acidic hillside seepages near the head of an unnamed tributary of Polecat Creek. Crossing the seeps is a powerline right of way, which appears to be kept open by periodic bushhogging. Slopes within the site boundary have gentle to moderately steep inclinations. The substrate at this site ranges from sand to sandy muck. Areas along the powerline right of way appear to be bushhogged on a rotational basis with more recently or thoroughly cut areas being dominated by light demanding herbs such as twisted yellow-eyed-grass (Xyiis torta), tall nutrush (Scleria friglomerata), Canadian St. John's-wort (Hypericum canadense), Maryland meadow-beauty (Rhexia mailana), Virginia meadow-beauty (R. virginica), brownish beakrush (Rhynchospora capitellata), slender beakrush (R. gracilenta), bushy bluestem (Andropogon glomerata), hairy umbrella-sedge (Fuirena squarrosa), and southern bog clubmoss (Lycopodiella appressa). Those areas not recently cut or left uncut are dominated by woody species, including red maple (Acer rubrwn), sweet-bay magnolia (Magnolia virginiana), sweet pepper-bush (Clethra alnifolia), and withe-rod (Viburnwn nudwn). Other rushes (Juncus spp.) which could be confused with J. caesariensis are present at this site, most notably Canada rush (J. canadensis) which is very similar morphologically. Mosses (Sphagnum sp.) and greenbriar (Smilax sp.) are also common at this site. Three watchlist plants were also 28 recorded from this area including thyme-leaf pinweed (Lechea minor), hairy pinweed (Lechea mucronata), and wild ipecac (Euphorbia ipecacuanhae). Approximately 250-300 fertile ramets of New Jersey rush were seen in a ca. 6 x 30 m area. Fertile ramets were in bud, Hower or early fruit. Many of the plants appeared to be quite small, possibly as a result of bushhogging earlier in the growing season. Two subpopulations of the northern pitcher plant were noted in the two adjacent seepage areas within the site. The northernmost subpopulation contained greater than 100 clumps within a ca. 0.5 acre area, including numerous ramets in flower or fruit. The southernmost subpopulation contains greater than 50 clumps within a ca. 6 x 12 m area, and only one flowering/fruiting ramet was seen. Open sphagnous areas and wet depressions caused by the collection of water in naturaldepressions and on occasion tire tracks serve as breeding habitat for the state-rare seepage dancer (Argia bipunctulata). As many as 20 of these animals were seen during several site visits in 1994. This brightly colored yet inconspicuous damselfly is closely associated with open acidic seepage habitats and bogs usually with abundant sphagnum, thus it has a highly localized distribution throughout its range. Individuals of this species generally feed and travel among emergent vegetation and typically perch on vertical stems within open habitats (Dunkle, 1990). This species is known from several other acidic seepage habitats within Caroline County, Virginia. BOUNDARY JUSTIMCATION: The boundary (Fig. 3) includes the catchment basin contributing to and including the acidic seepage habitats and a small downstream buffer. Open habitats containing both rare plant species and breeding habitat for the rare damselfly are included within the boundary. THREATS: Threats to the long-term survival of the rare plant and animal species at this site include alteration of the local hydrology, possibly timber harvest directly upstream of the site (possibly contributing to siltation), and direct impacts to the wetlands from ditching, filling, and off-road vehicle use. Excessive flooding due to the accumulation of rocks, culverts or other such materials at vehicular stream crossings may negatively impact the rare species at this site. Both rare plant species are light demanding and require open habitats, and thus may be threatened by succession of woody vegetation and subsequent canopy closure. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Prescribed burning is the preferred method for maintaining the open character of this site and reducing competition from woody species, and should be carried out during the early growing season on a 2-3 yeaf rotational basis. Alternative methods to prescribed burning include manual removal of vegetation, bushhogging, and herbicide applied directly to woody plant species. Herbicides should not be used in a generalized application at this site. Bushhogging should be done prior to the growing season to reduce negative impacts to the New Jersey rush and northern pitcher plant populations..A long-term monitoring plan should be implemented at this site including pre- and post-treatment census of rare plant populations. If land use (particularly hydrological) or management practices change within the site boundary, consult with DNH staff to avoid negative impacts to the natural heritage resources. Periodic censusing of the rare odonate population at the site is recommended. PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS: This site merits a high level of protection because of the presence of a globally rare federal candidate species and two state-rare species. Protection measures should include implementation of management recommendations and contacting landowners and land 29 managers within and adjacent to the site to educate them and work cooperatively toward a successful long-term management plan for the site. REFERENCES: Dunkle, Sidney W. 1990. Damselflies of Florida, Bermuda, and the Bahamas. Gainesville, Fla. - Washington, D.C.: Scientific Publishers. Ware, Donna M.E. 1991. New Jersey Rush (Juncus caesariensis). pp. 85-86 -in McDonald, J.N. and T. Skware, editors. Virginia's Endangered Species: Proceedings of a Symposium/coordinated by Karen Terwilliger. Blacksburg, Va.: The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company. 30 to -7:1 V-/ 50 0 ji 15- j f 88 ;7. L 15C 0 r-HMc a cp \j Vr\j IN T j 207 -V1 'wan& < C6 PO N 0- A ,?29 q Figure 3. Coleman's Mill Bog Conservation Planning Boundary Ruther Glen USGS 7.5' Quad i krn 31 \Grikv@l f'it@, 50 N@ 15 If f (00 3, C7P 150 N, colema 9 C ex@, C POO Nt -Z:Z, N 0 2 0- 2,?q oo 1%- .., I .; - I @/@ - Figure 4. Coleman's Mill Bog Location of Juncus caesariensis Ruther Glen USGS 7.5' Quad I Y, rn 32 U 50 qL @y Cr I w(v; 6 -2Y I- LU (7 @ e.,n (0 \S*an 0 2 N t CP Ij: cn- Figure 5. Coleman's Mill Bog Location of Sarracenia purpurea Ruther Glen USGS 7.5' Quad I km- @i7 ,;55 33 K A- - so 1-50 Ij -150 ! 0,11 Ic 10@ fi65 @jjI exn, 91( SN@Vans Iv :@0-02 2OU 4)@ Figure 6. Coleman's Mill Bog Location of Argia bipunctulata Ruther Glen LISGS 7.5' Quad 34 SIZE: ca. 32 acres LOWER POLECAT CREEK BIODIVERSITY RANK: B5 LOCALITY: Caroline County QUADRANGLE: Penola QUADRANGLE CODE: 3707783 LOCATION: Portion of Polecat Creek and adjacent bottomland and upland forest along the north bank, west and east of the Route 301 bridge. The area is approximately 2.5 km ESE of Penola. GLOBAL STATE VA ELEMENT RARrrY RARrrY USFWS LEGAL OCCURRENCE ELEMENT NAME RANK RANK STATUS STATUS RANK Eutrophic seasonally flooded CD forest SITE DESCRIPTION: This site encompasses a section of bottomland along Polecat Creek, which supports a significant stand of mature basket oak-sweet gum (Quercus michauxii-Liquidambar styraciflua) forest, classified as eutrophic seasonally flooded forest. The significance of the stand is in its maturity, and the size of the canopy trees: 2.5 to 3 feet diameter, and many 100-120 feet tall. Generally in Virginia's Coastal Plain, few other bottomland sites have escaped both logging and beaver disturbance long enough to develop 150+ year old near-climax condition forest of the type found at this site. Other tree species within the stand include sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) and willow oak (Quercusphellos). Dominant species in the understory are red maple (Acer rubrum), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), river birch (Betula nigra), American holly (Rex opaca), and American hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana). Herbaceous species in the stand include greater bladder sedge (Carex intwnescens), wood-reed (Cinna arundinacea), starved aster (Aster lateriflorus), and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicerajaponica). BOUNDARY JUSTIFICATION: Primary and secondary boundaries include adjacent bottomland corridor and a 100 foot buffer to protect the hydrologic regime associated with the community, and give some protection from wind damage. Recommended protection boundaries for this site are shown in Figure 7. THREATS: Logging within or around the site boundary is considered the primary threat to the quality of this community. However, water quality and maintaining the current hydrological regime within the site should also be considered. Beavers are active within this portion of Polecat Creek and their expansion into this site should be considered a threat to the integrity of this community. MANAGEAVENT RECONRdENDATIONS: Work with landowners to develop a management plan which provides for the maintenance of this site, and protection of the exemplary natural community. Avoid timber harvest, and monitor the condition of the community periodically. Continue water quality monitoring within the drainage. Monitor beaver activity in the vicinity of this site and implement control measures if necessary. 35 PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS: This site warrants protection because of the exemplary stand of near-climax condition forest classified as eutrophic seasonally flooded forest. Work with landowners to avoid timber harvest or degradation of the site. REFERENCES: Hammerson, Geoffrey A. 1994. Beaver (Castor canadensis): Ecosystem Alterations, Management, and Monitoring. pp. 44-57 in Natural Areas Journal, Vol. 14, No.l. Natural Areas Association, Rockford, Illinois. 36 .... .... "Cem 00 it It I/ so 92 80 R U "-6* e C 90 QS 0 0 r revel Figure 7. Lower Polecat Creek Conservation Planning Boundary Penola USGS 7.51 Quad 37 'All -.Cem (p 490 -@7 z so 92 80 Te-c 90 p 0 ep @qp 06 ravel Lit Figure 8. Lower Polecat Creek Location of Eutrophic Seasonally Flooded Forest Penola USGS 7.5' Quad I kox N 38 PENOLA BOTTOMLAND SIZE: ca. 38 acres BIODIVERSITY RANK: B5 LOCALYFY: Caroline County QUADRANGLE: Penola QUADRANGLE CODE: 3707783 LOCATION: Approximately 0.4 to 1.0 km SSW to WSW of Penola along Polecat Creek. Site begins upstream of county route 601 bridge and extends downstream of the bridge approximately 0.4 km NATURAL HER17FAGE RESOURCES SUMMARY TABLE GLOBAL STATE VA ELEMENT RARITY RARITY USFWS LEGAL OCCURRENCE ELEMENT NAME RANK RANK STATUS STATUS RANK ANIMALS: Macromia iflinoiensis G5T5 S2 C georgina Georgia river cruiser Somatochlora flosa G5 S2 C fine-lined emerald SrM DESCREMON: The site consists of a portion of Polecat Creek east and west of the Route 601 bridge near Penola, Virginia. Much of the area is second or third growth bottomland forest with some older, more mature trees scattered throughout. Backwaters and flooded forested depressions were encountered primarily on the south side of the creek within the site. Emergent vegetation was abundant in backwaters and open stretches of the creek in the downstream portion of the site. Substrate within the site consists of sand and sandy mud, and the creek bed was primarily sand with detritus accumulations and slower moving sections holding a mucky substrate. Uplands bordering the site have canopy dominants of river birch (Betula nigra), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum), and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) with some scattered loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) and Virginia pine (Pinus Wrginiana). Catbriar (Smilax rotundifolla) was noted as an important component of the shrub layer, while wood-reed (CYnna arundinacea) and sedges in the genus Carex were dominant in the herbaceous layer. BOUNDARY JUSTHICATION: Primary and secondary boundaries include a portion of bottomland and adjacent upland habitat downstrewn of the Route 601 bridge, and a small portion of bottomland upstream of the bridge. This boundary includes a recommended buffer zone to protect water quality and maintain current habitat within the site. Figure 9 shows the recommended conservation boundary for this site. THREATS: Disturbance of the hydrologic regime within or surrounding the site may have negative impacts on natural heritage resources. Beaver populations within the drainage may alter the hydrology of the area, significantly impacting aquatic habitats used by rare odonates present at this site. Water quality is considered the most important factor in maintaining populations of rare odonates within the site. 39 Although not currently a threat within the Polecat Creek drainage, the spread of the gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar) and consequent use of pesticides containing. chitin inhibitors (notably Dimilin) may pose a threat to the long-term survival of these species. AL4NAGEMENT RECONEWENDATIONS: Periodic census of the odonate populations at this site is recommended to determine status and abundance. Monitor beaver activities within the area and implement control measures if necessary. Continue to monitor water quality in Polecat Creek and work with landowners to ensure maintenance of the forest cover and hydrologic regime within the site. If the gypsy moth becomes a factor in the drainage, the use of Dimilin should be discouraged within or upstream of the site. PROTECTION RECOMMEENDATIONS: Work with landowners to secure protection for the species at this site and develop a long term management plan which will ensure the species' survival. Implement management recommendations noted above, and consult with DNH regarding changes in land use or management practices. REFERENCES: Dunkle, Sidney W. 1989 Dragonflies of the Florida Peninsula, Bermuda, and the Bahamas. Gainesville, Fla. - Washington D.C.: Scientific Publishers. 40 L it 50 :Cem 1VO it If % fill 80 it 92 80- ft (90 till nol 601 @x fec go QS % amp 0 V/ 0i R % -do. ravel 0 e Figure 9. Penola bottorniand Conservation Planning Boundary Penola USGS 7.5' Quad i Willi. 41 Cem so 0 it h -------- 80 it 92 80 90 no] till 0 re-C 00 90 ep, a m p 0 W, 97. & 70 Gravel 2 Figure 10. Penola bottomland Location of Macromia fflinoiensis georgina Penola USGS 7.5' Quad N 42 SO - - - - - - :Cem CP 100 so H - - - - - - so 6 --- 92 so r (90 nol I-ei C bf 00- 90 --Ait- A 41 ep amp 0 VI 0 ravel .9o 0 /-N Figure 11. Penola bottorniand Location of Somatochlora filosa Penola USGS 7.51 Quad N 43 0 V. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 0 0 44 A total of six element occurrences were found within the Polecat Creek drainage in the course of the Natural Heritage Inventory. These included one globally rare plant, a state rare plant, three state rare odonates; (dragonflies and damselflies), and one natural community. A historic occurrence of low water- milfail (Myriophyllwn hwnile) is known from Lake Caroline. The lake was briefly surveyed in 1993, and is currently thought to be too eutrophic to support a population of this species. However, this species could potentially occur as a remnant population in areas of the lake which have not been heavily eutrophied (e.g. stream input areas). Dwarf chinquapin oak Quercus prinoides) is known from the drainage divide near Petross, but was not encountered in those areas surveyed in 1994 and 1995. As a result of the Natural Heritage Inventory of the Polecat Creek drainage, three conservation sites were proposed to protect the rare species and significant communities within them. Two rare plants (Juncus caesariensis, Sarracenia purpurea) and one rare odonate (Argia bipunctulata) were documented at the Coleman's Mill Bog Conservation Site. Two rare odonates (Macromia illinoiensis georgina, Somatochlora filosa) were documented from the Penola Bottomland Conservation Site. One exemplary natural community (eutrophic seasonally flooded forest) was documented at the Lower Polecat Creek conservation site. In addition, several watchlist species were recorded from various areas within the Polecat Creek watershed. Appendix B summarizes watchlist species found during this inventory. 45 0 VI. SUMMARY OF PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT 0 RECOMMENDATIONS 0 46 Six natural heritage element occurrences were documented within the Polecat Creek watershed. For the most part, the protection and management activities required to maintain the viability of these occurrences should have little significant impact on the overall land use within the watershed. lbrough careful planning and early consultation with DNH staff when specific actions are proposed, most potential conflicts can be avoided or resolved. Potential threats to element occurrences, along with site-specific protection and management recommendations, are detailed for each of the three conservation sites described in this report. The conservation planning boundary drawn for each site should alert resource managers, landowners and planning agencies to the need for special planning when certain types of potentially threatening actions are proposed within these areas. Additional management activities needed to control biotic threats (e.g. beavers, gypsy moth) or to maintain habitat conditions (e.g. prescribed burning) are outlined when appropriate. All of the rare species and the exemplary community listed in this report are associated with wetland habitats (streams, seeps) fed by somewhat nutrient-poor groundwater seepage and streams. In most cases, maintenance of requisite habitat conditions requires protection of upslope hydrologic recharge zones and sufficient buffer to ensure the quality and quantity of both groundwater seepage and surface water. These considerations are strongly reflected in the conservation planning boundary location and specific recommendations for most of the sites. In this section, protection and management recommendations are summarized on an element-by-element basis. As a rule, recommendations are based on actual and potential threats identified during the survey work. It may be difficult, however, to identify highly specific management strategies because of time constraints and the focus on inventory during this type of study. In the case of a few natural heritage resources, management needs may be so obscure or complex that additional research is needed. In many cases, monitoring of element occurrences is recommended to determine the best long-term management practices. In all cases, if land use changes or specific high-impact actions are proposed within a site's boundary, consultation with DNH staff is recommended to assess impacts on the natural heritage resources. COMMUNITIES: Element name: Eutrophic Seasonally Flooded Forest One occurrence of this exemplary community was documented within the watershed, at the Lower Polecat Creek conservation site. The significance of the stand is in its maturity, and the size of the canopy trees: 2.5 to 3 feet diameter, and many 100-120 feet tall. Generally in Virginia's Coastal Plain, few other bottomland sites- have escaped both logging and beaver disturbance long enough to develop 150 + year old near-climax condition forest of the type found at this site. Management recommendations include working with landowners to develop a management plan which provides for the maintenance of this site, and protection of the exemplary natural community. Avoid timber harvest, and monitor the condition of the community periodically. Continue water quality monitoring within the drainage. Monitor beaver activity in the vicinity of this site and implement control measures if necessary. 47 PLANTS: Element name: Juncus caesariensis Common name: New Jersey rush Global/state ranks: G2/S2 Legal status: federal and state candidate for listing This globally rare species has a limited and irregular range in boggy habitats from New Jersey to Virginia, with outlying disjunctions in Nova Scotia and the mountains of North Carolina. One occurrence was reverified within the watershed during this inventory. This plant is a light-demanding species which requires open, usually sphagnous, groundwater-saturated habitats. This occurrence is interesting because of its location within a powerline right of way, and because management needs may be somewhat different from other sites where this species occurs. Flooding from blockages at vehicular road crossings, and direct disturbance of individual plants are considered the main threats at this site. Secondary threats include hydrologic perturbations from upslope timber harvests and road construction. Protection and management needs include the removal of debris obstructing the flow of seepages within the powerline right of way; and avoidance of timber harvests, road construction, and other activities which could adversely affect the hydrologic stability of the habitat. Monitoring of this species before and after treatment is recommended to determine the effectiveness of management techniques. Element name: Sarraceniapurpurea Common name: northern pitcher-plant Global/state ranks: G5/S2S3 This species is a characteristic plant of bogs in southern Canada and the north-central and northeastern 0 United States, extending south along the Coastal Plain to Louisiana. The plants of Caroline County, Virginia belong to var. purpurea, the northern phase of the species, which reaches its southernmost limits in Virginia. One occurrence has been documented within the watershed at the Coleman's Mill Bog conservation site. Prescribed burning is the recommended method of management at this site, although other methods such as manual removal of woody vegetation (possibly with direct application of herbicides to woody species) and bushhogging may be used as secondary management methods. In addition, upslope timber harvests, road construction (especially across the seepage habitat), and other potential sources of hydrologic perturbation should be avoided. Further monitoring of this species (pre- and post-treatment) is recommended to ensure the survival of this population, and monitor success of management practices. ANIMALS: Element name: Argia bipunctulata Common name: seepage dancer Global/state ranks: G4S2 One occurrence of this damselfly (ca. 20 individuals) was documented within the watershed, in the Coleman's Mill Bog conservation site. The seepage dancer is locally distributed within a wide range which includes much of the southeastern United States. Protection and management of this species' open, seepage-influenced habitat at Coleman's Mill Bog should include the avoidance of upslope timber harvests, road construction, and other hydrologic perturbations. Open conditions at the site appear to be 48 maintained, at least in the past, by periodic bushhogging of the site. Baseline monitoring of the population and vegetation management of this site are recommended to ensure long-term survival of this population. Element name: Macromia Winoiensis geoTina Common name: Georgia river cruiser Global/state ranks: G5T5/SIS2 One occurrence of this dragonfly (a single teneral male) was documented within the watershed, in the Penola Bottomland conservation site. 'Mis species is fairly common throughout its range. However, the subspecies M. i. georgina is relatively uncommon in Virginia, occupying medium to large, generally slow-moving streams and rivers in Virginia's Coastal Plain and southern Piedmont. Protection and management recommendations for this species include maintaining water quality within the drainage, and monitoring of the population to determine status and abundance. Element name: Somatochloraflosa Common name: fine-lined emerald Global/state ranks: G5/S2 One occurrence of this dragonfly (a single adult male) was documented within the watershed, in the Penola Bottomland conservation site. This species is rare in Virginia, and occurs primarily within the southeastern portion of the state. This occurrence represents the northernmost known locality for this species in Virginia. Dunkle (1989) reports that this species breeds in sheet flow swamp thickets and backwaters of slow-moving streams. The habitat where this species was documented is a slow-moving portion of Polecat Creek with abundant emergent vegetation, in proximity to backwater pools and flooded forested depressions. Although no evidence of reproduction was documented, the habitat at the collection site appears to be similar to breeding habitats at other locations in Virginia where this species has been documented. Protection and management recommendations include periodic census of odonate populations to determine presence/absence, number of individuals, etc.; continue water quality monitoring and work toward a long-term management plan for the site at which this species occurs. 49 0 VII. INFORMATION SOURCE REFERENCES 0 50 Braun, E.L. 1950. Deciduous Forests of Eastern North America. New York: Hafner Publishing Company. Conant, R. and J.T. Collins. 199 1. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians: Eastern and Central North America. Third Edition. The Peterson Field Guide Series. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Mass. 450 pp. Dunkle, Sidney W. 1989. Dragonflies of the Florida Peninsula, Bermuda, and the Bahamas. Gainesville, Fla. - Washington, D.C.: Scientific Publishers. Dunkle, Sidney W. 1990. Damselflies of Florida, Bermuda, and the Bahamas. Gainesville, Fla.- Washington, D.C.: Scientific Publishers. Fennemann, N.M. 1938. Physiography of Eastern United States. New York: McGray-Hill Book Company. Harnmerson, Geoffrey A. 1994. Beaver (Castor canadensis): Ecosystem Alterations, Management, and Monitoring. pp. 44-57 in Natural Areas Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1. Natural Areas Association, Rockford, Illinois. Hoppe, Diane A. S. and David L. Jones. 1989. Soil Survey of Essex County, Virginia. U.S.D.A., Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Lillywhite, Donald P. and Kirsten Niemann. 1993. Population Projections 2010. Virginia Employment Commission, Richmond. Mixon, R.B., C.R. Berquist, Jr., W.L. Newell and G.H. Johnson. 1989. Geologic Map and Generalized Cross Sections of the Coastal Plain and Adjacent Parts of the Piedmont, Virginia. U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with Virginia Division of Mines, Minerals and Energy. USGS Miscellaneous Investigations Services Map 1-2033. Rader, E.K., and N.H. Evans, editors, 1993, Geologic map of Virginia - expanded explanation: Virginia Division of Mineral Resources, 80 p. Thompson, Michael T. 1991. Forest Statistics for the Coastal Plain of Virginia, 1991. U.S. Forest Service Resource Bulletin SE 122. Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, NC. Ware, Donna M.E. 1991. New Jersey Rush (Juncus caesariensis). pp. 85-86 in McDonald, J.N. and T. Skware, editors; Virginia's Endangered Species: Proceedings of a Symposium/coordinated by Karen Terwilliger. Blacksburg, Va.: The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company. Woodward, Susan L. and Richard L. Hofftnan. 1991. The Nature of Virginia. pp. 23-50 in McDonald, J.N. and T. Skware, editors. Virginia's Endangered Species: Proceedings of a Symposium/Coordinated by Karen Terwilliger. Blacksburg, Va.: The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company. 51 0 SECTION Il. A MARK RECAPTURE STUDY 0 OF ELLIPTIO COMPLANATA 0 52 INTRODUCTTON The Polecat Creek drainage encompasses approximately 30,000 acres in south-central Caroline County, Virginia. As part of a combined inventory and monitoring project, DCR-DNH was contracted by CBLAD to identify and mark three populations of the eastern elliptio (Elliptio complanata) within the watershed. Initially, populations were identified at three distinct sites (gauge stations B,D,E) within the watershed. Unfortunately, the site located furthest downstream (site E) was inundated and subsequently destroyed by beaver activity during the Fall of 1994. Consequently, only two sites (sites B and D) were marked for future study. Prior to this study, only one mussel species was reported from the watershed. Stevenson (1994) found Elliptio complanata at three of four proposed gauging station sites that he surveyed (Stevenson, 1994). Of particular interest is the absence of the introduced asian clam (Corbiculafluminea). This species is well established in other tributaries of the Mattaponi River. Ile federally endangered dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) has been found in the Mattaponi River drainage, and although potential habitat for the species exists in Polecat Creek and its tributaries, this species has not been recorded here. Stevenson (1994) reported that favorable conditions for several other species including the triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata), yellow lance (Elliptio lanceolata), and squawfoot (Strophitus undulatus) exist within the watershed, although they were not recorded during his surveys. Polecat Creek and its tributaries lie partly within the Piedmont and partly within the Coastal Plain. Substrates and soils characteristic of both regions can be found within the watershed. Stevenson (1994) speculated that this geographic location may be a cause for the lack of several species which tend to occur in the Piedmont. In western portions of the watershed, stream habitats typify those of the Piedmont with generally more coarse substrates and higher flow rates. In eastern portions of the watershed, stream habitats are more Coastal Plain in character with more sandy substrates, and slower moving water. Water quality within Polecat Creek seems to be fairly good, with clear to moderately turbid waters depending on nutrient input, siltation, and recharge rates. The water is often tea-colored, due to excessive amounts of tannins from decaying vegetation. Several tributaries of Polecat Creek, including Stevens Mill Run, seem to have slightly more turbid waters, and typically are silt-laden even in areas with moderately high flow rates. Beaver populations, which seem to be quite vigorous, also impact water quality and flow rates, sometimes directly affecting mussel populations. With increased beaver activity, silt loads and flow rates are expected to fluctuate greatly. Toxic spills, including petroleum products, have been documented within the watershed particularly in proximity to Interstate 95. These inputs may drastically impact mussel and fish populations in the short-term, and with repeated spills, long-term affects can be expected. A major portion of the Polecat Creek watershed is designated as primary growth area in the Caroline County comprehensive plan. Significant urban development activity is expected in the area within the next ten years. Monitoring water quality and the effects of urban development on populations of freshwater mussels is a primary objective of this mark-recapture study, and with data collected from water quality monitoring stations at five sites within the drainage, the effects of toxic spills, increased sediment loads, and other by-products of urbanization can be monitored closely. This report summarizes the preliminary results, materials and methods used, descriptions of study sites, and comparison of preliminary results with those of other researchers. 53 MATERIAIS AND MEMODS Populations of freshwater mussels were identified at two distinct sites (gauging stations B and D) within the watershed. These sites were chosen based on the presence of mussels reported during previous surveys (Stevenson, 1994), and available natural or man-made barriers effectively isolating these populations for study. Site B consisted of an approximately section of Stevens Mill Run which began approximately 13 meters downstream of the County Route 601 bridge and continued to the second of two bedrock ledges approximately 90 meters downstream. Site D consisted of an approximately 750 meter section of Polecat Creek from Interstate 95 downstream to a bedrock ledge 10 meters upstream of the County Route 652 bridge. The primary survey method employed was aquascoping using five gallon buckets with clear plexiglass bottoms. Mussels were easily observed in the substrate using this technique. Handpicking and searching sandbars for discarded and dead shells were additional techniques used to locate specimens where applicable. Another technique which was not used during these surveys is searching muskrat middens. No muskrat middens were observed along those areas of the streams surveyed. Each site was thoroughly and systematically searched over four consecutive days. All individual mussels observed were removed from the substrate, cleaned, dried and uniquely marked using individually numbered, plasticized paper tags. All tags were fixed to the right valve of the shell (anterior end) using Superglue brand adhesive; some individuals were double-tagged on opposite sides of the shell at site B. Once the adhesive had dried, mussels were returned to the approximate vicinity of their -capture and placed in the proper orientation in the substrate. Mussels spent a maximum of 1.5 hours out of the water while allowing the glue to completely set. Dial calipers were used to record measurements of shell length, height and width for each individual animal (see Figure 12 for measurements taken). Data on sex, age and reproductive condition were not recorded for individuals marked during this survey. Size data collected for all mussels is presented in Appendix C. SITE DESCREMONS The survey area at site B provided a variety of suitable habitats for mussels including riffle, run, and pool areas with sand and gravel substrates interspersed with cobble and some bedrock. Stevens Mill Run at this site is a moderately small stream, from four to seven meters wide, and ranging from 0. 1 - 1 .0 meters in depth. Run type habitats were of moderate depths and typically held sand or gravel substrates. Riffle habitats were more shallow, and substrates were typically a sand and gravel mixture. Pool habitats were generally deeper and held primarily sand and cobble substrates with higher sediment loads. Water quality at this site was good, but somewhat more turbid and with a higher sediment load than the Polecat Creek site. The survey area at site D provided similar habitats to those at site B, although this site contained comparatively larger quantities of these habitats. Polecat Creek within this site was approximately four to eight meters wide with depths ranging from approximately 0. 1 m to nearly one meter in the deepest pools. Riffle habitats were generally shallow and contained mostly gravel and sand substrates. However, 54 those areas of riffle in the downstream sections of the site were noticeably more rocky with a greater component of cobble interspersed with pockets of sand and gravel. Riffle habitats occurring where bedrock protruded from the banks were somewhat deeper than others. Run type habitats, found primarily in the middle stretches of the site, were of moderate depths and generally had sand, gravel or mixed sand/gravel substrates. Pool habitats were relatively common in areas where beaver had impounded the stream. Substrates in these areas were silty or sandy in composition. Several small stretches of generally unsuitable habitat had bedrock or clay substrates. Water quality was noticeably better at this site than at site B with clear to slightly turbid water, except in those areas impacted by beaver. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A total of 356 eastern elliptio was captured and marked at site B. Mussel densities were extremely high at this site compared to site D; all individuals were captured in an approximately 90 meter section of the Stevens Mill Run. Additionally, two species of native freshwater mussels previously unrecorded from the watershed were encountered at this site, including one adult squawfoot (Strophitus undulatus), and 11 eastern floater (Pyganadon cataracta). Several recaptures of elliptio marked during fall 1994 were recorded at site B during further survey efforts in mid March, 1995. Of 83 individuals marked during 1994, 38 were recaptured during March, 1995. Recapture data is provided in Appendix C. For analysis, all eastern elliptio were placed into size classes based on their length measurement. The smallest numbers of individuals fell into the 20-40 and 100-115 mm size classes with four each. Intermediate size classes of 40-55, 55-70, and 85-100 mm contained 19, 87, and 54 individuals, respectively. The largest number of individuals (188) fell into the 70-85 mm size class. Fifty-three percent of the population at this site was in the 70-85 mm size class. This suggests that the population is made up of primarily moderate-sized adult animals with relatively few juveniles and large adults. The size frequency distribution of the Stevens Mill Run population of eastern elliptio is presented in Figures 13 and 14. The density of mussels observed in Stevens Mill Run greatly exceeds that reported by Stevenson (1994), and includes two additional species not found by him. Stevenson (1994) reported a total number of 32 live mussels and 7 dead shells (all eastern elliptio) within a 600 m survey area which includes the entirety of our survey area, and a considerable amount of habitat both upstream and downstream of the area surveyed for this report. Differences in reported mussel density at this site may be attributable to the timing of surveys and total search effort. Stevenson (1994) conducted intensive surveys (107 minutes survey time) during early February, a period during which many mussels may have receded into the substrate or may have been concealed by leaf pack. Our surveys were considerably more time-consuming and intensive, and were conducted mostly during mid-March, when mussels may have been more active and several fairly recent rain events had flushed most of the leaf pack from the substrate. A total of 473 eastern elliptio was captured and marked at site D. Density of mussels at this site was much less than at site B considering the greater length of the survey area and availability of habitat. All individuals were eastern elliptio, and were distributed patchily throughout the habitat, with several areas containing high densities while others produced very low densities. Mussels were most common at this site in the middle reaches of the survey area in deeper riffles and rocky or gravelly and moderately deep run habitats. Areas with predominantly cobble or mixed cobble/sand/gravel substrates were the least productive, and those areas with clay. or bedrock substrates were only slightly more productive. Size classes used for analysis of this population were comparable to those used for site B, with slightly 55 different distributions of individuals within them. The largest number of individuals (220) fell into the 55-70 mm class, while the smallest numbers of individuals were in the 20-40 and 100-115 mm classes with one and two individuals, respectively. Intermediate size classes of 40-55, 70-85, and 85-100 nun 10 held 56, 167, and 27 individuals, respectively. Forty-seven percent of the population was in the 55-70 mm size class as opposed to 24% in this class at site B. This distribution within size classes is somewhat different than in the population at site B. The large number of individuals in the 55-70 mm. size class suggests a slightly younger overall population at this site, but may reflect environmental differences between the sites such as food availability or water chemistry. It is possible that growth rates are different between the two sites. However, this cannot be ascertained without age data. The size-frequency distribution of the Polecat Creek population of eastern elliptio is presented in Figures 13 and 14. The density of mussels reported from survey site D are also not consistent with those reported by Stevenson (1994), who found only 132 individuals in 153 minutes of searching within a much greater survey area (1020 m). Our survey area is totally within the area surveyed by Stevenson. Furthermore, most of the mussels that he observed were found in the furthest downstream section of his survey area, most of which is below the County Route 652 bridge (not included in our site). Our survey showed that most of the mussels were found in the middle reaches of the site, well upstream of the bridge. Again, the discrepancy could lie in the factors associated with different survey periods and total amount of survey effort as mentioned for the previous site. SUMMARY Two populations of the eastern elliptio were identified and marked at two sites within the Polecat Creek watershed. Several recaptures of elliptio marked during Fall 1994 were recorded at site B during further survey efforts in late winter 1995. Three species were identified at site B, two of which had not been previously documented within the watershed (Strophitus undulatus, Pyganadon cataracta). A total of 356 individual elliptio was captured and individually tagged at site B, with the largest percentage of the population (53 %) in the 70-85 mm class size. At site D, a total of 473 elliptio was captured and individually tagged. The largest percentage of this population (47%) fell in the 55-70 mm. size class, possibly indicating a younger population than at site B. Mussel densities for both sites were considerably greater than those reported by Stevenson (1994). Several environmental or biological factors could explain these discrepancies in reported mussel densities. Individually tagged mussels will be used to monitor overall population trends over the next ten years to determine the effects of urbanization on the survival of these mussels. Further survey within the watershed may reveal the presence of other species of mussels or new populations of species documented here. 56 REFERENCES: Stevenson, Philip H. 1994. A Survey of the Freshwater Mussel Fauna at Four Proposed Gauging Stations in Polecat Creek, Caroline County, Virginia. Submitted to: Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department, Richmond, VA. 7 pp. Hammerson, Geoffrey A. 1994. Beaver (Castor canadensis): Ecosystem Alterations, Management, and Monitoring. pp. 44-57 in Natural Areas Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1. Natural Areas Associaion, Rockford, Illinois. 57 Vj H kn, LA L@ENGTH H 10 cm Figure 12. Size measurements taken on Elliptio complanata number of individuals 250 220 200 - 188 67 150 100--- 56 54 50 27 19 4 4 2 0- MEMOMMUM 20-40 40-55 55-70 70-85 85-100 100-115 Size classes of eastern elliptio Ml Site B M Site D Figure 13. Frequency distribution histogram for sites B and D -- total of individuals 59 Frequency of Individuals per of= class for poputation B 20-40 Ilk IWIts 1% percent of population 60 ...... . . . . . 53 so - - -- - - ------- ... .. .... ...... --------- .... ..... . .... ........ . . ............................. .. ......... . ........ ........ ... . .................... ............ 40 .. ......... . . . .... ........ ........ .... . .... . .. .......... . .... .............. .............. 35 based on length sessinswasts 30 . ............. . .... .. . .... . ....... -.- ----- -------- -- ------------- ---.............. ....... ............. . ............. . ................. ON 24 20 ... .... .. ...... - ---- ---- . .... ... . ....... .... ............... .................................... is 12 10 5 6 Frequency of individuals per size class '0'.'21 1 0.42 for population D 0 a ... ML- 1 20-40 40-55 55-70 70-85 85-100 100-115 33-70 47% Size classes of eastern elliptio Site B Site D 46-55 12% 20-400% based on length measurements 95-104 6% ........... baetd as lease% measanneals Figure 14. Frequency distribution histogram and pie charts for sites B and D percent of population per size class 0 APPENDIX A 0 0 A CLASSIFICATION OF VIRGINIA'S INDIGENOUS BIOTIC COMMUNITIES: VEGETATED TERRESTRIAL, PALUSTRINE, AND ESTUARINE COMMUNITY CLASSES by Thomas J. Rawinski Division of Natural Heritage Department of Conservation and Recreation Main Street Station 1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312 Richmond, VA 23219 Natural Heritage Technical Report # 92-21 May 1, 1992 CONTENTS Pa:,xe INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 1 CLASSIFICATION PRINCIPLES AND METHODS ........................................ 1 The Terrestrial System ...................................................... 3 The Estuarine System ......................................................... 4 The Palustrine System ......................................................... 5 CONCLUDING REMARKS ........................................................... 6 LITERATURE CITED ............................................................. 7 A KEY TO TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITY CLASSES ....................................... 8 A KEY TO ESTUARINE COMMUNITY CLASSES ......................................... 9 A KEY TO PALUSTRINE COMMUNITY CLASSES ......................................... 10 APPENDICES Terrestrial System TI: Character- species of the eutrophic forest class ........................ 13 T2: Conditional character- species of the permesotrophic forest class ....... 14 T3: Conditional character- species of mesotrophic classes ................... 15 T4: Conditional character- species of submesotrophic classes ................ 7 T5: Conditional character- species of oligotrophic classes .................. A Estuarine System El: Character- species of vegetated classes within the estuarine system ..... 18 Palustrine System Pl: Character- species of eutrophic saturated classes ....................... 19 P2: Conditional character- species of oligotrophic saturated classes ......... 20 P3: Conditional character- species of eutrophic semipermanently flooded classes ................................................................ 21 P4: Conditional character- species of oligotrophic semipermanently flooded classes .......................... eu@r*o, P5: Conditional character-species of seasonally flooded classes ..23 P6: Conditional character- species of oligotrophic seasonally flooded classes ............................................... ................. 24 P7: Conditional character- species of the submergent/f loating- leaved class ..25 INTRODUCTION: The goal of this work is to create a framework for understanding and classifying Virginia's indigenous biotic communities. Achieving this goal has direct bearing on the success of the Division of Natural Heritage whose mission is to document the status, distribution, and ecology of native species and their habitats in the Commonwealth, protect these living resources by way of a system of natural area preserves, and provide information and technical advice to individuals, organizations, and agencies. Community classification and inventory represents a "coarse- filter" approach to biological conservation which secures the protection of a vast number of cryptic or poorly known species. Also, it brings needed attention to the aesthetic, scientific, and ecosystem function values of natural communities. The present draft of the classification deals with communities supporting vascular plant species within the Terrestrial, Palustrine and Estuarine Systems. It supplants appropriate sections of an earlier Division of Natural Heritage classification (Rawinski, 1990). CLASSIFICATION PRINCIPLES AND METHODS: A classification system is an organized form of cataloging based on fixed principles. Community classifications vary widely, largely because principles vary in accord with classification purposes. The ultimate purpose of this effort is to name, describe, and differentiate Associations - the basic systematic nits. Unfortunately, these units have not yet-been identified because of insufficient information. However, the upper levels of a hierarchy, described u here, will help partition the great diversity of the natural world into logical units; this in turn will help us identify and understand relationships among the Associations. The hierarchical levels within the final draft of the Virginia classification will likely be: SYSTEM CLASS ALLIANCE ASSOCIATION SUBASSOCIATION. Communities of life are inextricably associated with the physical environment, and ignoring edaphic -ecological factors when constructing a f9community" classification is difficult. When classifications use biotic and abiotic factors to differentiate the basic systematic units (e.g. Reschke, 1990; Schafale and Weakley, 1990), these units are best characterized as "ecosystems", or "ecosystem units". In the Virginia classification, the basic systematic units - the Associations - will be differentiated entirely on the basis of their biological characteristics, with edaphic-ecological factors used in a complementary manner. Consequently, this draft of the Virginia community classification does not require any prior formal or ad hoc classification of physiographic region, landform, or habitat. It also avoids the use of terms such as bog, marsh, and fen in community names because such terms tend to vary in meaning, or reflect an ecosystem or landform approach to classification. Judging by my use of edaphic -ecological terms in Class names, one might assume that an ecosystem or landform approach was used; this is not the case. Ea Class was defined on the basis of a spec _floristic composition. Ideal 16 the Classes should have been named using a few diagnostic plant taxa, but because each Class encompassed many different kinds of vegetation, this was not: possible. Unavoidably, this classification focuses on vegetation, but it should not be viewed as simply a plant community classification. Among all forms of life, vascular plants are the easiest to work with because they are large and conspicuous, immotile, and superbly reflect subtle environmental conditions and site history. Classifying plant communities is therefore the key to describing and delimiting a full range of habitats utilized by animal and microbial life, at least within the vegetated Terrestrial, Palustrine, and Estuarine Systems. Principles of vegetation classification, namely those articulated by Westhoff and van der Maarel (1973) in their discussion of the Braun-Blanquet approach to community classification, are followed in the Virginia classification: � "Plant communities are conceived as types of vegetation, recognized by their floristic composition. The full species compositions of communities bet..ter express their relationships to one another and environment than any other characteristic. � Amongst the species that make up the floristic composition of a community, some are more sensitive expressions of a given relationship than others, For practical classification (and indication of environment) the approach seeks to use those species whose ecological relationships make them.most: effective indicators; these are diagnostic species (character differentia species, and constant companions). . -species, 16 � Diagnostic species are used to organize communities into a hiera.ehica classification of which the association is the basic unit. The vast information with which phytosociologists deal must, of necessity, be thus organized; and the hierarchy is not merely necessary but invaluable for the understanding and communication of community relationships that it makes possible." Character- species are more or less restricted to the stands of a given abstract community type, and therefore characterize it and indicate its environment (Westhoff and van der iaarel, 1973). These species may be used to identify syntaxa (named communities) within several levels of a classification hierarchy, from Subassociation to Class. Use of character- species is an extremely powerful tool in community classification, but very few plant species show strong fidelity to a given syntaxon, and this fact has seemed to hinder efforts to apply the Braun-Blanquet classification approach in eastern United States where the influential work of Whittaker (1953, 1962) and others emphasized continuous change in community composition along environmental gradients, resulting from the individualistic nature of species populations. Continuous compositional change along environmental gradients does not, however, preclude the use of the Braun-Blanquet classification approach, and in fact continuous and Predictablt compositional change can be used to great 2 advantage. As long as species response along environmental and community gradients is reasonably well understood, character-species and certain dif f erential- species may be used to classify communities. Differential -species are usually used to define only lower syntaxa (Westhoff and van der Maarel, 1973), but I have broadened their use and meaning to define Class-level syntaxa. To reflect the broadened application of the dif ferential- species concept, I refer to these species as "conditional character- species". These plants closely resemble true character- species in their ability to identify various syntaxa, but their diagnostic ability is conditional on the absence of certain other species. Referring to these plants as nconditional character-species" and arranging them in a sequence reflecting a community gradient bring a more intuitive level of understanding to the classification approach, and facilitate the production of dichotomous keys. The Terrestrial Syste : To generate Classes within the Terrestrial System, trophic (nutrient) regime was identified as a major environmental gradient affecting floristic composition and community gradients. Five trophic regime descriptors were selected: 1) eutrophic 2) permesotrophic 3) mesotrophic 4) submesotrophic, and 5) oligotrophic. Using floras, published and unpublished community literature, specimen label data, plot data, personal knowledge of plant habitat preference, and interviews with a number of botanists, I first generated a list of those plants restricted to the richest soil environments. These are true character - species and they are, almost without exception, instantly diagnostic of eutrophic communities. This method of selecting diagnostic species was very similar to that used by Reed (1988) who reviewed many floras and consulted with experts to generate lists of plant species diagnostic of wetland conditions. When the eutrophic indicators are not oresent in_ a given stand, other plants, the "conditional character- species", may become diagnostic of permesotrophic communities. These species have diagnostic qualities only when the eutrophic indicators are absent. Note that permesotrophic indicators may occur within eutrophic communities, but eutrophic indicators cannot occur in permesotrophic communities; the response of species- populations along this community gradient is therefore unidirectional. In the absence of both eutrophic and permesotrophic indicators, other plants become diagnostic of mesotrophic communities. Similarly, in the absence of eutrophic, permesotrophic, and mesotrophic indicators, certain plants become diagnostic of submesotrophic communities. Stands lacking the eutrophic, permesotrophic, mesotrophic, and submesotrophic indicators are classified as oligotrophic if any of the oligotrophic indicators are present. Finally, anomalous stands lacking the oligotrophic indicators may be assigned to a given class using other factors, e.g. soils, or simply called "unclassified". 3 0 Superimposed on the above trophic regime gradient is a light regime gradient. For this reason the mesotrophic, submesotrophic, and oligotrophic indicators were arranged by their relative shade tolerance. Stands containing only shade tolerant species will likely be forests, while stands supporting moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species will likely be woodland, scrub, or herbaceous -dominated types. The exception to this rule is applied to a short-term successional stage of vegetation resulting from infreguent or unusual episodes of disturbance. For example, a blown-down forest now dominated by blackberry should still be classified as forest despite the absence of trees. While this may seem awkward, it is a pragmatic solution to a difficult classification problem. Open-canopy vegetation maintained over the long-term through freguent disturbance (e.g. frequent fire, seasonal flood scour, repeated exposure to severe winds) should be regarded as distinct structural- floristic Classes. -Implicit in the distinction between infrequent and frequent disturbance is the notion that the history of frequent disturbance has allowed light- demanding plants to persist at the site over 'a long period of time. There will certainly be instances in which disturbance factors cannot rE,.adily be characterized as infrequent or frequent, and in these cases I recommend the recognition of distinct structural- floristic Classes; this is a conservative measure that ensures that poorly known or problematic communities are riot dismissed as seral stages. Users of this classification should be aware that the shade tolerant plants identified in the lists can occur in semi-forested and non-forested communities, but the shade intolerant plants will rarely, if ever, be found in forests. This implies another unidirectional gradient. Eutrophic and permesotrophic woodland, scrub, and herbaceous vegetation will most often be the result of infrequent disturbance, such as blow-down. No light-demanding plants faithful to these nutrient regimes could be identified. Open canopy eutrophic and permesotrophic communities are therefore not recognized as distinct Classes at the present time, but rather as seral stages of the forests. If future field work documents naturally occurring open canopy eutrophic and permesotrophic communities in Virginia, the classification can be adjusted accordingly. Lists of character- species and conditional character- species were derived from the Atlas of the Virginia Flora (Harvill et al. , 1986), but nomenclature followed Kartesz and Kartesz (1980). A species was selected for a list only if its habitat preference was reasonably well known, and if it had distinct diagnostic value for the purpose of the classification. Approximately 900 diagnostic species were selected. Species of wide ecological tolerance, such as those growing in both upland and wetland soils, were generally excluded from consideration; they did not meet fidelity criteria at the System level. Some of the excluded species will, however, have diagnostic value in differentiating the lower syTitaxa when these are classified in the future. The Estuarine System: Halophytes were used to define vegetated classes within the Estuari System. A very few of the species also occur in inland saline wetlands; -skis wetlands should be classified within the Palustrine System for the time being and regarded as a rare, or anomalous condition. 4 The Palustrine System: Classes within the Palustrine System were identified through the character- species/conditional character- species approach. I have not supplied detailed instructions for separating the Palustrine System from the Terrestrial because in most cases this difference will be readily apparent. However, when dealing with problematic transitional zones, I refer the user to Reed's (1988) list of plant species that o *ccur in Northeastern wetlands. Only those plants with indicator status of Obligate or Facultative Wetland should be regarded as diagnostic of the Palustrine System, for the purpose of the Virginia classification. If necessary, other factors such as soils or flooding regime may also be used to assign stands to the Palustrine System. The Palustrine System of the Virginia classification has a broader definition than that used in Cowardin et al. (1979). The Virginia definition includes all freshwater (to oligohaline) wetland and aquatic environments supporting non-halophytic vascular plant life, thereby encompassing parts of Cowardin's Lacustrine, Riverine, and Estuarine Systems. Note that the Cowardin definition of the Estuarine System relies upon an average salinity measure (0.5 ppt.), and not halophytic plants, to define the upstream or landward limit of the System. Determining this salinity measure in the field is difficult, and as a consequence, some wetlands classified within Cowardin' s Estuarine System support non-halophytic vegetation. Hydrologic regime was identified as a major factor influencing floristic composition at the Class level. Four hydrologic regime descriptors were subsequently identified: 1) saturated, 2) seasonally flooded, 3) semipermanently flooded (including permanently flooded environments supporting emergents), and 4) permanently flooded (lacking emergents). These descriptors were derived from Cowardin et al. (1979), but I've given numbers 2 and 3 broader meaning. Number 2 encompasses Cowardin's temporarily flooded category, while number 3 includes the intermittently exposed category and any permanently flooded environments supporting emergent vegetation. This was done out of practical necessity; too often the Cowardin hydrologic regime categories cannot be recognized in the field. Description number 4 also deviates from the Cowardin definition in the sense that it is exclusively reserved for those permanently flooded environments lacking emergents, i.e. communities composed entirely of submergents and/or floating-leaved species. Plant species indicative of trophic regime were also used to generate Classes within the Palustrine System. Unlike the Terrestrial System, where five trophic regime levels were identified, only two trophic regime levels were selected for use in the Palustrine System. This difference in approach seemed unavoidable, given the fact that fewer plant species were strictly diagnostic of trophic regime within the Palustrine System. The two trophic regime descriptors were: 1) oligotrophic, and 2) eutrophic. 5 Note that the each of the above terms now connotes a relatively wide range of fertility conditions; use of these terms in the Terrestrial System is much mor restrictive. While this might cause some confusion, it maintains a 'Level of* nomenclatural continuity between Systems. Lists of character- species and conditional character- species serve to identify and differentiate Classes within the Palustrine System. As with the Terrestrial System, some of the lists are subdivided into shade tolerant., moderately shade tolerant, and shade intolerant species to aid in distinguishing the various structural types. Keys to the Classes of the Terrestrial, Estuarine, and Palustrine Systems were developed. The character- species and conditional character- species that need to be examined when using the keys are given in appendices. CONCLUDING REMARKS: Character- species and conditional character- species play an important role in the classification of Virginia's indigenous vegetation. Relatively large lists of these species have been generated, and most stands of natural vegetation can be readily classified to the level of Class using this approach. The basic requirement is that a reasonably complete species list from a representative sample of the vegetation is collected and interpreted using the keys. Recommended plot size for forests and woodlands is 400 sq. m. , and for scrub, and herbaceous communities, 100 sq. m. As stand data sets accumulate and are analyzed, the Associations should become apparent. 0 The lists of character- species and conditional character- species serve another important purpose. They give an indication of the classification and inventory work which lies ahead. Each listed species needs to be observed in the field, and recorded as a component of a given community. This will ensure complete coverage of the final draft classification. Refinements and suggestions are definitely needed, and in fact, I eagerly await word of. any unusual communities that aren't readily classified under the present system. Natural vegetation is exceedingly complex and trying to make sense of it using feeble human constructs will no doubt be a long, frustrating, and humbling endeavor. 6 LITERATURE CITED: Cowardin, L.M. , V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Fish and Wildl. Serv. Washington, D.C. 103 pp. Harvill, A.M. Jr., T.R. Bradley, C.E. Stevens, T.F. Wieboldt, D.M.E. Ware, and D.W. Ogle. 1986. Atlas of the Virginia Flora. Second Edition. Virginia Botanical Associates, Farmville. 135 pp. Kartesz, J.T. and R. Kartesz. 1980. A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. 498 pp. Rawinski, T.J. 1990. A classification of Virginia's indigenous biotic communities: Phase 1. Upper levels of the hierarchy. unpublished rep. on file with the Virginia Dept. of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Richmond. 11 pp. Reed, P.B. Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northeast (Region 1). U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 88(26.1). 111 pp. Reschke, C. 1990. Ecological communities of New York State. New York Natural Heritage Program, Latham. 96 pp. Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina. Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh. 325 pp. Westhoff, V. and E. van der Maarel. 1973. The Braun-Blanquet approach. In: Handbook of Vegetation Science (Ed. R.H. Whittaker), vol. 5, 616-726. Junk, Den Haag. Whittaker, R.H. 1953. A consideration of climax theory; the climax as a population and pattern. Ecol. Monogr. 23:41-78. Whittaker, R.H. 1962. Classification of natural communities. Bot. Rev. 28:1-239. 7 A KEY TO VEGETATED TERRESTRIAL C014MUNITY CLASSES (Note: Ail Class names are understood to represent the Terrestrial System). a. Eutrophic character-species (Appendix T1) present. . . . . . [EUTROPHIC FOREST] a. Eutrophic character-species absent. b. Permesotrophic conditional character-species (Appendix T2) present. [PERMESOTROPHIC FOREST] b. Permesotrophic conditional character- spec i es absent. c. Mesotrophic conditional character- species (Appendix T3) present. d. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species (Appendices T3, T4, & T5) present and conspicuous; woodland, scrub and herbaceous communities. e. Trees present (covering at least 5% of the area), but significant gaps exist among tree crowns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . EMESOTROPHIC WOODLAND] e. Trees absent or cover less than 5% of the area. f. Woody species between 1 and 6 m tail (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [MESOTROPHIC SCRUB] f. Scrub vegetation absent or covers less than 5% of the area; herbaceous species prevalent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CMESOTROPHIC HERBACEOUS VEGETATION] d. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species absent or inconspicuous; trees form a more or less continuous cover; forest. [MESOTROPHIC FOREST] c. Mesotrophic conditional character- spec i es absent. 9. Submesotrophic conditional character- speci es (Appendix T4) present. h. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species (Appendices T4 & T5) present and conspicuous; woodland, scrub and herbaceous communities. i. Trees present (covering at least 5% of the area), but significant gaps exist among tree crowns. [SUBMESOTROPHIC WOODLAND] i. Trees absent or cover Less than 5% ;f t'he*ar;a.* Woody species between 1 and 6 m tail (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area. . . . . . . . . . . * * . . . . . ESUBMESOTROPHIC SCRUB] Scrub vegetation absent or covers Less than 5% of th; a;ea; herbaceous species prevalent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ESUBMESOTROPHIC HERBACEOUS VEGETATIO@ h. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species absent or inconspicuous; trees form a more or less continuous cover; forest. ESUBMESOTROPHIC FOREST] g. Submesotrophic conditional character- spec i es absent. k. Otigotrophic conditional character- spec i es (Appendix TQ present. L. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species present and conspicuous; woodland, scrub and herbaceous communities. m. Trees present (covering at least 5% of the area), but significant gaps exist among tree crowns. * * ' * . . . . [OLIGOTROPHIC WOODLAND] m. Trees absent or cover less than 5% ;f t*he'ar;a.* n. Woody species between I and 6 m tail (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area. . * ' * ' * ' ' * ' ' * ' * * ' * " ' [OLIGOTROPHIC SCRUB] n. Scrub vegetation absent or- covers less than 5% of the area; herbaceous species prevalent. . . . ... . . . . . . . . [OLIGOTROPHIC HERBACEOUS VEGETATIONI 1. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species absent or inconspicuous; trees form a more or less continuous cover; forest . . . [OLIGOTROPHIC FOREST] k. Oligotrophic indicators absent. Use other factors (e.g. soits) to 0 assign the stand to one of the above classes. if this isn't possible, COMMUN I.TYI refer to the stand as: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [UNCLASSIFIED TERRESTRIAL A KEY TO VEGETATED ESTUARINE C014MUNITY CLASSES a. Estuarine character-species (Appendix El) present. b. Woody species between 1 and 6 m. tall (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [ESTUARINE SCRUB] b. Scrub vegetation absent or cover less than 5% of the area. c. Herbaceous species other than submergents present. . . . . . . . .[ESTUARINE HERBACEOUS VEGETATION] c. The only vascular plants present are submergents such as Ruppia maritima and Zostera marina. . . . . . . . . . . . . .[ESTUARINE SUBMERGENT VEGETATION] a. Estuarine character-species absent. Consider whether the stand could be classified using the Palustrine System key, or refer to the stand as: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [UNCLASSIFIED ESTUARINE COMMUNITY] KEYS TO THE VEGETATED PALUSTRINE COMMUNITY CLASSES (Note: At L Class names are understood to represent the Patustrine System. Also, use of the terms, eutrcphic and ol op is in the broad sense, each term encompassing roughly half of the range of community trophic conditions). Character- spec i es indicating saturated, eutrophic conditions (Appendix Pl) present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EUTROPHIC SATURATED Key P1 Conditional character-species indicating saturated, oligotrophic conditions (Appendix P2) present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . OLIGOTROPHIC SATURATED Key P2 Conditional character-species indicating semipermanentty flooded, eutrophic conditions (Appendix P3) present. . . . . . . . . EUTROPHIC SEHIPERMANENTLY FLOODED Key P3 Conditional character- spec i es indicating semipermanentty flooded, otigotrophic conditions (Appendix PO present. . . . . . . . . . . OLIGOTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED Key P4 Conditional character-species indicating seasonally flooded, eutrophic conditions (Appendix P5) present. . . . . . . EUTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED Key P5 Conditional character-species indicating seasonally flooded, oligotrophic conditions (Appendix P6) present. . . . . . . . . . . OLIGOTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED Key P6 Conditional character- spec i es indicating permanently flooded conditions (Appendix P7) present (submergent/floating-leaved vegetation). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [SUBMERGENT/FLOATING-LEAVED VEGETATION] None of the above spe'cies present. Use other factors to is assign the stand to a Class. If this isn't possible, refer to the stand as: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [UNCLASSIFIED PALUISTRINE COMMUNITY] 10 Key Pl: Eutrophic Saturated a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species (Appendices P1 & P2) present and conspicuous; woodland, scrub, and herbaceous communities. b. Trees present (covering at Least 5% of the area), but significant gaps exist among tree crowns. . . . . . . . . CEUTROPHIC SATURATED WOODLAND] b. Trees absent or cover less than 5% of th; a;ea. c. Woody species between 1 and 6 m. tat( (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area. [EUTROPHIC SATURATED SCRUB] C. Scrub vegetation absent ;r.;ov;rs'Le;s 'the; 5% of the ;re;,- - herbaceous species prevalent. . . . . . . . . . . . . [EUTROPHIC SATURATED HERBACEOUS VEGETATION) a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species absent or inconspicuous; trees form a more or less continuous cover; forest. [EUTROPHIC SATURATED FOREST] Key P2: Otigotrophic Saturated a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species present and conspicuous; woodland, scrub, and herbaceous communities. b. Trees present (covering at least 5% of the area), but significant gaps exist among tree crowns. . . . . . . . . . . . . COLIGOTROPHIC SATURATED WOODLAND] b. Trees absent or cover Less than 5% of the area. c. Woody species between 1 and 6 m. ta(L (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area. . . . . [OLIGOTROPHIC SATURATED SCRUB] c. Scrub vegetation absent or cov;rs*Less t'ha; 5% of the are;,- - herbaceous species prevalent. . . . . . . . . . . . . COLIGOTROPHIC SATURATED HERBACEOUS VEGETATION a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species absent or inconspicuous; trees form a more or Less continuous cover; forest. JOLIGOTROPHIC SATURATED FOREST] Key P3: Eutrophic SemipermanentLy Flooded a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species (Appendices P3 & P4) present and conspicuous; woodland, scrub, and herbaceous communities. b. Trees present (covering at Least 5% of the area), but significant gaps exist among tree crowns. . . . . . . . . . . . CEUTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED WOODLAND] b. Trees absent or cover Less than 5% of the area. c. Woody species between 1 and 6 m. tell (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area [EUTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED SCRUB] c. Scrub veget;tion absen*t ;r cov;rs*te;s ihan 5%* of the area; herbaceous species prevatent. . . . [EUTROPHIC SEHIPER14ANENTLY FLOODED HERBACEOUS VEGETATION] a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species absent or inconspicuous; trees form a more or less continuous cover; forest. [EUTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED FOREST] Key P4: Oligotrophic Semipermanentty Flooded a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species present and conspicuous; woodland, scrub, and herbaceous communities. b. Trees present (covering at least 5% of the area), but significant gaps exist among tree crowns. . . . . . . . . . . . . EOLIGOTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOWED WOODLAND'@ b. Trees absent or cover Less than 5% of the area. c. Woody species between 1 and 6 m. tat I (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area. COLIGOTROPHIC SEMIPERKANENTLY FLOODED SCRUB] c. Scrub vegetation absent or covers less than 5% of the area; herbaceous species prevalent. . . . COLIGOTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED HERBACEOUS VEGETATION] a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species absent or inconspicuous; trees form a more or Less continuous cover; forest. [OLIGOTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED FOREST] Key P5: Eutrophic Seasonally Flooded a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species (Appendices P5 & P6) present and conspicuous; woodland, scrub, and herbaceous communities. b. Trees present (covering at least 5% of the area), but significant gaps exist among tree crowns. CEUTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED WOODLAND] b. Trees absent or cover Less than 5% of the area. c. Woody species between 1 and 6 m. tall (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [EUTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED SCRUB] c. Scrub vegetation absent or covers Less than 5% of the area; herbaceous species prevalent. [EUTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED HERBACEOUS VEGETATION] a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species absent or inconspicuous; trees farm a more or less continuous cover; forest. EEUTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED FOREST] Key P6: Oligotrophic Seasonally Flooded a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species present and conspicuous; woodland, scrub, and herbaceous communities. b. Trees present (covering at least 5% of the area), but significant gaps exist among tree crowns. . . . . . . . JOLIGOTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED WOODLAND) b. Trees absent or cover less than 5% of th; a;ea: c. Woody species between 1 and 6 m. tall (scrub) cover more than 5% of the area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [OLIGOTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED SCRUB] c. Scrub vegetation absent or covers Less than 5% of the area; herbaceous species prevalent. . . . COLIGOTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED HERBACEOUS VEGETATION] a. Moderately shade tolerant or shade intolerant species absent or inconspicuous; trees form a more or Less continuous cover; forest. [OLIGOTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED FOREST] 12 Appendix Tl Character- spec i es of the eutrophic forest ctass SHADE TOLERANT Acer nigrum BLephita ciliata Carex albursina Carex careyana Carex hitchcockiana Carex plantaginea Diplazium pycnocarpon oryopteris goidiana Erigenia butbosa Erythroniun a(bidum Floerkea proserpinacoides Hydrophytluu macrophyttun Jeffersenia diphy[la Matteuccia struthiopteris Meehania cordata Mertensia virginica Miliun effusum Phacetia bipinnatifida Smilacina stettata Tri I I im cernuum Trittium sessite Uvutaria grandiftora 13 Appendix T2 Conditional character-species of the permesotrophic forest class SHADE TOLERANT Attium tricoccum Carex pedunculata Carex sparganioides Cautophyttum thatictroides Chaerophytium procumbens Delphinium tricorne Diarrhena americana Dicentra canadensis Dicentra cucultaria Disporum maculatum Gymnoctadus dioica Hepatica nobiLis v. acuta Hybanthus concotor Hydrastis canadensis Hydrophyttum canadense Panax quinquefotius Phlox divaricata Phlox stoLonifera Polemonium -reptans Schizachne purpurascens T@: *-,.an grandiftorun Vic'a --nadensis Vi.-@:j rostrata V:.@a striata 14 Appendix T3 Conditional. character-species of mesotrophic ctasses SHADE TOLERANT MODERATELY SHADE TOLERANT Acer floridanum Adtumia fungosa Aconitum rectinatum Astragatus canadensis Actaea pachypoda Baptisia austratis Adiantum pedatum Stephilia hirsuta Attium canadense Camassia scitLoides Aptectrum hyemaLe Campanula americana Aralia racemosa Carex oligocarpa Aristolochia macrophytLa Cassia marilandica Asarum canadense Clematis occidentalis Asimina triloba Eupatori.um sessitifoLium Astilbe biternata Hacketia virginiana Botrychium virginianum Hexatectris spicata Carex amphibota Lathyrus venosus; Carex gracilLima Liatris spicata Carex jamesii Onosmodium hispidissimum Cimicifuga americana Oryzopsis racemosa Cimicifuga racemosa Pycnanthemum incanum Claytonia caroliniana Salvia urticifoLia Claytonia virginica Silphium terebinthinaceum CoLtinsonia canadensis Solidago rigida Cryptotaenia canadensis Uniola latifolia Dentaria diphytia Zanthoxytum americanum Dentaria laciniata Deparia acrostichoides Desmodium cuspidatum Desmodium glutinosum Diphytteia cymosa Dirca palustris Dryopteris ce(sa Festuca obtusa Fraxinus quadranguLata Galearis spectabilis Geranium maculatum Hetianthus decapetatus Hepatica nobitis v. obtusa Hydrophyltum virginianum Hystrix patula Impatiens pattida Laportea canadensis Magnotia tripetata .Menispermum canadense Mitelta diphyi(a Monarda clinopodia Osmorhiza claytoni Osmorhiza tongistytis Penstemon taevigatus Potymnia canadensis Polymnia uvedatia Rubus odoratus Rudbeckia taciniata Sanguinaria canadensis Sanicuta canadensis SanicuLa gregaria Sanicuta maritandica Sotidago fiexicautis Staphytea trifotia Thatictrum coriaceum That ictrum dioicum TheLypteris hexagonoptera Titia hererophytta Trittium sutcatum TriOsteum angustifoLium Triosteum aurantiacum Triosteum perfoLiatum 15 Appendix T4 Conditional character- species of submesotrophic classes SHADE TOLERANT MODERATELY SHADE TOLERANT SHADE INTOLERANT Acer saccharum Agropyron trachycautum Ageratina attissima Aquitegia canadensis Anemone tancifttiO Arabis patens Anemone Virginians, Aster infirmus Aster grandiflorus Ange tica triquinats Aster obtongifotius Atriptex arenaria Antennaria ptantaginifotia Aurectaris flava Gvchnera americw%a Arabis canadensis Berberis canadensis Cakile edentu(a Arabis teevigats Boutelous curtipenduta Castitteia coccines Arissema t6phytium Bromus pubescens Cirsiuu virginianum Asclepias exa(t4ta Carex cephatophors Coreopsis tripteris Asciepias quadrifolia Carex ebumea Eryngium yuccifotium Asp I en i um res i I i ens Carex meadii Ne(janthus angustifolius Aster macro0yllus Cetestrus scarKiens Metianthus atrorubens Athyrium aspienioides Ctematis viorna Potygonum qlaucum Betuta papyrifera Cornus rugosa Psoratea psoratiaides grachyeietrun erectum Cuscuta coryti Salsota kali Catlicarpa americana Cystopteris fragitis Sporobolus asper Catycanthus f(oridus Echinaces laevigata Carex aestivatis Frageria vesce Carex digitalis Helianthus divaricatus Carex laxicutmis Hetiantf%us strumsus Carex taxiflora L 1 thospermum cwwscens Carex nigromarginats Lonicers dioica Carex Plaryphylta Muhtenbergia sabotifera Carex virescens f4uhtenbergia tenuifoiia Carex witidenowii Myosatis Verna Carpinus carotiniana Parthenjum auricutatup Carya cordiformis Passiftora, tutea Chrysogonum virginiamin Peltsea atropurpurea, Clintonia umbeitulata Penstemon catycosus Conophotis amricana Penstemon hirsutus Coreopsis auriculata Phacetia dubia Cornus a trernifotia Poty9ata senega Cunit(a origanoides RanuncuLus fascicularis Cymoohyttus fraseri Ranuncutus micranthus Cyriogtossun virginianum Rhanv%us carotiniana Denrar iz heterophytta Rudbeckia triloba Desmodiun nudiftorun Sitene virginica Desmodiun pauciftorum Silphjum trifo(istum Desmodiun rotundifoLium Soliciago u(mifotia Dichantheliun tatifatium Tradescantia ahiensis Dioscorea vittosa Viburnum rafinesquismin Disporun lanuginosum woodsis obtus4 Go t i um c 1 rcaez ans zizia aptera Gal ium concir%nm Gatium tatifotium Hedyotis purpurea Heracietim kanatum Hieracium paniculatun Hydrangea arborescens LigustiCuM canadense Liparis litMotia Lonicera canadensis Luzuta acuminata Kagnolis acumiants Obotaris virginica Ostrya virginiam Oxatis vietacea Phryma teptostachya Platanthers orbituLata Platanthere viridis v. bracteats Poa cuspidata Podaphyllum pettatum. Polygonatum biftorum Potygonatu" pubescens Potystichum acrostichoides Prenanthes alba PyruLaria pubera Scirpus verecundus Sed" ternatum Senecio obovetus, Silene stettata Smitacina racemoss Setidago, arguta Solidago caesia Sokidaso @rtisii sphenopholis nitida Stellaria pu!@*ra Styrax americana 'Taenidia integerrima Taxus canadensis Thatictrun thatictraides Thaspium barbinode Thaspiun trifoliatun Tiaretla cordifoiia Uvutaria perfoLiata Viburnum acerifotiun Viols hastata Viola rotundifotia Viola tri(oba 16 Appendix T5 Conditional character-species of otigorrophic classes SHADE TOLERANT MWERATELY SME TOLERANT SKADE LNTOLERANT WC,r pensytvanicun Ageratina aromatfca ianthium muscaetoxicLgn Attium cernum Antennaria virginica Angelice venenosa Asimina parviflora Arabis serotina Agrostis e(Hottiana Aster acuminatus Aristide, (anosa Affmophita brevitigutata Aster divaricatus Aster linariifolius Anaphalis margaritacea Betuta (enta Aster undutatus Andropogon gerardii GuckLeya distichophylta Aureolaria laevigata Arabis lyrata Carex brunnescens Aureotaria Pedicularia Aratia hispida Carex debilis Baptisia tinctoria Arctostaphytos uva-ursi Carex pensy(vanica C81amagrostis porteri Aristida curtissii Carya glabra Calystegia spithamaea Aristida dichotcaw Castanea dentata C&nPanula divaricata Aristida purpurascens Castanea pumita Carex envoonsii Aristida, tubercutosa ChamaeLirium tuteum Carex potymorpha Asciepias amptexicautis Chintaphila macuLata Carex umbettata Asciepias verticitlata Chimaphita unbeltata CarYa pattida, Aspteniun montanum Clethra acuninata Centrosems virginianum Aster spectabilis Clintonia borealis Cheitanthes tanosa Bulbostytis capiltaris Comandre urbeLLata Chrysopsis gossypina Buibostytis citiatifolia Convattaria montana Ctematis albicocm Carex siticea Corattorhiza odontorhiza Cleffiatis ochroteuca Carphephorus bettidifoiius Coreopsis maj .or Clematis viticautis Carphephorus tmientosus Cypripedium acaule Cnidoscojus stimulosus Cenchrus tribuLoides Deschaffpsia ftexuosa COmPtonia peregrina Cirsim horridutum Draba ramosissima Coreopsis verticitlata Corydatis seffipervirens Dryopteris canpytopters Danthonia coupressa Cyperus granitophilus Dryopteris marginalis Desmodium paniculatum Cyperus grayi Epigaea repens Dicentra eximia Danthonia sericea Galax urceotata Diervitla tonicera Danthonia spicata Gaultheria procumbens Eri0gonum aLleni Desmodium sessilifolium Goodyera pubescens Euphorbia ipecacuanhae Desmodium strictLEn GywnocarpiLxn dryopteris Galactia regularis Diamorpha sma(Iii Hamaffietis virginiana Gaylussacia dumosa Eragrostis hirsute Hexastytis virginica Gymnopogon ambiguus Eragrostis refracta flex vomitoria Metianthemum canadense Eragrostis spectabitis Isotria medeotoides Heuchera americana Euphorbia affmnnioides Isotria verticittata IHS verna Euphorbia polygonifoLia Lycopodium annotintin Kuhnia eupatorioides Festuca octofLora L yc opod i Lmn ctavatLn Liatris graminifoLia Haptopappus divaricatus Lycopodium digitatum Litiun philadelphicum Hetianthemum bickneltii Lycopodium obscurun LuPinus perennis Hetianthus hirsutus ycopodium obscurun v. dendroideuin LYCOpodiLin prophilum Hudsonia tomentosa ycopodiun tristachym LYcopodium setago Isanthus brachiatus IDYS i maCh i a quadrifotia OPhiogiossun engetmannii Juncus secundus; MaLaxis unifotia Paronychia canadensis Juniperus comnunis Medeota virginiana Paxistime caribyi Krigia biflora Metanpyrun Lineare Pinus echinata Krigia montane Melanthim hybridum Pinus; patustris Krigia virginica Menziesia pitosa Pinus; pungens Lechea maritima OxaHs acetoselia Pinus virginiana Lechea racemuLosa Oxydendruin arboreum PitYoPsis graminifokia Lechea vittosa Pieris floribunda Potygonum citinode Leptotoma cognatun Polypodium virginianLn Prenanthes roanensis Liatris asoera Prenanthes trifoliata Pseudotaenidis montane Liatris turgid Pteridiun aquitimn PYxidanthere barbutata Manfreda virginica Quercus coccinea Quercus iticifokis Minuartia giabra Quercus marilandica Quercus; Incana Minuartia groentandica Quercus montane Quercus tsevis minuartia michauxii Quercus vetutina Quercus margarettae Minuartia patula Rhododendron catenduLaceum Quercus; virginiana Muhtenbergia capiLlaris Rhododendron perictymenoides Rhus aromatica Muhtenbergia cuspidata Rhododendron prinophyttum Saxifraga michauxif 0enothera humifusa Sassafras albidun Sedum telephloides Opuntia humifusa Symplocos tinctoria SetagineLta rupestris Panicum amarutun Tiputaria discolor SeneCj0 antennarMotius Panicun amarum Tritliun Lgiclutatum Senecio Pauperculus Panicum fLexite Tsuga caroliniana Sitene caroLiniana Paronychia argyrocoma Uvularia pudica Smitax taminoides Paronychia fastigiata Uvu(aria sessilifolia So(fdago bfcolor Paronychia riparia Vaccinium arboreun Solidago odora Polygala verticiltata Vaccinium ettiottij Soildago roanensis Potygonella articulate Vacciniun erythrocarpun Sorbus wwricana PotygoneUs potyganta Vaccinium stamineum Spiraea betutifoLia ssp. corrnbosa Portutaca smattii Vacciniun tenellun SPorobolus ctandestimis Potentitla tridentata StiP3 zvcrlmcca Ruell'a StYtosanches -offlora sell;: rrI3vTj--- Tephrosia virginiana Schizachyrium scoparium Tradescantia rosea v. grami .nea Scutettaria parvuta Trifotiun vfrginicun Silphim composituin Vaccinim angustifoijum Sisyrinchiun atbidum Vaccinium crassifotium Sotidago racemosa Vacciniun myrtittoides SoHdago spathuLata ssp. randii Viburnuu rufidulLin Spiranthes tuberose ViOta peclata Sporobolus vaginiftorus Woodsia itvensis Stiputicida setacea Woodsia scopuLina, Sty(isma hutnistrata XerophyttLo asphodeloides Tatinum teretifotium ZIgadenus giaucus Triplasis purpurea Zlgadenus leinonthoides Uniola panicutata Zanthoxylum ciava-hercutis 17 Appendix El Character-species of vegetated classes within the estuarine system Agalinis maritima Aster tenuifolius Borrichia frutescens Distichlis spicata Fimbristylis castanea Iva frutescens Juncus gerardii Juncus roemerianus Kosteletzkya virginica Lythrum lineare Puccinellia fascicuLata ruppia maritima Salicornia bigeLovii Salicornia europea Salicornia virginica Scirpus maritimus Scirpus robustus sesuvium maritimum Spartina alterniflora Spartina cynosuroides Spartina patens Spergularia marina Suaecla linearis Suaeda maritima Zostera marina 10 Appendix P1 Charactor-species of eutrophic saturated classes SHADE TOLERANT MODERATELY SHADE TOLERANT SHADE INTOLERANT Caltha palustris Acorus calamus Carex scabrata Carex stipata Carex lacustris Hexastylis lewisii Carex trichocarpa Carex tanuginosa Ranuncutus septentrionatis Iris versicolor Carex tetanica LobeLia siphilitica Cyperus haspan Myosotis laxa Eleocharis rostellata Veronica americana Juncus balticus Veronica anagallis-aquatica Lathyrus paLustris Lysimachia quadrifLora Lythrum alatum Mentha arvensis Pedicularis lanceotata Sabatia dodecandra 19 Appendix P2 Conditional character- spec i es of otigotrophic saturated classes SHADE TOLERANT MODERATELY SHADE TOLERANT SHADE INTOLERANT Cardamine bulbosa ALnus incana ssp. rugosa Aletris aurea Cardamine rotundifolia Asclepias rubra Calamagrostis cinnoides Carex collinsii Aster radula Calopogon tuberosus Carex laevivaginata Campanula aparinoides Carex buxbaumii Carex leptalea Carex atlantica Carex conoidea Carex prasina Carex bullata Carex hystericina Carex styloftexa Carex trisperma Carex interior Chamaecyparis thyoides Carex venusta Carex prairea Chrysosplenium americanum Chelone cuthbertii Centella asiatica Cyrilla racemiflora Cirsium muticum Cladium mariscoides Dalibarda repens Conioselinum chinense Cleistes divaricata Fraxinus nigra Cypripedium reginae Dichromena cotorata Hedyotis michauxii Drosera rotundifolia Drosera brevifolia Helonias bullata Eleocharis tortilis Drosera capiLlaris Listera smaLlii Equisetum sylvaticum Epilobium leptophyLlum Lyonia lucida Parnassia grandifolia Equisetum fLuviatile Ophioglossum vulgatum Platanthera ciliaris EriocauLon decanguLare Parnassia asarifolia Poa palustris Eriophorum virginicum Platanthera clavellata Rhamnus atnifolia Eryngium aquaticum Platanthera psycodes Sanguisorba canadensis Filipendula rubra Poa paludigena Sarracenia purpurea Fimbristylis puberula Saxifraga micranthidifolia Selaginella apoda iris prismatica Saxifraga pensylvanica Solidago uliginosa Juncus abortivus Solidago patula Sphenopholis pensylvania Juncus nodosus Symplocarpus foetidus Zenobia puLverulenta Juncus pelocarpus Thalictrum clavatum Lilium catesbaei TheLypteris simulata Lobelia georgiana Toxicodendron vernix Lycopodium alopecuroides veratrum viride Lycopodium appressum Viburnum nudum Lycopodium inundatum Viola walteri Menyanthes trifoliata Muhlenbergia glomerata Nasturtium officinaLe Ptatanthera blephariglottis Platanthera cristata Pogonia ophioglossoides PotygaLa cruciata Rhynchospora alba Rhynchospora capillacea Sabatia calycina Sarracenia flava Scirpus expansus Scleria reticutaris ScLeria verticillata Sclerotepis uniflora Tofieldia glutinosa Tofieldia racemosa Utricularia cornuta UtricuLaria juncea Xyris ambigua Xyris difformis Xyris jupicai Xyris torta Zigadenus densus Zigadenus glaberrimus 20 Appendix P3 Conditional character- spec i es, of eutrophic semipermanently flooded classes SHADE TOLERANT MODERATELY SHADE TOLERANT SHADE INTOLERANT Cardamine tongii Azota carotiniana Aeschynomene virginica Fraxinus carotiniana Carex decomposita Amaranthus cannabinus Nyssa aquatica Carex hyatinotepis Asclepias canceotata Peltandra virginica Echinodorus; cordifoLius Aster subutatus RanuncuLus fLabeLaris Heteranthera reniformis Bacopa inominita Ranuncutus laxicaulis Hydrocotyle ranuncutoides Bidens coronata Rumex verticiLlatus Limnobium spongia Carex aLata Triadenum watteri Pontederia cordata Carex torta Ranuncutus sceteratus Cladium jamaicense Sium suave Cyperus brevifolioides Echinochloa watteri ELatine minima Eqlatine triandra Eqteocharis halophiLa Eriocauton parkeri Isoetes riparia Juncus acuninatus Justicia americana Lemna trisulca Lilaeopsis carolinensis Lilaeopsis chinensi Lobetia eLongata Netumbo tutea Nuphar Luteum ssp. sagittifolium Physostegia purpurea Sacciolepis striata Sagittaria calycina v. spongiosa Sagittaria rigida scirpus acutus Sparganium eurycarpum Spirodella potyrhiza Wolfietta gtadiata Zizania aquatica 21 Appendix P4 Conditional character-species of otigotrophic semipermanentLy flooded classes SHADE TOLERANT MODERATELY SHADE TOLERANT SHADE INTOLERANT Itea virginica Carex comosa Sidens laevis Taxodiun distichum Nottonia infLata Grasenia schreberi HydrocotyLe umbettata Carex canescens Hydrocotyle verticilLata DuLichium arundinaceum Orontiun aquaticun Eleocharis equisetoides Eteocharis quadrangulata ELeocharis robbinsii Eriocauton septgngulare GLyceria acutiflora Glyceria septentrionalis Isoetes engeLmannii Panicum hemitomon Polygonum amphibium Polygonum hydropiperoides Sagittaria graminea Scirpus ancistrochaetus Scirpus subterminalis Scirpus tabernaemontainii Scirpus torreyi 22 Appendix P5 Conditional character-species of eutrophic seasonally flooded classes SHADE TOLERANT MODERATELY SHADE TOLERANT SHADE INTOLERANT Arisaema dracontium Carex gigantea Axonopus furcatus Carex crus-corvi Hibiscus moscheutos Cyperus erythrorhizos Carex frankii Justicia ovata v. tanceotata Cyperus fiticinus Carex grayi Penthorun sedoides Cyperus strigosus Carex oxytepis Salix carotiniana Eclipta atba Carex squarrosa Satix nigra Eragrostis frankii Carex typhina Eragrostis hypnoides Carya aquatica Gtyceria grandis Commetina virginica Juncus torreyi Cornus foemina Lippia Lanceo tata MimuLus alatus PhaLaris arundinacea Ppulus: heterophylta Rorippa patustris uercus bicotor Scirpus atrovirens uercus lyrata Scirpus ftuviatilis Saururus cernuus Scirpus pendutus Scirpus divaricatus Appendix P6 Conditional character-species of oLigotrophic seasonally flooded classes SHADE TOLERANT MODERATELY SHADE TOLERANT SHADE INTOLERANT Carex crinita Carex gLaucescens Bottonia asteroides Carex louisianica Carex joori Catamagrostis canadensis Carex tuputina Carex waLteriana Carex albolutescens Cinna arundinacea Gtyceria melicaria Carex barrattii Cornus amomun Iris virginica Cyperus dentatus uercus paLustris Juncus effusus Drosera intermedia Scirpus cyperinus Eleocharis baldwinii ELeocharis ftavescens Eteocharis metanocarpa ELeocharis tricostata Eteocharis tuberculosa Erigeron vernus Eupatorium teucotepis Eupatorium recurvans Fimbristytis annua Fimbristytis autumnatis Fuirena puniia Glyceria canadensis v. laxa HeLenium virginicum Juncus brevicaudatus Juncus caesariensis Juncus canadensis Juncus repens Juncus scirpoides Lachnocauton anceps Lindernia anagaltidea Lipocarpha macutata Lobetia puberuta Ludwigia brevipes Ludwigia sphaerocarpa Lysimachia hybrida Panicum rigidulum Proserpinaca palustris Proserpinaca pectinata PycnanthemLsn flexuosum Rhynchospora caduca Rhynchospora cephatantha Rhynchospora cornicutata Rhynchospora macrostachya Scirpus purshianus 2/4 Appendix P7 Conditional character-species of the submergent/floating-leaved class Cabomba caroliniana Callitriche heterophylla Ceratophyllum demersum Ceratophyllum muricatum Elodea canadensis Elodes nuttallii Heteranthera dubia Myriophyllum heterophyllum Myriophyllum humile Myriophyllum spicatum Najas flexilis Najas gracillima Najas guadalupensis Nymphoides aquatica Podostemon ceratophyllum Potamogeton crispus Potamogeton diversifolius Potamogeton epihydrus Potamogeton foliosus Potamogeton illinoensis Potamogeton nodosus Potamogeton oakesianus Potamogeton pectinatus Potamogeton perfoliatus Potamogeton pulcher Potamogeton pusillus Potamogeton spirilus Potamogeton tennesseensis Potamogeton zosteriformis Utricularia biflora fibrosa inflata Utricularia purpurea Utricularia radiata Utricularia vulgaris Vallisneria americana Zannichellia palustris 0 APPENDIX B 0 0 . List of watchlist species recorded during 1994-1995 at Polecat Creek. Scientific name Common name Plants: Lechea minor thyme-leaf pinweed Lechea mucronata hairy pinweed Euphorbia ipecacuanhae wild ipecac Utricularia geminiscapa hidden-fruited bladderwort Animals: A cantharcus pomotis mud sunfish Calopteryx dimidiata sparkling jewelwing Lampetra aepypetra least brook lamprey Lestes inaequalis elegant spreadwing Lestes vigilax swamp spreadwing Rana virgatipes carpenter frog Strophitus undulatus squaw-foot 63 0 APPENDIX C 0 0 Appendix 3. Data collected f rom mussels at sites B and D, by species. Pyganadon cataracta (n = 11) Identification Length Heicfht Width 'MM MM MM ------------------------------------------------------------------ B008 58.5 30.6 21.3 B024 60.5 34.0 22.7 B034 61.7 33.7 20.3 B039 64.6 35.2 22.4 B042 62.6 36.3 22.5 B069 91.5 47.3 32.6 B099 77.5 43.7 28.7 B104 58.9 34.5 22.0 B119 73.7 42.5 26.5 B125 108.0 55.4 39.5 B250 30.1 17.7 11.5 Strophitus undulatus (n 1) Identification Length Heicfht Width MM MM --------------------------------------- --------------------------- M B171 67.5 39.9 26.5 Elliptio complanata f rom site D (Gauging station D, Polecat Creek) Identification Length Height Width mm mm wk ------------------------------------------------------------------- D001 92.0 47.9 31.6 D002 91.8 52.1 26.3 D003 82.2 45.2 23.5 D004 89.4 45.2 2-3.5 D005 70.7 36.8 20.2 D006 77.1 41.4 221.4 D007 72.9 40.4 21.5 D008 71.0 38.2 21.0 D009 69.7 35.6 19.3 D010 58.8 30.6 141.4 D011 73.5 41.7 20.3 D012 59.3 30.2 15.2 D013 51.6 27.7 13.2 D014 56.2 30.2 16.3 D015 49.0 25.4 13.4 D016 58.0 28.3 15.2 D017 41.4 20.4 11.3 D018 40.1 21.2 10.4 D019 69.6 59.0 20.6 D020 65.4 35.1 19.7 D021 66.1 37.3 113.3 D022 76.8 42.0 23. 1 D023 64.5 37.8 113.0 D024 63.8 35.4 177.6 D025 64.8 35.7 19.8 D026 66.7 37.8 19.2 D027 55.1 29.3 1:3.8 D028 75.1 42.1 20.4 D029 68.4 35.8 21.3 D030 54.1 29.2 15.7 D031 80.1 44.7 21.0 D032 71.3 38.5 21.5 D033 65.2 33.1 115.8 D034 83.8 49.9 213.3 D035 59.7 28.7 14.5 D036 55.5 28.7 111.0 D037 67.2 36.3 113.5 D038 92.8 51.5 213.4 D039 58.2 29.4 115.2 D040 64.2 36.5 17.9 D041 60.0 33.6 17.4 D042 60.8 35.6 17.3 D043 71.3 38.3 21.5 D044 54.1 28.3 13.8 D045 75.1 42.9 20.8 D046 59.1 32.1 18.3 D047 66.9 37.1 20.9 Site D (cont d) D048 70.3 38.8 19.7 D049 83.4 49.0 26.7 D050 88.1 50.6 27.9 D051 76.1 40.6 22.4 D052 55.0 28.7 13.5 D053 70.8 37.1 18.8 D054 72.7 38.5 19.7 D055 .63.8 35.2 17.5 D056 74.3 38.8 22.1 D057 65.7 37.2 18.0 D058 64.9 37.1 19.0 D059 71.1 40.3 21.1 D060 75.7 49.0 20.0 D061 67.0 36.7 20.4 D062 58.6 33.0 17.6 D063 73.3 39.0 21.4 D064 70.2 38.2 20.7 D065 67.7 36.1 20.1 D066 71.6 41.2 20.2 D067 78.2 43.7 23.2 D068 71.0 41.5 21.8 D069 80.0 46.9 26.1 D070 81.6 46.1 25.4 D071 71.4 42.5 20.9 D072 71.4 39.6 21.7 D073 62.4 35.2 19.2 D074 75.4 41.1 20.5 D075 75.5 40.2 19.5 D076 78.9 43.9 22.1 D077 74.0 40.0 22.0 D078 87.7 46.3 22.8 D079 56.3 30.3 14.5 D080 67.4 37.6 19.3 D081 69.2 37.8 20.2 D082 68.8 37.3 18.5 D083 54.1 29.4 15.8 D084 72.6 40.0 23.0 D085 73.5 38.0 19.0 D086 69.5 39.5 20.0 D087 75.0 40.3 20.3 D088 67.3 38.2 20.4 D089 69.1 38.3 21.2 D090 68.6 36.5 17.3 D091 52.8 28.1 13.9 D092 75.3 41.3 21.3 D093 60.6 34.0 17.2 D094 64.8 36.7 19.8 D095 82.2 44.0 22.0 D096 92.8 50.2 26.4 D097 64.7 35.4 19.5 D098 64.8 36.9 18.9 D099 67.3 35.9 19.4 Site D (cont'd) D100 64.3 37.3 21.2 D101 90.0 50.7 28.3 D102 91.3 51.8 28.1 D103 70.5 38.2 19.4 D104 66.2 36.3 19.0 D105 62.5 35.5 18.5 D106 71.6 37.5 18.9 D107 66.2 37.2 1.9.2 D108 67.4 36.7 1.8.5 D109 63.3 33.9 1.6.0 D110 84.5 46.3 27.0 D111 74.9 42.3 24.1 D112 111.6 62.9 31.5 D113 84.4 49.2 27.7 D114 59.5 33.8 3.6.2 D115 70.0 40.7 23.3 D116 53.0 29.8 3.5.4 D117 59.5 29.7 1.4.9 D118 71.9 40.0 21.8 D119 72.3 37.5 20.0 D120 82.0 44.7 22.6 D121 88.2 49.8 23.2 D122 75.5 39.1 20.0 24.4 D123 81.0 46.4 D124 73.5 41.5 20.7 D125 72.2 41.2 20.4 D126 72.6 37.9 19. 1 D127 69.0 38.9 19 . 0 D128 69.2 38.7 19 . 7 D129 73.0 39.8 20.4 D130 73.9 40.6 :11.4 D131 62.4 35.6 IS . 5 D132 61.5 32.2 16. 4 D133 78.5 42.1 21.2 D134 50.0 27.5 13.8 D135 76.7 40.2 :23.2 D136 69.2 35.8 19.5 D137 74.9 39.3 20.0 D138 71.2 37.5 18. 8 D139 72.1 37.8 19.7 D140 76.3 40.9 :21.4 D141 76.1 41.5 :24.0 D142 65.8 36.1 .19.7 D143 65.6 36.0 18.3 D144 73.1 38.7 .20.3 D145 75.8 41.3 .21.9 D146 71.3 39.7 21.2 D147 71.4 38.6 20.4 D148 89.9 51.2 27.1 D149 83.5 47.0 25.2 D150 53.4 28.2 14.0 D151 65.5 35.6 19.4 Site D (cont*ld) D152 66.2 35.7 19.3 D153 84.0 44.5 26.8 D154 46.2 26.3 13.3 D155 56.6 29.6 14.6 D156 39.6 22.4 12.0 D157 54.0 27.7 14.3 D158 50.7 27.3 14.2 D159 53.0 32.3 14.9 D160 60.6 32.3 14.9 D161 62.8 33.9 16.2 D162 64.5 34.5 18.9 D163 62.8 34.3 17.6 D164 67.3 37.9 19.5 D165 69.5 36.7 17.6 D166 61.7 33.6 14.6 D167 69.2 36.6 21.3 D168 68.5 37.2 18.8 D169 69.7 39.2 20.3 D170 76.3 43.1 24.5 D171 70.4 37.0 19.8 D172 84.1 46.5 28.2 D173 72.0 41.0 22.2 D174 79.5 43.0 24.7 D175 79.4 46.3 25.3 D176 86.5 47.9 26.2 D177 71.5 39.2 19.9 D178 87.1 49.7 22.9 D179 67.8 39.2 20.5 D180 55.0 28.8 14.4 D181 63.8 34.5 14.7 D182 71.4 40.0 19.6 D183 78.7 43.4 25.5 D184 57.0 28.7 14.7 D185 81.5 46.9 25.7 D186 68.7 37.5 19.9 D187 79.5 44.3 22.6 D188 65.8 37.2 16.2 D189 82.0 47.5 21.3 D190 50.8 27.7 15.2 D191 62.7 33.1 16.0 D192 70.0 36.9 19.5 D193 69.5 38.0 19.4 D194 75.7 41.5 20.9 D195 83.5 47.5 26.0 D196 67.4 37.4 19.4 D197 78.7 47.0 24.2 D198 78.5 41.7 23.0 D199 87.6 50.0 27.5 D200 58.6 32.1 15.5 D201 67.1 38.2 19.3 D202 68.6 37.1 19.9 D203 71.9 40.3 19.4 Site D (cont'd) D204 70.2 36.5 19.6 D205 69.5 40.0 17.7 D206 70.3 42.7 20.6 D207 52.4 28.3 14.5 D208 57.7 30.1 13.2 D209 90.7 46.2 2 6. 1 D210 70.9 37.6 :20.7 D211 74.4 41.8 :21.0 D212 67.3 39.1 :20.4 D213 66.2 36.8 '19.4 D214 63.3 35..5 19. 0 D215 47.7 26.8 @12.8 D216 46.5 24.2 12.4 D217 61.2 .32.8 18.1 D218 72.2 37.3 20.9 D219 67.5 38.0 19.8 D220 50.9 25.9 13.7 D221 70.3 39.1 19.2 D222 62.1 34.0 17.9 D223 74.2 40.4 21.5 D224 78.0 43.6 20.7 D225 75.7 42.0 19.4 D226 72.7 40.2 21.7 D227 65.6 37.0 16.6 D228 66.2 38.8 20.5 D229 65.7 35.7 18.2 D230 73.7 41.1 21.2 D231 61.9 33.4 16.0 D232 81.0 47.1 25.2 D233 56.0 28.7 12.9 D234' 62.1 34.1 18.5 D235 58.8 32.3 16.6 D236 92.4 49.8. 26.3 D237 47.5 23.7 12.2 D238 52.2 29.4 13.7 D239 63.2 33.5 18.0 D240 69.1 38.0 20.1 D241 65.1 34.2 17.7 D242 66.0 33.9 18.2 D243 70.2 39.3 20.3 D244 53.1 29.0 16.2 D245 76.9 42.1 21.1 D246 74.4 40.6 20.0 D247 88.7 49.5 25.7 D248 49.9 28.2 12.8 D249 72.2 37.2 18.2 D250 70.6 36.2 16.7 D251 75.7 41.7 20.2 D252 54.2 28.5 14.7 D253 74.7 37.8 20.6 D254 69.3 38.1 20.7 D255 56.8 28.8 14.9 Site D (cont'd) D256 61.1 33.3 15.2 D257 69.3 37.3 19.5 D258 79.4 42.3 21.0 D259 76.4 43.1 22.8 D260 62.7 33.9 16.8 D261 68.1 36.3 19.5 D262 51.0 28.2 13.1 D263 71.6 40.2 20.5 D264 71.7 39.2 19.5 D265 65.3 38.0 19.2 D266 60.2 33.5 18.3 D267 48.6 26.1 12.0 D268 73.2 41.7 20.5 D269 76.3 43.1 24.9 D270 47.1 26.6 13.5 D271 51.9 26.9 13.8 D272 65.8 34.5 17.3 D273 71.3 35.7 20.0 D274 91.7 53.6 27.3 D275 77.8 44.4 21.2 D276 56.2 29.1 15.1 D277 61.1 33.5 18.4 D278 67.8 35.7 20.5 D279 63.3 33.8 18.2 D280 65.5 36.0 17.0 D281 63.4 33.5 14.9 D282 80.5 43.9 25.7 D283 73.7 40.1 20.4 D284 70.8 38.5 21.0 D285 54.7 30.2 15.6 D286 52.6 27.8 14.3 D287 71.8 38.7 18.5 D288 66.0 34.7 19.1 D289 66.3 38.6 22.3 D290 74.8 42.3 22.1 D291 72.9 41.5 22.5 D292 65.8 36.8 20.3 D293 63.2 33.9 18.6 D294 70.6 37.7 19.2 D295 56.5 28.2 16.1 D296 71.0 39.0 22.7 D297 52.3 39.4 14.5 D298 50.2 27.3 14.1 D299 73.7 39.9 20.7 D300 48.4 25.5 13.0 D301 59.5 32.4 16.7 D302 48.5 26.4 13.0 D303 60.0 33.8 17.0 D304 48.7 25.5 12.1 D305 60.7 35.2 17.9 D306 65.5 37.0 20.6 D307 73.6 38.9 19.2 Site D (cont'd) D308 85.2 49.7 24.7 D309 83.3 45.2 22.5 D310 72.5 39.2 18.6 D311 67.5 34.4 18.5 D312 66.3 35.5 19.3 D313 61.2 32.8 18.0 D314 63.3 34.0 19.1 D315 49.5 26.5 13.5 D316 53.5 28.8 13.4 D317 67.2 36.5 20.7 D318 67.8 34.6 20.5 D319 61.0 32.6 16.3 D320 51.7 26.8 13.5 D321 53.6 29.5 13.4 D322 61.8 33.0 20.2 D323 69.2 35.8 20.5 D324 63.5 35.5 18.3 D325 no measurements taken on this animal D326 61.3 33.3 18.9 D327 69.6 36.9 20.0 D328 68.7 37.3 19.1 D329 75.2 39.7 20.5 D330 75.4 40.0 21.5 D331 43.9 23.1 12.2 D332 57.9 30.0 14.7 D333 56.5 31.1 15.3 D334 55.8 29.0 15.2 D335 56.3 31.2 15.3 D336 58;.0 32.0 16.2 D337 55.5 29.5 14.1 D338 57.8 31.2 14.5 D339 71.2 39.0 20.7 D340 70.5 37.6 22.5 D341 48.8 24.5 13.0 D342 66.5 34.0 15.7 D343 68.5 36.7 18..6 D344 93.5 52.7 27.8 D345 70.8 38.9 19.5 D346 67.0 36.5 18.6 D347 69.3 36.9 21.1 D348 68.9 39.8 21.9 D349 67.5 35.3 20.0 D350 59.8 32.1 16.6 D351 64.5 37.5 20.2 D352 72.5 39.0 20.9 D353 68.7 38.0 19.5 D354 63.3 36.0 19.7 D355 46.2 25.1 11.5 D356 88.2 47.0 24.3 D357 64.3 34.1 19.9 D358 75.7 39.9 21.0 D359 78.7 44.8 28.0 Site D (cont'd) D360 59.5 32.7 18.3 D361 46.5 26.7 11.4 D362 79.2 43.9 19.8 D363 83.7 45.8 24.5 D364 85.4 50.5 25.4 D365 72.8 39.3 21.5 D366 80.6 43.7 24.8 D367 66.2 36.3 15.5 D368 44.5 23.8 12.0 D369 66.1 36.1 18.2 D370 77.6 41.5 22.9 D371 63.5 33.7 17.5 D372 66.8 37.1 17.6 D373 109.6 59.0 30.6 D374 88.7 50.5 31.7 D375 90.2 49.4 24.5 D376 70.1 39.3 18.7 D377 50.5 26.1 13.2 D378 78.6 45.3 28.3 D379 55.9 30.0 15.3 D380 58.2 30.3 15.2 D381 67.6 37.2 18.1 D382 95.8 58.2 29.7 D383 69.0 39.3 20.6 D384 63.0 32.8 17.6 D386 70.6 37.4 20.2 D387 78.0 44.6 25.0 D388 55.5 30.9 15.4 D389 59.0 32.5 17.0 D390 78.0 42.8 22.4 D391 63.5 35.2 19.4 D392 41.6 22.3 10.9 D393 70.7 39.3 21.3 D394 51.1 28.4 13.2 D395 73.2 38.3 19.2 D396 62.4 33.8 17.1 D397 58.5 29.3 13.7 D398 67.6 39.3 18.5 D399 69.6 38.2 19.3 D400 83.0 51.0 26.0 D401 67.7 38.9 20.4 D402 65.8 35.4 18.0 D403 58.5 31.0 14.5 D404 62.0 33.1 15.9 D405 68.9 38.3 19.2 D406 62.5 34.8 18.0 D407 47.8 25.4 13.2 D408 50.1 27.9 14.1 D409 69.7 38.1 20.5 D410 77.7 45.0 24.1 D411 70.5 38.0 19.5 D412 55.9 28.2 14.1 Site D (cont'd) D413 80.6 42.6 19.2 D414 67.9 36.8 19.0 D415 56.1 31.2 15.0 D416 76.3 41.3 20.4 D417 66.4 36.3 18.1 D419 68.7 37.2 19.9 D420 64.3 34.1 15.3 D421 71.7 38.2 18.5 D422 65.6 35.7 18.1 D423 65.5 36.5 19.0 D424 50.9 27.8 15.0 D426 55.2 31.7 16.3 D427 73.4 39.5 15.9 D428 84.7 48.0 27.5 D429 67.4 38.3 18.5 D430 60.4 33.3 17.3 D431 48.7 26.1 12.8 D432 63.7 37.5 19.6 D433 66.9 36.8 19.5 D434 71.6 41.4 20.2 D435 59.4 33.4 19.0 D436 62.4 34.4 17.1 D437 74.9 41.5 20.0 D438 55.4 31.1 16.0 D439 59.9 34.2 19.2 D440 86.0 49.0' 27.5 D441 80.8 46.6 24.3 D442 72.4 40.2 20.0 D443 71.8 39.2 20.2 D444 62.4 33.9 16.4 D445 56.8 30.9 14.7 D446 59.1 30.9 14.8 D447 68.2 37.7 21.0 D448 68.6 38.7 20.3 D449 70.9 37.8 20.6 D450 63.8 34.5 18.0 D451 52.8 28.5 13.0 D452 49.0 25.6 12.7 D453 73.1 42.5 21.8 D454 73.3 39.2 22.2 D455 76.3 39.5 20.5 D456 56.7 31.1 D457 53.2 30.3 14.6 D458 56.2 32.8 17.0 D459 82.6 46.9 23.4 D460 66.2 34.0 16.9 D461 64.0 35.4 20.3 D462 77.4 41.7 20.4 D463 66.3 38.3 21.1 D464 86.5 49.1 27.0 D465 61.2 34.8 18.9 D466 68.8 38.9 20.4 Site D (cont'd) D467 63.1 35.0 15.5 D468 76.9 43.6 26.4 D469 47.4 24.0 12.3 D471 69.0 42.5 22.7 D472 67.3 35.5 17.5 D473 66.1 37.1 20.1 D474 61.4 36.7 18.0 D479 80.2 46.8 27.4 D480 72.7 39.6 22.9 D481 58.2 31.5 14.7 D482 56.4 33.5 18.1 Total number marked at site D = 473 Elliptio, complanata from site B (Gauging station B, Stevens Mill Run). Identification Length Height Width mm mm mm ------------------------------------------------------------------ B001 73.4 41.3 23.5 B002 64.0 34.8 18.3 B003 79.5 45.2 24.9 B004 81.1 44.8 23.8 B005 79.1 43.7 25.8 B006 104.7- 60.9 29.8 B007 85.4 46.8 28.1 B009 80.6 44.7 25.9 B010 75.0 42.7 24.2 B011 61.5 35.4 19.3 B012 57.7 32.0 16.4 B013 76.3 42.1 24.0 B014 72.9 42.8 24.9 B015 61.0 33.9 18.7 B016 81.2 45.7 25.3 B017 80.1 45.5 26.4 B018 67.0 38.7 22.6 B019 87.5 45.1 24.5 B020 71.2 40.6 19.6 B021 84.7 49.2 26.7 B022 72.1 40.6 20.9 B.023 50.6 26.9 13.7 B025 85.6 47.7 28.7 B026 86.5 4.7.2 25.7 B027 74.3 43.8 23.9 B028 73.1 42.7 22.6 B029 71.1 39.1 23.4 B030 67.2 38.6 19.6 B031 8.4.7 48.1 27.5 Site B (cont'd) B032 78.3 44.0 25.5 B033 67.5 40.4 21.3 B035 77.9 43.4 23.1 B036 98.6 54.2 26.9 B037 57.6 32.4 18.7 B038 80.0 43.6 25.6 B040 87.9 47.5 25.4 B041 79.3 44.3 B043 76.3 41.3 24.9 B044 71.4 42.1 22.1 B045 72.3 42.5 21.5 B046 75.6 42.3 20.6 B047 77.8 43.9 26.3 B048 69.3 37.7 20.1 B049 95.0 50.9 27.5 B050 55.0 28.5 15.4 B051 83.8 45.9 26.8 B052 71.3 40.2 23.1 B053 79.4 46.0 27.0 B054 85.7 47.5 27.4 B055 89.2 48.5, 29.8 B056 68.3 41.4 21.6 B057 76.8 44.1 22.9 B058 82.5 43.4 21.6 B059 81.0 46.4 25.0 B060 75.6 40.2 23.6 B061 39.1 21.3 11.7 B062 88.4 49.1 26.9 B063 87.3 50.5 28.2 B064 94.6 51.5 27.7 B065 77.8 45.3 24.9 B066 67.9 41.3 21.5 B067 78.4 43.0 25.2 B068 84.5 46.6 29.1 B070 90.1 49.4 26.1 B071 76.2 41.1 26.1 B072 88.0 50.0 27.8 B073 92.7 50.4 27.2 B074 107.6 58.4 30.7 B075 85.7 50.4 25.7 B076 91.7 50.3 27.0 B077 77.6 44.1 23.7 B078 90.4 50.5 25.7 B079 57.3 32.2 15.5 B080 98.3 52.5 31.2 BOSI 45.2 25.3 B082 67.2 38.5 21.5 B083 68.1 39.1 19.6 B084 85.8 47.3 23.9 B085 81.0 46.4 24.5 B086 .61.4 34.4 18.2 B087 74.7 41.6 20.3 Site B (cont'd) B088 93.3 52.8 26.0 B089 69.1 38.1 18.7 B090 73.3 40.0 23.6 B091 77.8 45.3 22.5 B092 73.5 42.1 19.8 B093 71.6 39.7 23.2 B094 78.9 47.2 26.5 B095 72.6 41.3 25.7 B096 74.4 42.0 24.9 B097 85.0 46.8 27.7 B098 77.2 42.3 21.6 BIOO 73.6 43.5 23.6 B101 65.7 36.6 19.5 B102 60.6 34.6 20.2 B103 64.6 35.8 18.4 B105 58.8 30.8 15.5 B106 79.2 43.0 25.7 B107 72.4 41.2 22.7 B108 57.5 34.6 18.8 B109 54.8 31.4 18.4 B110 86.0 45.3 25.8 B111 78.9 44.5 23.3 B112 89.0 51.4 27.5 B113 83.1 48.8 28.3 B114 73.7 41.7 23.2 B115 62.7 35.8 16.0 B116 76.0 42.9 23.3 B117 63.0 36.0 19.0 B118 72.0. 38.1 23.0 B120 61.3 34.0 20.2 B121 53.5 27.7 14.2 B122 84.0 44.7 23.4 B123 73.3 43.6 21.0 B124 70.3 42.6 24.9 B126 82.3 46.2 21.6 B127 77.0 42.5 24.0 B128 75.5 40.7 21.3 B129 74.8 41.7 24.4 B130 61.8 33.8 18.3 B131 68.7 40.0 21.0 B132 79.8 44.8 20.8 B133 68.3 37.6 20.7 B134 69.4 39.4 23.1 B135 68.2 38.0 19.6 B136 63.0 33.7 18.3 B137 74.3 41.5 21.3 B138 71.9 41.4 21.3 B139 52.5 27.2 14.0 B140 47.8 27.8 14.2 B141 77.2 41.8 22.4 B142 84.8 47.0 24.7 B143 96.5 49.8 28.0 Site B (cont'd) B144 69.4 37.9 23.6 B145 69.7 43.0 20.2 B146 73.5 41.7 23.4 B147 78.6 42.1 23.5 B148 82.1 46.5 27.8 B149 71.0 37.9 19.8 B150 75.4 41.8 23.7 B151 87.7 49.0 25.4 B152 72.0 40.2 22.1 B153 89.3 50.6 23.4 B154 79.1 43.1 23.8 B155 58.7 33.1 17.7 B156 70.7 40.3 23.3 B157 74.2 43.7 23.0 B158 67.5 39.5 20.4 B159 90.2 48.6 27.7 B160 65.3 34.8 19.9 B161 78.3 43.7 21.6 B162 49.6 29.1 14.1 B163 48.9 27.8 13.9 B164 60.5 31.9 18.8 B165 71.1 39.4 23.9 B166 65.3 36.2 16.9 B167 94.5 51.2 26.2 B168 80.7 44.0 26.1 B169 82.9 46.5 23.4 B170 83.1 46.0 27.0 B172 66.4 37.7 16.2 B173 83.2 47.4 25.1 B174 78.6 41.2 23.6 B175 68.7 40.1 22.5 B176 62.5 33.5 60.2 B177 63.3 37.1 20.1 B178 54.6 31.5 16.0 B179 -70.6 39.2 21.5 B180 61.6 35.2 17.0 B181 49.8 28.6 14.0 B182 55.1 30.4 16.8 B183 90.1 53.3 28.6 B184 84.0 46.5 23.7 B185 84.8 43.8 27.0 B186 102.6 56.8 27.4 B187 71.2 38.6 20.4 B188 79.2 44.0 25.2 B189 84.3 50.0 25.5 B190 78.0 43.8 23.7 B191 94.1 52.4 31.1 B192 76.6 45.0 25.4 B193 79.1 46.4 24.6 B194 73.8 41.2 24.4 B195 69.4 38.5 19.5 B196 59.8 29.9 16.6 Site B (cont'd) B197 87.4 46.0 27.4 B198 61.3 33.9 18.6 B199 57.5 32.4 16.3 B200 80.5 43.3 26.7 B201 79.9 44.4 26.2 B202 81.0 47.4 22.0 B203 81.5 44.8 23.8 B204 90.3 48.2 27.5 B205 76.7 42.8 21.9 B206 82.6 44.8 25.4 B207 76.6 42.2 23.0 B208 70.1 41.5 22.3 B209 84.4 49.4 27.2 B210 64.4 35.6 20.7 B211 76.9 43.1 23.3 B212 75.8 43.1 23.5 B213 82.2 47.0 22.0 B214 67.5 37.0 22.0 B215 80.0 45.8 26.4 B216 59.2 33.5 18.1 B217 84.2 47.0 27.0 B218 82.2 46.2 26.9 B219 72.2 40.5 21.9 B220 73.2 40.5 20.7 B221 74.1 40.2 18.5 B222 60.8 35.9 20.5 B223 56.5 30.5 16.3 B224 86.8 50.2 27.2 B225 71.7 42.5 23.7 B226 83.5 48.3 26.8 B227 68.5 37.2 20.4 B228 60.8 32.0 21.9 B229 75.0 41.2 25.2 B230 55.4 31.1 15.1 B231 78.3 43.5 23.8 B232 66.8 38.2 20.3 B233 73.5 42.5 24.7 B234 77.0 43.5 25.0 B235 68.0 40.0 19.5 B236 66.2 37.3 17.4 B237 82.3 47.3 22.2 B238 74.3 43.1 24.6 B239 77.2 42.8 23.4 B240 82.2 43.1 23.6 B241 78.8 43.4 25.3 B242 83.1 45.8 27.0 B243 59.9 36.8 20.5 B244 55.8 30.5 13.7 B245 83.5 44.9 25.2 B246 78.9 45.7 23.6 B247 79.2 43.9 25.4 B248 57.2 29.9 13.2 Site B (cont'd) B249 40.5 .20.7 11.6 B251 23.8 13.0 5.4 B252 20.7 11.7 5.5 B253 79.6 45.5 22.6 B254 87.5 48.6 25.0 B255 93.2 50.9 32.1 B256 96.6 53.2 28.1 B257 75.9 43.1 22.1 B258 98.4 57.6 28.2 B259 51.3 34.5 17.4 B260 74.0 42.8 23.2 B261 76.8 42.8 25.5 B262 54.7 30.1 17.0 B263 62.7 36.6 18.2 B264 55.0 29.8 16.0 B265 92.6 51.5 28.2 B266 77.5 45.4 27.9 B267 107.6 59.7 31.5 B268 81.5 45.1 21.5 B269 78.9 46.0 25.9 B270 67.3 38.3 21.5 B271 92.0 49.4 30.1 B272 66.9 38.8 19.9 B273 88.2 49.9 24.2 B274- 72.1 41.7 24.7 B275 74.5 42.1 25.0 B276 74.8 39.9 23.3 B277 60.2 34.5 19.6 B278 72.7 41 *'. 3 24.8 B279 69.7 40.1 21.8 B280 71.2 38.2 20.5 B281 99.1 57.8 29.7 B282 71.1 38.2 20.7 B283 81.3 45.6 25.8 B284 84.3 45.9 22.3 B285 53.8 30.1 15.3 B286 84.0 43.9 26.6 B287 76.0 43.4 25.3 B288 74.7 41.8 23.4 B289 98.6 52.6 26.3 B290 81.5 48.1 25.3 B291 81.2 44.5 23.2 B292 70.7 39.4 20.7 B293 73.8 39.3 25.7 B294 56.5 31.3 15.3 B295 83.1 46.2 22.7 B296 83.1 47.6 27.3 B297 63.0 35.9 20.8 B298 72.6 42.7 23.0 B299 69.8 40.7 21.4 B300 64.1 36.6 18.0 B301 70.3 38.4 20.1 site B (cont d) B302 51.9 27.6 14.8 B303 88.0 50.4 26.6 B304 81.1 46.6 25.1 B305 67.8 38.3 17.8 B306 52.0 27.7 13.2 B307 69.5 38.8 21.9 B308 63.9 35.6 16.2 B309 78.4 43.5 24.9 B310 65.8 38.1 17.5 B311 49.5 28.8 14.4 B312 72.2 44.5 22.6 B313 30.9 17.6 10.8 B314 73.1 39.2 23.8 B315 82.5 46.3 28.6 B316 78.6 43.5 25.8 B317 80.5 44.6 22.8 B318 78.1 43.2 21.7 B319 78.2 43.4 25.8 B320 87.3 46.8 26.1 B321 89.9 49.5 29.0 B322 88.1 50.4 23.3 B323 80.7 41.9 25.3 B324 67.1 36.4 14.8 B325 69.7 36.3 17.1 B326 89.1 51.2 25.9 B327 69.9 40.9 22.1 B328 85.1 49.1 24.9 B329 86.4 47.3 28.5 B330 90.7 53.3 31.5 B331 67.7 37.8 24.0 B332 77.2 46.2 24.7 B333 64.5 38.2 21.9 B334 81.2 44.9 25.5 B335 62.5 33.5 not meas. B336 78.9 43.8 26.2 B337 61.0 34.2 17.7 B338 78.2 43.3 24.6 B339 51.9 29.4 13.6 B340 58.7 32.6 15.8 B341 58.5 34.0 15.3 B342 70.0 41.5 24.5 B343 75.8 43.6 24.7 B344 58.7 31.3 14.9 B345 84.0 46.7 23.0 B346 77.9 43.4 21.5 B347 86.7 50.9 28.5 B348 81.5 48.7 26.1 B349 84.7 45.4 26.2 B350 73.1 41.8 21.5 B351 81.0 46.7 26.4 B352 84.0 51.0 24.8 B353 54.5 30.6 17.2 Site B (cont'd) B354 76.6 42.3 25.1 B355 72.9 42.0 20.2 B356 84.9 47.7 29.1 B357 81.1 44.0 2:3.8 B358 71.0 43.0 22. 7 B359 72.7 40.5 22.8 B360 87.6 45.4 25.2 B361 81.4 47.2 26.3 B362 79.5 45.0 215.5 B363 80.6 46.4 245.3 B364 78.1 42.4 2:3.0 B365 48.1 25.4 11.8 B366 66.5 36.5 20.1 B367 83.9 45.8 26.7 B368 97.9 51.6 27.6 number 296 was triple-tagged. number 312 and numbers 314-368 above were double-tagged. Total number marked at site B = 356 Recaptures recorded during 1995 from site B (with date of recapture). Mussel Number Date Recaptured B002 3/15 B004 3/15 B006 3/15 B007 3/15 B008 3/15 BOII 3/15 B012 3/17 B013 3/16 B014 3/16 B016 3/15 B017 3/15 B019 3/15 B020 3/15 B025 3/15 B028 3/15 B029 3/15 B030 3/15 B037 3/15 B038 3/15 B051 3/15 B040 3/16 B042* 3/16 B043 3/16 B047 3/16 Recaptures (cont'd) B049 3/16 B054 3/16 B055 3/16 B056 3/16 B058 3/16 B059 3/16 B060 3/16 B062 3/16 B064 3/16 B067 3/16 B068 3/16 B073 3/16 B076 3/16 B077 3/16 =Pyganadon cataracta Total number of recaptures 38 Date 5/04/95 Grant: NOAA CZM 10/01/93 Principal Task: Gage Grant Funds State Funds In Kind Contractual Allocated 66,934.00 52,707.00 0.00 Spent 66,934.00 60,032.88 ---------------------------------------------------- Remaining 0.00 (7,325.88) 0.00 Equipment Allocated 0.00 100.00 0.00 Spent 100.00 ---------------------------------------------------- Remaining 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fringe Allocated 755.00 0.00 4,978.00 Spent 755.00 3,502.79 ---------------------------------------------------- Remaining 0.00 0.00 1)475.21 Personnel Allocated 5,993.00 0.00 15,311.00 Spent 5,993.00 .51 14,561.74 ---------------------------------------------------- Remaining 0.00 (.51) 749.26 Travel Allocated 0.00 600.00 0.00 Spent 600.00 ---------------------------------------------------- Remaining 0.00 0.00 0.00 NOAA CZM I O/ol /93 Expenditure Expenditure Funding Overall Date Recipient Expenditure Description Source Allocation 12-Oct-04 VPI&SU $11,631.00 Install Gages Grant Contractual 21 -Nov-94 VPI&SU $38,369.00 Install Gages Grant Contractual 12-Dec-94 VCU $2,644.46 Biomonitoring 1011 /94 through 3/30195 Grant Contractual 1 "an-05 VCU $7,018.06 Blomontioring Grant Contractual 30-Mar-05 VCU $7,080.54 Biomonttoring 10/1194 through 3/30/95 Grant Contractual 30-Mar-95 VPI&SU $190.94 Gage Monitoring (Jan'95 - Mar'95) Grant Contractual 30-Mar-05 DNH $755.00 Final Report Mussel Surveys Grant Fringe 16-Nov-94 Div. Natural Heritage $2,652.51 Mussel Survey - Personnel bilied to Contractual Grant Personnel 29-Mar-95 DNH Reimbursement $3,341.00 Final Report Mussel Surveys Grant Personnel 05-Apr-05 CBLAD ($0.51) Adjustment to DNH Personnel Expenses Grant Personnel $73,682.TO 26-Mar-94 C.W. Jackson Hauling $566.82 Repairs to Mr. Atkinson's driveway at Gage Site C State Contractual 28-Apr-G4 VPI&SU $38,369.46 Purchase Gage Equipment and Supplies State Contractual 15-Nov-94 VCU $787.86 Biomonttoring State Contractual 22-Nov-94 VPI&SU $1,133.52 Install Gages State Contractual 08-Dec-94 VPI&SU $12,822.00 Gage Monitoring State Contractual 17-Jan-G5 VCU $1,919.14 Siomonftoring State Contractual 31 -Mar-95 VPI&SU $4,434.06 Gage Monitoring (Jan'95 - Mar'95) State Contractual 29-Mar-05 Div Natural Heritage $100.00 Equipment reimbursement State Equipment 04-Apr-05 CBLAD $0.51 Adjustment to DHN Personnel Expenses State Personnel 30-Mar-G5 Div Natural Heritage $600.00 Travel Reimbursement State Travel $60,733.39 NOAA CZM 10/01/93 In Kind Expenditures Time Period Overall Position Ends Allocation DOLLARS EE Fringe 30-Jun-94 Fringe $15.93 SEN Fringe 30-Jun-94 Fringe $39.04 EE Fringe 30-Sep-94 Fringe $42,48 SEN Fringe 30-Sep-94 Fringe $39.04 CE Fringe 31-Dec-94 Fringe $378.00 DNH Eco Fri 31-Dec-94 Fringe $385.60 DNH Zoo Fri 31 -Dec-94 Fringe $822.40 EE Fringe 31-Dec-94 Fringe $185.26 SEC Fringe 31-Dec-94 Fringe $72-48 SEN Fringe 31-Dec-94 Fringe $554,40, CE Fringe 30-Mar-95 Fringe $270.00 EE Fringe 30-Mar-95 Fringe $174.64 SEC Fringe 30-Mar-95 Fringe $48.32 SEN Fringe 30-Mar-95 Fringe $475.20 $3,502.79 EE Salary 30-Jun-94 Personnel $208.04 SEN Salary 30-Jun-94 Personnel $132.00 EE Salary 30-Sep-94 Personnel $554.76 SEN Salary 30-Sep-94 Personnel $132.00 CE Salary 31 -Dec-94 Personnel $1,259.44 DNH Zoo Per 31 -Dec-94 Personnel $2,740.00 EE Salary 31 -Dec-94 Personnel $2,471.18 SEC Salary 31-Dec-94 Personnel $241.92 SEN Salary @1 -Dec-94 Personnel $t,848.00 CE Salary 30-Mar-95 Personnel $899.60 EE Salary 30-Mar-95 Personnel $2,329.52 SEC Salary 30-Mar-95 Personnel $161.28 SEN Salary 30-Mar-95. Personnel $1,584.00 -$14,561.74 INTERAGENCY TRANSFER INVOICE SUPPLIED BY: CREDIT SUPPLIED TO: CHARGE AGENCY VIRGINIA TECH CODE 230 AGENCY FISCAL OFFICER CODE OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROGRAMS 208 CHESAPEAKE BAY LOCAL ASS'T DEP ADDRESS 805 EAST BROAD ST., SUITE 701 ADDRESS 340 BURRUSS HALL RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219 SHIPPED TO BLACKSBURG, VIRGINIA 24061-0249 AGENCY REFERENCE NO. INV 1 0072 437952-0320 DATE 10/12/94 APPROVED BY Walter Terry (703)231-9387 DATE OF DELIVERY DESCRIPTION OF OR SERVICES QNTY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 7/1/94 TRANSFER FUNDS FOR POLECAT CREEK 20,022.00 20.022.00 THROUGH WATERSHED PROJECT. 9/30/94 20,022.00 136 230 03 02 96 06050 20,022.00 COST CODE AGENC PSU AGY. REFERENCE. INVOICE DUE DATE REF DOC 437952 DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER SX DEXCRIPTION NUMBER SUBSIDIARY ACCOUNT MULTI- PURPOSE FUND PROGRAM REV PROJECT TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND DET FFY PROG SUB EIE OBJ SOURCE AMOUNT PROJ TK PH 380 408 100 00 95 503 02 1244 11631.00 40002 COST INVOICE DUE DATE REF DOC CODE FIPS PSD AGY. REFERENCE DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER SX CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- CHECK IF EXP. DESCRIPTION NUMBER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE DISTRIBUTION SHEETS ARE ATTACHED VIRGINIA TECH- CHES. BAY LOCAL ASST OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROdAAMS 208 805 EAST BROAD STREET, SUITE 701 340BURRUSSHALL RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23129 BLACKSBURG, VIRGINIA 24061-0249 IATTENTION: JEAN TINGLER 9 FOR DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A TOTAL AMT WATER QUALITY MONITORING SYSTEM FOR POLECAT $39,502.52 THROUGH CREEK WATERSHED - 94-408-04 9/30/94 CREDIT: 437880-0320 615ETTA@RRY RESEARCH ADMIN. PHONE: (703) 231-9387 8 $39,502.52 (703) 231-4 22 TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION 136 208 03 102 195 06050 $39,502.52 . . . . . . . . . . . wo W-0-41 437880 15M 0--21 so ...... ..... 00 0109 @Fl BILLING W RQU ;41 9 4 nT@E @CL( 0 w Page OF DISTRIBUTION CON71NUATION SHEET VOUCHER- DATE ON DD FUND OGRAM I 000 WA SW ELE AMOUNT PROJECT SOURCE PROJECT I YX PH /T/-3,3 _6J - . -- I I INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC f" PSD AGENCY REFERENCE DATE NUMBER MM DO YY NUMBER sx PTX)N CURRENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- NUMBE -ACCOUNT PURPOSE 7- *R"- In OGRAM VM AGENCY GLA I" AMOUNT I - I PROG SUB ELE SOURCE PROJECT TX FH -kiE @ @Q 1 n0195 A@ L - - - 3 s-, I --Y,.g zl"-,21 - - COST FIPS PSO AGENCY REY.- DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC DATE NUMBER MM DO YY NUMBER DESCRIPTm CURR;NT DOC SUBSIDIARY muLn- NUMBER ACCOUNT PURPOSE TRAMI AGENCY GLA RAM LAM=%, I AMOUNT FRU MND DMET PROG SUB SOURCE PROJECT TK PH COST INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE FIPS PSO AGENCY REFERENCE DATE NUMBER MM DO YY NUMBER sx DESCRIPTION WR-RiNT DMOCUME @U-SSIDI=' MULTI- MJL48ER --LSX I ACCOUNT PURPOSE TRANS AGENCY GLA RAM AMOUNT FUNWD Off PROG SUB ELE SOURCE ECTL TIK( PH COST @OICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE FIPS PSO AGENCY REFERENCE, DATE NUMBER sx mm DO w NUMBER DESCRIPTION CURRENT DOCUME SUBSIDL4kRY MULTI_ NUL48ER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE PI OGRAM 9 -%x-m I I t: PROJECr TRANS AGENCY GLA ffy PROG SOURCE AMOUNT PROJECT Tx PH INVOICE DUE DATE F COST =REr DOC CODE FIPS I pso AGENCY REIFERENCE DATE NUMBER Mm Do YY BE ex DESCRIPTION CURRENt DOC SU13SIDIARY MuLTf- CHEM F EXPENOfTURE NUMBER Sx ACCOUNT PURPOSE DWRIBUTION CONTMIATION twft@lv ARE ATTACIIIIED DA-02-039 (REV.7/86) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTS INTERAGENCY TRANSFER INVOICE *121294-378GC SUPPLIED BY: CREDIT SUPPLIED TO: CHARGE AGENCY VA Commonwealth University CODE AGENCY Chesapeake Local Assistance Dept. CODE Grants and Contracts Accounting 236 Fiscal Office 408 ADDRESS Box 843039 ADDRESS 701 E Broad Street, Suite 701 Richmond, Va 23284-3039 Richmond, Va 23219 INVOICE NUMBER DATE (MM/DD/YY) SHIPPED TO #2 121294 Attn: Jean Tingler REQUISITION NUMBER AGENCY REFERENCE NO. DATE OF DELIVERY DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES OR SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT AMOUNT OR SERVICE PRICE Month To request payment in accordance with the contract between Ending Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance and VCU for the project 11/30/94 entitled "Local-Term Biological Characterization of Water Quality of Polecat Creek..." under the direction of Dr(s) Greg C. Garman and Len Smock. 2,644.46 0-38022-4213 NOTE: SECTION 9 OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL LISTS TRANSACTION CODES AUTHORIZED FOR USE ON THIS DOCUMENT. I certify that this voucher is in agreement with the merchandise or service for which payment is being made; and further, that computations and coding on the voucher are correct and discounts taken are proper. Initial JP VOUCHER NUMBER 950334 DATE (MM/DD/YY) 011995 TOTAL THIS SHEET 2,644.46 TOTAL SHEET 2 TOTAL SHEET 3 TOTAL SHEET 4 AMOUNT CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND FFY PROGRAM OBJECT REVENUE AMOUNT PROJECT FUND DET PROG SUB ELE SOURCE PROJECT TK PH 136 236 03 02 95 06050 2644.46 COST FIPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER SX DEXCRIPTION CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- NUMER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND FFY PROGRAM OBJECT REVENUE AMOUNT PROJECT FUND DET PROG SUB ELE SOURCE PROJECT TK PH 380 408 01 00 95 503 02 1244 2644.46 COST FIPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER SX 611 DESCRIPTION CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- CHECK IF EXPENDITURE NUMBER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE DISTRIBUTION CONTINU- ATION SHEETS ARE ATTACHED 2-039 (REV. 7/86) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMEN OF ACCOUNTS TERAGENCY TRANSFER INVOICE *011795-451GC SUPPLIED BY: CREDIT SUPPLIED TO: CHARGE AGENCY VA Commonwealth University CODE AGENCY Chesapeake Local Assistance Dept. CODE Grants and Contracts Accounting 236 Fiscal Office 408 ADDRESS Box 843039 ADDRESS 701 E. Broad Street, Suite 701 Richmond, VA 23284-3039 Richmond, VA 23219 INVOICE NUMBER DATE (MM DD YY) SHIPPED TO #3 1-17-95 Attn: Jean Tingler EQUISITION NUMBER AGENCY REFERENCE NO. DATE OF DELIVERTY DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES OR SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT AMOUNT OR SERVICE PRICE 1994 To request payment in accordance with the contract between Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance and VCU for the project thru entitled "Local-Term Biological Characterization of Water /31/94 Quality of Polecat Creek..." under the direction of Dr(s) Greg C. Garman and Len Smock. 8937.14 11/1/94 thru 12/31/94 0-38022-4213 NOTE: SECTION 9 OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL LISTS TRANSACTION CODES AUTHORIZED FOR USE ON THIS DOCUMENT. I certify that this voucher is in agreement with the merchandise of service for which payment is being made; and further, that computations and coding on the voucher are correct and discounts taken are proper. Initial JP VOUCHER NUMBER 56474 DATE (MM DD YY) 030195 TOTAL THIS SHEET 8937.14 TOTAL SHEET 2 TOTAL SHEET 3 TOTAL SHEET 4 AMOUNT CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND FFY PROGRAM OBJECT REVENUE AMOUNT PROJECT FUND DET PROG SUB ELE SOURCE PROJECT TK PH 136 236 03 02 95 06050 8937.14 COST FIPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER SX DESCRIPTION CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- NUMBER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND FFY PROGRAM OBJECT REVENUE AMOUNT PROJECT FUND DET PROG SUB ELE SOURCE PROJECT TK PH 380 408 01 00 95 503 12 1244 1217.14 COST FIPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER SX 611 DESCRIPTION CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- CHECK IF EXPENDITURE NUMBER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE DISTRIBUTION CONTIN- UATION SHEETS ARE MAY 03-95 TUE 09:41 VCU-GRANTS & CONTRACTS FAX NO. 804 828 8644 P.03 PLEASE RETAIN YELLOW COPY DA-02-039 (REV/ 886) VCU GENERAL ACCOUNTING COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTS BOX 843037 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23284-3037 INTERAGENCY TRANSFER INVOICE *040595- 679GC SUPPLIED BY: CREDIT SUPPLIED TO: CHARGE AGENCY VA Commonwealth University CODE AGENCY Chesapeake Local Assistance Dept. CODE Grants and Contracts Accounting 236 Fiscal Office 408 ADDRESS BOX 843039 ADDRESS 701 E. Broad street, Suite 701 RICHMOND, VA 23284-3039 RiCHMOND, VA 23219 INVOICE NUMBER DATE (MM/DD/YY) SHIPPED TO #4 4-5-95 Attn: Jean Tingler REQUISITION NUMBER AGENCY REFERENCE NO. DATE OF DELIVERY DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES OR SERVICES QUANITY UNIT UNIT AMOUNT OR SERVICE PRICE Quarter To request payment in accordance with the contract between Ending Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance and VCU for the project 03/31/95 entitled "Local-Term Biological Characterization of Water Quality of Pole Cat Creek" under the direction of Dr(s) Greg C. Garman and Len Smoak. 7,080.54 0-38022-4213 VOUCHER NUMBER DATE (MM/DD/YY) I certify that this voucher is in agreement NOTE: with the merchandise or service for which payment is being made; and further, that TOTAL THIS SHEET 7,080 54 computations and coding on the voucher SECTION 9 OF THE COMMONWEALTH are correct and discounts taken are OF VIRGINIA ACCOUNTING POLICIES proper. TOTAL SHEET 2 AND PROCEDURES MANUAL LISTS TRANSACTION CODES AUTHORIZED initial JP FOR USE ON THIS DOCUMENT. TOTAL SHEET 3 TOTAL SHEET 4 AMOUNT CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION FUND REVENUE PROJECT TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND DET PPY PROG SUB ELE OBJECT SOURCE AMOUNT PROJECT TK PM 136 236 03 02 95 06050 7 080 54 COST INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE RPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER SX CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- DESCRIPTION NUMBER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE FUND PROGRAM REVENUE PROJECT TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND DET PPY PROG SUB ELE OBJECT SOURCE AMOUNT PROJECT TK PM COST INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE PIPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER SX CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDARY MULTI CHECK IF EXPENDITURE DESCRIPTION NUMBER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE DISTRIBUTION CONTINUATION SHEETS ARE ATTACHED INTERAGENCY .TRANSFER INVOICE FYI CD SUPPLIED BY: CREDIT -SUPPLIED TO: CHARGE AGENCY AGENCY CODE Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Departmenrw4EO8 Department of Enviornmental Quality 440 ADDRESS 111RISb 0 Box 10150 805 E. Broad St., Ste 701 Richmond, VA 23219 Richmond. VA 23219 INVOICE NUMBER DATE (MM/DDNY) SHIPPED TO #95010 4/7/95 REQUISITION NUMBER AGENCY REFERENCE NO. DATE OF DELIVERY DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES OR SERVICES OUANTITY UNIT UNIT AMOUNT OR SERVICE PRICE 10/01/94- To request funds for expenditures incurred under the VCRMP 03/31/95 Grant #NA370ZO3601, Task #9 4,096.00 3 3 @D 'V --t VOUCHER NUMBER DATE (MM/DD/YY) I certify that this voucher Is in agreement NOTE: with the merchandise or service for which payment Is being made; and further, that computations and coding on the voucher TOTAL THIS SHEET 4,096 100 SECTION 9 OF THE COMMONWEALTH are correct and discounts taken are I OF VIRGINIA ACCOUNTING POLICIES proper. TOTAL SHEET 2 1 1 AND PROCEDURES MANUAL LISTS initial I TOTAL SHEET 3 1 TRANSACTION CODES AUTHORIZED FOR USE ON THIS DOCUMENT. TOTAL SHEET 4 1 I AMOUNT CERTIFIED I.: TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION FOR PAYMENT 4,096 100 TRANS AGENCY GLA I FUND I FY I PROGRAM OBJECT REVENUE AMOUNT PROJECT IFUNDI DET ' IPROG I SUB I ELE SOURCE PROJECT TK PH k#j. 408 10 1001951 503 02 1 - - - 99 40002 1 1 COST INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE FIPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE DATE I NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER DESCRIPTION CURRENT DOCUMENT I SUBSIDIARY I MULTI- SX NUMBER ....... ACCOUNT _@_PURPOSE FUND P OGRAM REVENUE PROJECT TRANS AGENCY GLA __ __ FFY OBJECT AMOUNT FUND1 DETI IFROG SUB EUEd SOURCE PROJECT TK PH COST INVOICE DUE DATE RI OC CODE FIPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER SX CURRENT DOCUMENT -URRIDIARY MULTI_ CHECK IF EXPENDITURE ONTINUATI DESCRIPTION NUMBER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE DISTRIBUTION C ON SHEETS ARE ATTACHED DA 02-039 (REV /88) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTS INTERAGENCY TRANSFER INVOICE SUPPLIED BY: CREDIT SUPPLIED TO: CHARGE AGENCY: DER/DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE CODE AGENCY: CHESAPEAKE BAY LOCAL ASSISTANCE DEPT CODE P. O. Box 721, Financial Mgt Sect 199 805 East Broad Street, Suite 701 408 ADDRESS Richmond, Virginia 23219 ADDRESS Richmond, Virginia 23219 INVOICE NUMBER DATE (MM/DD/YY) SHIPPED TO H0074-S 11/16/94 REQUISITION NUMBER AGENCY REFERENCE NO. DATE OF UNIT DELIVERY DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES OR SERVICES QUANITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT OR SERVICE Polecat Creek Water Quallty Monitoring Project Freshwater Mussel Surveys through September, 1994 $2652.5l VOUCHER NUMBER DATE(MM/DD/YY I certify that this voucher is in agreement 950227 112294 NOTE. with the merchandise or service for which payment is being made; and further, that TOTAL THIS SHEET computations and coding on the voucher SECTION 9 OF THE COMMONWEALTH are correct and discounts taken are TOTAL SHEET 2 2652 51 OF VIRGINIA ACCOUNTING POLICIES proper AND PROCEDURES MANUAL LISTS TOTAL SHEET 3 TRANSACTION CODES AUTHORZED Initial FOR USE ON THIS DOCUMENT. TOTAL SHEET 4 AMOUNT CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT 2652 51 TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION FUND PROGRAM OBJECT REVENUE AMOUNT PROJECT TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND DET FFY PROG SUB ELE SOURCE PROJECT TK PH 136 199 O2 00 95 503 17 02600 265251 7775 COST INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE FIPST PSD AGENCY REFERENCE DATE HUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER 637 H0074-S C. W. Jackson Hauling, Inc. HAULING INVOICE 03-26-94 21049 ICC - 183693 P.O. Box 469 Milford, VA 22514 RECEIVED APR 6 1994 Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Dept. TO: PLEASE REMIT TO: CHESAPEAKE BAY LOCAL ASST. C. W. Jackson Hauling, Inc. 805 E. BROAD ST. SUITE 701 ICC - 183693 RICHMOND, VA 23219 P.O. Box 469 Milford, VA 22514 CUSTOMER NO. 1685 PAGE NUMBER 1 PHONE: 804-225-3440 TRIP DATE TICKET PICKUP LOCATION DESTINATION DRIVER QUANTITY RATE TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 415 03-24-94 839352 GEN. CRUSH/DOSWELL,V ATKINSON - A940065 ELLIS B. LOVING 15.65 3.02 47.26 414 03-24-94 839365 GEN. CRUSH/DOSWELL,V ATKINSON - A940065 ELLIS B. LOVING 15.61 3.02 47.14 412 03-24-94 839391 GEN. CRUSH/DOSWELL,v ATKINSON - A940065 ELLIS B. LOVING 15.42 3.02 46.57 413 03-24-94 839421 GEN. CRUSH/DOSWELL,V ATKINSON - A940065 ELLIS B. LOVING 15.39 3.02 46.48 03-24-94 -- Daily Total -- 62.07 ----------- 187.45 ATKINSON - A940065 --- Job Total--- 62.07 ----------- 187.45 TOTAL TICKETS 4 62.07 TOTAL DUE 187.45 TRIP DATE TICKET PICKUP LOCATION DESTINATION MATERIAL QUANTITY RATE AMOUNT TAX TOTAL -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 415 03-24-94 839352 GEN. CRUSH/DOSWELL ATKINSON - A940065 GVA4-A 15.65 5.70 89.20 4.01 93.21 414 03-24-94 831365 GEN. CRUSH/DOSWELL ATKINSON - A940065 GVA4-A 15.61 5.70 88.98 4.00 92.98 412 0324-94 831391 GEN. CRUSH/DOSWELL ATKINSON - A940065 GVA57 15.42 6.00 92.52 4.16 96.68 413 03-24-94 839421 GEN. CRUSH/DOSWELL ATKINSON - A940065 GVA57 15.39 6.00 92.34 4.16 96.50 TOTAL TICKETS 4 42.07 363.04 16.33 379.37 INVOICE SUMMARY FOR HAULING AMOUNT 187.45 FOR MATERIAL AMOUNT 379.37 PLEASE PAY THIS AMOUNT --- FOR HAULING MATERIAL TOTAL DOE THE GINERAL CRUSHED STONLCO- TRIANGLE PARK GENERAL OFFM RESEARcm TRIANGLE PAM H@. GENERAL OFFICE. RESEARCH WMAL CRUSHED STONE Co OFFIM RESEARCH 'MMOLE PARK NC 839365J 8 3'c% VERDON PLANT 036 VERDON PLANT 036 839421 VERDON-HANOVER Cn RT 684 VERDON-HANOVER Co RT 684 P 0 BOX a P 0 Box a .PLANT 036 DOSWELL VA 23047 DOSWELL VA 2304T 4-227-3372 804-227-3372 HANOVER Co RT 684 80 x 8 w L VA 23047 27-3372 SOLDTO- SO r. VV C- W JACKSON HAULING INC .,c WJACKSON HAULING INC Joe CUST PICKUP J08 CUST PICKUP LOCA'nOfPo#CWJ771 LOCATIOPPO#CWJ771 CY20077 8 01 I 04 020077 4 N HAULING INC I @;- 39352 1 Q ol 09: PICKUP .37 Tmcz@ RC R 771 o o:7:7: 0 @@l tills. ELLIS L /EL2 Las. ELLIS L /EL2 -6 TO .-IN T... la -1. I 1 839421 TA . 1:)(,) *22480 .00 .00 00 EL S L /EL2 5326 4319 Lms. .65 4319 ===5arr=, 22 .00 40015 L=40015 MATFAIAL. MAT 0780 4313 :TALX HSAL HAUL T ACKNOWLEr 3ED A 57 --KR opmnrlml- T w fn N 0 qr Lu V w L Q It -j i W M 4. 0. M CO i -Z 45 c o c: CY) I 0 oo -j 0 r, (z z a LO N W z ex x us IE -75 0 IX - a, z u -j 0 L) Ix z 4 Ld L2 to 3 a u 0- J z 0 r- <r -1 <r z (') qc I 3: 1@ r a o o 4 a: -j 4x OD M f-) rl v u gull I LI. X z CO RT CD Ca. Co w k.') C4 C, z Z, z-j C.4 Tj 2 @o or, to N M 0 a LO W N 1,@ @- U 0@ @ ul C3 Im LI Wit N 17 ir 0: C3 :(34 11 0 qt N w w 0 0 Du 0 J > > a. M CD a -j J -c p L) 0 X + RECEIVEO MAY 2 1994 jT ChesaNke Bay 4 .1 LOCal Assistance C4 Dept. 0 806 IS F-= 8N C- 8V -2r R A 6M:E; 2V I=- R 2X SUPPLIED BY: CREDIT SUPPLIED TO: AGENCY VIRGINIA TECH CODE AGENCY MS. JEAN TINGLER CODE OFFICE Of SPONSORED PR6O6GRAMS1 230 CHESAPEAKE BAY LOCAL ASSIT ADDRESS 340 BURRUSS HALL ADDRESS DEPT., 805 EAST BROAD STREET, BLACKSBURG, VIRGINIA 24061-0241 SUITE 701, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA. 23219 INV 1 0386 437880-0320 OAT SHIPPED TO APPROVED 8 A6 ENCY REfERENCE NO. 0 6Ll DATE OF UNIT DELIVERY DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES OR SERVICES NTY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1,11/94 TRANSFER FUNDS FOR DESIGN AND 38,369-48 THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF A WATER UALITY 3,131/94 MONITORING-SYSTEN FOR POLECAT CREEK_ WATERSHED NOTE: I certify that this vouch- VOUCHER DATE SECTION 9 OF THE er is in agreement with the merchandise or service COMMONWEALTH OF for which payment is being SHEET 1 38,369 48 VIRGINIA ACCOUNTING made; and further, that POLICIES AND PRO- computations and coding on SHEET 2 CEEDURES MANUAL the voucher are correct LISTS TRANSACTION and discounts taken are SHEET 3 CODES AUTHORIZED proper. FOR USE ON THIS Initial SHEET 4' DOCUMENT TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION TOTAL 38,369 4818 FUND PROGRAM REV. PROJECT TRANS AGNCY GLA FUNDIDET FFY PROG OBJ. SOURCE AMOUNT PROJ K P 136. 230 034JO2 94 06050 38,369.48 COST INVOICE DUE DATE REF DOC CODE AGENC PSD AGY. REFERENCE DATE NUMBER NUMBER JSX 437880 CURRENT DOCUMENTISUBSIDIARY MULTI- DESCRIPTION N61.16ER I JAI MULUUNI PURPOSE FUND PROGRAM REV. PROJECT TRANS AGNCY2IG6LA FUND DET FFY PROG SUB0JEL8E OBJ. SOURCE AMOUNT PR r 92f76o 7268)/ )520 9684 806-840-96a .96368y 523-4040. 4@4l92y COST ICE DUE DATE REF DOC I6NVO CODE FIP-2S PSD AGY. REFERENCE DATE NUMBER 2S2x MM DD YY NUMBE CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- CHECK IF EXP. M) -Ch Loll OF E RY 2O2J6ITK6IPH 2Y2Y CHE120 DESCRIPTION N8U44F-40f40f24@ 2S6x ACCOUNT PURPOSE0F 88rDIST8RIBUTION SHEETS ARE ATTACHED ddVA E 111594 SUPPLIED BY: CREDIT SUPPLIED TO: CHARGE AGENCY VA 2co4m4m8Wealt8h 8u4ni8v8"sit0y CODE AGENCY Chesapeake LAx:al Ass14stan8ae i4m2pt. CODE Gra0nt43 and 404=tr0aCt4l &:counting 236 Fiscal Office 408 F ADDRESS 843039' 701 E. Broad Street,, Suite 701 Rickimo8nd, VA 23284-3039 Richmond, V4A 23219 INVOICE NUMBER. DATE (MWDPNY) SHIPPED TO Attns Jean Tingler.' REaUISMON NUMBER AGENCY REFERENCE NO. DATE OF ICES UNIT AMOUNT DELIVERY DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES OR SERV OUANTITY UNIT PRICE OR SERVICE month To reuest payment in accordance with the contract between Ending Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance and VCEJ for the project 10/31/94 entitled "Local-Term Biological Characterization of Water uality of Polecat Creek..." under the direction of D4r(s) Greg C. Gar0mn and(IR4n 8@a0mk. 787.86 0-38022-4213 VOUCHER NUMBER DATE (MM/DD1YY) I certityihat this voucher Is In agreement NOTE: with the merchandise or service for which payment Is being made; and further, that TOTAL THIS SHEET 767 6 computations and coding on the voucher SECTION 9 OF THE COMMONWEALTH are correct and discounts taken are pr9per TOTAL SHEET 2 OF VIRGINIA ACCOUNTING POLICIES II "' 4A8p AND PROCEDURES MANUAL LISTS Irtit TOTAL SHEET 3 TRANSACTION CODES AUTHORIZED FOR USE ON THIS DOCUMENT. TOTAL SHEET 4 J AMOUNT CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT TRANSFER DISTRIB4En4ON 07 i2uo R E UE PROJECT PR0tGRAM ECT @v 11 1 L MS AGENCY GLA FUND I DET I FFY PROG SU13 I ELE OBJ 11 SOURCE AMOUNT PROJECT TK IPH 136 236 03 0P2 1951 ._ _. 1 1 06050 1 787 886 1- COST FIPS PSD @ AGENCY REFERENCE'.-- INVOICE DUE DATE DOC' CODE V DATE NUMBER MM DO YY -NUMBER J SX CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI DESCRIPTION ...... NUMBER SX ACCOUNT . PURPOSE FUN&-- WE ar T48OET ff0@ -ROG'.' 048@ PNT -PFIO0jE12&,01 'TK PH; ..69LA: 0_FU NrD 611P UP _URCE4% '-C '-' 4' @; r 2f2t-V TN. PROGFL6kM'- ilT!0"' AGEN COSI.- CE-:@-1--'-'1-@!" i DUE D4AT8F '7:---'REF4ERENCIE DOC.-.T1.-V:-i. ,.'hPS, PS AGENCY RE EFIENCE'8V-1.- 20J . :-. '@ I', DO I ..wI sx ., . .0. . . -F - " . DATE MM YY 'v NUMBER' @E 6 MIR Ni F 0 om1p632;420;84;960 @ @ @ 1p1p EN A N T@ C TERAG TR 707 CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY. MULTI- CHECK IF EXPENDITURE :'D SCR TION'-- 0"AC0MUNT' PURPOSE ";"-"':NUMBER DISTFIIBL2MO0N'CONTIN06ATIOt4i',i,' J'SX 'A :HEDI4;2vj 0 so fflilffmt@l 18 @ VIRGINIA TECH CHESAPEAKE BAY LOCAL OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROGRAMS 208 805 EAST BROAD STREET, SUITE 701 340 BURRUSS HALL RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219 BLACKSBURG, VIRGINIA 24061-0249 A6TrENTION: FISCAL OFFICER 12/15/94 10114 TRANSFER FUNDS FOR 95-408-001 - POLECAT CREEK TOTAL AIVIT 10/1/94 WATERSHED PROJECT $20,022.00 THROUGH 12/31/94 CREDIT: 437952-0320 .......... %JDETTA 06132Y RESEARCH ADMIN. PHONE (703) 231-9387 J2p1pp $20,022.00 (703) 231-4822 TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION 136 208 03 102 19 06050 $20,022.00 2Wi8m, "8ni2f2fi2m2m4m 1437952 $20,022.00 6424 IEEE= 0 DA239 (REV. 7/86) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 'DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTS INTERAGENCY TRANSFER INVOICE SUPPLIED BY; CREDIT SUPPLIED TO: CHARGE AGENCY CoDg AGENCY CODE pept. of Enviror0m4mtal uality 1440 _Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance 1408 ADDRESS ADDRESS 629 E. Main St. r 3rd Flr, Ric8h8=-44, VA 805 E. Broad St., Suite 701, RichT4", VA INVOICE UMBEF1 DATE (MMIDDIYY) SHIPPFD TO J/ 8Yo 28s- 0 4/18/95 REUISITION NUMBER AGE"CY REFERENCE No. 94-408-06 DATE OF UNIT DELIVERY 1119SCOIPTION OF ARTICLES OR Sr:RVICP� UANTITY UNIT pRICg AMOUNT OR SERVICE Costs in0c8=e6d with the Polecat Creek Watershed Project for the period Jan, 1 March 31, 1995 4625. 64 / =2C-0 2c8z,;, VOUCHER NUMBER DATE (MM/DD/YY) I certify that this voucher Is In agreement NOTE: with the merchandise or service for which payment Is being made; and further, that TOTAL THIS SHEET computations and coding on the voucher 4;625! On SECTION 9 OF THE COMMONWEALTH are correct and discounts taken are proper. TOTAL SHEET 2 OF VIRGINIA ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL LISTS Initial TOTA@ SHEET 3 TRANSACTION CODES AUTHORIZED FOR USE ON THIS DOCUMENT. TOTAL SHEET 4 AMOUNT CERTIFIED TRANSFER DISTRI13UTION FOR PAYMENT 41625 00 FUND PROGRAM ___ REVENUE I PROJECT TRANS AGENCY GLA TU-N-D-r-DET FFY I PRor. sue I ELE I OBJECT I SOURCE AMOUNT PROJECT TK 'PH 180 440 01100 -07 1 1 1123 1 _ . 1 .4 1 625 00 COST FIPS PSO AGENCY REFERENCE INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE DATE NUMBER MM DO YY NUMBER SX 608 1 DESCRIPTION CURRENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- NUMBER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND FFY PROGRAM OBJECT REVENUE AMOUNT PROJECT FUNDI DET PROG I SUB 'I ELE SOURCE PROJECT TK I PH COST INVOICE UBS" DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC 40EACCO I 08@PRI CODE FIPS Pso AGENCY REFERENCE DATE NUMBER MM DD YY NUMBER Sx CU62RENT DOCUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- CHECK IF EXPENDITURE I)IS DIS DESCRIPTION NUMB8@R 52@x ACCOUNT PURPOSE 6:00f00i TRIBUTION CONTINUATION SHEETS ARE -- - - - - ATTACHED 0 DA239 (REV. 7/86) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTS INTERAGENCY TRANSFER INVOICE SUPPLIED BY: CREDIT SUPPLIED TO: CHARGE AGENCY CODE AGENCY CODE DCR/ Division of Natural Heritage 199 Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Dept ADDRESS ADDRESS 1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312 804 E. Broad Street, Suite 701 9 ? jR;A&W0nd, Vixginia 252t DATE (MWDD/YY) SHI4M2ARG"d' Vigg0" a 3?19 H-0156 4/13/95 REUISITION NUMBER AGENCY REFERENCE NO. DATE OF DELIVERY DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES OR SERVICES UANTITY UNIT UNIT AMOUNT PRICE OR SERVICE Expenses for State Match Funds Polecat Creek Water uality Monitoring Project 700.00 r X VOUCHER NUMBER DATE (MM/DDfYY) I certify that this voucher Is In agreement NOTE: with the merchandise or service for which I payment Is being made; and further, that 700100 computations and coding on the voucher TOTAL THIS SHEET I SECTION 9 OF THE COMMONWEALTH are correct and discounts taken are OF VIRGINIA ACCOUNTING POLICIES proper. TOTAL SHEET2 AND PROCEDURES MANUAL LISTS initial TOTAL SHEET 3 TRANSACTION CODES AUTHORIZED FOR USE ON THIS DOCUMENT. TOTAL SHEET 4 AMOUNT CERTIFIED I FOR PAYMENT 700 100 TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION I TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND IFFY PROGRAM I REVENI IF AMOUNT PROJECT FUND I DET I I PROG SUB ELE I SOURCE PROJECT TK I PH 19 9 _ 21 2O I (2b 15. 0 3 1 7 1 1 4Z8.41 - - - - 16.0.0 71- 75-31 1 COST INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOG I --CODE FIPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE DATE NUMBER MM I DD YY NUMBER sx CURRENT DOCUMEN SUBSIDIARY MULTI- DESCRIPTION NUMBER- Sx ACCOUNT PURPOSE Polecat Creek TRANS AGENCY GLA FUND IFFY PROGRAM OBJECT REVENUE AMOUNT I PROJECT FUND I DET FROG SUB I ELE SOURCE I PROJECT 84T TK PH 19 9 0 6J 001 9 04 5-0 3 1 71 . 011 3 4 31 81 0 0 . . . . . . . 29_01 7 1_ 7 53 1 COST FIPS PSD AGENCY REFERENCE INVOICE DUE DATE REFERENCE DOC CODE DATE NUMBER MM Do I YY NUMBER SX 6@00 637 C4@RR2;7N_T_260-4CUMENT SUBSIDIARY MULTI- CHECK IF EXPENDIITURE DESCRIPTION NUMBER SX ACCOUNT PURPOSE DISTRIBUTION CONTINUATION Polecat Creek E ATTACHIEP..., ADMINISTRATION NATURAL HERITAGE PLANNING AND RECREATION RESOURCES SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION STATE PARKS COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE Main Street Station, 1500 East Main Street -- Suite 312 TDD (804) 786-2121 Richmond. Virginia 23219 (804) 786-7951 FAX: (804) 371-2674 \N ,1314151 April 13, 1995 Cb - -4 , r-11 APR1999 co VED -1Y tocal Mr. Darryl M. Glover Senior Environmental Engineer Chesapeake Bay local Assistance Department 6 805 E. Broad Street, Suite 701 Ridmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Mr. Glover: Enclosed is the State Match information for the Polecat Creek Water Quality Monitoring Project. DNH State Zoologist 20 days @ $137 $2,740 Fringe State Zoologist 30% of $2,740 822 Fringe State Ecologist 19$ of $2,025 385 Total DNH State Match Funds 3,947 If you need any further information, do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, Pat Jarrell Financial Administrator pi NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY 3 6668 141127,157 3