DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 2 Delaware's Wildlife Habitats

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 2 Delaware's Wildlife Habitats CHAPTER 2 DELAWARE’S WILDLIFE HABITATS 2 - 1 Delaware Wildlife Action Plan Contents Chapter 2, Part 1: DELAWARE’S ECOLOGICAL SETTING ................................................................. 8 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 9 Delaware Habitats in a Regional Context ..................................................................................... 10 U.S. Northeast Region ............................................................................................................. 10 U.S. Southeast Region .............................................................................................................. 11 Delaware Habitats in a Watershed Context ................................................................................. 12 Delaware River Watershed .......................................................................................................13 Chesapeake Bay Watershed .....................................................................................................13 Inland Bays Watershed ............................................................................................................ 14 Geology and Soils ......................................................................................................................... 17 Soils .......................................................................................................................................... 17 EPA Ecoregions ........................................................................................................................ 17 TNC Ecoregions ....................................................................................................................... 21 US Forest Service Ecoregional Provinces ................................................................................. 21 Climate ........................................................................................................................................ 21 Historical Trends ...................................................................................................................... 22 Land Cover .................................................................................................................................. 22 Natural Disturbance Regimes in Delaware................................................................................... 23 Fire .......................................................................................................................................... 23 Inland Flooding, Wind, and Ice ................................................................................................. 23 Coastal Flooding and Coastal Storms....................................................................................... 24 Delaware’s Flora .......................................................................................................................... 24 Chapter 2, Part 2: HABITAT CLASSIFICATION ................................................................................ 26 Relationship of Habitats to Species ............................................................................................. 27 Background ............................................................................................................................. 27 Species – Habitat Associations in Delaware ............................................................................. 27 Habitat Analysis for the 2015 DEWAP Revision ........................................................................... 28 Habitat Classification ............................................................................................................... 28 2 - 2 CHAPTER 2: Delaware’s Wildlife Habitats Habitat Condition and Extent ...................................................................................................31 Mapping Habitats .................................................................................................................... 32 Priority Wildlife Habitats .......................................................................................................... 32 Chapter 2, Part 3: HABITAT DESCRIPTIONS, CONDITION, and EXTENT ........................................ 38 Natural Upland Habitats .............................................................................................................. 39 Forest ...................................................................................................................................... 39 Upland Forest Habitat Types ....................................................................................................... 46 Beach and Dune Uplands ......................................................................................................... 59 Upland Barrens ........................................................................................................................ 65 Early Successional Habitats ..................................................................................................... 66 Modified Upland Habitats ........................................................................................................... 72 Modified Forested Habitats ..................................................................................................... 72 Agricultural Habitats ................................................................................................................ 76 Roadsides and Rights-of-Way .................................................................................................. 80 Developed Habitats ................................................................................................................. 81 Wetland Habitats ........................................................................................................................ 88 Wetland Condition ................................................................................................................... 88 Natural Non-tidal Wetlands ..................................................................................................... 90 Modified Wetlands ................................................................................................................. 119 Tidal Wetlands ....................................................................................................................... 128 Riverine Aquatic Habitats ...................................................................................................... 144 Estuarine and Marine Aquatic Habitats ................................................................................... 157 Literature Cited .......................................................................................................................... 175 2 - 3 Delaware Wildlife Action Plan Figures Figure 2. 1 Delaware’s major drainage basins. .............................................................................................. 12 Figure 2. 2 Watersheds of Delaware ............................................................................................................. 16 Figure 2. 3 EPA Ecoregions of Delaware ....................................................................................................... 19 Figure 2. 4 Core areas and corridors in the Delaware Ecological Network ...................................................... 33 Figure 2. 5 DEN core area composite ecological ranks (in three groups by natural breaks). .......................... 36 Figure 2. 6 2015 DEWAP DEN modeled Priority Wildlife Habitat ................................................................... 37 Figure 2. 7 Changes in Forest Acreage in Delaware since 1907. Sources: Lister and Pugh (2014), Oswalt (2014), Delaware Forest Service (2010) ................................................................................................. 40 Figure 2. 8 Stocking classes in Delaware Forests, 1999. (Delaware Forest Service) ....................................... 42 Figure 2. 9 Forest Species Composition of Delaware Forests, 1957-2009. Source: U.S. Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis. ........................................................................................................................ 43 Figure 2. 10 Forest Stand Size Classes in Delaware, 1972-2009. Source: Delaware Forest Service (Data from U.S. Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis U.S.F.S. Resource Bulletins NE-109 & NE-151.) ....... 44 Figure 2. 11 Coastal Plain Oak-Pine Forest at Prime Hook NWR. Photo: Matthew J. Sarver.......................... 47 Figure 2. 12. Inland Xeric Sand Forest Photo: William A. McAvoy ................................................................. 49 Figure 2. 13 Successional Maritime Forest at Cape Henlopen State Park. Photo: William A. McAvoy ........... 51 Figure 2. 14 Piedmont Oak Forest. Photo: William A. McAvoy ..................................................................... 53 Figure 2. 15 Basic Mesic Forest. Photo: William A. McAvoy .......................................................................... 55 Figure 2. 16 . Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest. Photo: William A. McAvoy ...................................................... 57 Figure 2. 17 Dunes at Cape Henlopen State Park. Photo: William A. McAvoy ............................................... 60 Figure 2. 18 Unvegetated Sandy
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study
    Report No. 90-16 FOOD AND FEEDING OF YOUNG FINFISH SPECIES IN THE LOWER ROANOKE RIVER, BATCHELOR BAY, AND WESTERN ALBEMARLE SOUND, NORTH CAROLINA, 1982-1988 Volume I - Text Roger A. Rulifson. John E. Cooper, Donald W. Stanley, Marsha E. Shepherd, Scott F. Wood, and Deborah A. Daniel l .. .;' ~ ·~ - -~ ' ' . ' u r: ,' . , . C1 h· !1. :.· •. II j 509;F68 )\y}., 1 • I It ! I 1 f 'f I I ., I ' I ' 1994 I ALBEMARLE-PAMLICO ESTUARINE STUDY NC O..patlment ot Environmental Environment, Heollh, Protection Agency and Nolurol Resources =~81~ Notional Esluory Program Food and Feeding of Young Finfish Species in the Lower Roanoke River, Batchelor Bay, and Western Albemarle Sound, North Carolina, 1982-1988 Volume I - Text By 1 2 1 1 2 Roger A. Rulifson • , John E. Cooper , Donald W. Stanley • , Marsha E. Shepherd3, Scott F. Wood 1•2, and Deborah A. Daniel2 1/nstitute for Coastal and Marine Resources 2Department ofBiology 3Academic Computing East Carolina University Greenville, NC 27858-4353 (ICMR Contribution Series, No. ICMR-93-04) The research on which the report is based was financed, in part, by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, through the Albemarle-Pamlico Study. Additional support was provided by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, under the Wallop-Breaux Amendment to the Sport Fish Restoration Act. Contents of the publication do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute their endorsement by the United States or North Carolina governments.
    [Show full text]
  • L O U I S I a N A
    L O U I S I A N A SPARROWS L O U I S I A N A SPARROWS Written by Bill Fontenot and Richard DeMay Photography by Greg Lavaty and Richard DeMay Designed and Illustrated by Diane K. Baker What is a Sparrow? Generally, sparrows are characterized as New World sparrows belong to the bird small, gray or brown-streaked, conical-billed family Emberizidae. Here in North America, birds that live on or near the ground. The sparrows are divided into 13 genera, which also cryptic blend of gray, white, black, and brown includes the towhees (genus Pipilo), longspurs hues which comprise a typical sparrow’s color (genus Calcarius), juncos (genus Junco), and pattern is the result of tens of thousands of Lark Bunting (genus Calamospiza) – all of sparrow generations living in grassland and which are technically sparrows. Emberizidae is brushland habitats. The triangular or cone- a large family, containing well over 300 species shaped bills inherent to most all sparrow species are perfectly adapted for a life of granivory – of crushing and husking seeds. “Of Louisiana’s 33 recorded sparrows, Sparrows possess well-developed claws on their toes, the evolutionary result of so much time spent on the ground, scratching for seeds only seven species breed here...” through leaf litter and other duff. Additionally, worldwide, 50 of which occur in the United most species incorporate a substantial amount States on a regular basis, and 33 of which have of insect, spider, snail, and other invertebrate been recorded for Louisiana. food items into their diets, especially during Of Louisiana’s 33 recorded sparrows, Opposite page: Bachman Sparrow the spring and summer months.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 10 Plan Review and Revision
    Chapter 10 Plan Review and Revision PLAN REVIEW AND REVISION Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 10-1 Maryland SWAP Review Schedule ........................................................................................... 10-2 Maryland SWAP and the State Wildlife Grant Program ........................................................... 10-3 State Wildlife Grant Projects ..................................................................................................... 10-3 Conservation Planning ........................................................................................................ 10-6 Technical Assistance .......................................................................................................... 10-8 Inventory, Monitoring, and Research ............................................................................... 10-10 Mammals ..................................................................................................................... 10-10 Birds............................................................................................................................. 10-11 Reptiles and Amphibians ............................................................................................. 10-13 Invertebrates ................................................................................................................ 10-16 Multiple Animal Taxa .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • * This Is an Excerpt from Protected Animals of Georgia Published By
    Common Name: BLACKBANDED SUNFISH Scientific Name: Enneacanthus chaetodon Other Commonly Used Names: none Previously Used Scientific Names: none Family: Centrarchidae Rarity Ranks: G4/S1 State Legal Status: Endangered Federal Legal Status: Not Listed Description: The blackbanded sunfish is a small, laterally compressed and deep-bodied species reaching a maximum total length of 100 mm (4 inches). There is a prominent notch separating the spinous and soft-rayed portions of the dorsal fin. It is distinctively marked with 5-6 black bars along the sides that extend from the dorsum to the venter. The first of these bars passes through the eye, and the third extends through the first three membranes of the spinous dorsal fin to the upper edge of the fin. No other sunfish has this barring pattern. The blackbanded sunfish is also very colorful with black vertical bars, olive-brown to variegated-brown on the dorsum and upper sides, and orange-copper marking the leading edge of the pelvic fins and the irises. Similar Species: The small body size and distinctive color pattern make it difficult to confuse the blackbanded sunfish with any other fish species in Georgia waters. It may superficially resemble the banded (Enneacanthus obesus) and bluespotted (E. gloriosus) sunfishes, which differ in having only a shallow notch separating the spinous and soft-rayed portions of the dorsal fin and lacking the prominent dark bar extending through the anterior dorsal fin membranes. Habitat: Blackbanded sunfish are restricted to shallow, low-velocity, non-turbid waters of lakes, ponds, rivers and streams. They are strongly associated with aquatic plants, which provide habitat for foraging and cover.
    [Show full text]
  • New Insights Into the Phylogenetics and Population Structure of the Prairie Falcon (Falco Mexicanus) Jacqueline M
    Doyle et al. BMC Genomics (2018) 19:233 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-018-4615-z RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access New insights into the phylogenetics and population structure of the prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus) Jacqueline M. Doyle1,2*, Douglas A. Bell3,4, Peter H. Bloom5, Gavin Emmons6, Amy Fesnock7, Todd E. Katzner8, Larry LaPré9, Kolbe Leonard10, Phillip SanMiguel11, Rick Westerman11 and J. Andrew DeWoody2,12 Abstract Background: Management requires a robust understanding of between- and within-species genetic variability, however such data are still lacking in many species. For example, although multiple population genetics studies of the peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) have been conducted, no similar studies have been done of the closely- related prairie falcon (F. mexicanus) and it is unclear how much genetic variation and population structure exists across the species’ range. Furthermore, the phylogenetic relationship of F. mexicanus relative to other falcon species is contested. We utilized a genomics approach (i.e., genome sequencing and assembly followed by single nucleotide polymorphism genotyping) to rapidly address these gaps in knowledge. Results: We sequenced the genome of a single female prairie falcon and generated a 1.17 Gb (gigabases) draft genome assembly. We generated maximum likelihood phylogenetic trees using complete mitochondrial genomes as well as nuclear protein-coding genes. This process provided evidence that F. mexicanus is an outgroup to the clade that includes the peregrine falcon and members of the subgenus Hierofalco. We annotated > 16,000 genes and almost 600,000 high-quality single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the nuclear genome, providing the raw material for a SNP assay design featuring > 140 gene-associated markers and a molecular-sexing marker.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Structure and Food-Web Dynamics in Northeastern U.S
    COMMUNITY STRUCTURE AND FOOD-WEB DYNAMICS IN NORTHEASTERN U.S. TIDAL MARSHES By Laura Kay Garey B.S. Truman State University, 2010 A THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (in Ecology and Environmental Sciences) The Graduate School The University of Maine May 2017 Advisory Committee: Brian J. Olsen, Associate Professor, School of Biology and Ecology, Co-advisor Thomas P. Hodgman, Non-game Bird Biologist, Retired, Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Co-advisor Hamish S. Greig, Assistant Professor, School of Biology and Ecology Adrienne I. Kovach, Assistant Professor, Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of New Hampshire COMMUNITY STRUCTURE AND FOOD-WEB DYNAMICS IN NORTHEASTERN U.S. TIDAL MARSHES By Laura Kay Garey Thesis Advisors: Dr. Brian J. Olsen and Thomas P. Hodgman An Abstract of the Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (in Ecology and Environmental Sciences) May 2017 Tidal marshes represent one of the most productive natural systems on the globe, but because they are so physiologically stressful, they have low species richness. Consequently, tidal marsh communities are relatively homogenous across large spatial scales. Within saltmarshes, scale-dependent processes and patterns can be identified with the reduction of variation in community dynamics due to low species turnover. I conducted two studies in tidal marshes along the northeastern U.S. coast to explore the abiotic and biotic factors that influence food-web dynamics and community structure. I explored the effect of temporal and spatial variables on community composition of tidal-marsh invertebrates.
    [Show full text]
  • SP20 Delaware Piedmont Geology
    Delaware Piedmont Geology including a guide to the rocks of Red Clay Valley RESEARCH DELAWARE SERVICEGEOLOGICAL SURVEY EXPLORATION Delaware Geological Survey University of Delaware Special Publication No. 20 By Margaret O. Plank and William S. Schenck 106/1500/298/C Delaware Piedmont Geology Including a guide to the rocks of Red Clay Valley Delaware Geological Survey University of Delaware Special Publication No. 20 Margaret O. Plank and William S. Schenck 1998 Contents FOREWORD . v INTRODUCTION . vii Acknowledgments . viii BASIC FACTS ABOUT ROCKS . 1–13 Our Earth . 1 Crust . 1 Mantle . 2 Core. 2 Plate Tectonics . 3 Minerals . 5 Rocks . 6 Igneous Rocks . 6 Sedimentary Rocks. 8 Metamorphic Rocks . 9 Deformation. 11 Time . 12 READING THE ROCKS: A HISTORY OF THE DELAWARE PIEDMONT . 15–29 Geologic Setting . 15 Piedmont . 15 Fall Line. 17 Atlantic Coastal Plain. 17 Rock Units of the Delaware Piedmont . 20 Wilmington Complex . 20 Wissahickon Formation . 21 Setters Formation & Cockeysville Marble . 22 Geologic Map for Reference . 23 Baltimore Gneiss . 24 Deformation in the Delaware Piedmont . 24 The Piedmont and Plate Tectonics . 27 Red Clay Valley: Table of Contents iii A GUIDE TO THE ROCKS ALONG THE TRACK . 31–54 Before We Begin . 31 Geologic Points of Interest . 31 A Southeast of Greenbank . 35 B Workhouse Quarry at Greenbank. 36 C Red Clay Creek and Brandywine Springs Park . 36 D Brandywine Springs to Faulkland Road . 38 E Hercules Golf Course . 39 F Rock Cut at Wooddale . 40 G Wissahickon Formation at Wooddale. 43 H Quarries at Wooddale. 43 I Red Clay Creek Flood Plain . 44 J Mount Cuba . 44 K Mount Cuba Picnic Grove .
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B Landscape Assessment of the Puncheon Run Site
    APPENDIX B LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT OF THE PUNCHEON RUN SITE Archaeology of the Puncheon Run Site (7K-C-51) Volume II: Technical Appendices LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT OF THE PUNCHEON RUN SITE By Justine Woodard McKnight Consulting Ethnobotanist 708 Faircastle Avenue Severna Park, Maryland 21146 THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP, INC. 2300 N Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20037 Submitted To U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration and DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF STATE Division of Historical and Cultural Affairs Bureau of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Prepared For DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Division of Highways Location and Environmental Studies Office g Eugene E. Abbott Director of Planning 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE List of Figures........................................................... B-iii List of Tables ........................................................... B-iii List of Plates............................................................ B-iii I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................... B-1 A. Project Background ................................................... B-1 B. Research Context ..................................................... B-1 1. Archaeobotanical Analyses .......................................... B-3 2. Review of Ethnohistoric Literature .................................... B-4 3. Landscape Assessment .............................................. B-4 C. Navigating This Report ................................................ B-5 II. LANDSCAPE CONTEXT ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • AKFS Aktuell Nr. 35
    Kaltwasserfische und Fische der Subtropen A K F S aktuell Nr. 35 - Oktober 2015 Sonderheft Die Haltung des Scheibenbarsches im Wandel der Zeit ISSN 1864-8681 4 ─ Kaltwasserfische und Fische der Subtropen ● AKFS-aktuell 35/2015 Kaltwasserfische und Fische der Subtropen ● AKFS-aktuell 35/2015 ─ 5 und dort fünf Jahre bis zu einem Umzug in eine zentralbeheizte Anlässe, über den Scheibenbarsch zu schreiben Peter Pretor — Rösrath Neubauwohnung blieb. Danach vergingen gut 30 Jahre bis mich Über die Lebensverhältnisse der Scheibenbarsche ist bisher er- Anfang der achtziger Jahre - ausgelöst durch ein wunderschön staunlich wenig bekannt. Es fehlen umfassende Studien. Kaum eingerichtetes Aquarium meines damals 16jährigen Sohnes - er- etwas ist nach Rohde et al. (2009) zu Ihrer Ökologie bekannt, Über den Scheibenbarsch Enneacanthus chaetodon (Baird, 1855) neut die Lust auf die Wasserwelt packte. d.h. zu ihren Lebensräumen, ihrer Lebensgeschichte, ihrer Rolle und seine Haltung im Wandel der Zeit Eine ausführliche Literatursichtung lenkte mein Interesse vor in der Lebensgemeinschaft und ihren Anpassungen. allem auf eine Tropenwelt hinter Glas, wie sie Werner Schmett- Über den Scheibenbarsch zu schreiben heißt: Mit der Zielsetzung kamp 1982 in seinem Buch ‘Die Zwergcichliden Südamerikas‘ als und dem Anspruch zu schreiben, das gesamte Spektrum von der Zusammenfassung zahlreicher Dia-Vorträge faszinierend zum Haltung, Pflege, Zucht, Systematik und Verbreitung, seiner Histo- Leben erweckt hat und mit dem ich über viele Jahre hinweg die rie bis zu wesentlichen Bereichen wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis- Begeisterung für Apistogramma-Arten in freundschaftlicher Ver- se zu erfassen. Dies erfordert zeitaufwendige und sehr sorgfältige bundenheit teilen konnte. Unter Beachtung der beschriebenen Recherchen, um bevorzugt auf Basis eigener Nachforschungen Daten vom Fundort sowie sonstiger ökologischen Untersuchun- ein umfassendes Gesamtbild von dieser Art zu vermitteln.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecomorphology of Centrarchid Fishes D
    Cooke Jayshree c13 V1-12/10/2008 11:37pm P.70 Chapter 3 Ecomorphology of centrarchid fishes D. C. Collar and P. C. Wainwright 3.1 Introduction From the ecologist’s perspective, centrarchid fishes are widely recognized as a model system for investigating the role of phenotypic variation in shaping ecological patterns. To the ichthyologist, this group is considered among the most morphologically and ecologically diverse of North America’s freshwater ichthyofauna. This chapter is intended to bring these perspectives together, highlighting the contributions of studies linking resource use patterns to morphology in order to make sense of the ecological, functional, and morphological diversity exhibited within the Centrarchidae. We review literature on feeding and on locomotion. Historically, the diversity represented within this radiation helped inspire the development of ecomorphology, a research perspective that investigates hypothesized associations between organismal design and ecology. Working independently, Werner (1974, 1977) and Keast (1978, 1985; Keast and Webb 1967) were among the first to point out a general associa- tion between head and body form and resource use in centrarchid species. Using bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus), green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus), and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) to represent the range of ecologi- cal and morphological diversity in centrarchids, Werner and coworkers developed the first mechanistic insights into the implications of variation in body and head morphology. The diversity of form and feeding habits represented by bluegill, largemouth bass, black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), and rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris) motivated Keast’s proposal that different suites of morphological features confer varying prey capture and habitat use capabil- ities on these species and that these differences underlie the capacity for these species to coexist in sympatry.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter Distribution of the Sharp-Tailed Sparrow Complex in Virginia
    Investigation of Winter Mercury Levels in the Sharp-tailed Sparrow Complex in the Chesapeake Bay and Seaside of Virginia Fletcher Smith1 Dan Cristol2 1 Bryan Watts 1 The Center for Conservation Biology at The College of William and Mary and Virginia Claire Varian- Commonwealth University Ramos2 2 Department of Biology, College of William and Mary Institute for Integrative Bird Susan Behavior Studies Lingenfelser3 3 USFWS EC Division, VA Field Office What’s in a name? Project Background • CCB identified an information gap in wintering marsh birds on the Eastern Shore of Virginia. Study was initially tied to looking at the impact of Phragmites australis on the high marsh community (funded by NOAA/CZM). • Marsh surveys began in winter of 2006, though identification to species was problematic for sharp-tails (initiated trapping to solve problem). • We began trapping bayside marshes during the winter of 08-09. • Began feather and blood collecting to look at mercury, isotopes, and genetic origin in sharp- tails in 2008-2011 Winter trapping sites 2006-2011 (n=27) Methods • Modified rope-drag technique, with target netting of individuals • Morphological measurements and ageing of birds • Collection of feathers for isotope and mercury analysis and blood for mercury • Photographic record at multiple angles of each capture Saltmarsh vs. Nelson’s Species Breakdown for Winter Marshbird Trapping 2006- 2010 New Same Year Between Year Species Totals Capture Recap Recap Saltmarsh Sparrow 296 (41.9%) 50 (36.5%) 17 (38.6%) 363 Nelson's Sparrow 267 (37.8%)
    [Show full text]