DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Environmental Statement Related to the Forked River Nuclear

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

~,~~afjF~M flV~~3 ~ '*-'a- qi'4a' 0.nv,.-.tn, WSie related to the FORKED RIVER NUCLEAR STATION UNIT I JERSEY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY DOCKET No. 50-363 February 1973 UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION DIRECTORATE OF LICENSING i SUM~MARY AND CONCLUSIONS This Final Environmental Statement was prepared by the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of Licensing. 1. This action is administrative. 2. The proposed action is the issuance of a construction permit to the Jersey Central Power and Light Company (hereafter the Applicant) for the construction of the Forked River Nuclear Station Unit 1 (hereafter the Station), a nuclear power reactor to be located a few miles inland from Barnegat Bay near the community of Forked River, Ocean County, New Jersey (Docket No. 50-363). Unit 1 will employ a pressurized water reactor' to produce up to 3390 megawatts thermal (MWt)'. A steam turbine-generator will use this heat to provide 1093 megawatts of electrical power capacity (MWe). A "stretch power level" of 1143 MWe is anticipated at-a future date and is considered in the assessments contained in this statement. The turbine-exhaust steam will be cooled with seawater obtained from a canal connected to Barnegat Bay and circulated through either a counter-flow or cross-flow, natural-draft cooling tower. The interaction of the Forked River Station with the nearby operating Oyster Creek Nuclear Station was considered in this statement in evaluating environmental impacts. The existing environmental conditions with the Oyster Creek Station operating were used as an evaluation baseline. The Staff analysis showed no significant compounding of potential adverse effects attributable to th e addition of the Forked River Station. A separate environmental statement is being prepared for the Oyster Creek Station. 3. Summary of environmental impact and adverse effects: a. Several hundred acres of marginally productive agricultural land will be disturbed by construction activities and preempted for other uses. The associated loss of wild- life habitat will be minimal. Some turbidity may be ii, added to adjacent surface waters during the construction phase due to soil erosion and runoff: and a relatively small and temporary loss of benthic organisms will re- sult from dredging operation in the bay and discharge canal. b. Transmission lines right-of-way construction will result in the alteration of approximately two thousand acres of forest and agricultural land and the displacement of some wildlife presently in this area. In order to minimize impacts, the Applicant has cooperated with the State and local agencies to optimize wildlife values. c. Aquatic organisms entrained in the plant's cooling water system will be killed due to thermal, chemical, and mechanical shock. This loss is not expected to represent a significant fraction of the bay's biomass or to affect the productivity of adjacent waters. d. From 5,000 to 10,000 finfish and crabs will be destroyed each year by impingement and entrapment on water intake screens. This loss represents a very small fraction of Barnegat Bay ecosystem's annual production. e. Chemicals discharged from the Station, particularly chlorine, will be readily diluted to concentrations below those which might adversely affect aquatic resources. f. The cooling tower and issuing vapor plume may constitute a visual impact from surrounding areas and a possible distraction to traffic on the nearby Garden State Parkway. The several additional hours of fogging and/or icing ex- pected each year should be of little consequence. g. Use of fresh and salt water at the Station will not measurably deplete supply sources nor impair the quality of return flows for other uses. h. The deposition of salt resulting from the operation of the cooling tower within present design criteria will have no significant adverse impact on adjacent surfaces and vegetation. .i. Normal operation of the Station will introduce a very small radiation dose to the environment which will not constitute a meaningful risk. The estimated dose to the population within 50 miles is about 10 man-rem/yr. iii j. The addition of heat to the discharge canal from Forked River cooling tower blowdown is relatively small and will not adversely affect aquatic life in the canal or Barnegat Bay. k. The risk associated with accidental radiation exposure is very low. 4. Principal alternatives considered: a. Abandonment of the site; b. The purchase of power; c. Use of fossil fuels; d. Location of the Station at other sites; e. An ocean outfall, once-through saltwater cooling system, f. Other freshwater sources (surface water and treated sewage effluent) as make-up for the cooling tower, g. The use of treated sewage effluent as make-up for a spray pond or evaporative cooling lake, and h. Transportation of radioactive materials by other than normal procedures. 5. Comments on the Draft Environmental Statement were received from the agencies and organizations listed below and have been con- sidered in the preparation of the Final Environmental Statement. Copies of these comments are included as Appendix D and discussed in Section XII. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Department of Agriculture Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Department of Commerce Department of Health, Education and Welfare Department of Housing and Urban Development Department of the Interior Department of Transportation Environmental Protection Agency Federal Power Commission State of New Jersey Ocean County Commissioners. 6. This statement was made available to the public, to the Council on Environmental Quality, and to the other specified agencies in February 1973. iv 7. On the basis of the analysis and evaluation set forth in this statement, after weighing the environmental, economic, technical and other benefits against environmental costs and considering available alternatives, it is concluded that the action called for under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Appendix D to 10 CFR Part 50 is the issuance of a construction permit for the Forked River Nuclear Station Unit 1 subject to the following conditions for the protection of the environment: a. Measures will be undertaken to assure good practices to minimize the impacts resulting from the clearing of land, dredging operations, construction equipment oils and lubricants, and cleaning of plant equipment and piping. A separate clarification pond or other suitable means will be provided and used for presettlement of construction drainage waters to minimize the discharge of sediment to the discharge canal. (See Section IV-C.) b. The cooling tower drift and salt deposition investigatory program must be conducted through the prototypical testing stage to provide adequate assurance that the low salt deposition and low drift goal can be achieved and maintained throughout the life of the plant, to expand drift rate in- formation for a wide range of meteorological conditions, and to assure the statistical reliability of the methods used. (See Section V-A.) c. Aquatic forms in the intake will be surveyed in detail. Those adversely affected by the intake and discharge will be monitored by number and species in order to determine the need, if any to install alternate or additional means for the preservation of such forms. (See Section V-C.2.) d. The environmental monitoring program will be expanded to include additional surface water sampling and increased frequency of milk sampling. (See Section V-D.4.) e. The objective of the station design shall be such that the 'release of radioiodines to the environment is controlled so that the Staff's projected annual exposure to the 2-gram thyroid organ of a child will not exceed 5 millirems. (See Section V-D.2) f. The Applicant shall implement a monitoring program to deter- mine environmental effects which may occur as a result of site preparation and Station construction and operation. If harmful effects or evidence of irreversible damage are detected by the monitoring program, the Applicant will provide to the staff an analysis of the problem and a plan of action to be taken to eliminate or significantly reduce the detrimnental effects or damage. V TABLE OF CONTENTS Page * SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............. i LIST OF FIGURES ................... * xi LIST OF TABLES ...... ............. • xii FOREWORD ........... ................... ........... xiv I. INTRODUCTION ..... .............. A. SITE SELECTION ..... .......... .. 1-2 B. APPLICATIONS AND APPROVALS .... .. 1-3 II. THE SITE ...... ................ ............. 11-1 A. LOCATION OF PLANT ............. ............. 11-9 B. REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHY AND LAND USE. ............. II-1 C. HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE .......... ....... 11-9 D. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ......... 11-9 1. Geology ..... ........... ............................ 1II-9 2. Climate .... ............. ......... 11-10 3. Hydrology .... ........... a. Surface Waters ........... 11-12 b. Groundwater ........... ........... 11-17 E. ECOLOGY OF SITE AND ENVIRONS.. ........... 11-17 1. Terrestrial Ecology ....... ............. 1-17 2. Aquatic Ecology ........... ............................ II-20 a. Freshwater Ecosystems . b. Intake and Effluent Canal Ecosystem . 11-22 c. Barnegat Bay Ecosystems ........ 11-23 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page III. THE PLANT A. EXTERNAL APPEARANCE .............. ... 111-4 B. TRANSMISSION LINES. .............. * . 111-6 C. REACTOR AND STEAM-ELECTRIC SYSTEM ....... * . 111-6 D. EFFLUENT SYSTEMS ......... ................. *..111-6 1.
Recommended publications
  • Cloverdale Farm County Park

    Cloverdale Farm County Park

    Ocean County CLOVERDALE Board of Chosen Freeholders John C. Bartlett, Jr. Cloverdale FARM COUNTY Chairman of Parks and Recreation PARK John P. Kelly Within the boundaries of this 90-acre park, James F. Lacey Farm you will find the diversity of the Pine Bar- Gerry P. Little rens wetlands, uplands, and the beauty of 20 Joseph H. Vicari acres of cranberry bogs all year long. County The early settlers of New Jersey referred to the Pine Barrens as “barren” because Park traditional crops grew poorly here. Other types of agriculture were later established in the region. This trail will allow you to experience the natural beauty of the Pine Barrens and delve into its rich historical and agricultural past. Ocean County Department of Parks and Recreation The Ocean County Natural Lands Trust Administrative Offices Fund Program acquired Cloverdale Farm in 1-877-OC-PARKS 2004. The park was the site of the Collins’ family farm, which several generations of Fax: 1-732-270-9464 the family operated, going back to the early www.oceancountyparks.org 1900s. http://www.facebook.com/OceanCountyParks As you meander along the bog edges be sure to keep your eye out for different species of flora and fauna. You might just find one of Michael T. Mangum, our native carnivorous plants luring in ants Director with its false nectar bribes or be amazed by Kenneth F. Pullen, the sheer beauty of mountain laurel in General Supervisor bloom. As you wander, keep your eyes and 34 Cloverdale Road ears open or you might miss a red-tailed Mary Bavais, hawk as it cries soaring overhead or a Superintendent of Recreation Barnegat, NJ bluebird on its morning forage for insects.
  • The Natural Communities of South Carolina

    The Natural Communities of South Carolina

    THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF SOUTH CAROLINA BY JOHN B. NELSON SOUTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE & MARINE RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FEBRUARY 1986 INTRODUCTION The maintenance of an accurate inventory of a region's natural resources must involve a system for classifying its natural communities. These communities themselves represent identifiable units which, like individual plant and animal species of concern, contribute to the overall natural diversity characterizing a given region. This classification has developed from a need to define more accurately the range of natural habitats within South Carolina. From the standpoint of the South Carolina Nongame and Heritage Trust Program, the conceptual range of natural diversity in the state does indeed depend on knowledge of individual community types. Additionally, it is recognized that the various plant and animal species of concern (which make up a significant remainder of our state's natural diversity) are often restricted to single natural communities or to a number of separate, related ones. In some cases, the occurrence of a given natural community allows us to predict, with some confidence, the presence of specialized or endemic resident species. It follows that a reasonable and convenient method of handling the diversity of species within South Carolina is through the concept of these species as residents of a range of natural communities. Ideally, a nationwide classification system could be developed and then used by all the states. Since adjacent states usually share a number of community types, and yet may each harbor some that are unique, any classification scheme on a national scale would be forced to recognize the variation in a given community from state to state (or region to region) and at the same time to maintain unique communities as distinctive.
  • Carolina Sandhills General Brochure

    Carolina Sandhills General Brochure

    Carolina Sandhills National Wildlife Refuge Numerous small creeks and tributaries flow through the Carolina Sandhills U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (NWR) encompasses approximately 45,000 refuge and drain into either Black Creek on the east side National Wildlife Refuge and Lynches River on the west side. Atlantic white cedar, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acres in northeastern South Carolina. The pond pine, and dense stands of evergreen shrubs occur 23734 U.S. Highway 1 refuge is one of more than 560 refuges in along these streams forming pocosin (swamp on a hill) McBee, SC 29101 Carolina Sandhills areas throughout the refuge. Thirty man-made lakes and 843 335 8401 office the National Wildlife Refuge System, the ponds and 1,200 acres of old fields, forest openings, and world’s most outstanding network of lands and cultivated fields contribute to the diverse habitats found on http://www.fws.gov/refuge/Carolina_Sandhills National Wildlife the refuge. waters dedicated to wildlife the conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Refuge management, and where appropriate, restoration Refuge Wildlife 1 800/344 WILD of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources The refuge supports a diverse assemblage of plants and http://www.fws.gov animals including more than 190 species of birds, 42 and their habitats for the benefit of present and species of mammals, 41 species of reptiles, 25 species of August 2019 future generations of Americans. amphibians, 62 species of butterflies and moths, 56 species of native bees, and more than 800 species of plants! Refuge History In 1939 the federal government purchased land under Threatened and Endangered Species the provisions of the Resettlement Act.
  • Imperiled Treasures: Wetlands at Risk

    Imperiled Treasures: Wetlands at Risk

    Table of Contents Green-backed herons live near fresh and salt water lakes, streams, shores, swamps, marshes, rivers and ponds. Curiously, they are known to use bait (feathers, insects, twigs, moss, etc.) to lure fish. Introduction .............................................. 2 Southeast.................................................. 4 Northeast/Mid-Atlantic .............................. 6 Great Lakes/Upper Mississippi........................ 8 The Great Plains ........................................ 10 Southwest ................................................ 12 West/Great Basin........................................ 14 Alaska .................................................... 16 Hawaii .................................................... 18 Conclusion................................................ 19 Endnotes .................................................. 20 Other Sources ............................................ 20 Photo Credits ............................................ 20 A report by the National Wildlife Federation and Natural Resources Defense Council 1 Introduction America’s wetlands are in danger. Thirty years after passage of the Clean Water Act, wetlands continue to be drained, filled and polluted at an alarming rate. So-called “isolated wetlands” are in particular peril, due in great measure to a recent Supreme Court decision potentially jeopardizing federal Clean Water Act protections for millions of acres of waters and wetlands. exclude waters determined to be “isolated” from pro- tection under the Clean
  • Wetlands.Pdf

    Wetlands.Pdf

    Table of Contents Green-backed herons live near fresh and salt water lakes, streams, shores, swamps, marshes, rivers and ponds. Curiously, they are known to use bait (feathers, insects, twigs, moss, etc.) to lure fish. Introduction .............................................. 2 Southeast.................................................. 4 Northeast/Mid-Atlantic .............................. 6 Great Lakes/Upper Mississippi........................ 8 The Great Plains ........................................ 10 Southwest ................................................ 12 West/Great Basin........................................ 14 Alaska .................................................... 16 Hawaii .................................................... 18 Conclusion................................................ 19 Endnotes .................................................. 20 Other Sources ............................................ 20 Photo Credits ............................................ 20 A report by the National Wildlife Federation and Natural Resources Defense Council 1 Introduction America’s wetlands are in danger. Thirty years after passage of the Clean Water Act, wetlands continue to be drained, filled and polluted at an alarming rate. So-called “isolated wetlands” are in particular peril, due in great measure to a recent Supreme Court decision potentially jeopardizing federal Clean Water Act protections for millions of acres of waters and wetlands. exclude waters determined to be “isolated” from pro- tection under the Clean
  • PINELANDS New Jersey’S PINELANDS Wildlife Action Plan

    PINELANDS New Jersey’S PINELANDS Wildlife Action Plan

    PINELANDS New Jersey’s PINELANDS Wildlife Action Plan Stronghold for Globally Rare Wildlife Enter a region of vast pitch pine forests and Atlantic white cedar swamps that shelter globally rare plants and animals such as the Pine Barrens tree frog. The New Jersey’s reliance of rare wildlife on specialized habitats means Frosted elfin they live close to a tipping point; every animal in the Four-toed salamander Wildlife Action Plan State threatened Conservation concern The southern part of the population matters. Their survival depends on the The smallest of New Jersey’s 16 Creating a Network Pinelands shelters one of the connected forests of the Pinelands that are important salamander species, the four- world’s largest colonies of toed salamander inhabits wooded for Conservation frosted elfin butterflies. Look for for nesting songbirds and serve as migratory bird swamps and bogs throughout the this small butterfly on utility line stopovers. Today’s top challenges are to mimic the Pinelands. Females usually lay rights-of-way and at airports their eggs in nests of sphagnum To protect our wildlife of greatest conservation where the caterpillars depend historic role of fire in shaping this ecosystem, to moss that are overhanging need, the New Jersey Department of on wild indigo host plants for maintain intact forests and unique habitat types, and streams. The adults are just Environmental Protection’s Division of Fish their survival. 2 inches to 3 ½ inches long. to protect wildlife from the hazards of roads. and Wildlife led many partners to develop and Conserving implement the state’s Wildlife Action Plan.
  • Wildlife Disease and Habitat Modification Paola Dolcemascolo Montclair State University

    Wildlife Disease and Habitat Modification Paola Dolcemascolo Montclair State University

    Montclair State University Montclair State University Digital Commons Theses, Dissertations and Culminating Projects 5-2014 Anthropogenic Disturbance of the Herpetofauna in the Northeast US : Wildlife Disease and Habitat Modification Paola Dolcemascolo Montclair State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/etd Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Dolcemascolo, Paola, "Anthropogenic Disturbance of the Herpetofauna in the Northeast US : Wildlife Disease and Habitat Modification" (2014). Theses, Dissertations and Culminating Projects. 60. https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/etd/60 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Montclair State University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations and Culminating Projects by an authorized administrator of Montclair State University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ANTHROPOGENIC DISTURBANCE OF THE HERPETOFAUNA IN THE NORTHEAST US: WILDLIFE DISEASE AND HABITAT MODIFICATION A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of Montclair State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by PAOLA DOLCEMASCOLO Montclair State University Upper Montclair, NJ 2014 Dissertation Chair: Kirsten Monsen-Collar, PhD Copyright © 2014 by Paola Dolcemascolo. All rights reserved. ABSTRACT ANTHROPOGENIC DISTURBANCE OF THE HERPETOFAUNA IN THE NORTHEAST US: WILDLIFE DISEASE AND HABITAT MODIFICATION by
  • Kirkwood-Cohansey Project

    Kirkwood-Cohansey Project

    KirKwood-Cohansey ProjeCt the Potential imPaCt of simulated Groundwater withdrawals on the oviPosition, larval develoPment, and metamorPhosis of Pond-breedinG froGs Cover: A calling male Pine Barrens tree frog (Hyla andersonii). Photograph taken by John F. Bunnell. KirKwood-Cohansey ProjeCt the Potential imPaCt of simulated Groundwater withdrawals on the oviPosition, larval develoPment, and metamorPhosis of Pond-breedinG froGs John F. Bunnell and JenniFer l. Ciraolo 2010 Pinelands Commission P.o. Box 359 new lisBon, new Jersey The Pinelands Commission Candace McKee Ashmun, Acting Chair John A. Haas, Acting Vice Chair William J. Brown Daniel M. Kennedy Dr. Guy Campbell, Jr. Judith Y. Link Leslie M. Ficcaglia Edward Lloyd Paul E. Galletta Ed McGlinchey Lloyd Henderson, Jr. Robert W. McIntosh, Jr. Robert Jackson Francis A. Witt John C. Stokes, Executive Director For more information on the Pinelands Commission, the Kirkwood-Cohansey Project, and other Science Office publications visit: http://www.state.nj.us/pinelands http://www.state.nj.us/pinelands/science/current/kc http://www.state.nj.us/pinelands/science/pub Suggested citation: Bunnell, J. F. and J. L. Ciraolo. 2010. The potential impact of simulated groundwater withdrawals on the oviposition, larval development, and metamorphosis of pond-breeding frogs. Pinelands Commission, New Lisbon, New Jersey, USA. Abstract Wetland hydroperiod is a key factor for the reproductive success of pond-breeding amphibians. Groundwater withdrawals may cause intermittent ponds to dry prematurely, potentially affecting amphibian development. In three intermittent ponds, we monitored hydrology and tracked oviposition, larval development, and metamorphosis for three frog species that represented a range of breeding phenologies. The three species were the southern leopard frog (Lithobates sphenocephalus), spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer), and Pine Barrens treefrog (Hyla andersonii).
  • An Ecological Characterization of the Florida Panhandle ,- P,, P,, C Ct\$-.%1 *- J

    An Ecological Characterization of the Florida Panhandle ,- P,, P,, C Ct\$-.%1 *- J

    / FWS Biological Report 88(12) OCS Study MMS 88-0063 An Ecological Characterization of the Florida Panhandle ,- p,, p,, c ct\$-.%1 *- J ". ALABAMA U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service and Minerals Management Service FWS Biological Report 88(12) OCS Study MMS 88-0063 An Ecological Characterization of the Florida Panhandle Authors Steven H. Wolfe Jeffrey A. Reidenauer State of Florida Department of Environmental Regulations Tallahassee, Florida and D. Bruce Means The Coastal Plains Institute Tallahassee, Florida Prepared under Interagency Agreement 14-1 2-0001-30037 Published by U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Minerals Management Service, New Orleans October 1988 DISCLAIMER The opinions and recommendations expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the Minerals Management Service, nor does the mention of trade names constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the Federal Government. Library of Congress Cataloging-In-Publication Data Wolfe, Steven H. An Ecological characterization of the Florida panhandle. Biological report ; 88 (12)) 6 upt. of DOCS.no. : 149. 89/:88(12) "Performed for U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wild- life Service, Research and Development, National Wetlands Research Center, Washington, D.C. and Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf Office, Minerals Management Service, New Orleans, LA." "October 1988." Bibliography: p. 1. Ecology--Florida. 2. Natural history--Florida. I. Reidenauer, Jeffrey A. II. Means, D. Bruce. Ill. National Wetlands Research CenterJU.S.) IV. Unitec! States. Minerals Management Service. Gulf of exlco OCS Reg~on.V.
  • Herpetofauna of the New Jersey Pine Barrens

    Herpetofauna of the New Jersey Pine Barrens

    Herpetofauna of the New Jersey Pine Barrens Herpetofauna of the New Jersey Pine Barrens By Robert T. Zappalorti Introduction I recall with fondness my first trip to the New Jersey Pine Barrens, back in June of 1961. I was with my childhood friend and buddy, Jim Bockowski. We were looking for an old clay mining town called Crossley, in Ocean County, but could not find it. Out of desperation we stopped at a gas station in Whiting to ask for directions. We spoke with an elderly man dressed in overalls and a straw hat, and asked if he knew where Crossley was? The local man (known as a “Piney,” a person who lives in the Pine Barrens), was kind enough to say, “follow me, I’m going that way. I’ll show you Crossley Road.” So, Jim and I followed the man in his pickup truck Eastward from Whiting. After about 1.4 miles he slowed down and pointed North towards a non-decrypt sand road, then waived good bye as he continued on his way. We turned left and followed the winding sand road through an extensive pine-oak forest. The over-story trees consisted of pitch pine, short-leaf pine, scrub oak, black-jack oak and sassafras, while the under-story was mostly huckleberry, lowbush blueberry, inkberry and bracken fern. We came to a sandy flat section of the road and had trouble driving in soft white sand, but managed to keep going with some extra speed. After traveling about 0.75 of a mile, we came upon an opening in the forest and an abandoned railroad track that ran from East to West through the pine forest.
  • Biological Status Report

    Biological Status Report

    Pine Barrens Treefrog Biological Status Review Report March 31, 2011 FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600 Biological Status Review of the Pine Barrens Treefrog (Hyla andersonii) March 31, 2011 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) directed staff to evaluate all species listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Species of Special Concern as of November 8, 2010 that had not undergone a status review in the past decade. Public information on the status of the Florida population of the Pine Barrens treefrog was sought from September 17 through November 1, 2010. A five-member Biological Review Group (BRG) met on November 9-10, 2010. Group members were Bill Turner (FWC lead), Ryan Means (Coastal Plains Institute), Kelly Jones (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University), Paul Moler (independent consultant), and John Himes (FWC) (Appendix 1). In accordance with rule 68A-27.0012, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), the BRG was charged with evaluating the biological status of the Pine Barrens treefrog using criteria included in definitions in 68A-27.001, F.A.C., and following protocols in the Guidelines for Application of the IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional Levels (Version 3.0) and Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria (Version 8.1). Please visit http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/imperiled/listing-action- petitions/ to view the listing process rule and the criteria found in the definitions. In late 2010, staff developed the initial draft of this report which included BRG findings and a preliminary listing recommendation from staff.

  • Conservation of South Carolina Coastal Plain Reptiles and Amphibians

    SC-T-F16AF00708 Final Report Final Report State Wildlife Grant SC-T-F16AF00708 South Carolina Department of Natural Resources October 1, 2016 – March 31, 2020 Conservation of South Carolina Coastal Plain Reptiles and Amphibians Submitted By: Andrew M. Grosse – Herpetologist, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, 220 Santee Gun Club Rd., McClellanville, SC 29466 Need and Approach: South Carolina is home to 143 species of reptiles and amphibians, making it exceptionally diverse for its size. Excluding the sea turtles, 11 reptile and amphibian species are listed as threatened or endangered by the State of South Carolina and 48 are identified in the 2015 revision of the State Wildlife Action Plan. Many of these species are also included as species petitioned for protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) or are candidate species. The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) has made reptile and amphibian conservation a priority and initiated studies on many imperiled taxa (Eastern Diamondback Rattlesnake, Pine Barrens Tree Frog, Flatwoods Salamander, Gopher Frog, and Gopher Tortoise). Though SCDNR has maintained an active herpetological research and survey program, several species are in need of additional survey and monitoring and additional research into their conservation biology. Much of our understanding of species distributions via element occurrences reflects survey effort at specific locations and not equal effort across the range of potential habitat. We conducted 4 individual projects, described below, focused on at-risk species in the Coastal Plain of South Carolina. Amphibians of isolated wetlands Objectives: Isolated freshwater wetlands in the coastal plain of South Carolina are home to a unique suite of amphibians that rely on these landscape features for breeding.