Unique Wildlife Ecosystem Concept Plan
STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA UNIQUE WILDLIFE ECOSYSTEM CONCEPT PLAN
STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
June 1979 DEPARTI1ENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, Region 5 Newton Corner, Massachusetts Table of Contents:
Objective ...... •...... •..... 1
Criteria ...... 1
Description of the State ...... •.•.. 3
Habitat Threats •.....••..•.•..•..•.•.. 6
Habitat Preservation Efforts ...... ?
Views of Others •...... •...... 9
Alternative Strategies ...•...... 9
Summary of Areas Submitted ...... 9
Appendices:
A. Project Description Format
B. Key to Threat of Destruction
C. Other Areas UNIQUE WILDLIFE ECOSYSTEM CONCEPT PLAN STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
Objective
Protecting some of this Nation's wildlife areas may be the most important conservation contribution of our generation. Recognizing this as a major problem, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has em barked on the Unique Ecosystem Program. This program is designed to safeguard some of our remaining wildlife lands and is to be a coop erative approach with full participation of Federal, state and local governments as well as conservation organizations and private citizens. It should not be construed as a definitive plan on the part of the Service to acquire any or all of the projects listed since Service acquisition, in most cases, is viewed as a final alternative after other means of preservation have failed.
This Concept Plan ~dentifies these areas in the state of West Virginia and outlines initial priorities and suggests various alternatives for preservation.
Basic Criteria
1. Areas selected must be nationally significant wildlife ecosystems with fish and wildlife values which go beyond local values in providing substantial benefits to many people over a wide geo graphical area.
2. Areas must be unique wildlife ecosystems, that is, they must be significantly different from other habitats in the region and sup port natural fish and wildlife communities.
3. The area must be of sufficient size to materially contribute, in some substantial measure, to the overall wildlife resource(s) of a region.
4. The area must contain wildlife and plant resources which are native to the geographic region, and these resources must be unique or one of the best representative examples in the region or larger.area.
Priority Criteria
Areas submitted were ranked in a regional priority by a team in accor dance with the following criteria:
1. Areas that have a federally-listed endangered species received top priority, followed by areas that have a federally-listed threatened species, then by state listed endangered, ~hreatened or rare species, and lastly, other species.
1 2. Areas that have diverse habitats and numerous wildlife species are ranked highest, and areas with few wildlife species and relatively non-diverse habitats are ranked lowest.
3. Areas that are in immediate danger from development/encroachment, agricultural drainage, timber harvest or similar threats, are ranked highest, and those that are relatively well protected are ranked lowest.
4. Areas that are generating or are anticipated to generate public interest are ranked highest, and areas that generate little public interest are ranked lowest.
Criteria 1 and 2 were considered "biological factors," and items 3 and 4 "non-biological." Areas that have both high biological and non-biological rankings scored highest. Areas that had similar biological ratings were then ranked according to relative threat and public interest.
There are instances where other factors were considered as part of the review process and these are noted in the appropriate places.
2 WEST VIRGINIA
Description of the State
Population
The population of West Virginia in 1970 was 1,744,000. The state experienced population declines until 1970 but had a 4.4 percent increase by 1976. In general, this population reversal can be at tributed to the renewed interest and job opportunities available in connection with the coal mining industry. Almost 15 percent of the state's work force is employed in mining.
Less than 70 percent of the population resides in urban areas of the state.
Industry
Coal is West Virginia's leading industry. In 1975, there were 1,360 coal mines in the state, 859 of which were underground, and 501 were surface and auger mines. Surface mines appear to be the trend of the future. In the first eight months of 1978, 170 new surface mine ap plications were filed.
Agriculture
Much of the land in West Virginia is unsuitable for crop production and grazing because of steep topography and shallow soils. Therefore, agriculture is conducted on a small scale, and much of it occurs in the eastern panhandle. Lands suitable for range are somewhat more wide spread; approximately one million acres are in pastured woodland. The sale of livestock and livestock products represents the greatest value in farm marketing.
The state has 12,172,000 acres of commercial forest land; 734,000 acres of these lands are on national forests. The forests in the state produce high quality hardwood saw-timber including yellow and paper birch, black cherry and tulip poplar. Few other areas in the United States are manage·d to produce saw-timber size hardwoods.
Recreation
With a strong rural flavor and forested, mountainous terrain, West Virginia lies between the industrial areas to the east and west. The population concentration of the Northeast puts heavy pressure on limited public lands.
3 With no large, natural lakes, the state's water-based recreational opportunities are provided by Corps of Engineers impoundments and state managed areas for a total of 61,000 surface acres. One million acres of national forest, providing 1.5 million man-days of recreation in 1976, and approximately 150,000 acres of state parks, forests, recreation and wildlife areas provide the bulk of the recreation sites in the state.
Climate
The topography of the state has specific effects on the distribution of temperature and precipitation. The altitude has a decided cooling effect in summer and makes for a lesser number of uncomfortable days than the flatter plains at lower elevations. The summer average temperature is 71 degrees F; autumn is 54 degrees F; winter is 33 degrees F; and spring is 52 degrees F. Most of the state is west of the Allegheny Front and receives greater amounts of precipitation because of the forced ascent of air as it rises over the mountains, causing moisture to condense into precipitation.
Habitat Types
The state is divided into four physiographic regions:
1. The Unglaciated Allegheny Plateau Section of the Appalachian Plateaus Province 2. The Allegheny Mountain Section of the Appalachian Plateaus Province 3. The Ridge and Valley Province 4. The Blue Ridge Province
The Unglaciated Allegheny Plateau Section comprises the western three fourths of the state; the Allegheny Mountain Section is composed of the high mountains in the east-central part of the state; the Ridge and Valley Province lies along the eastern border of the state with Virginia; while only the.easternmost extension of West Virginia near Harper's Ferry is within the Blue Ridge Province. Although the vege tation of the entire state fits into the broad category of eastern deciduous forest, each division has its own distinguishable physical geography and plant associations.
Vegetation of the Allegheny Plateau Section may be classified as part of the central hardwood forest. This forest association ranges from dry to wet: oak-pine and oak-chestnut communities (xeric), cover hard woods or mixed mesophytic forests (mesic) and flood plain communities (hydric).
4 The Allegheny Mountain Section includes the highest elevations of the state and is generally composed of mountain ranges oriented in a northeast-southwest direction, with deep valleys intervening. The vegetation may be classified as belonging to the northern forest and may be roughly subdivided into the northern evergreen and the northern hardwood cover types. The northern evergreen forest has red spruce as a dominant, while the northern hardwoods has sugar maple, beech and yellow birch as its dominants.
The Ridge and Valley Province is a lowland above which rise lon gitudinal ranges, sometimes crowded, sometimes widely spaced. The vegetation might be referred to as oak-hickory-pine, although originally chestnut was a dominant species.
The Blue Ridge Province touches the eastern panhandle of the state. It is characterized by steep high ridges and deep intermountain valleys (the Shenandoah Valley). Deciduous forests similar to the forest cover of the Ridge and Valley Province are found here.
There is an abundance of free-flowing rivers and streams throughout the state, but with the exception of the Canaan Valley (see Appendix C), the Meadow River Wetlands and the Ohio River marshes, wetland wildlife habitat is scarce.
Wildlife
Wildlife and fish resources are those normally associated with mixed hardwood and softwood forests. Undeveloped lands, especially in the eastern portion of the state, support sizable populations of white tailed deer, black bear, turkey and a variety of upland game, fur bearers and non-game birds and mammals. Waterfowl are relatively scarce in the state. The Canaan Valley is a very important breeding and migration area for woodcock.
The Potomac drainages and the Ohio River provide good warmwater fish habitat, but coldwater fisheries are mostly dependent on hatchery operations.
Endangered Species
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). No current nesting population known. There are historic and potential nesting and feeding areas in the state along the Ohio River and between the confluence of the Potomac and Shenandoah Rivers.
Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus). No current nesting population known.
5 Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis). Hellhole Cave (see Appendix C) is one of the most important hibernaculas for this species. Three other caves have smaller populations.
Eastern cougar (Felis concolor). There have been several alleged sightings in recent years.
Kirtland's warbler (Dendroica kirtlandii). Migrates through the state (Morgantown area).
Tuberculed-blossom pearly mussel (Epioblasma torulosa torulosa). Occurs in one West Virginia location in the Kanawha River, opposite Falls View.
Pink mucket pearly mussel (Lampsilis orbiculata orbiculata). Occurs in two locations on the Kanawha River.
Flat-spired three-toothed land snail (Triodopsis platysayoides). Threat ened species, occurs only in the Coopers Rock State Forest, owned by the State DNR.
There are no federally-listed plants known to occur in the state.
Habitat Threats and Associated Problems
Generally, wildlife habitat has been impacted in two different ways:
1. By resource exploitation and environmental disruption associated with manmade projects.
2. By development related to population growth.
The first impact is statewide and results from such activities as strip-mining, timbering, power-plant siting, reservoir and road con struction and over-grazing. The second impact has so far been more limited to the eastern panhandle and the suburban strip between Charleston and Huntington and consists of a slow erosion and encroach ment of animal habitat by single-family home development.
Threats to the natural environment in West Virginia can be broken down by the habitat types:
1. Riparian habitat and wetlands: Smaller wetland and riparian habitats are under pressure to be cleared, drained and developed for residential, agricultural or industrial use. The Ohio River wetlands are especially susceptible to industrial siting, while the Ohio River islands are threatened by gravel quarries and dredging.
6 2. Streams and rivers: Siltation and sedimentation as a result of road construction and unreclaimed strip mines account for many stream problems. Poorly executed logging operations also lead to water quality degradation and flooding.
The state's chief water problem has been stream pollution. Un treated municipal and industrial wastes along with acid drainage from mines, are the principal sources of pollution, and pollution from oil wells is a problem in several counties.
Chemicals and other pollutants introduced into the hydrologic cycle may have long-range and long-distance effects as pollutants travel from one aquifer to another. Over half of all streams in the state are affected by some type of pollutant.
3. Wilderness and roadless areas: Wilderness areas are susceptible to resource exploitation, such as timbering and mining, resort and recreational development, and reservoir and highway construction. Two of West Virginia's big game animals -- bear and turkey -- are sensitive to high levels of vehicular traffic. Vehicular traffic increases levels of noise, dust and litter, and frequently reduces the quality of a fishery when a road parallels a stream.
Rate of Loss
Accurate figures for habitat loss are not available at this time, as there is no state land use clearing house. Figures are available in only one category: surface mining. In 1977 16,402.65 acres were bonded for disturbance by surface mine activities; in the first six months of 1978, 14,052 acres were bonded.
Other activities which cause loss of animal habitat are less easily monitored. For example, home building in Putnam County is expected to increase dramatically next year; second home development in the eastern panhandle is a slow and seemingly inexorable trend. Despite this difficulty of assessment, it is clear that the state has limited time to plan for and conserve its natural resources.
Habitat Preservation Efforts
Private
The Nature Conservancy is the leading private organization in West Virginia concerned with preserving rare species habitat. Eleven tracts of land have been purchased, representing a variety of habitat types. The Nature Conservancy has recently opened a field office in Charleston and plans to continue purchasing tracts of land with unique biological and natural values. The state chapter of the Audubon Society controls a 100 acre site.
7 State
The Heritage Trust Program began in early 1975 as a cooperative program between the state Department of Natural Resources and The Nature Conservancy. The state's rare plant and animal species, plant communities, aquatic types and critical habitats, outstanding geo logical features and important historic and recreation sites will be inventoried. Once these areas are identified, techniques for protecting them can be considered.
The Division of Parks and Recreation is tasked with conserving recreation and unique, natural or scenic areas. The park system now contains 36 units of 63,732 acres of which 54,703 acres are designated as natural areas. However, portions of these natural areas have been developed for intensive recreation.
The Division of Wildlife Resources controls 30 public hunting and fishing areas totaling 77,142 acres and two refuges containing 348 acres. The Division is currently identifying wetland areas for management.
The Division of Forestry has no official program to set aside areas of natural value although some locations on state forests are not timbered because of their scenic attributes. The Division owns and administers nine state forests containing 80,000 acres.
Federal
The U.S. Forest Service administers 1,861,000 acres in two national forests and has set aside 3.5 percent of this land as wilderness areas. The Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with the state Division of Wildlife Resources, manages 34,283 acres of land and 8,733 acres of water as public hunting and fishing areas. The Corps owns a total of 105,000 acres in West Virginia.
The Fish and Wildlife Service has no refuges in the state but has proposed Hellhole Cave and the Canaan Valley for acquisition as National Wildlife Refuges.
Preservation efforts are made by the Fish and Wildlife Service through acquisition and management of lands, administration of Federal Aid to States in the Fish and Wildlife Restoration Program, and recom mendations to safeguard fish and wildlife values on Corps of Engineers dredge and fill permit applications. There is cooperation and coordination with Federal agencies, state and local governments, as well as private conservation organizations. Also, other Federal agencies provide as sistance to state and local governments for a variety of projects that contribute to habitat preservation.
8 Views of Others on Acquisition Program
The West Virginia Department of,Natural Resources and The Nature Conservancy fully support the preservation of unique wildlife eco systems within the state. These agencies emphasize that habitat protection for endangered species is especially critical as such habitat is limited or not well identified in the state.
Alternative Strategies
1. State Legislative Action: Appropriation of funds by the Legis lature is one alternative which in the past has been used to acquire refuge land for game species; it is unlikely, at the present time, that land would be purchased for non-game species protection.
2. Acquisition of Land for Inclusion in the State Parks or Public Hunting and Fishing Areas System: The Director of DNR may acquire land for the state by purchase, condemnation, lease or agreement, or accept gifts, donations, contributions, bequests or devices for public hunting, fishing and trapping or for the cultural, archeological, or historfc values or natural wonders or to provide public recreation.
3. Partial Acquisition: Purchase of rights (either mineral or surface) rather than full fee purchase.
4. Conservation Easements: This is essentially a means by which the owner of land can transfer the development rights of the land to a qualified non-profit conservation organization or to a governmental agency. Such a transfer does not allow the recipient to develop the land, it merely extinguishes the owner's development rights.
West Virginia has an appurtenant easement law which, to date, has never been used to secure a conservation easement.
Summary of Areas Submitted
The following project descriptions are organized in the order of their decreasing priority. Format and explanatory keys are in Appendices A and B. Areas submitted but not evaluated or not meeting the criteria for inclusion are listed in Appendix c. A map showing the general locations of project areas follows.
9 1. Meadow River Wetlands: The headwater marshes of the Meadow River are the largest and best wetlands for wildlife in the area. They are important to resident and migrating waterfowl, two rare plant species and a variety of other wildlife.
2. Ohio River Islands: The islands are West Virginia's most im portant areas for river fish production, migratory waterfowl, and are historic nesting areas for eagles and peregrine falcons.
10 83· IIZ· 81_ so 79 78
\ . PROPOSED PROJECT AREAS 40c OHIO 39·- -39 ,, • LJMILD -38 WEST VIRGINIA • ITATI( CA~ITAL • COUNTY HAT I 82· 81° 80• 79 78· PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 Name: Meadow River Wetlands County: Greenbrier U.S.G.S. Quad. - Rupert 1. Uniqueness: Large wetland areas are very uncommon in the West Virginia region, and the headwaters of the Meadow River are the largest and best in the area. They are important to migrating waterfowl as well as a wide variety of other wildlife and two rare plants. 2. Wildlife Values: a. Endangered and threatened species: None b. Species of concern: None c. Others: Green heron, American bitterns, woodcock, wood duck, mallard, black duck, widgeon, green-winged teal, scaup and ring-necked ducks. Various other upland game birds, small game, white-tailed deer, furbearers and songbirds. 3. Habitats: There are undetermined amounts of seasonally flooded basins or flats, shrub swamps and hardwood swamps. Forty-three percent of the wetlands are timber land with thirty-five percent grazing lands, nineteen percent agriculture and three percent brush or old fields and shrub swamps. 4. Development Needs: A previous biological study outlined a plan for "the creation of a series of nine management pools and green-tree reservoirs, a diversion channel and several acres of goose pasture to assist in waterfowl management. The area would also need to be posted. 5. Existing Refuges Facilitating Administration: There are currently no Federal Refuges in this part of the nation. 6. Identified by Others as an Area of Concern: This area has been iden tified by the West Virginia Department of Natural Resources and The 'Nature Conservancy. 7. Ownership: Except for a highway right-of-way owned by the state, the 9,300 acres of wetlands are in an unknown number of private ownerships. 8. Acquisition and Development Costs: Full fee acquisition and development would cos.t approximately $7,000,000 (USFWS estimate). 9. O&M Funding Estimate: $150,000/year (USFWS estimate). / Approximate " ------Q Ecosystem Boundary ' \ "' ,.., /" ,.., "\ "• (..__...... I l,~ ' _, --.-. ___ , I r ek MEADOW RIVER~ WETLANDS 1 t- ..... ,.· -- ~:ALE I: MIL.:S I I ' \ ----. - 10. Threat of Destruction: a. Nature - Highway construction b. 1-5 years c. Severity of Impact - 1 d. Permanence of Change - 1 e. Cost of Conversion - U Destruction of 1,500-2,000 acres of the area is threatened because of construction of Interstate Highway 64. Construction is scheduled to begin when funding becomes available. 11. A Water Resources Council "Principles and Standards" Plan would be required if the Service plans to acquire the area and develop the wetlands. 12. Reactions of Others to Project: Mostly unknown. Those interested in development of the highway would oppose preservatlon efforts. 13. Alternatives to Fish and Wildlife Service Acquisition: a. Acquisition or easement purchase by the state or private conservation groups. b. Federal-state cooperative acquisition with management by the state. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 Name: Ohio River Islands Counties: Wood U.S.G.S. Quads. - Paden City Pleasants New Matamoras Tyler Raven Rock Belmont Willow Island Marietta Parkersburg Little Hocking Lubeck 1. Uniqueness: These islands, between river mile 132 and 197 are one of West Virginia's most importan~ areas for an array of fish and wild life resources. All Ohio River islands are important to river fish populations and aquatic life production. They provide habitat diversity in the form of drop-offs, gravel shoals and eddies that are necessary for natural fish production. These areas are now unique because of the destruction of the natural shoreline of the river. 2. Wildlife Values: a. Endangered and threatened species: Peregrine falcons Bald eagle These two birds are historic residents of the Ohio River Valley, and both species have been spotted in the area in recent years. b. Species of conern: (Listed by West Virginia Department of Natural Resources) Osprey Eastern pipistrelle Golden eagle Eastern mole Marsh hawk Eastern harvast mole Pigeon hawk Small-mouthed salamander Virginia rail Eastern ribbon snake Common snipe Black redhorse Henslow's sparrow Ghost shiner Dickcissel Suckermouth minnow Swainson's warbler River shiner Short-billed marsh wren Southern redbelly dace Lark sparrow Grass pickerel LEGEND • PROPOSED PROJECT SITES • CITIES ~-\ .. ·-~ .- 1 INTERMITTENT STREAMS @ ~ STATE and COUNTY ROADS -·· Cfj} INTERSTATE HIGHWAY ~ STREAMS ... • DIRECTION OF FLOW ~ RIVERS KEY TO OHIO RIVER ISLANDS 1 MUSTAPHA ISLAND 10 MIDDLE ISLAND 2 NEWBERRY ISLAND 11 BAT ISLAND 3 BLENNERHASSETT ISLAND 12 GRANDVIEW ISLAND 4 NEAL ISLAND 13 MILL CREEK ISLAND 5 HALFWAY ISLAND 14 WELLS ISLAND 6 MUSKINGUM ISLAND 15 CRAB ISLAND 7 MARIETTA ISLAND 16 WITTEN TOWHEAD ISLAND 8 LOWER BROTHERS ISLAND 17 WILLIAMSON ISLAND 9 MIDDLE BROTHERS ISLAND 18. PADEN ISLAND ,, / f'\ ~ OHIO RIVER ISLANDS Scale in Miles 5- ----0 5 MAP· - -- -, OHIO RIVER ISLANDS SCALE IN MILES 5 0 MAP 2 ____J c. Others: Islands provide nesting, feeding and resting areas for various species of waterfowl. The islands support small game populations, upland songbirds and furbearers. The surrounding waters are very important to game and forage fish populations. 3. Habitats: All these islands provide excellent fishing, spawning and feeding grounds where shallow waters exist. There are 18 islands proposed for acquisition, which total approximately 1,600 acres. Almost all are unhabited and well vegetated with riparian and mature bottomland hardwoods: Mustapha: Primary value is as a resting area for migrating water fowl. There is some development on the Ohio side. The island has steep banks. Newberry Island: Eagles have been sited near this island a couple of times by pleasure boaters. The island is in private ownership with a boat dock and primitive camping area. It pro vides nesting habitat for resident waterfowl. Blennerhassett Island: This is probably the most valuable island on the Ohio River. The island has a 20 acre marsh that is used heavily by both resident and migrating waterfowl. Os preys have been seen regularly in the area but nests have not been confirmed. Area birders report a large variety of birds due to the variety of habitat found on the island. The greatest danger to this island is from recreational development. Neal Island: A DNR biologist reported se~ing a young canvasback in late July here. The island is farmed with row crops. The low banks encourage heavy human use of the beach area during the summer. There is some early nesting habitat. Halfway (Vienna) Island: Halfway Island has valuable nesting habitat on the Ohio bank side. There is no development presently, and there has been no farming on the island for several years. Muskingum Island: There is not much nesting habitat here, nor is there farming or development. There are several small islands between Muskingum and the WV shore. The river is rather shallow in this area. Marietta (Buckley) Island: This is an attractive island for migrating waterfowl. It is farmed with row crops. There is no other development. There is possibly some nesting habitat on either end of the island. Lower and Middle Brothers Islands (Eureka and Broadback): There is no development and no farming on these islands. Both are partly timbered, both have low banks and grassy areas and look very good for nesting habitat. Middle Island: This island is almost totally in agricultural production. It contains valuable nesting habitat on the up stream end and on the WV side. It is a valuable feeding area during migration. Bat Island (Grape (Island): There is neither development nor farming on this island. Its low, wooded banks look good for nesting habitat. Grandview Island: This island may have nesting habitat. Mill Creek Island: There is some mature timber on this island which is valuable to nesting wood ducks. There is little other available nesting habitat. While it has been row cropped in the past, there is no farming now. Wells Island: This island has high banks. No additional in formation is available. Crab Island: No specific information is available. Witten Towhead and Williamson Island: Both have a wooded shore line. Williamson has been farmed in the past but is not now. These islands have nesting, resting, and feeding habitat. Paden Island: This island has probably been row cropped in the past. The wooded shoreline is of great value to wood ducks. 4. Development Needs: It is desirable to maintain the islands and their habitats in a natural state and preclude excessive human disturbance and encroachment by commercial development. Acquisition of the islands for a refuge or wildlife management area would fulfill these goals. It is believed that management of such an area could be basically ac complished at an administrative level, with minimal field level in volvement. A few islands will need minimal restoration (e.g. planting) to prevent erosion. 5. Existing Refuges Facilitating Administration: There are currently no Federal Refuges in this part of the nation. 6. Identified by Others as an Area of Concern: This area has been iden tified by the WV Department of Natural Resources, The Nature Conservancy and the Ohio River Basin Commission. 7. Ownership: Island River Mile Acreage Ownership Mustapha 197 23 Shelly & Sands Inc. & YMCA of Parkersburg Newberry 195 2 Pfaff & Smith Co. Blennerhassett 188 497 E. I. DuPont Corp. Neal 182 107 Ohio River Sand & Gravel Co. Halfway 178.5 30 Kanawha Sand Co. Muskingum 176 111 Henderson Oil Co. & Tom S. Reed, et. al. Marietta 170 184 Howard G. Buckley Lower Brothers 160.5 12 American Cyanamid Co. Middle Brothers 158.5 38 Ohio River Sand & Gravel Co. ~fiddle Island 154 236 Unknown Bat 152 39 Ohio,., River Sand & Gravel Co. Grandview 144 13 " II II II II Mill Creek 141.5 25 " II II II II II Wells 139.5 57 II II II II II II Crab 138.5 2 II II II II II II Witten Towhead 135.5 12 II II II 11 II 1l Williamson 135 131 It II " II II II Paden 132.5 83 II II ll II II II 8. Acquisition and Development Costs: Costs will vary according to the land use suitability of each island. Island crop land is extremely ex pensive, whereas marsh and bluff land may sell for $150 per acre. The cropped lands might best be preserved by easement or agricultural zoning. 9. O&M Funding Estimate: Unknown. 10. Threat of Destruction: a. Nature - 4,5 and dredging b. 1-5 years c. Severity of Impact - 1 or 2 d. Permanence of Change - 2 e. Cost of Conversion - H 11. The Gallispolis Locks and Dam Replacement Project would require a plan to be written under "Principles and Standards." 12. Reaction of Others to Project: Efforts to study the resource value of this area are supported by the WV Heritage Trust Program, the Division of Wildlife Resources (DNR), the Army Corps of Engineers and the Ohio River Basin Commission. 13. Alternatives to Fish and Wildlife Service Acquisition: a. "Green space" zoning to preserve wildlife habitat. Agricultural practices could be consistent with wildlife values and even beneficial. b. Acquisition or easement purchase by the state, private conservation groups or local conservation connnissions. c. Federal-state coopenative acquisition with management by the state. Appendix A PROJECT DESCRIPTION FORMAT Name______County ------ 1. Uniqueness Wildlife and Habitat (Describe) 2. Wildlife Values a. Endangered and Threatened Species b. Species of Concern c. Others 3. Habitats (types and acres) 4. Development Needs - What degree of management will be necessary? (Inten sive restoration, routine maintenance, administrative - give details.) 5. Facilitate administration of Existing Refuges? 6. Identified by Others as an Area of Concern 7. Ownership - provide location map Tracts Acres Private State 8. Acquisition and Development Costs - Whose estimates? 9. O&M Funding Estimate (Average annual operating cost?) 10. Threat of Destruction a. Nature b. How Soon? Less than 1 year; 1-5 years; 5-10 years c. Severity of Impact d. Permanence of Change e. Cost of Conversion 11. Are there major economic impacts involving Water Resources? (Power plant sites, flood control dam, etc.) The Water Resources Council that would require a plan under "Principles and Standards?" 12. Reaction of Others to Project 13. What means, other than acquisition by the Fish and Wildlife Service, are recommended to preserve the wildlife values of the project area? Appendix B KEY TO THREAT OF DESTRUCTION (Item 10 of Project Description) 1:./ Nature of Threat 1 - Housing Development 8 - Timber Cutting 2 - Conversion to Agriculture 9 - Intensified Grazing 3 - Reservoir Development 10 - Geothermal Development 4 - Industrial Development 11 - Irrigation 5 - Quarry Operations 12 - Commercial Development 6 - Public Disturbance 13 - Pollution 7 - Conversion to Pineland 2/ Severity of Impact 1 If left in private ownership, the values to be preserved would be destroyed. 2 If left in private ownership, the values to be preserved would be altered but not destroyed or permanently changed. 3 - If left in private ownership, the values to be preserved would not be altered within foreseeable future. ]./ Permanence of Change 1 Possibility of converting the land is impossible or economically unfeasible. 2 Possibility of converting the land is possible but expensive. 3 - Private sector use for foreseeable future having little impact or little permanence of change. !!_I Cost of Conversion S Species destruction, conversion useless U - Change permanent, unrecoverable resource P - Cost prohibitive; over 100 percent cost increase_ after change H - High cost; 50 to 100 percent cost increase after change M - Moderate Cost; 25 to 50 percent cost increase after change L - Low cost; 0 to 25 percent cost increase after change Appendix C OTHER AREAS The following projects have already been proposed for acquisition by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and are considered to qualify as Unique Wildlife Ecosystems: 1. Canaan Valley - This is the largest wetland in West Virignia. The area under consideration exceeds 18,000 acres. It is the largest shrub swamp and the third largest bog in the eastern United States. Although similar habitats exist, nowhere is the size and diversity of habitat matched in a single unit. It is currently threatened with inundation by a hydroelectric power project. 2. Hellhole Cave - This is one of 21 caves and mines in the United States that have been designated as critical habitat for the endangered Indiana bat. Preservation of this cave would protect a wintering population of 1,500 Indiana bats as well as 500 Virginia big-eared bats, a species proposed for addition to the endangered species list. The following areas were submitted but did not meet the criteria for inclusion: 1. North Fork Mountain has a diversity of wildlife value: Trout Cave, an Indiana bat hibernacula; a golden eagle nesting site last active in 1969; and a variety of forest game species including turkeys, bears, bobcats and white-tailed deer. There are also some unique floristic types found in this area. The area was not considered nationally significant in that the current wildlife benefits do not go beyond local values. 2. Dolly Sods resembles areas in subarctic regions with its high al titude and remoteness. It is within a major migration route for raptors and songbirds. However, its uniqueness as a wildlife ecosystem is not sufficient to include the area in this plan. 3. Ten Mile Creek supports the only known population of the Midland smooth softshell turtle. Two other species of concern, the map turtle and red-eared turtle have also been found here. Since these are not federally-listed endangered or threatened species, this area is not considered nationally significiant. 4. General Davis Cave contains some interesting cave dwelling species of invertebrates. The cave is not considered nationally significant. 5. Cave Branch Falls is the type locality for three species of land snails which have not been found anywhere else in the state. This area is not considered nationally significant and is currently well protected. 6. Boaz Marsh located along the Ohio River provides good wetland habitat for a vareity of waterfowl, wading birds and aquatic fur bearers and white-tailed deer. The area is of local importance but is not nationally significant. 7. Dunmore Springs is a very interesting botanical area but is too small to support a diversity or abundance of wildlife and is not considered a unique wildlife ecosystem. The following areas were listed as actual, historic or potential endan gered species habitat but were not studied. Bald Eagle Sites: 1. Fishing Creek, near Reader in the Ohio River Area 2. Short Creek 3. Middle Island Creek, north of St. Mary's 4. Near Jones Springs, Berkely County 5. Harper's Ferry, bluffs along the Potomac 6. Mouth of Meadow River Peregrine Falcon Sites: 1. Camp Ann Bailey 2. Gorge of Guyandotte River 3. Confluence of Beech Fork and Twelve Pole Creek Indiana Bat Sites: 1. Martha's Cave 2. Cornwall Cave Endangered Mussel Sites 1. South Bank, Kanawha· River opposite Falls View 2. Kanawha Falls and .6 miles below falls