DOCSLIB.ORG

Prioritization of Carolina Bays As Mitigation Projects from Herpetofaunal Perspectives by James Edwards June 2011 Director of Th

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prioritization of Carolina Bays As Mitigation Projects from Herpetofaunal Perspectives by James Edwards June 2011 Director of Th Prioritization of Carolina Bays as Mitigation Projects from Herpetofaunal Perspectives By James Edwards June 2011 Director of Thesis: Dr. Dan Marcucci Major Department: Geography Carolina bays are landform features of the southeastern United States that contain isolated depressional wetlands. These unique ecosystems are particularly valuable for herpetofauna and are at risk of being extirpated from the landscape because of recent legal developments. There are few available inventories of these landform features and associated wetlands, most notably the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources inventory. No known peer reviewed published inventory exists for North Carolina, which contains a high concentration of Carolina bays in the southeastern coastal plain. Wetland inventories offer planners and landscape managers a source of information that can be integrated with other information to aid in rapid natural resource assessment and planning. This research is designed to develop a methodology that directs limited resources and funds towards Carolina bays that contain attributes necessary to provide habitat, refuge, and hibernacula for general herpetofauna while meeting regulatory needs. The implications of the research are that it uses existing data and builds upon them to prioritize Carolina bays while still being generalizable to other regions containing depressional isolated wetlands. By not using specific organisms, the research is intended to serve as a tool to direct efforts to locales where ground based surveys and truthing can be conducted for target species. Prioritization of Carolina Bays as Mitigation Projects from a Herpetofaunal Perspective A Thesis Presented To the Faculty of the Department of Geography East Carolina University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Art By James Edwards June, 2011 © 2011 James Dean Edwards Jr. All Rights Reserved Prioritization of Carolina bays as Mitigation projects from a Herpetofaunal Perspective By James Dean Edwards Jr. Approved By: Director of Thesis: ______________________________________________________________ (Dan Marcucci, PhD) Committee Member: ____________________________________________________________ (Thomas Crawford, PhD) Committee Member: ____________________________________________________________ (David Chalcraft, PhD) Chair of the Department of Geography ______________________________________________ (Burrell Montz, PhD) Dean of the Graduate School______________________________________________________ (Paul J. Gemperline, PhD) Dedication Jimmy Edwards (1961 – 2010) This thesis is dedicated to all those who have supported me through my academic career, especially my father. My father was a jack of many trades and master of none who had a passion for nature. It was his dream that I continue my education. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my committee for their help and support. My advisor, Dr. Dan Marcucci, provided valuable guidance and advice during my tenure. Dr. Marcucci helped me to focus my research interests and develop a representative thesis. I have become a better writer under his supervision and I am grateful that he had the patience to assist me with developing this valuable skill. Dr. Tom Crawford has been a mentor since I began taking geography classes. Dr. Crawford‟s advice with handling the spatial analysis for this thesis created an atmosphere conducive for creativity. Dr. Mark Brinson was a devoted wetland ecologist with keen interests in classification systems. Dr. Brinson assisted with the initial development of the classification system used for this thesis. I am honored to have known and had Dr. Brinson on my committee. I would like to give special thanks to Dr. David Chalcraft. Many of my research interests have developed from working with Dr. Chalcraft as an undergraduate. Dr. Chalcraft stepped in for Dr. Brinson and provided valuable insights into how the analysis should proceed. Dr. Chalcraft‟s expertise provided the groundwork for finishing this thesis, which would have been greatly hindered without his help. I would like to thank the Department of Geography for accepting me and creating one of the best academic environments I have been part of. I am honored to have conducted this thesis as a geography student and the experience I received will be with me the rest of my life. Finally, I would like to thank my family for supporting me and giving encouragement in troubling times. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page .................................................................................................................................... i Copyright Page ........................................................................................................................... i Signature Page ............................................................................................................................ i Dedication ................................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... vii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ xi List of Equations ..................................................................................................................... xiii Chapter 1: Executive Summary ...................................................................................................1 Analysis ..................................................................................................................................3 Carolina Bay Inventory ........................................................................................................3 Carolina Bay Herpetofaunal and Mitigation Attributes .........................................................3 Agricultural edge ..............................................................................................................3 Road edge.........................................................................................................................4 Percent pine ......................................................................................................................4 Biodiversity and wildlife habitat analysis (BWHA) rated ..................................................4 Patch cohesion ..................................................................................................................5 Patch diversity ..................................................................................................................5 Carolina bay density and variability ..................................................................................5 Road density. ....................................................................................................................5 Swine lagoon count ..........................................................................................................6 Parcel count. .....................................................................................................................6 Restorability. ....................................................................................................................6 Carolina Bay Prioritization ...................................................................................................6 Hierarchy..........................................................................................................................6 Stakeholder participation. .................................................................................................7 Analytic hierarchy process (AHP). ...................................................................................7 Scaling and scoring...........................................................................................................7 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................7 iii Chapter 2: Literature Review and Problem Formulation ..............................................................9 Background ........................................................................................................................... 12 Legal Interpretations .......................................................................................................... 12 Wetland mitigation and North Carolina .............................................................................. 14 Carolina bays ..................................................................................................................... 16 Hydrology ...................................................................................................................... 16 Vegetation ...................................................................................................................... 18 Landscape ecology ............................................................................................................. 26 Heterogeneity ................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Origin of Atlantic Coastal Plain Ponds in New York and New Jersey
    ORIGIN OF ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN PONDS IN NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY A Final Report Presented by Shuangtao Zhang to The Department of Geosciences in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Hydrogeology Stony Brook University August, 2008 Abstract of the Report The Origin of Fox Pond By Shuangtao Zhang Master of Science In Hydrogeology Stony Brook University 2008 This study places constraints on the origin of the Coastal Plain ponds in New Jersey and Long Island, which are a subset of the elliptical, small, shallow, groundwater- fed ponds found on the siliciclastic sands of the Atlantic Coastal Plain from Florida to Long Island. French and Demitroff (2001) considered a variety of hypotheses for the origin of the Coastal Plain ponds of New Jersey, known as spungs, and concluded that the most viable model is that the depressions are blowouts formed by eolian processes during the periglacial period between 20,000 and 13,000 years ago. More recently Howard et al, 2007 have suggested that the origin of the Coastal Plain ponds in North and South Carolina, know as Carolina Bays, may be due to a comet that broke up and then the pieces may have exploded over or on the Laurentian Ice Sheet near the Great Lakes and ii the Hudson Bay some 12,900 years ago. This impact would have made airborne large masses of ice from the comet and the glacier. When these ice masses landed, they created the shallow depressions forming the Carolina Bays. The approach used to test these models was grain-size analysis of the conspicuous rims of the Coastal Plain pond depressions.
    [Show full text]
  • Memorial to Charles Wythe Cooke 1887— 1971 VICTOR T
    Memorial to Charles Wythe Cooke 1887— 1971 VICTOR T. STRINGFIELD 4208 50 Street, NW„ Washington, D.C. 20016 The death of Dr. Charles Wythe Cooke in Daytona Beach, Florida, on Christmas Day 1971, ended his long and successful career as geologist, stratigrapher, and paleontologist. He is survived by his sister, Madge Lane Cooke. Cooke was born in Baltimore, Maryland, July 20, 1887. He was a bachelor. He received the degree of Bachelor of Arts from Johns Hopkins University in 1908 and Ph.D. (in geology) in 1912. From 1911 to 1912 he was a Fellow at the university. In July 1910, while a grad­ uate student, he received an appointment as Junior Geologist for summer work in the U.S. Geological Survey, beginning his long career in that organization. In the U.S. Geological Survey, he was Assistant Geologist, 1913 to 1917; Paleontologist, 1917 to 1919; Associate Geologist, 1919 to 1920; Geologist, 1920 to 1928; Scientist, 1928 to 1941; Senior Scientist, 1941 to 1951; andGeologist-Stratigrapher-Paleontologist, 1952 to 1956. He served as research associate in the Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C., from 1956 until his death. He was geologist in the Dominican Republic for the Geological Survey in 1919 and worked for the Tropical Oil Company, Colombia, South America, in 1920. After completing his 40 years of service in the U.S. Geological Survey, Cooke retired on November 30,1956. Also in 1956 he received the Meritorious Service Award of the Interior Department in recognition of his outstanding service. That citation in 1956 states: His scientific work lias been concerned with the paleontology, stratigraphy, and landforms (geomorphology) of the Coastal Plain, extending from New Jersey to Mississippi.
    [Show full text]
  • ORIGIN of ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN PONDS in NEW YORK and NEW JERSEY Shangtao Zhang and Gilbert N. Hanson Department of Geosciences
    ORIGIN OF ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN PONDS IN NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY Shangtao Zhang and Gilbert N. Hanson Department of Geosciences Stony Brook University Stony Brook, NY 11794-2100 The origins of the Coastal Plain ponds of New Jersey and North and South Carolina have been proposed as blowouts formed by eolian processes during the periglacial period between 20,000 and 13,000 years ago (French and Demitroff, 2001) or created by airburst related to a comet that broke up and then the pieces may have exploded over or on the Laurentian Ice Sheet near the Great Lakes and the Hudson Bay some 12,900 years ago (Howard et al, 2007), separately. The approach used in this study to test these models was grain-size analysis of the conspicuous rims of the Coastal Plain pond depressions. Cumulative curves and plots indicate that the rim sediments from these ponds have alluvial not eolian characteristics. Extensions of the long axes of the Coastal Plain ponds including those of the Carolina Bays, New Jersey and Long Island converge on the Great Lakes and Hudson Bay in Canada where the proposed comet pieces burst or impacted. Comparison of Cumulative Curves 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 Long Island Ponds -------- 30 New Jersey Spunges -------- Cumulative Weight (%) Weight Cumulative 20 Carolina Bays -------- Long Island Dunes -------- 10 0 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 Grain Size (phi) Figure 1 Comparison of the Cumulative Curves of sediments from the rims of New Jersey Spungs, Long Island Ponds, Carolina Bays and Long Island Dunes Figure 2 Plots of moment parameters: Skewness against Standard Deviation (After Friedman, 1961) Figure 3 Plots of moment parameters: Mean against Skewness (After Friedman, 1961) Figure 4 Plots of moment parameters: Mean against Standard Deviation (After Friedman, 1961) Figure 5 The orientation of the long axes of Carolina bays converge.
    [Show full text]
  • Carolina Bays and the Shapes of Eddies
    Carolina Bays and the Shapes of Eddies By C. WYTHE COOKE A SHORTER CONTRIBUTION TO GENERAL GEOLOGY GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254-I Presenting corroborative evidence that the elliptical Carolina bays were shaped by tidal eddies and that the shape of the ideal eddy is elliptical UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1954: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Douglas McKay, Sec"retary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 70 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Page Abstract __________________________________________ _ 195 Occurrence of eddy-built bars-Continued Hypotheses of origin _______________________________ _ 195 Wicomico (100-foot) sea leveL __________________ _ 202 Ideal outlines of an eddy ___________________________ _ 196 Okefenokee (145-foot) sea leveL ______________ -_-_ 203 Structures built by eddies ___________________________ _ 199 Sunderland (170-foot) sea leveL _________________ _ 204 Stationary tidal eddies _________________________ _ 199 Coharie (215-foot) sea leveL ____________________ _ 204 Eddy-built bars or Neptune's racetracks __________ _ 199 Hazlehurst (270-foot) sea leveL _________________ _ 204 Occurrence of eddy-built bars _______________________ _ 200 Summary _________________________________________ _ 204 Relation to Lhe contemporary sea leveL __________ _ 200 Practical applications ______________________________ _ Silver Bluff (6-foot) sea leveL ___________________ _ 200 205 Talbot (42-foot) sea leveL ______________________ _ 202 Literature cited _________________________ ------------ 205 Penholoway (70-foot) sea leveL ____________ ~ ____ _ 202 Index ____________________________________________ _ 207 ILLUSTRATIONS [Plates follow index] PLATE 41. Halfmoon Island and vicinity, Accomac County, Va. A low spit partly surrounding a tidal eddy.
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina
    SOUTH CAROLINA Cheryl Matheny Gloria Burns James G. Titus Andrew Hickok Daniel Hudgens The Likelihood of Shore Protection, Volume 2 February 2010. The following document can be cited as: Matheny, C, G. Burns, J. G. Titus, A. Hickok, and D.E. Hudgens. 2010. “South Carolina”. In James G. Titus, Daniel L Trescott, and Daniel E. Hudgens (editors). The Likelihood of Shore Protection along the Atlantic Coast of the United States. Volume 2: New England and the Southeast. Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official opinion of the Environmental Protection Agency. The primary referring page for this document is http://risingsea.net/ERL/SC.html Chapter 3: SOUTH CAROLINA Prepared by: Cheryl Matheny* Gloria Burns* James G. Titus** Andrew Hickok** Daniel Hudgens** Photos by Jim Titus * Matheny and Burns prepared portions of the report through the section on stakeholder review, but were not involved with the final review which substantially changed the results. ** Titus, Hickok, and Hudgens undertook the final review and produced the final report. 115 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 119 METHOD......................................................................................................................................... 123 SOUTH CAROLINA PERSPECTIVES............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CEAP-Wetlands Science Note Delmarva Bays Morphometry
    Natural Resources Conservation Service Assessing Wetland Morphometrics and Conservation Effects Assessment Project Ecosystem Functions in Agricultural CEAP Science Note Landscapes of the Atlantic Coastal Plain September 2015 Using Fine Scale Topographic Information Summary Background • Topography is a known control on Topography is a known control on Light Detection and Ranging multiple ecosystem processes, influencing the movement of water, soil, multiple ecosystem processes, (LiDAR)-based digital elevation and other constituents. influencing the movement of water, models (DEMs; see summary at soil, and other constituents. In the left) enable mapping of landscape • In the Atlantic Coastal Plain, even subtle differences in topography can lead to Atlantic Coastal Plain, even subtle features that were previously substantial variations in these processes, differences in topography can lead difficult if not impossible to including those related to to substantial variations in these distinguish with commonly biogeochemistry (i.e., nutrient cycling), erosion/deposition, and surface and processes, including those related available DEMs produced using groundwater movement. to biogeochemistry (i.e., nutrient stereo-interpretation of aerial cycling), erosion/deposition, and • Traditionally available digital elevation photographs. Fenstermacher et al. models (DEMs) created using aerial surface water and groundwater (2014) highlights the importance of photography have much coarser vertical movement. In turn, these processes LiDAR-based DEMs for mapping accuracies 3.28 – 32.81 feet (1 – 10 m) than those derived from LiDAR ~ 0.50 influence a number of ecosystem Delmarva bays, elliptical feet (~ 15 cm). services which are highly relevant depressional landforms that are in agricultural landscapes including commonly found on the • LiDAR-derived DEMs also have relatively fine horizontal resolutions ~ the provision of clean water, the agriculturally dominated Delmarva 3.28 – 9.84 feet (~ 1 – 3 m).
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution, Morphometry, and Land Use of Delmarva Bays
    Wetlands (2014) 34:1219–1228 DOI 10.1007/s13157-014-0583-5 ORIGINAL RESEARCH Distribution, Morphometry, and Land Use of Delmarva Bays D. E. Fenstermacher & M. C. Rabenhorst & M. W. Lang & G. W. McCarty & B. A. Needelman Received: 9 September 2013 /Accepted: 23 September 2014 /Published online: 8 October 2014 # Society of Wetland Scientists 2014 Abstract Delmarva Bays are depressional wetlands that are Introduction elliptical in shape with sandy rims, and occur mainly in the central portion of the Delmarva Peninsula within the Mid- Carolina Bays are unique geomorphic formations that occur Atlantic United States. Situated in a region with abundant along the Atlantic Coastal Plain from Florida to New Jersey, agriculture, Delmarva Bays and other wetlands may enhance although the most notable and highly studied Carolina Bays are water quality by reducing nutrient and sediment levels in local situated in North and South Carolina. They are characterized waters. A significant portion have been drained and converted geomorphologically by their overall elliptical shape that is often from forested wetlands to agriculture. Using LiDAR to locate oriented northwest to southeast along the major axis (Sharitz Bays, we estimate that there are 17,000 Bays on the Delmarva and Gibbons 1982; Stolt and Rabenhorst 1987b;Brulandetal. Peninsula, which is an order of magnitude greater than earlier 2003). Carolina Bays commonly have a sandy rim, usually in estimates. Using a stratified sampling scheme based on Bay the southeast end of each Bay (Prouty 1952;Thom1970; Stolt density, morphometric parameters of 1494 Bays were mea- and Rabenhorst 1987a;Tiner2003). In areas where they are sured from the LiDAR data and their land use was assessed readilyfoundtheycancoverasmuchas50%ofthelandarea using aerial photography.
    [Show full text]
  • Santee National Wildlife Refuge
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Santee National Wildlife Refuge Refuge Facts ■ Habitat types found on the refuge ■ The Santee National Wildlife include mixed hardwoods, mixed Refuge was established in 1941 to pine hardwoods, pine plantations, compensate for the loss of habitat marsh, croplands, old fields, ponds, for migratory waterfowl by the impoundments, and open water. creation and flooding of the Santee This tremendous diversity in Cooper Lakes. habitats supports many kinds of wildlife. photo: USFWS/S. Heisey photo: ■ When established, the refuge was approved for 90,000 acres, to be ■ Endangered and threatened leased from the South Carolina species found on the refuge include Public Service Authority for 35 the American alligator, wood stork, years. and short-nosed sturgeon. ■ Under the 1975 lease agreement, ■ The Dingle Pond Unit is home to the refuge was separated into four a Carolina Bay, providing unique units along the northern shore of habitat for several wetland species Lake Marion totaling 8,195 acres including reptiles and amphibians. leased from Santee Cooper. The Carolina Bays are depressional refuge also has 4,448 acres that are wetlands typically fed by rain or photo: USFWS/M. Epstein photo: owned fee title. The current lease spring. agreement will expire in 2025. Financial Impact of Refuge ■ The refuge manages three ■ Full time employees: six migratory bird sanctuaries to provide a place for wintering ■ Annual visitation: 181,000 visitors waterfowl to rest, loaf, and feed. ■ Primary host of the Santee Birding The largest concentrations of and Nature Festival; partners with wintering waterfowl on the refuge local conservation organizations are found within these sanctuaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    INTRODUCTION CONSERVATION OF CAROLINA BAYS IN GEORGIA Executive Summary Carolina bays are unique wetland landforms present in several states along the Atlantic Coastal Plain. As suggested by their name, most bays are found in the states of North and South Carolina. Each of those states conducted systematic inventories of their bays during the 1980s (Nifong 1982, Sarsony 1991, Weakley 1982, and Bennett and Nelson 1991). It was important for Georgia to follow suit and investigate the status of Carolina bays within its borders. The results of this study are particularly poignant considering the 2001 US Supreme Court decision on SWANCC vs. USACE which enervated legal protections for isolated wetlands under the Clean Water Act. Because degradation of isolated wetlands could occur at an accelerated pace, it was important to find out where these bays are, the status of their condition, and to spread the word of their importance. Five-hundred twenty-eight (528) bays covering over 27,000 hectares (ha) were identified and digitized into a GIS coverage. These bays were remotely assessed via recent oblique color aerial photographs taken by the USDA Farm Services Agency. Each bay was assessed for seven parameters, including General Integrity, Ditching Intensity, Rim Condition, Buffer Condition, Dominant and Secondary Vegetation Types, and Natural Hydrologic Connectivity. The values generated under this remote assessment were used to prioritize sites for aerial and ground surveys in the second phase of the project. Unfortunately, the second phase of the project revealed that the remote assessments generally depicted bays as being in a better condition than experienced on the ground.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of a Spatially Explicit Model to Estimate Karen F
    Eastern Illinois University The Keep Faculty Research & Creative Activity Biological Sciences January 2005 The development of a spatially explicit model to estimate Karen F. Gaines Eastern Illinois University, [email protected] C. Shane Boring Rutgers University Dwayne E. Porter University of Georgia Follow this and additional works at: http://thekeep.eiu.edu/bio_fac Part of the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Gaines, Karen F.; Boring, C. Shane; and Porter, Dwayne E., "The development of a spatially explicit model to estimate" (2005). Faculty Research & Creative Activity. 61. http://thekeep.eiu.edu/bio_fac/61 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at The Keep. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Research & Creative Activity by an authorized administrator of The Keep. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Science of the Total Environment 341 (2005) 15–31 www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv The development of a spatially explicit model to estimate radiocaesium body burdens in raccoons (Procyon lotor) for ecological risk assessment Karen F. Gainesa,b,c,*, C. Shane Boringc,d, Dwayne E. Portera aUniversity of South Carolina, Norman J. Arnold School of Public Health, Columbia, SC 29208, USA bThe University of Georgia, Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, Aiken, SC 29802, USA cConsortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Piscataway, NJ, USA dDivision of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA Received 25 May 2004; received in revised form 27 August 2004; accepted 7 September 2004 Abstract A spatially explicit model of raccoon (Procyon lotor) distribution for the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • I a GEOGRAPHIC ONTOLOGY and GIS MODEL for CAROLINA BAYS a Thesis by JACOB RICHMOND TURNER Submitted to the Graduate School Appa
    A GEOGRAPHIC ONTOLOGY AND GIS MODEL FOR CAROLINA BAYS A Thesis by JACOB RICHMOND TURNER Submitted to the Graduate School Appalachian State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS August 2010 Department of Geography and Planning i A GEOGRAPHIC ONTOLOGY AND GIS MODEL FOR CAROLINA BAYS A Thesis by JACOB RICHMOND TURNER August 2010 APPROVED BY: ______________________________ Christopher A. Badurek Chairperson, Thesis Committee ______________________________ Gabrielle Katz Member, Thesis Committee ______________________________ Zack E. Murrell Member, Thesis Committee ______________________________ James E. Young Chairperson, Department of Geography of Planning ______________________________ Edelma D. Huntley Dean, Research and Graduate Studies ii Copyright by Jacob Richmond Turner 2010 All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT A GEOGRAPHIC ONTOLOGY AND GIS MODEL FOR CAROLINA BAYS (August 2010) Jacob R. Turner, B.A., University of Georgia. M.A., Appalachian State University Chairperson: Christopher A. Badurek Carolina bays are a unique geomorphologic entity located along the Atlantic coastal plain. Even without the benefit of an overhead view, they have been noted as a distinct feature of the coastal plain as first described by the South Carolina Geological Survey of South Carolina in 1848. The first aerial photographs in the 1930 coastal South Carolina region revealed that the unique depression wetlands were more than just a strange local phenomenon. Aerial photos enabled observers to see qualities in addition to their relative distribution that make them unique: their oval shape, northwest to southeast orientation and the presence of raised sand rims along their eastern and southeastern edges in many instances. Being such a distinctive surface feature and recognized for their ecological value, it would seem that Carolina bays would have been defined within their own map coverage across the Atlantic Coastal plain.
    [Show full text]
  • Carolina Bays FS
    ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ SREL ○○○○○○○○ Wetlands SeriesCarolina Bays FactSheet ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ DEFINITION CAROLINABAYWILDLIFE water;asadults,theyde- Carolinabaysareisolated AlthoughmanyCarolina pendonCarolinabaysas wetlandsinnaturalshallow baysaretemporaryponds breedingsiteswherethey depressionsthatare thatholdwateronlypart laytheireggs. largelyfedbyrainand oftheyear,thesewetlands shallowgroundwater. hostavarietyofwildlife, PLANTLIFEINBAYS Thesebayshaveanellipti- providingvaluablehabitat Averagewaterdepthand calshapeandgenerallya forsuchanimalsasfrogs, soiltypehavealargeinflu- northwesttosoutheast salamanders,turtles, enceonthetypesofplants orientation.Theyarefound snakesandalligators. foundinandaroundCaro- primarilyinGeorgiaand Manybirds,suchasher- linabays.Manybayscon- theCarolinas,butrange ons,egretsandmigratory taintreessuchasblack fromFloridatoDelaware. waterfowl,liveinCarolina gum,sweetgum,magnolia, Asmanyas300Carolina bays.Alsomammals,such baldcypressandmaple, baysexistontheSavannah asdeer,raccoons,skunks andshrubssuchassumac, RiverSite. andopossumsgetfood buttonbush,gallberryand andwaterfromCarolina redbay.Alsocommonin HABITATDESCRIPTION bays.Inaddition,micro- Carolinabaysarewater Carolinabaysvaryinsize scopicorganismscalled lilies,sedgesandvarious fromlessthananacreto zooplanktonliveinCaro- grasses.OntheSRS,60 manyacres.Waterlevels linabays.Salamandersand percentoftherareand arenormallylowestin frogsareamongthemost threatenedplantspecies autumnandhighestin abundantwildlifefoundin arefoundinCarolinabays.
    [Show full text]