National Wetlands Inventory

SEPTEMBER 1989

WETLANDS OF RHODE ISLAND

u.s. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service WETLANDS OF RHODE ISLAND

by

Ralph W. Tiner U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 Fish and Wildlife Enhancement One Gateway Center Newton Corner, MA 02158

SEPTEMBER 1989

Published with support from the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region I, John F. Kennedy Federal Building, Boston,MA This report should be cited as follows:

Tiner. R. W. 1989. Wetlands of Rhode Island. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Newwn Comer, MA. 71 pp. 4- Appendix.

Credits:

Credit is given 10 the following sources for pennission to copy some of the illustrations found in this book:

A Field Guide to Coastal Wetland Plants of the Northeastern United Stales by Ralph W. Tiner, k, drawings by Abigail Rorer (Amherst: University of MassachusettS Press, 1987), copyright © 1987 by Ralph W. Tiner, Jr. Figures 10 and 17.

Hydric Soils of New England by Ralph W. Tiner, Jr. and Peter L.M. Veneman, drawings by Elizabeth Scott (Amherst University of Massachusetts Cooperative Extension, 1989). Figure 14. Acknowledgements

Ma.:oy individuals have contributed to the completion of the wetlands inventory in Rhode Island and to the prepa.ration of this report. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region I, Boston contributed funds for publishing this report. Matt Schweisberg served as project officer for this work and his patience is appreciated.

In preparing the National Wetlands Inventory maps, wetland photo interpretation was done by John Organ, Frank Shun vvay, Judy Harding, and Janice Stone. Their work serves as the foundation for this report. John Organ also provided assistance in quality control of the interpreted photographs and in draft map review. The Service's National Wethl .. ods Inventory Group in S t. Petersburg, Florida provided technical support for producing the wetland maps. Nino Alessandroni and Rudolf Nyc were responsible for compiling wetland acreage summaries, while Joanne Gookin also assisterl.

The following persons reviewed the draft manuscript and provided comments: Dr. Frank Golet (University of Rhode IslaIld), Bob Scheirer (FWS), Bill Zinni (FWS), Glenn Smith (FWS), Everett Stuart (SCS), Matt Schweisberg (EPA), Rick Enser (RID EM), Irene Kenenski (RICRMC), and Dean Albro (RID EM). I am particularly indebted to Dr. Golet who !'Spent considerable time reviewing the manuscript, and preparing comments based on his extensive knowledge of the state's wetlands; he also provided slides for use in this report.

Others providing infonnation included: Porter Reed, Ralph Abele, Charles Allin, Lori Suprock, Michael Lapisky, Tim Lynch, Patricia Toomer, and Alan Steiner.

Tile manuscript was typed by Joanne Gookin and Joan Gilbert. Some of the figures were prepared by Mary O'Connor. Rick Newton also provided technical support in preparing photographs for publication.

Photo Credits

PhD tographs used in this report were gratiously provided by several people who are listed below in alphabetical order a.long with the plate and figure numbers oftheirphotographs: M. Anderson (Figure 22b), Dr. Frank Golet (Plates 6,9. 1 1,12,13,14,15, and 16; Figures 8, 15a, 15b, 18, 19,20,21, 24, and 29), Fred Knapp (Figure 22d), Ralph Tiner (Plates 1,2,3,5,7,8, and 10; Figures 16 and 30), Dr. Peter Veneman (Plate 4), and Bill Zinni (Figure 22c).

Cover photo credits: Golet (salt marsh, great egret, least bittern, and pickerelweed marsh) and Tiner (inland marsh and turk's-cap lily). Table of Contents

Page Acknowledgements; Photo Credits ...... iii Table of Contents ...... lV List of Figures ...... vi List of Tables ...... , .. . vii List of Plates ..... , ...... , ...... , ...... , ...... , .. ,., .. ,., .. . vii

Chapter- 1. Introduction ...... , ... , ...... 1 Rhode Island Wetlands Inventory ...... , ...... , ... , ...... " ...... 2 Description of Study Area ...... , ...... 2 PurpDse and Organization of this Report ...... 2 References ...... , ...... , ...... 2

Chapter 2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Wetland Definition and Classification System ...... 4 Introduction ...... 4 Wetland Definition ...... 4 Wetland Classification ...... , ...... 7 References ...... 12

Chapter 3. National Wetlands Inventory Techniques and Results ...... 13 Introduction ...... 13 Wetlands Inventory Techniques ...... 13 Mapping Photography ...... 13 Photo Interpretation and Collateral Data ...... 13 Field Investigations ...... 13 Draft Map Production ...... 15 Draft Map Review ...... 15 Final Map Production ...... 15 Wetland Acreage Compilation ...... 15 Wetlands Inventory Results ...... 15 National Wetlands Inventory Maps ...... 15 Wetland and Deepwater Habitat Acreage Summaries ...... 15 State Totals ...... 15 County Totals ...... 17 Summary ...... 18 References ...... 18

Chapter 4. Wetland Formation and Hydrology ...... 19 Introduction ...... 19 Wetland Formation ...... 19 Inland Wetland Formation ...... 19 Coastal Wetland Formation ...... 21 Wetland Hydrology ...... 23 Tidal Wetland Hydrology ...... 23 Nontidal Wetland Hydrology ...... 24 References ...... 27

Chapter 5. Hydric Soils of Rhode Island ...... 29 Introduction ...... 29 Definition of Hydric Soil ...... 29 Major Categories of Hydric Soils ...... 29 National List of Hydric Soils ...... 32 Rhode Island's Hydric Soils ...... 32

iv County Acreage of Hydric Soils ...... 32 Hydric Soils Descriptions ...... 32 References ...... 35

Chapter 6. Vegetation and Plant Communities of Rhode Island's Wetlands ...... 36 Introduction ...... 36 Hydrophyte Definition and Concept ...... 36 Wetland Plant Communities...... 37 Marine Wetlands ...... 38 Estuarine Wetlands ...... 38 Riverine Wetlands ...... ,...... 41 Palustrine Wetlands ...... ,..... 41 Lacustine Wetlands ...... ,. 49 References ...... ,...... 50

Chapter 7. Wetland Values ...... 52 Introduction ...... ,...... 52 Fish and Wildlife Values ...... ,...... ,. 52 Fish and Shellfish Habitat ., ...... ,..... 52 Waterfowl and Other Bird Habitat ...... 53 Mammal and Other Wildlife Habitat . , ...... , ...... , . . . . . 54 Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Plants...... 55 Environmental Quality Values ...... , ...... 55 Water Quality Improvement ...... , ...... 55 Aquatic Productivity ...... 59 Socio-economic Values ...... 60 Flood and Storm Damage Protection ...... 60 Shoreline Erosion Control ...... 62 Water Supply ...... 62 Ground-water Recharge...... 63 Harvest of Natural Products...... 63 Recreation and Aesthetics ...... 64 Summary...... 64 References ...... 64

Chapter 8. Wetland Protection ...... ,...... 67 Introduction ...... 67 Wetland Regulation ...... 67 Wetland Acquisition ...... 67 Future Actions ...... 69 References ...... ,...... 70

Appendix: List of Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands 71 Enclosure: General Distribution of Rhode Island's Wetlands

v List of Tables No. Page l. Definition of "wetland" according to selected Federal regulations and state statutes...... 6 2. Classes and subclasses of wetlands and deepwater habitats ...... , ... , ...... 10 3. Water regime modifiers, both tidal and nontidal groups...... 11 4. Salinity modifiers for coastal and inland areas ...... , ...... ,.. II 5. Wetland acreage summaries for Rhode Island ...... 17 6. Deepwater habitat acreage summaries for Rhode Island ...... 18 7. Percentage of each county covered by wetland ...... 18 8. Tidal ranges of mean and spring tides and mean tide level at various locations in Rhode Island ...... 24 9. Examples of plant indicators of tidal water regimes for Rhode Island's estuarine wetlands ...... 24 10. Examples of plant indicators of nontidal water regimes for Rhode Island's wetlands ...... 26 11. Criteria for hydric soils ...... 29 12. Definitions of the classes of natural soil drainage associated with wetlands ...... 30 13. Hydric soils of Rhode Island...... 33 14. County summaries of hydric soils acreage in Rhode Island ...... 33 15. Wetland indicator status of various life forms of Rhode Island's wetland plants ...... 36 16. Examples of four wetland plant types occurring in Rhode Island ...... 37 17. Examples of palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands in Rhode Island ...... 44 18. Examples of palustrine forested wetlands in Rhode Island ...... 46 19. List of major wetland values ...... 52 20. Plant species of special concern to Rhode Island that occur in wetlands ...... 56 21. Summary of primary Federal and state laws requiring permits for wetland alteration in Rhode Island ... 58

List of Plates* No. I. Carlisle muck. 2. Scarboro mucky sandy loam. 3. Wareham loamy sand. 4. Ridgebury fine sandy loam (hydric). 5. Ridgebury fine sandy loam (nonhydric). 6. Sudbury sandy loam. 7. Salt marsh in Tiverton. 8. Salt marsh adjacent to Winnapaug Pond, Westerly. 9. Freshwater wetlands in Frying Pan Pond, Richmond. 10. Seasonally flooded marsh along the Chipuxet River, West Kingston. II. Seasonally flooded marsh on Block Island. 12. Grazed wet meadow in Tiverton. 13. Diamond Bog, Richmond in autumn. 14. Newton Marsh, Westerly. 15. Atlantic white cedar swamp bordering Ell Pond, Rockville. 16. Red maple swamp, Richmond.

* Plates lie between pages 38 and 39.

VB

CHAPTER 1. Introduction

Wetlands are usually periodically flooded lands occur­ nance. Prior to this time, wetlands were regarded by most ring between uplands and open water bodies such as people as wastelands, whose best use could only be at­ lakes, rivers, streams, and estuaries. Many wetlands, tained by alteration, e.g., draining for agriculture, dredg­ however, may be isolated from such water bodies. These ing and filling for industrial and housing developments wetlands are located in areas with seasonally high water and filling with sanitary landfill. Scientific studies demon­ tables that are surrounded by upland. Wetlands are com­ strating wetlands values, especially for coastal marshes, monly referred to by a host of terms based on their loca­ were instrumental in increasing public awareness of wet­ tion and characteristics, such as salt marsh, tidal marsh, land benefits and stimulating concern for wetland protec­ mudflat, wet meadow, cedar swamp, and hardwood tion. Consequently, several states passed laws to protect swamp. These areas are important natural resources with coastal wetlands, including Massachusetts (1963), Rhode numerous values, including fish and wildlife habitat, Island (1965), Connecticut (1969), New Jersey (1970), flood protection, erosion control, and water quality main­ Maryland (1970), Georgia (1970), New York (1972) and tenance. Delaware (1973). Four of these states subsequently adopted inland or nontidal wetland protection legislation: The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has always Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and New recognized the importance of wetlands to waterfowl, York. Most of the other states in the Nation with coastal other migratory birds and wildlife. The Service's respon­ wetlands followed the lead of these northeastern states sibility for protecting these habitats comes largely from and enacted laws to protect or regulate uses of coastal international treaties concerning migratory birds and wetlands. During the early 1970's, the Federal govern­ from the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. The Service ment also assumed greater responsibility for wetlands has been active in protecting these resources through through Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Con­ various programs. The Service's National Wildlife Re­ trol Act of 1972 (later amended as the Clean Water Act of fuge System was established to preserve and enhance 1977) and by strengthening wetland protection under Sec­ migratory bird habitat in strategic locations across the tion 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Federal country. More than 10 million ducks breed annually in permits are now required for many types of construction U. S. wetlands and millions more overwinter here. The in many wetlands, although normal agricultural and for­ Service also reviews Federal projects and applications for estry activities are exempt. Federal permits that involve wetland alteration. With increased public interest in wetlands and strength­ Since the 1950's, the Service has aeen particularly ened government regulation, the Service considered how concerned about wetland losses and their impact on fish it could contribute to this resource management effort, and wildlife populations. In 1954, the Service conducted since it has prime responsibility for protection and man­ its first nationwide wetlands inventory which focused on agement of the Nation's fish and wildlife and their hab­ important waterfowl wetlands. This survey was per­ itats. The Service recognized the need for sound eco­ formed to provide information for considering fish and logical information to make decisions regarding policy, wildlife impacts in land-use decisions. The results of this planning, and management of the country's wetland re­ inventory were published in a well-known Service report sources, and established the National Wetlands Inventory entitled Wetlands of the United States, commonly referred Project (NWI) in 1974 to fulfill this need. The NWI aims to as Circular 39 (Shaw and Fredine 1956). to generate scientific information on the characteristics and extent of the Nation's wetlands. The purpose of this Since this survey, wetlands have undergone many information is to foster wise use of U. S. wetlands and to changes, both natural and human-induced. The conver­ provide data for making quick and accurate resource deci­ sion of wetlands for agriculture, residential and industrial sions. developments and other uses has continued. During the 1960's, the general public in many states became more Two very different kinds of information are needed: (1) aware of wetland values and concerned about wetland detailed maps and (2) status and trends reports. First, losses. They began to realize that wetlands provided sig­ detailed wetland maps are needed for impact assessment nificant public benefits besides fish and wildlife habitat, of site-specific projects. These maps serve a purpose especially flood protection and water quality mainte- similar to the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service's soil 2 survey maps, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad­ characterized by cold winters and warm summers, with a ministration's coastal and geodetic survey maps, and the moderating ocean influence. Average winter temperature U.S. Geological Survey's topographic maps. Detailed is 30°F with lowest temperatures ranging between - 10°F wetland maps are used by local, state and Federal agen­ and -20°F. Summer temperatures average 70°F and peak cies as well as by private industry and organizations for in the 90's. The growing season ranges from late March many purposes, including watershed management plans, and early April to November. Annual precipitation aver­ environmental impact assessments, permit reviews, facil­ ages from 44 to 48 inches, with precipitation relatively ity and corridor sitings, oil spill contingency plans, natu­ evenly distributed throughout the year. Thunderstorms ral resource inventories, wildlife surveys and other uses. occur mostly in the summer. Average snowfall is 36 To date, wetland maps have been prepared for 61 % of the inches and maximum snowfall usually occurs in Febru­ lower 48 states, 18% of Alaska, and all of Hawaii. Sec­ ary. ondly, national estimates of the current status and recent losses and gains of wetlands are needed in order to pro­ vide improved information for reviewing the effective­ Purpose and Organization of this Report ness of existing Federal programs and policies, for identi­ fying national or regional problems and for general public The purpose of this publication is to report the findings awareness. Technical and popular reports about these of the Service's wetlands inventory of Rhode Island. The trends have been recently published (Frayer, et al. 1983; discussion will focus on wetlands with a few references to Tiner 1984). deepwater habitats which were also inventoried. The fol­ lowing chapters will include discussions of wetland con­ Rhode Island Wetlands Inventory cept and classification (Chapter 2), inventory techniques and results (Chapter 3), wetland formation and hydrology (Chapter 4), hydric soils (Chapter 5), wetland vegetation Rhode Island's wetlands were mapped as part of a and plant communities (Chapter 6), wetland values larger inventory including Massachusetts, coastal Maine (Chapter 7), and wetland protection (Chapter 8). The ap­ and southern New Hampshire. Although each of these pendix contains a list of vascular plants associated with states had mapped wetlands to some extent, there was no Rhode Island's wetlands. Scientific names of plants fol­ consistency from state to state, due to differences in wet­ low the National List ofScientific Plant Names (U.S.D.A. land definitions and inventory procedures. The Service's Soil Conservation Service 1982). A figure showing the National Wetlands Inventory Project (NWI) has produced general distribution of Rhode Island's wetlands and deep­ a consistent and more up-to-date set of maps and other water habitats is provided as an enclosure at the back of data for New England wetlands. The Rhode Island wet­ this report. (Note: This figure shows many forested wet­ lands inventory provides government administrators, pri­ lands of various sizes and only the large emergent and vate industry, and others with improved information for scrub-shrub wetlands, thus many smaller wetlands of project planning and environmental impact evaluation these latter types are not depicted; this is perhaps most and for making land-use decisions. This inventory identi­ evident by the lack of wetlands shown for Block Island.) fies the current status of Rhode Island's wetlands and serves as the base from which future changes can be determined. References Description of the Study Area Bailey, R.G. 1978. Description of the Ecoregions of the United States. Rhode Island is the smallest state in the Nation, oc­ U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service, Ogden, Utah. 77 pp. cupying 1,058 square miles or 677,120 acres (Rector Bromley, S.W. 1935. The original forest types of southern New En­ gland. Ecol. Monog. 5(1): 61-89. 1981). The state is divided into five counties: Bristol, Frayer, W.E., T.l. Monahan, D.C. Bowden, and FA. Graybill. 1983. Kent, Newport, Providence, and Washington (Figure 1). Status and Trends of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats in the Conter­ Narragansett Bay is a dominant feature in the state, as it minous United States, 1950's to 1970's. Dept. of Forest and Wood essentially separates Newport and Bristol Counties from Sciences, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins. 32 pp. the rest of the state. The landscape is part of the Eastern Rector, D.D. 1981. Soil Survey of Rhode Island. U.S.D.A. Soil Con­ servation Service, 200 pp. + maps. Deciduous Forest Province, Appalachian Oak Forest Sec­ Shaw, S.P. and C.G. Fredine. 1956. Wetlands of the United States. tion as defined by Bailey (1978). The northern part of the Their Extent and Their Value to Waterfowl and other Wildlife., U.S. state falls within the White Pine Region of southern New Fish and Wildlife Service. Circular 39. 67 pp. England as characterized by Bromley (1935). Tiner, R. W., lr. 1984. Wetlands of the United States: Current Status and Recent Trends. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, Washington, DC. 59 pp. The climate of Rhode Island has been described by V.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National List of Scientific Rector (1981) and elsewhere. In general, the climate is Plant Names. Vol. I. List of Plant Names. SCS-TP-159. 416 pp. 3

, PROVIDENCE (

OIl Rhode Island Sound

"Block Island (Newport Co.) &P Q

Figure 1. Rhode Island and its counties, CHAPTER 2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Wetland Definition and Classification System

Introduction tion, the Service's classification system has been widely used by Federal, state, and local agencies, university To begin inventorying the Nation's wetlands, the Ser­ scientists, and private industry and non-profit organiza­ vice needed a definition of wetland and a classification tions for identifying and classifying wetlands. At the First system to identify various wetlands types. The Service, International Wetlands Conference in New Delhi, India, therefore, examined recent wetland inventories through­ scientists from around the world adopted the Service's out the country to learn how others defined and classified wetland definition as an international standard and recom­ wetlands. The results of this examination were published mended testing the applicability of the classification sys­ as Existing State and Local Wetlands Surveys (1965- tem in other areas, especially in the tropics and subtropics 1975) (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1976). More than (Gopal, et al. 1982). Thus, the system appears to be 50 wetland classification schemes were identified. Of moving quickly towards its goal of providing uniformity those, only one classification-the Martin, et al. system in wetland concept and terminology. (l953)-was nationally based, while all others were re­ gionally focused. In January 1975, the Service brought together 14 authors of regional wetland classifications Wetland Definition and other prominent wetland scientists to help decide if any existing classification could be used or modified for Conceptually, wetlands usually lie between the better the national inventory or if a new system was needed. drained, rarely flooded uplands and the permanently They recommended that the Service attempt to develop a flooded deep waters of lakes, rivers and coastal embay­ new national wetland classification. In July 1975, the ments (Figure 2). Wetlands generally include the variety Service sponsored the National Wetland Classification of marshes, bogs, swamps, shallow ponds, and bottom­ and Inventqry Workshop, where more than 150 wetland land forests that occur throughout the country. They usu­ scientists and mapping experts met to review a prelimi­ ally lie in depressions surrounded by upland or along nary draft of the new wetland classification system. The rivers, lakes and coastal waters where they are subject to consensus was that the system should be hierarchical in periodic flooding. Some wetlands, however, occur on nature and built around the concept of ecosystems (Sather slopes where they are associated with ground-water seep­ 1976). age areas. To accurately inventory this resource, the Ser­ vice had to determine where along this natural wetness Four key objectives for the new system were estab­ continuum wetland ends and upland begins. While many lished: (I) to develop ecologically similar habitat units, wetlands lie in distinct depressions or basins that are (2) to arrange these units in a system that would facilitate readily observable, the wetland-upland boundary is not resource management decisions, (3) to furnish units for always easy to identify. This is especially true along many inventory and mapping, and (4) to provide uniformity in floodplains, on glacial till deposits, in gently sloping concept and terminology throughout the country (Cowar­ terrain, and in areas of major hydrologic modification. In din, et al. 1979). these areas, only a skilled wetland ecologist or other specialist can accurately identify the wetland boundary. The Service's wetland classification system was devel­ To help ensure accurate and consistent wetland determi­ oped by a four-member team, i.e., Dr. Lewis M. Cowar­ nation, an ecologically based definition was constructed din (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), Virginia Carter by the Service. (U.S. Geological Survey), Dr. Francis C. Golet (Univer­ sity of Rhode Island) and Dr. Edward T. LaRoe (National Historically, wetlands were defined by scientists work­ Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), with assis­ ing in specialized fields, such as botany or hydrology. A tance from numerous Federal and state agencies, univer­ botanical definition would focus on the plants adapted to sity scientists, and other interested individuals. The clas­ flooding or saturated soil conditions, while a hydrolo­ sification system went through three major drafts and gist's defintion would emphasize fluctuations in the posi­ extensive field testing prior to its publication as Clas­ tion of the water table relative to the ground surface over sification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the time. Lefor and Kennard (1977) reviewed numerous defi­ United States (Cowardin, et al. 1979). Since its publica- nitions for inland wetlands used in the Northeast. Single 5

Upland

Upland

v V V u Depressional Wetland Overflow Deepwater Overflow Seepage Wetland on Slope Wetland Habitat Wetland

Figure 2. Schematic diagram showing wetlands, deepwater habitats, and uplands on the landscape. Note differences in wetlands due to hydrology and topographic position. parameter definitions in general are not very useful for some time during the growing season to stress plants and identifying wetlands. A more complete definition of wet­ animals not adapted for life in water or saturated soils. land involves a multi-disciplinary approach. The Service Most wetlands have hydrophytes and hydric soils present, has taken this approach in developing its wetland defini­ yet many are nonvegetated (e.g., tidal mud flats). The tion and classification system. Service has prepared a list of plants occurring in the Nation's wetlands (Reed 1988) and the Soil Conservation The Service has not attempted to legally define wet­ Service has developed a national list of hydric soils land, since each state or Federal regulatory agency has (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 1987) to help iden­ defined wetland somewhat differently to suit its admin­ tify wetlands. istrative purposes (Table 1). Therefore, according to ex­ isting wetland laws, a wetland is whatever the law says it Particular attention should be paid to the reference to is. The Service needed a definition that would allow flooding or soil saturation during the growing season in accurate identification and delineation of the Nation's the Service's wetland definition. When soils are covered wetlands for resource management purposes. by water or saturated to the surface, free oxygen is gener­ ally not available to plant roots. During the growing sea­ The Service defines wetlands as follows: son, most plant roots must have access to free oxygen for respiration and growth; flooding at this time would have "Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and serious implications for the growth and survival of most aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or plants. In a wetland situation, plants must be adapted to near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. cope with these stressful conditions. If, however, flood­ For purposes of this classification wetlands must have ing only occurs in winter when the plants are dormant, one or more of the following three attributes: (1) at least there is little or no effect on them. periodically, the land supports predominantly hydro­ phytes; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained Wetlands typically fall within one of the following four hydric soil; and (3) the substrate is nonsoil and is satu­ categories: (I) areas with both hydrophytes and hydric rated with water or covered by shallow water at some soils (e.g., marshes, swamps and bogs), (2) areas without time during the growing season of each year." (Cowar­ hydrophytes, but with hydric soils (e.g., fanned wet­ din, et al. 1979) lands), (3) areas without soils but with hydrophytes (e.g., seaweed-covered rocky shores), and (4) periodically In defining wetlands from an ecological standpoint, the flooded areas without soil and without hydrophytes (e.g., Service emphasizes three key attributes of wetlands: (1) gravel beaches). All wetlands must be periodcially satu­ hydrology-the degree of flooding or soil saturation, (2) rated or covered by shallow water during the growing wetland vegetation (hydrophytes), and (3) hydric soils. season, whether or not hydrophytes or hydric soils are All areas considered wetland must have enough water at present. Completely drained hydric soils that are no 6

Table 1. Definitions of "wetland" according to selected Federal agencies and state statutes.

Organization (Reference) Wetland Definition Comments

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service "Wetlands are lands transitional between ter­ This is the official Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin, et at. 1979) restrial and aquatic systems where the water definition and is being used for conducting table is usually at or near the surface or the an inventory of the Nation's wetlands. It em­ land is covered by shallow water. For pur­ phasizes flooding andlor soil saturation, poses of this classification wetlands must hydric soils and vegetation. Shallow lakes have one or more of the following three and ponds are included as wetland. Com­ attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land prehensive lists of wetland plants and soils supports predominantly hydrophytes; (2) the are available to further clarify this definition. substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and (3) the substrate is nonsoil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing sea­ son of each year." U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers Wetlands are "those areas that are inundated Regulatory definition in response to Section (Federal Register. July 19, 1977) and or saturated by surface or ground water at a 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977. Ex­ U.S. Environmental Protection frequency and duration sufficient to support, cludes similar areas lacking vegetation, such Agency (Federal Register, December and that under nonnal circumstances do sup­ as tidal flats, and does not define lakes, 24. 1980) port, a prevalence of vegetation typically ponds and rivers as wetlands. Aquatic beds adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. are considered "vegetated shallows" and in­ Wetlands generally include swamps. cluded as other "waters of the United marshes, bogs and similar areas." States" for regulatory purposes. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service "Wetlands are defined as areas that have a This is the Soil Conservation Service's defi­ (National Food Security Act Manual, predominance of hydric soils and that are in­ nition for implementing the "Swampbuster" 1988) undated or saturated by surface or ground provision of the Food Security Act of 1985. water at a frequency and duration sufficient Any area that meets hydric soil criteria is to support, and under nonnal circumstances considered to have a predominance of hydric do support, a prevalence of hydrophytic veg­ soils. Note the geographical exclusion for etation typically adapted for life in saturated certain lands in Alaska. soil conditions, except lands in Alaska iden­ tified as having a high potential for agricul­ tural development and a predominance of pennafrost soils." State of Rhode Island Coastal "Coastal wetlands include salt marshes and State's public policy on coastal wetlands. Resources Mgmt. Council freshwater or brackish wetlands contiguous Definition based on hydrologic connection to (RI Coastal Resources Mgmt. Program to salt marshes. Areas of open water within tidal waters and presence of indicator plants. as amended June 28, 1983) coastal wetlands are considered a part of the Note: Original definition made reference to wetland. Salt marshes are areas regularly in­ the occurrence and extent of salt marsh peat; undated by salt water through either natural it was probably deleted since many salt or artificial water courses and where one or marsh soils are not peats, but sands. more of the following species predominate: [8 indicator plants listed]. Contiguous and associated freshwater or brackish marshes are those where one or more of the follow­ ing species predominate: [9 indicator plants listed]. " State of Rhode Island Dept. Fresh water wetlands are defined to include, Fresh Water Wetlands Act definition. Several of Environmental Mgmt. "but not be limited to marshes; swamps; wetland types are further defined. The defi­ (RI General Law, Sections 2-1-18 et bogs; ponds; river and stream flood plains nition includes deepwater areas and the 100- seq.) and banks; areas subject to flooding or stonn year flood plain as wetland. Minimum size flowage; emergent and submergent plant limits are placed on ponds (one quarter communities in any body of fresh water in­ acre), marsh (onc acre), and swamp (three cluding rivers and streams and that area of acres). Under the definition of "river bank," land within fifty feet (50') of the edge of any all land within I 00 feet of any flowing body bog, marsh, swamp, or pond." Various wet­ of watcr less than 10 feet wide during nor­ land types are further defined on the basis of mal flow and within 200 feet of any flowing hydrology and indicator plants, including body of water 10 feet or wider is protected bog (15 types of indicator plants), marsh (21 as wetland. types of plants), and swamp (24 types of in­ dicator plants plus marsh plants). 7 longer capable of supporting hydrophytes due to a change alternately flooded by tides and exposed to air. Similarly, in water regime are not considered wetland. Areas with the Lacustrine System is separated into two systems completely drained hydric soils are, however, good in­ based on water depth: 0) Littoral-wetlands extending dicators of historic wetlands, which may be suitable for from the lake shore to a depth of 6.6 feet (2 m) below low restoration through mitigation projects. water or to the extent of nonpersistent emergents (e.g., arrowheads, pickerelweed or spatterdock) if they grow It is important to mention that the Service does not beyond that depth, and (2) Limnetic-deepwater habitats generally include permanently flooded deep water areas lying beyond the 6.6 feet (2 m) at low water. By contrast, as wetland, although shallow waters are classified as the Riverine System is further defined by four subsystems wetland. Instead, these deeper water bodies are defined as that represent different reaches of a flowing freshwater or deepwater habitats, since water and not air is the principal lotic system: (1) Tidal-water levels subject to tidal fluc­ medium in which dominant organisms live. Along the tuations, (2) Lower Perennial-permanent, flowing wa­ coast in tidal areas, the deepwater habitat begins at the ters with a well-developed floodplain, (3) Upper Peren­ extreme spring low tide level. In nontidal freshwater nial-permanent, flowing water with very little or no areas, this habitat starts at a depth of 6.6 feet (2 m) floodplain development, and (4) Intermittent-channel because the shallow water areas are often vegetated with containing nontidal flowing water for only part of the emergent wetland plants. year.

The next level-CLASS-describes the general ap­ Wetland Classification pearance of the wetland or deepwater habitat in terms of the dominant vegetative life form or the nature and com­ The following section represents a simplified overview position of the substrate, where vegetative cover is less of the Service's wetland classification system. Conse­ than 30% (Table 2). Of the 11 classes, five refer to areas quently, some of the more technical points have been where vegetation covers 30% or more of the surface: omitted from this discussion. When actually classifying a Aquatic Bed, Moss-Lichen Wetland, Emergent Wetland, wetland, the reader is advised to refer to the official Scrub-Shrub Wetland and Forested Wetland. The remain­ classification document (Cowardin, et al. 1979) and ing six classes represent areas generally lacking vegeta· should not rely solely on this overview. tion, where the composition of the substrate and degree of flooding distinguish classes: Rock Bottom, Unconsoli­ The Service's wetland classification system is hier­ dated Bottom, Reef (sedentary invertebrate colony), archial or vertical in nature proceeding from general to Streambed, Rocky Shore, and Unconsolidated Shore. specific, as noted in Figure 3. In this approach, wetlands Permanently flooded nonvegetated areas are classified as are first defined at a rather broad level-the SYSTEM. either Rock Bottom or Unconsolidated Bottom, while The term SYSTEM represents "a complex of wetlands and exposed areas are typed as Streambed, Rocky Shore or deepwater habitats that share the influence of similar Unconsolidated Shore. Invertebrate reefs are found in hydrologic, geomorphologic, chemical, or biological both permanently flooded and exposed areas. factors." Five systems are defined: Marine, Estuarine, Riverine, Lacustrine and Palustrine. The Marine System Each class is further divided into SUBCLASSES to generally consists of the open ocean and its associated better define the type of substrate in nonvegetated areas high-energy coastline, while the Estuarine System en­ (e.g., bedrock, rubble, cobble-gravel, mud, sand, and compasses salt and brackish marshes, nonvegetated tidal organic) or the type of dominant vegetation (e.g., persis­ shores, and brackish waters of coastal rivers and embay­ tent or nonpersistent emergents, moss, lichen, or broad­ ments. Freshwater wetlands and deepwater habitats fall leaved deciduous, needle-leaved deciduous, broad­ into one of the other three systems: Riverine (rivers and leaved evergreen, needle-leaved evergreen and dead streams), Lacustrine (lakes, reservoirs and large ponds), woody plants). Below the subclass level, DOMINANCE or Palustrine (e.g., marshes, bogs, swamps and small TYPE can be applied to specify the predominant plant or shallow ponds). Thus, at the most general level, wetlands animal in the wetland community. can be defined as either Marine, Estuarine, Riverine, Lacustrine or Palustrine (Figure 4). To allow better description of a given wetland or deep· water habitat in regard to hydrologic, chemical and soil Each system, with the exception of the Palustrine, is characteristics and to human impacts, the classification further subdivided into SUBSYSTEMS. The Marine and system contains four types of specific modifiers: (1) Wa­ Estuarine Systems both have the same two subsystems, ter Regime, (2) Water Chemistry, (3) Soil, and (4) Spe­ which are defined by tidal water levels: (1) Subtidal­ cial. These modifiers may be applied to class and lower continuously submerged areas and (2) Intertidal-areas levels of the classification hierarchy. 8

Subsystem Class

ROCk Bottom r------Subtidal------I Unconsolidated Bottom Aquatic Bed EReef Marine -----I Aquatic Bed I...------Intertidal------I Reef §Rocky Shore Unconsolidated Shore

ROCk Bottom ------Subtidal------~ Unconsolidated Bottom Aquatic Bed EReef Aquatic Bed Estuarine ---.... Reef Streambed Rocky Shore L------Intertidal------l Unconsolidated Shore Emergent Wetland Scrub-Shrub Wetland Forested Wetland

r Rock Bottom r Unconsolidated Bottom ______Tidal------.....--Aquatic Bed r Rocky Shore t Unconsolidated Shore Emergent Wetland

Rock Bottom Unconsolidated Bottom '--______. Aquatic Bed r- Lower Perenmal Roc k yoreSh -----{ Riverine ------i Unconsolidated Shore Emergent Wetland

ROCk Bottom Unconsolidated Bottom I------Upper Perennial------+--Aquatic Bed Rocky Shore ~ Unconsolidated Shore I...------Intermittent ------Streambed

ROCk Bottom ,..------Limnetic ------l~Unconsolidated Bottom EAquatic Bed Lacustrine ---I Rock Bottom Unconsolidated Bottom '------Littoral------I. Aquatic Bed Rocky Shore Unconsolidated Shore ~Emergent Wetland Rock Bottom Unconsolidated Bottom Aquatic Bed Unconsolidated Shore Palustrine------i Moss-Lichen Wetland Emergent Wetland Scrub-Shrub Wetland Forested Wetland

Figure 3. Classification hierarchy of wetlands and deepwater babitats showing systems, subsystems, and classes. The Palustrine System does not include deepwater babitats (Cowardin, et ai, 1979), 9

RIVERINE WATER

UPLAND

LACUSTRI~E WETLAND LACUSTRINE WATER LACUSTRINE ~-- WATER

PALUSTRI~E WETLAND RESERVOIR DAM

LEGEND .... System Boundary '-"'0--_ ESTUARINE WATER WETLA~D CLASSES ESTUARINE WETLAND ----\-;-.;. Intertidal Beach Tidal Flat

Aquatic Bed

Emergent Wetland

Forested Wetland

UPLAND

MARINE WATER MARINE (OCEAN) WETLAND

Figure 4. Diagram showing major wetland and deepwater habitat systems. Predominant wetland classes for each system are also designated. (Nntp' Tidal flat and heach classes are now considered unconsolidated shore.) 10

Table 2. Classes and subclasses of wetlands and deepwater habitats (Cowardin, et al. 1979).

Class Brief Description Subclasses

Rock Bottom Generally permanently flooded areas with bottom substrates Bedrock; Rubble. consisting of at least 75% stones and boulders and less than 30% vegetative cover. Unconsolidated Bottom Generally permanently flooded areas with bottom substrates Cobble-graveL Sand; Mud; Organic consisting of at least 25% particles smaller than stones and less than 30% vegetative cover. Aquatic Bed Generally permanently flooded areas vegetated by plants grow­ Algal; Aquatic Moss; Rooted Vascular; ing principally on or below the water surface line. Floating Vascular Reef Ridge-like or mound-like structures formed by the colonization Coral; Mollusk; Worm and growth of sedentary invertebrates. Streambed Channel whose bottom is completed dewatered at low water Bedrock; Rubble; Cobble-gravel; Sand; periods. Mud; Organic; Vegetated Rocky Shore Wetlands characterized by bedrock, stones or boulders with Bedrock; Rubble areal coverage of 75% or more and with less than 30% coverage by vegetation. Unconsolidated Shore* Wetlands having unconsolidated substrates with less than 75% Cobble-gravel; Sand; Mud; Organic; coverage by stone, boulders and bedrock and less than 30% Vegetated vegetative cover, except by pioneer plants. (*NOTE: This class combines two classes of the 1977 operational draft system-BeachiBar and Flat) Moss-Lichen Wetland Wetlands dominated by mosses or lichens where other plants Moss; Lichen have less than 30% coverage. Emergent Wetland Wetlands dominated by erect, rooted. herbaceous hydrophytes. Persistent; Nonpersistent Scrub-Shrub Wetland Wetlands dominated by woody vegetation less than 20 feet (6 m) Broad-leaved Deciduous; Needle-leaved tall. Deciduous; Broad-leaved Evergreen; Needle-leaved Evergreen; Dead Forested Wetland Wetlands dominated by wood vegetation 20 feet (6 m) or taller. Broad-leaved Deciduous; Needle-leaved Deciduous; Broad-leaved Evergreen; Needle-leaved Evergreen; Dead

Water regime modifiers describe flooding or soil sat­ dium chloride, which is gradually diluted by fresh water uration conditions and are divided into two main groups: as one moves upstream in coastal rivers. On the other (1) tidal and (2) nontidal. Tidal water regimes are used hand, the salinity of inland waters is dominated by four where water level fluctuations are largely driven by oce­ major cations (i.e., calcium, magnesium, sodium and po­ anic tides. Tidal regimes can be subdivided into two tassium) and three major anions (i.e., carbonate, sulfate, general categories, one for salt and brackish water tidal and chloride). Interactions between precipitation, surface areas and another for freshwater tidal areas. This distinc­ runoff, ground-water flow, evaporation, and sometimes tion is needed because of the special importance of sea­ plant evapotranspiration form inland salts which are most sonal river overflow and ground-water inflows in fresh­ common in arid and semiarid regions of the country. Table water tidal areas. By contrast, nontidal modifiers define 4 shows ranges of halinity and salinity modifiers which conditions where surface water runoff, ground-water dis­ are a modification of the Venice System (Remane and charge, and/or wind effects (Le., lake seiches) cause Schlieper 1971). The other set of water chemistry modi­ water level changes. Both tidal and nontidal water regime fiers are pH modifiers for identifying acid (pH<5.5), modifiers are presented and briefly defined in Table 3. circumneutral (5.5-7.4) and alkaline (pH> 7.4) waters. Some studies have shown a good correlation between Water chemistry modifiers are divided into two catego­ plant distribution and pH levels (Sjors 1950; Jeglum ries which describe the water's salinity or hydrogen ion 1971). Moreover, pH can be used to distinguish between concentration (pH): (I) salinity modifiers and (2) pH mineral-rich (e.g., fens) and mineral-poor wetlands (e.g., modifiers. Like water regimes, salinity modifiers have bogs). been further subdivided into two groups: halinity modi­ fiers for tidal areas and salinity modifiers for nontidal The third group of modifiers-soil modifiers-are pre­ area". R~tllarinp. anrl mannp. waters are dominated hy Im- sented because the nature of the soil exerts strong inftu- 11

Table 3. Water regime modifiers, both tidal and nontidal groups (Cowardin, et al. [979).

Group Type of Water Water Regime Definition

Tida[ Saltwater Subtidal Permanently flooded tidal waters and brackish areas Irregularly exposed Exposed less often than daily by tides Regularly flooded Daily tidal flooding and exposure to air Irregularly flooded Flooded less often than daily and typically exposed to air Freshwater Permanently flooded-tidal Permanently flooded by tides and river or exposed irregularly by tides Semipermanently flooded-tidal Flooded for most of the growing season by river overflow but with tidal fluctuation in water levels Regularly flooded Daily tidal flooding and exposure to air Seasonally flooded-tidal Flooded irregularly by tides and seasonally by river overflow Temporarily flooded-tidal Flooded irregularly by tides and for brief periods during growing season by river overflow Nontidal Inland freshwater Permanently flooded Flooded throughout the year in all years and saline areas Intermittently exposed Flooded year-round except during extreme droughts Semipermanently flooded Flooded throughout the growing season in most years Seasonally flooded Flooded for extended periods in growing season, but surface water IS usually absent by end of growing season Saturated Surface water is seldom present, bu t substrate is saturated to the surface for most of the season Temporarily flooded Flooded for only brief periods during growing season, with water table usually well below the soil surface for most of the season Intermittently flooded Substrate is usually exposed and only flooded for variable peri­ ods without detectable seasonal periodicity (Not always wetland: may be upland in some situations) Artificially flooded Duration and amount of flooding is controlled by means of pumps or siphons in combination with dikes or dams

Table 4. Salinity modifiers for coastal and inland areas ences on plant growth and reproduction as well as on the (Cowardin et ai .. 1979). animals living in it. Two soil modifiers are given: (l) mineral and (2) organic. In general, if a soil has 20 Approximate percent or more organic matter by weight in the upper 16 Specific Coastal Inland Salinity Conductance inches, it is considered an organic soil. whereas if it has Modifiersl Modifiers2 (%0) (Mhos at 25° C) less than this amount, it is a mineral soiL For specific definitions, please refer to Appendix D of the Service's Hyperhaline Hypersaline >40 >60,000 classification system (Cowardin, et al. 1979) or to Soil Euhaline EusaJine 30-40 45,000-60,000 Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff 1975). Mixohaline MixosaJine 3 0.5-30 800-45,000 (Brackish) The final set of modifiers-special modifiers-were Polyhaline Polysaline 18-30 30.000-45.000 established to describe the activities of people or beaver affecting wetlands and deepwater habitats. These modi­ Mesohaline Mesosaline 5-18 8,000-30,000 fiers include: excavated, impounded (i.e., to obstruct 01igohaline Oligosaline 0.5-5 800-8.000 outflow of water), diked (i.e., to obstruct inflow of wa­ Fresh Fresh <0.5 <800 ter), partly drained, fanned, and artificial (i.e., materials deposited to create or modify a wetland or deepwater ICoastal modifiers are employed in the Marine and Estuarine Sys­ habitat). tems. 21nland modifiers are employed in the Riverine, Lacustrine and Palustrine Systems. 3The term "brackish" should not be used for inland wetlands or deepwater habitats. 12

References

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.e. Oolet and E.T. LaRoe. 1977. Classi­ Wetlands: 1988 National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, fication of Wetlands and Deep-water Habitats of the United States National Ecology Research Center, Ft. Collins, CO. BioI. Rep. (An Operational Draft). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. October 88(24). 244 pp. 1977. 100 pp. Remane, A. and e. Schlieper. 1971. Biology of Brackish Water. Wiley Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.e. Oolet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classi­ Interscience Division, John Wiley & Sons, :-.lew York. 372 pp. fication of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Sather, 1. H. (editor). 1976. Proceedings of the National Wetland Classi­ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-79!31. fication and Inventory Workshop, July 20-23, 1975, at the Uni\\ersity 103 pp. of Maryland. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 358 Oopal, B., R.E. Turner, R.O. Wetzel and D.F. Whigham. 1982. Wet­ pp. lands Ecology and Management. Proceedings of the First Interna­ Shaw, S.P. and e.O. Fredine. 1956. Wetlands of the United States. tional Wetlands Conference (September 10-17, 1980; New Delhi, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Circular 39. 67 pp. India). National Institute of Ecology and International Scientific Pub­ Sjors, H. 1950. On the relation between vegetation and electrolytes in lications, Jaipur, India. 514 pp. north Swedish mire waters. Oikos 2: 241-258. Jeglum, IK. 1971. Plant indicators of pH and water level in peat lands Soil Survey Staff. 1975. Soil Taxonomy. Department of Agriculture, at Candle Lake, Saskatchewan. Can. 1. Bot. 49: 1661-1676. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC. Agriculture Handbook Lefor, M.W. and W.e. Kennard. 1977. Inland Wetland Definitions. No. 436. 754 pp. University of Connecticut, Institute of Water Resources, Storrs. Re­ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1976. Existing State and Local Wet­ port No. 28. 63 pp. lands Surveys (1965-1975). Volume II. Narrative. Office of Biolog­ Martin, A.C., N. Hotchkiss, F.M. Uhler and W.S. Bourn. 1953. Classi­ ical Services, Washington, De. 453 pp. fication of Wetlands of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Hydric Soils of the United Service, Washington, De. Special Scientific Report, Wildlife No. States. In cooperation with the :-.Iational Technical Committee for 20. 14 pp. Hydric Soils. Washington, De. Reed. P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in CHAPTER 3. National Wetlands Inventory Mapping Techniques and Results

Introduction Wetland photo interpretation, although extremely effi­ cient and accurate for inventorying wetlands, does have The National Wetlands Inventory Project (NWI) uti­ certain limitations. Consequently, some problems arose lizes remote sensing techniques with supplemental field during the course of the survey. Additional field work or investigations for wetland identification and mapping. use of collateral data was necessary to help overcome High-altitude aerial photography ranging in scale from these constraints. These problems and their resolution are 1:58,000 to 1:80,000 serves as the primary remote imag­ discussed below. ery source. Once suitable high-altitude photography is obtained, there are seven major steps in preparing wet­ 1. Spring flooding of certain wetlands. In some areas, land maps: (1) field investigations, (2) photo interpreta­ spring flooding produced a dark photo signature, ob­ tion, (3) review of existing wetland information, (4) qual­ scuring the wetland vegetation. Field checks and use ity assurance, (5) draft map production, (6) interagency of collateral photography allowed determination of review of draft maps, and (7) final map production. Steps appropriate vegetation class. 1, 2 and 3 encompass the basic data collection phase of the inventory. After publication of final wetland maps for 2. Identification of freshwater aquatic beds and nonper­ Rhode Island, the Service began collecting acreage data sistent emergent wetlands. Due to the primary use of on the state's wetlands and deepwater habitats. The pro­ spring photography, these wetland types were not in­ cedures used to inventory Rhode Island's wetlands and terpretable. They were generally classified as open the results of this inventory are discussed in the following water, unless vegetation was observed during field sections. investigations.

3. Identification of subclass in forested wetlands. Due to Wetlands Inventory Techniques the spring flooding problem, field checks had to be conducted in many areas to distinguish deciduous Mapping Photography from evergreen trees.

For mapping Rhode Island's wetlands, the Service 4. Inclusion of small upland areas within delineated wet­ used I :80,000 black and white photography (Figure 5). lands. Small islands of higher elevation and better Most of this imagery was acquired from the spring of drained uplands naturally exist within many wetlands. 1974 to the spring of 1977. Thus, the effective period of Due to the minimum size of mapping units, small this inventory can be considered the mid-1970's. upland areas may be included within designated wet­ lands. Field inspections andlor use of larger-scale Photo Interpretation and Collateral Data photography were used to refine wetland boundaries when necessary. Photo interpretation was performed by the Department of Forestry and Wildlife Management, University of 5. Forested wetlands on glacial tilL These wetlands are Massachusetts, Amherst. All photo interpretation was difficult to identify in the field, let alone through air done in stereo using mirror stereoscopes. Other collateral photo interpretation. Consequently, some of these data sources used to aid in wetland detection and classi­ wetlands were not detected and do not appear on the fication included: NWI maps.

(1) 1:20,000 black and white photography (1975); Field Investigations (2) U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps; (3) U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service soil surveys; Ground truthing surveys were conducted to collect in­ (4) U.S. Department of Commerce coastal and geo- formation on plant communities of various wetlands and detic survey maps; to gain confidence in detecting and classifying wetlands (5) Rhode Island Map Down Land Use and Vegetative from aerial photography. Detailed notes were taken at Cover Maps (MacConnell 1974). more than 70 sites throughout the state. In addition to 14

Hmmm~ April 1974 lIB April 1975 t7ZLl October 1975

t=:;.;.:.:.:~...... April 1977

Fil!ure 5. Index of aerial photography used for the National Wetlands Inventory in Roorl .. I,hnc! 15 these sites, observations were made at countless other The YAMS is a photo-optic system that allows the opera­ wetlands for classification purposes and notations were tor to fill in map polygons electronically, while the acre­ recorded on appropriate topographic maps. In total, ap­ age is automatically determined and then recorded in a proximately three weeks were spent in the field examin­ computer file. This technique allowed for preparation of ing wetlands. acreage summaries on a county basis and for the entire state. Draft Map Production

Upon completion of photo interpretation, two levels of Wetlands Inventory Results quality assurance were performed: (I) regional quality control, and (2) national consistency quality assurance. National Wetlands Inventory Maps Regional review of each interpreted photo was accom­ plished by Regional Office's NWI staff to ensure identi­ A total of thirty-seven (37) 1:24,000-scale wetland fication of all wetlands and proper classification. By con­ maps were produced. These maps identify the size, shape trast, national quality control by the NWI Group at St. and type of wetlands and deepwater habitats in accor­ Petersburg, Florida entailed spot checking of photos to dance with NWI specifications. The minimum mapping ensure that national standards had been successfully fol­ unit for wctlands ranges between approximately 1-3 lowed. Once approved by quality assurance, draft large­ acres. A recent evaluation of NWI maps in Massachusetts scale (1:24,000) wetland maps were produced by the determined that these maps had accuracies exceeding Group's support service contractor using Bausch and 95% (Swartwout, et at. 1982). This high accuracy is Lomb zoom transfer scopes. possible because the inventory technique involves a com­ bination of photo interpretation, field studies, use of ex­ Draft Map Review isting information and interagency review of draft maps. Final maps have been available since 1980. Figure 6 Draft maps were sent to the following agencies for shows an example of the large-scale map. In the near review and comment: future, a series of small-scale wetland maps (1:100,000) will be produced by the NWI. Copies of NWI maps and a (1) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New England map catalogue can be ordered from the Rhode Island Field Office; Department of Environmental Management, Freshwater (2) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (New England Di­ Wetlands Section, 83 Park Street, Providence, RI 02903 vision); (4011277-6820). (3) U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service; (4) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Region Wetland and Deepwater Habitat Acreage Summaries J); (5) National Marine Fisheries Service; and State Totals (6) Rhode Island Department of Environmental Man­ agement. According to this survey, Rhode Island possesses roughly 65,000 acres of wetlands and 106,000 acres of In addition, the Regional Office's NWI staff conducted deepwater habitats, excluding marine waters and smaller field checks and a thorough examination of draft maps to rivers and streams that either appear as linear features on ensure proper placement of wetland polygons and labels wetland maps or wetlands that were not identified due to as well as accurate classification. their small size. About 10 percent of the state's land surface is represented by wetlands. Final Map Production Nearly all (99 percent) of the state's wetlands fall A}l comments received were evaluated and incorpo­ within two systems-palustrine (88 percent) and es­ rated into the final maps, as appropriatc. Final maps were tuarine (11 percent). The general distribution of Rhode published in 1980. Island's wetlands and deepwater habitats is shown on the enclosed figure at the back of this report. Wetland Acreage Compilation Palustrine wetlands are slightly more than eight times In 1984, the Service collected wetland acreage infor­ more abundant than estuarine wetlands, covering 57,106 mation from NWI maps for Rhode Island. Area measure­ acres. Eighty-three percent of Rhode Island's freshwater ments were recorded using a video area measurement wetlands are forested wetlands, with 77 percent of the system (VAMS) rather than conventional planimeters. total represented by broad-leaved deciduous forested wet- 16

NATIONAL WETLANOS INVENTORY UNITED STATES OfPAltT'MJNT Of THE INTBUOR

TJ

'/ tf Y"'''?~-k ,,·,'0 PHOVIO(NCE 'joN ~71'30 ~:xtl I';,LANU t(:NGsfON R r Figure 6. Example of a National Wetlands Inventory map. This is a reduction of a 1 :24,000 scale mao. with the le!!end omitted. 17

Thble 5. Wetland acreage summaries for Rhode Island.

Bristol Kent Newport Providence Washington State System Class County County County County County Total

Marine Beach/Bar 147 342 489 Rocky Shore 217 122 339 Flat 99 4 103 (Subtotal) (463) (468) (931) Estuarine Beach/Bar 125 16 366 6 64 577 Rocky Shore 20 2 22 Flat 257 148 401 166 1,927 2,899 Emergent Wetland 820 164 1,081 72 1,331 3.468 Scrub-Shrub Wetland 52 52 (Subtotal) (l,202) (328) (1,868) (244) (3,376) (7,018) Palustrine Open Water 32 389 302 783 929 2,435 Aquatic Bed 1 17 1 14 41 74 Emergent Wetland 33 180 378 691 397 1,679 Scrub-Shrub Wetland Deciduous 103 914 635 1,205 2,326 5,183 Evergreen 7 54 58 119 Forested Wetland Broad-leaved Deciduous 658 5,880 4,359 12,032 21,219 44,148 Needle-leaved Evergreen 566 3 820 1,850 3,239 Dead 19 46 80 145 Farmed Wetland (Cranberry Bog) 74 10 84 (Subtotal) (827) (8,046) (5,678) (15,645) (26,910) (57,106) Lacustrine Aquatic Bed/Emergent Wetland 38 61 99 (nonpersistent)

Total Wetlands ...... , .... , ... 2,029 8,374 8,009 15,927 30,815 65,154

lands, mostly red maple swamps. Evergreen forested tively. Table 7 shows the percentage of each county cov­ wetlands accounted for nearly six percent, whereas scrub­ ered by wetlands. Washington County possesses 30,815 shrub wetlands make up nine percent of the freshwater acres or 47 percent of the state's wetlands, while Provi­ wetlands. By contrast, emergent wetlands represent only dence County has 15,927 acres of wetland or nearly 25 three percent of the total inland wetlands, while small percent of the state total. Newport and Kent Counties ponds (including aquatic beds) made up the remaining have nearl y equal amounts of wetland and their combined four percent. total represented another 25 percent. Bristol County has 2,029 acres or only three percent of the state's wetlands. Of the 7,018 estuarine wetland acres, 49 percent are emergent wetlands and 41 percent are intertidal fiats. Marine wetlands, largely represented by intertidal Scrub-shrub wetlands account for only 52 acres, whereas beaches and rocky shores, occur only in Washington and estl!arine beaches total 577 acres. Newport Counties, whereas estuarine and palustrine wet­ lands exist in all five counties. Nearly half (48 percent or Deepwater habitats in Rhode Island, excluding marine 3,376 acres) of the state's estuarine wetlands are found in waters, total 106,257 acres. As expected, due to Nar­ Washington County, while 27 percent (or 1,868 acres) ragansett Bay, estuarine waters predominate and repre­ occur in Newport County. Washington County also pos­ sent 82 percent of the total. Lakes and reservoirs ac­ sesses 26,910 acres of palustrine wetlands which account counted for about 18 percent, while freshwater rivers for 47 percent of the state's freshwater wetlands. Provi­ only made up 0.5 percent of the state's non-marine wa­ dence County has 15,838 acres of palustrine wetlands or ters. 28 percent of the state total. Lacustrine wetlands are rather limited, and were mapped only in Washington and County Totals Providence Counties.

Acreage of wetlands and deepwater habitats for each Newport County has the greatest acreage of non-marine county are presented in detail on Tables 5 and 6, respec- deepwater habitats, with 50,137 acres inventoried. This 18

Table 6. Deepwater habitat acreage summaries for Rhode Island, excluding marine waters.

Bristol Kent Newport Providence Washington State System County County County County County Total

Estuarine 9,687 6,668 48,254 3,560 18,740 86,909 Riverine 71 312 143 526 Lacustrine 160 2,216 1,883 10,075 4,488 18,822 Totals 9,847 8,955 50,137 13,947 23,371 106,257 figure accounts for 47 percent of the state's non-marine Table 7. Percentage of each county covered by wetland. County waters. Washington County possesses 23,371 acres or 22 acreages were obtained from U.S.D.A. soil survey for percent of the state total. Rhode Island (1981).

% of County Covered Summary County by Wetland

The NWI Project has completed an inventory of Rhode Bristol 11.4 Kent 7.5 Island's wetlands using aerial photo interpretation meth­ Newport 11.8 ods. Detailed wetland maps and acreage summaries have Providence 6.0 been produced for the entire state. Roughly 65,000 acres Washington 14.4 of wetland and 106,000 acres of deepwater habitat were inventoried in Rhode Island. Thus, about 10 percent of the state is represented by wetland.

References

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1977. Classi­ Cover in Rhode Island. Cooperative Extension Service, University of fication of Wetlands and Deep-water Habitats of the United States Rhode Island, Kingston. 93 pp. (An Operational Draft). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. October Swartwout, D.l., W.P. MacConnell, and 1.T. Finn. 1982. An Evalua­ 1977. 100 pp. tion of the National Wetlands Inventory in Massachusetts. Proc. of Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.e. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classi­ In-Place Resource Inventories Workshop (University of Maine, fication of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Orono, August 9-14,1981). pp. 658-691. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-79/31. 103 pp. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. 1981. Soil Survey of Rhode MacConnell, W.P. 1974. Remote Sensing Land Use and Vegetative Island. 200 pp. + maps. CHAPTER 4. Wetland Formation and Hydrology

Introduction glacier stopped moving south, the leading edge of the ice melted, depositing boulders, sand, and clay (glacial till) Wetlands are usually found in depressions, along the and forming an irregular ridge called an "end moraine." shores of waterbodies such as lakes, rivers, coastal The outermost end moraine in Rhode Island is located ponds, and estuaries, and at the toes of slopes. Some offshore on Block Island; it extends west to the middle of wetlands occur on the slopes themselves where they are Long Island and east to Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket associated with groundwater seepage (springs) or with (Quinn 1973). surface water drainageways. Historical events and pres­ ent hydrologic conditions have acted in concert to create When the climate warmed and melting increased about and maintain a diversity of wetlands in Rhode Island. 18,000 years ago, the glacier retreated northward to a Human activities have recently become more important to point just north of Rhode Island's South Shore. There it wetland formation and hydrology. The following sections stopped for several thousand years, depositing glacially address general differences between Rhode Island's in­ held materials and forming another end moraine, the land and coastal wetlands in terms of their formation and Charlestown Moraine. This ridge promoted wetland for­ hydrology. The discussion is not intended to be com­ mation by blocking drainages from the north and causing prehensive, but a generalized overview of wetland forma­ the newly formed Pawcatuck River to flow west instead of tion and hydrology. References have been cited for more south. When the glacier finally retreated from Rhode detailed descriptions. Island, drainage patterns throughout the state were modi­ fied greatly. Glacial drift was dumped across the land­ scape-till at higher elevations and stratified drift in low­ Wetland Formation lands (F. Golet, pers. comm.). Other areas were deeply eroded: When this drift blocked outlets of streams, wet­ Many events have led to the creation of wetlands lands and waterbodies were created. As the glacier throughout the state, but none are more significant than melted, ice blocks of assorted sizes were left in many glaciation, a geological event that took place thousands of places on the outwash plains in front of the melting glacier years ago. Current events, such as rising sea level and where they were buried by outwash or surrounded by it. erosion and accretion processes, continue to build, shape, Ice blocks were also deposited in till areas and on the end and even destroy wetlands. Construction of ponds, im­ moraine itself. Glacial ice blocks gradually melted and poundments, and reservoirs also may create wetlands, but many formed kettle lakes and ponds (Figure 7). Many of often involve wetland destruction as well. these waterbodies gradually filled with sediment from inflowing streams. Eventually, aquatic vegetation colo­ Inland Wetland Formation nized the shallow waters and began to flourish, building peat deposits, and increasing the level of the wetland Glaciation was the most important factor in the cre­ surface, so that other wetland plants could become estab­ ation of Rhode Island's inland wetlands. From about one lished. Filling of glacial lakes and ponds still continues billion years ago to about 10-12,000 years ago, the state (Figure 8), yet some isolated ones on the Charlestown was buried under several thousand feet of glacial ice moraine are still deep-greater than 50 feet (F. Golet, (Quinn 1973). During this "ice age," roughly one-third pers. comm.). Many of Rhode Island's wetlands were of the world's land area was covered by ice compared to formed in these types of glacial depressions. Dansereau only ten percent of today's surface (Wolfe 1977). During and Segadas-Vianna (1952) have described the develop­ the last glaciation (Wisconsinan), glacial ice advanced as ment of eastern North American bogs in these situations far south as northern New Jersey and northeastern Penn­ (Figure 9). sylvania in the East and to southern Illinois in the Mid­ west (Shepps 1978). Wetlands also developed in compact glacial till soils with a confining layer (hardpan or fragipan) close to the As the glacier moved south, the landscape was scoured surface. In certain soils (e.g., Ridgebury and Stissing and in most areas the soil was carried away by the moving series) slowly permeable layers form due to the down­ ice, leaving mostly fresh bedrock behind. In some areas, ward migration (translocation) of silts, clays, and iron depressions were scraped out of the bedrock. When the oxides and their accumulation in a distinct zone or to 20

Figure 7. Many inland wetlands have developed in kettles, while coastal wetlands have fonned behind barrier beaches, along tidal rivers and in sheltered coves. The region shown is in Washington County (Point Judith - lower right, Wakefield/Pettaquamscutt Cove upper right, Worden Pond - upper left, Trustom and Card Ponds lower left). Area A shows kettle ponds in South Kingston; Area B - coastal marshes and tidal flats in Galilee and Jerusalem; Area C coastal marsh along Pettaquamscutt River. compaction of till by past glaciers. When close to the and are better drained than the inner floodplain that is surface (e.g., within 20 inches) these layers can create composed of silts and clays and has generally poor drain­ "perched" water tables that promote the establishment of age. Early stages of floodplain development are charac­ wetland plants and the formation of wetlands. These soils terized by extensive marshes bordering streams, while occur in depressions, but also are found on gentle slopes later stages developing as sedimentation increases wet­ in glacial till areas. land surface elevations are usually represented by shrub and forested wetlands (Nichols 1915). Some floodplain Wetlands have formed on floodplains along certain marshes and meadows may persist due to extended flood­ large streams in the state. In mature floodplains, wetlands ing periods that preclude the establishment of tree species are found on the inner floodplain terrace behind the natu­ or to periodic mowing or grazing. rallevees. The levees are composed of coarser materials 21

Figure 8. Aerial view of Hannah Clarkin Pond (a kettle pond) in Charlestown. Note the floating aquatic beds and Atlantic white cedar stands along the water's edge.

Historically, the activities of beaver were instrumental block former drainageways or that have undersized cul­ in creating wetlands. Through their construction of dams, verts causing a local rise in water levels. In other cases, beaver blocked drainages, causing water levels to rise and wetlands may be intentionally created to mitigate un­ flood adjacent uplands. Flooding of uplands killed the avoidable losses of natural wetlands by various con­ existing vegetation and allowed wetland plants to become struction projects. established, Although extirpated from the state due to fur trapping in colonial times, beaver popUlations are now Coastal Wetland Formation increasing, especially in the Moosup River and Pawca­ tuck systems in western and southern Rhode Island. Coastal wetlands have also been affected by glacia­ tion, but in a much different way than their inland coun­ Human activities have become increasingly important terparts. During the "ice age," much of the world's in wetland creation. Construction of farm ponds, sedi­ ocean waters were stored in the form of glacial ice. At mentation/detention ponds, recreational ponds and lakes, that time, sea level was as much as 425 feet lower than and reservoirs may create vegetated wetlands to some present levels (Wolfe 1977). As the glaciers melted (de­ extent, although natural wetlands may be altered or de­ glaciation), water was released back into the oceans, stroyed by these projects. Farm ponds, for example, may thereby raising sea levels. As sea level rose, barrier is­ become overgrown with wetland vegetation including lands migrated landward and river valleys were sub­ aquatic plants and emergent, herbaceous plants. Shrub merged. Coastal marshes which were behind these bar­ and forested wetlands could eventually become estab­ rier islands were submerged along with other low-lying lished in manmade basins, Wetland vegetation may also areas, but other coastal wetlands eventually reformed develop along the shorelines of the larger waterbodies. behind the barrier beaches when they finally stabilized, Unfortunately, reservoirs are usually subjected to drastic Evidence of submergence of low-lying areas may be drawdowns of water levels during the summer leaving found in salt marshes where buried Atlantic white cedar exposed, non vegetated shores which are unsuitable for stumps may be present, e.g., Hundred Acre Cove in establishment of a viable wetland plant community. More Barrington (F. Golet, pers. comm.). Rising sea level has stable water levels would, however, promote wetland transformed former nontidal freshwater wetlands and up­ formation along shorelines. Wetlands have been uninten­ lands into coastal marshes. Bloom and Ellis (1965) re­ tionally .;m~ated in some areas by highw"y~ th"t dirEctly ported on the occurrence of salt marshes over fonner 22

Lacustrine Initiation of Open Water Floating Mat (Palustrine Open Water; Palustrine Emergent Wetland)

J J

Palustrine Development of Open Water Floating Mat and False Bottom (Palustrine Emergent or Scrub -Shrub Wetland)

I 1

Palustrine Closing of Open Emergent Wetland Water; Consoli­ (Vegetation in dation of Mat Standing Water) (Palustrine Scrub­ Shrub Wetland) I \ !

Palustrine Filled Basin or Scrub-Shrub Lowmoor Bog Wetland (Saturated Sediments, no Standing Water) /

Palustrine Raised or Scrub-Shrub Domed Bog or Forested (Palustrine Wetland Scrub-Shrub or Forested Wetland) 23 uplands in Connecticut. Narragansett Bay is an excellent Salt marshes are still fonning along the Rhode Island example of a "drowned" river valley. Coastal wetlands coast. In coastal ponds, new sediments come mainly from have fonned in various coves or protected embayments stonnwater washover during hurricanes and other severe along the Bay. stonns and from sea water moving through breachways, with very little input from adjacent uplands (Lee 1980; Today, sea level continues to rise along the U. S. coast­ Dillon 1970; Conover 1961). These processes fonn ex­ line at average rates between four and ten inches per tensive shoals and sand bars in coastal ponds. Coastal century, with local variations (Hicks, et at. 1983). The marshes may, in time, develop in these areas as can be "greenhouse effect" and projected global wanning could witnessed inside the Charlestown Breachway (F. Golet, lead to further melting of polar ice in Greenland and the pers. comm.). Antarctic and of mountain glaciers; this coupled with coastal subsidence could raise sea levels 3.0 to 5.7 feet (3.7 feet most likely) by the year 2100 (Titus and Seidel Wetland Hydrology 1986). Such an increase would have profound effects on Rhode Island's coastal wetlands as well as other low­ The presence of water from stream or lake flooding, lying areas in the coastal zone. surface water runoff, ground-water discharge, or tides is the driving force creating and maintaining wetlands. Hy­ In Rhode Island, coastal marshes typically, developed drology detennines the nature of the soils and the types of along tidal rivers, estuarine embayments (e.g., coves). plants and animals living in wetlands. An accurate as­ and coastal ponds (Figure 7). Along Narragansett Bay and sessment of hydrology unfortunately requires extensive various coastal rivers, such as the Pettaquamscutt and knowledge of the frequency and duration of flooding, Warren Rivers, coastal wetlands fonned in areas of sed­ water table fluctuations and ground-water relationships. imentation. Sediments are transported by rivers and This infonnation can only be gained through intensive streams flowing seaward as well as by inflowing ocean and long-tenn studies. There are, however, ways to rec­ currents. When the river meets the sea, sediments begin to ognized broad differences in hydrology or water regime. settle out of suspension fonning deltas and bars at the At certain times of the year, such as during spring floods river's mouth and intertidal flats in adjacent protected or high tides in coastal areas, hydrology is apparent. Yet, areas. Sedimentation also takes place further upstream for most of the year. such obvious evidence is lacking in when tidal currents slow, as during slack water periods. mary wetlands. At these times, less conspicuous signs of The rate and extent of sedimentation depends on the flooding may be observed, including (1) water marks on original size and age of the estuary, present erosion rate vegetation, (2) water-transported debris on plants or col­ upstream, and deposition by the river and marine tides and lected around their bases, and (3) water-stained leaves on currents (Reid 1961). Orson and others (1987) described the ground (Tiner 1988). These and other signs, such as the fonnation of tidal marshes in a drowned river valley in wetland vegetation, help us recognize hydrologic differ­ the Pataguanset River of eastern Connecticut. The salt ences between wetlands. marsh began fonning about 3,500 years ago. Halophytic (salt-tolerant) plants replaced freshwater marsh plants as The Service's wetland classification system (Cowar­ salinity increased due to rising sea level (coastal sub­ din, et al. 1979) includes water regime modifiers to de­ mergence) and replaced upland vegetation as low-lying scribe hydrologic characteristics. Two groups of water uplands were submerged by estuarine waters. regimes are identified: (1) tidal and (2) nontidal. Tidal water regimes are driven by oceanic tides, while nontidal Coastal wetlands are common in the intertidal zone regimes are largely influenced by surface water runoff along salt and brackish "ponds" which occur behind the and ground-water discharge. barrier beaches along Rhode Island's South Shore. Red­ field (1972) has described development of a New England Tidal Wetland Hydrology salt marsh behind a developing barrier beach. Initially, mud and silt are deposited to fonn tidal flats in shallow In coastal areas. ocean-driven tides are the dominant areas. As elevations exceed mean sea level, smooth cord­ hydrologic feature of wetlands. Along the Atlantic coast, grass (Spartina alterniflora) becomes established, fonn­ tides are semidiurnal and symmetrical with a period of 12 ing the low or regularly flooded marsh. The presence of hours and 25 minutes. In other words, there are roughly this vegetation further slows the velocity of flooding wa­ two high tides and two low tides each day. Since the tides ters, causing more sedimentation. Sediments continue to are largely controlled by the position of the moon relative build up to a level where erosion and deposition are in to the sun, the highest and lowest tides (i.e., "spring relative equilibrium. The high or irregularly flooded salt tides") usually occur during full and new moons. Coastal marsh begins to fonn where the substrate builds up above stonns can also cause extreme high and low tides. Strong the mean high water mark. winds over a prolonged period have a great impact on the 24

Extreme high spring tides and stonn tides O"VlI1",'"I.'.' ..•• " .. '~""" ' •••••.•• , ...... ".0 •• , ••• « •••• Upland Mean high tide ...... , ...... " " .... ' .... ~ ......

Irregularly Flooded Zone Regularly Flooded Zone Subtidal Zone

Coastal Wetlands Coastal Waters

Figure 10. Hydrology of coastal wetlands showing different zones of flooding. The regularly flooded zone is flooded at least once daily by the tides, while the irregularly flooded zone is flooded less often. (Source: Tiner 1987)

nonnal tidal range in large coastal bays. Table 8 shows Table 8. Tidal ranges of mean and spring tides and mean tide examples of varying tidal ranges along the Rhode Island level at various locations in Rhode Island (U.S. Depart­ coast. ment of Commerce 1988). Mean Spring Mean In coastal wetlands, differences in hydrology (tidal Tide Tide Tide flooding) create two readily identifiable zones: (I) reg­ Range Range Level ularly flooded zone and (2) irregularly flooded zone (Fig­ Location (ft) (ft) (ft) ure 10). The regularly flooded zone is alternately flooded Narragansett Bay and exposed at least once daily by the tides. It includes at Sakonnet 3.1 3.9 1.7 both the "low marsh" and intertidal mud and sand flats. at Newport 3.5 4.4 1.9 Above the regularly flooded zone, the marsh is less fre­ at Bristol Ferry 4.1 5.1 2.2 quently flooded by the tides (less than once a day). This at Providence 4.5 5.6 2.4 irregularly flooded zone, or "high marsh", is exposed to at Wickford 3.8 4.7 2.0 the air for variable periods; it is usually flooded only for Seekonk River at Pawtucket 4.6 5.8 2.5 brief periods. Most of the high marsh is flooded during Great Salt Pond at Block Island 2.6 3.2 1.4 spring tides. The upper margins of the high marsh may be Block Island Sound at Watch flooded, however, only during stonn tides which are Hill Point 2.6 3.2 1.4 more frequent in winter. Estuarine plants have adapted Pawcatuck River at Westerly 2.7 3.2 1.5 to these differences in hydrology (Adams 1963; Nixon 1982) and certain plants are good indicators of different water regimes (Table 9). The tall fonn of smooth cord­ grass (Spartina alterniflora) has been shown to be a reli­ able indicator of the landward extent of mean high tide Table 9. Examples of plant indicators of tidal water regimes for (Kennard, et al. 1983). Rhode Island's estuarine wetlands. These plants are Nontidal Wetland Hydrology generally good indicators of the regimes. Beyond the influence of the tides, two hydrologic Water Regime Indicator Plants forces regulate water levels or soil saturation in wetlands: Regularly Smooth Cordgrass (tall form) (Spartina (1) surface water runoff and (2) ground-water discharge. Flooded alternifiora ) Wind driven-waves across lakes cause flooding of shore­ Rockweeds (Fucus spp. and Ascophyllum nodosum) line wetlands. Surface water runs off from the land and either collects in depressional wetlands or enters rivers Irregularly Salt Hay Grass (Spartina patens) and lakes after snowmelt or rainfall periods and may Flooded Spike Grass (Distichlis spicata) Black Grass (Juncus gerardii) overflow into adjacent floodplains (Figure 11). Ground Smooth Cordgrass (short form) (S. alternifiora) water discharges into depressional wetlands when di­ Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) rectly connected to the water table or into doping: wet- Common Reed (Phragmites aU.

SURFACE WATER SURFACE WATER DEPRESSIONAL WETLAND SLOPE WETLAND

Lake or River Overland Flood Water Flow / Level

Water Table (may temporarily rise to wetland Water Table (may temporarily rise to wetland level, but ground water inflow is minor level, but ground water inflow is minor compared to surface water inflow) compared to surface water inflow)

Figure 11. Hydrology of surface water wetlands. (Source: redrawn from Novitski 1982) 26

GROUND WATER GROUND WATER DEPRESSIONAL WETLAND SLOPE WETLAND

Overland Flow

TableWater ------l~rt"•• ~:~

Ground Water Seasonal High Inflow Water Table Ground Water Inflow

Figure 12. Hydrology of ground-water wetlands. (Source: redrawn from Novitski 1982)

a semipermanently flooded wetlands remain flooded Table 10. Examples of plant indicators of nontidal water regimes throughout the growing season in most years. Only dur­ for Rhode Island's wetlands. ing dry periods does the surface of these wetlands become Water Regime Indicator Plants exposed to air. Even then, the water table lies at or very near the surface. The wettest wetlands are permanently Permanently White Water Lily (Nymphaea odorata) flooded. These areas include open water bodies where Flooded Pondweeds (Potamogeton spp.) Water Shield (Brasenia schreberi) depth is less than 6.6 feet, e. g., ponds and shallow por­ Spatterdock (Nuphar luteuml tions of lakes, rivers and streams. Semipermanently Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) Flooded Burreeds (Sparganium spp.) Some rarely flooded wetlands are almost entirely influ­ Bayonet Rush (Juncus miUtaris) enced by ground-water discharge or surface water runoff. Pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata) Many of these wetlands occur on considerable slopes in Seasonally Broad-leaved Cattail (Typha latifolia) association with springs (i.e., points of active ground­ Flooded TUssock Sedge (Carex stricta) water discharge), which are commonly called "seeps". Turk's-cap Lily (Lilium canadense michi­ Their soils are saturated to the surface for much of the ganese) growing season and the water regime is, therefore, classi­ Marsh Fern (Thelypteris thelypteroides) Arrow-leaved Tearthumb (Polygonum fied as saturated. Some seepage areas are more seasonal sag ittatum) in nature and many "wet meadows" may be saturated Highbush Blueberry (Vaccinium corym- only during the early part of the growing season. Other bosum) saturated wetlands include "bogs". In these situations. Swamp Rose (Rosa palustris) the soil is virtually continuously saturated. Alders (Alnus spp.) Common Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thy- For Rhode Island, the most common non tidal water oides) regimes, listed by frequency of occurrence are: (1) sea­ Saturated Pitcher Plant (Sarracenia purpurea) sonally flooded, (2) permanently flooded, (3) saturated, White Beak-rush (Rhynchospora alba) and (4) semipermanently flooded. Common indicator Beaked Sedge (Carex rostrata) plants of nontidal water regimes are presented in Table Leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata) 10. Hydrologic conditions, e.g., water table fluctuation, flooding, and soil saturation, for each of Rhode Island's 27

surface water present fa! s~rface waTer variable periods growth plants dormant, present for SOIL .... lower evapoIahor. /vanabte periods SURFACE 0 ...... / !...... ,,- '" .. 20 / . .. ,- ...... ,,- ~ 40 ...... '"~]~ _ u _ =:s ~ ...... etll~ 60

'" 80

A

YEAR 1 YEAR 2

Figure 13. Water table fluctuations in a nontidal wetland (adapted from data by Lyford 1964). In general, the water table is at or near the surtace through the winter and spring. drops markedly in summer, and begins to rise in the fall. As shown, the water table fluctuates seasonally and annually. hydric soils are generally discussed in the following chap­ the reader is referred to the following sources. Some of ter. the most current information on wetland hydrology is found in the recently published proceedings of a national For more detailed information on wetland hydrology, symposium on this topic (Kusler and Brooks 1988).

References

Adams, D.A. 1963. Factors influencing vascular plant zonation in Variations for the United States: 1855-1980. U.S. Dept. of Com­ North Carolina salt marshes. Ecology 44(3): 445-456. merce, NOAA-NOS, Rockville, MD. Anderson, P.H., M.W. Lefor, and We. Kennard. 1980. Forested wet· Holzer, T.L 1973. Inland wetlands and ground water in eastern Con­ lands in eastern Connecticut: their transition zones and delineation. necticut. In: T. Helfgott, M.W. Lefor, and we. Kennard (editors). Water Resources Bulletin 16(2): 248-255. Proceedings: First Wetlands Conference. University of Connecticut, Bloom, A.L. and e.W Ellis, Jr. 1965. Postglacial stratigraphy and Institute of Water Resources, Storrs. pp. 66-81 morphology of Coastal Connecticut. Conn. Geol. Nat. Hist. Survey Kennard, We., M. W Lefor, and D.L Civco. 1983. Analysis of Guidebook No. I. Hartford, CT. 10 pp. Coastal Marsh Ecosystems: Effects of Tides on Vegetational Change. Carter, v., M.S. Bedinger, R.P. Novitski, and WO. Wilen. 1979. University of Connecticut, Institute of Water Resources, Storrs. Res. Water resources and wetlands (theme paper). In: Greeson, P.E., J.R. Proj. Tech. Completion Rep!. B-014 CONN. 140 pp. Clark and J.E. Clark (editors). Wetland Functions and Values: The Kusler, J.A., and G. Brooks (editors). 1988. Proceedings of the Na­ State of Our Understanding. American Water Resources Association, tional Wetland Symposium: Wetland Hydrology. Association of State Minneapolis, Minnesota. pp. 344-376. Wetland Managers, Berne. NY. 339 pp. Conover, R.1. 1961. A Study of Charlestown and Green Hills Ponds, Lee. V 1980. An Elusive Compromise: Rhode Island Coastal Ponds and Rhode Island Ecology 42: 119-140. Their People. Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island, Cowardin, L.W, V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T laRoe. 1979. Classi­ Narragansett. Marine Tech. Rept. 73. 82 pp. fication of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Leitch, J.A. 1981. Wetland Hydrology: State-of-the-Art and Annotated U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-79!31. 103 pp. Bibliography. North Dakota State Univ .. Agric. Expt. Stat. North Dansereau, P. and F. Segadas-Vianna. 1952. Ecological study of the Dakota Research Rep!. No. 82, 16 pp. peat bogs of eastern North America. Can. 1. Bot. 30: 490-520. Lowry, DJ. 1984. Water Regimes and Vegetation of Rhode Island Dillon, WP. 1970. Submergence effects on a Rhode Island barrier and Forested Wetlands. M.S. thesis, University of Rhode Island, Plant lagoon and interferences on migration of barriers. J. Geology 78: 94- and Soil Science. Kingstown. 174 pp. 106. Lyford, WH. 1964. Water Table Fluctuations in Periodically Wet Soils Gosselink, LG. and R.E. Turner. 1978. The role of hydrology in of Central New England. Harvard University. Harvard Forest Paper freshwater wetland ecosystems. In: Good, R.E., D.F. Whigham, and No.8. 15 pp. R.L Simpson (editors). Freshwater Wetlands. Ecological Processes Motts. WS. and A.L O'Brien. 1981. Geology and Hydrology of and Management PotentiaL Academic Press, Inc., New York. pp. Wetlands in Massachusetts. University of Massachusetts, Water Re­ 63-78. sources Research Center, Amherst. Publication No. 123. Hall, F.R., RJ. Ruthertord, and G.L Byers, 1972. The Influence of a Nichols, G.E. 1915. The vegetation of Connecticut. V. Plant societies New England Wetland on Water Quantity and Quality. University of along rivers and streams. BulL Torrey Bot. Club 42: 169-217. New Hampshire. Water Resource Research Center, Durham. Res. Nixon, S.W. 1982. The ecology of New England High Salt Marshes: A Rept. No.4. 51 pp. Community Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, Hicks, S.D, H.A. DeBaugh, and LH. Hickman. 1983. Sea Level DC. FWSIOBS-8l/55. 70 pp. 28

Novitzki, RP. 1982. Hydrology of Wisconsin Wetlands. U.S. Geologi­ Swift, B.L., l.S. Larson, and R.M. DeGraaf. 1984. Relationship of cal Survey, Reston, VA. Information Circular 40. 22 pp. breeding bird density and diversity to habitat variables in forested Novitski, R.P. 1989. Wetland Hydrology. Chapter 5. In: S.K. Majum­ wetlands. Wilson Bulletin 96: 48-59. dar, R.P. Brooks, F.l. Brenner, and R.W. Tiner. Jr. (editors). Wet­ Tiner, R. w., Jr. 1988. Field Guide to Nontidal Wetland Identification. lands Ecology and Conservation: Emphasis in Pennsylvania. The Maryland Dept. of Natural Resources, Annapolis and U.S. Fish and Pennsylvania Academy of Sciences. pp. 47-65. Wildlife Service, Newton Comer, MA. Cooperative publication. 283 O'Brien, A.L. 1977. Hydrology of two small wetland basins in eastern pp. + plates. Massachusetts. Water Resources Bulletin 13: 325-340. Titus, J.G. and S.R. SeideL 1986. Overview of the effects of changing Orson, R.A., R.S. Warren, and W.A. Niering. 1987. Development of a the atmosphere. In: J.G. Titus (editor). Effects of Changes in Strato­ tidal marsh in a New England river valley. Estuaries 10(1): 20-27. spheric Ozone and Global Climate. Volume 1: Overview. U.S. En­ Quinn, A.W. 1973. Rhode Island Geology for the Non-Geologist. RI vironmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC and The United Dept. of Natural Resources, Providence. 63 pp. Nations Environment Programme. Cooperative publication. pp. 3- Redfield, A.C. 1972. Development ofa New England sail marsh. Ecol. 19. Monogr. 42: 201-237. U.S. Department of Commerce. 1988. Tide Tables 1989. High and Low Reid, G.K. 1961. Ecology of Inland Waters and Estuaries. Van Nos­ Water Predictions. NOAA, National Ocean Survey. 289 pp. trand Reinhold Co .. New York. 375 pp. Wolfe, P.E. 1977. The Geology and Landscapes of New Jersey. Crane, Shepps. Vc. 1978. Pennsylvania and the Ice Age. Pennsylvania Dept. Russak and Co., Inc. 351 pp. of Environmental Resources, Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey, Harrisburg. Educ. Series No.6. 33 pp. CHAPTER 5. Hydric Soils of Rhode Island

Introduction Major Categories of Hydric Soils

The predominance of undrained hydric soil is a key Hydric soils are separated into two major categories on attribute for identifying wetlands (Cowardin, et ai. 1979). the basis of soil composition: (I) organic soils (histosols) Hydric soils naturally develop in wet depressions, on and (2) mineral soils. In general, soils having 20 percent floodplains, on seepage slopes, and along the margins of or more organic material by weight in the upper 16 inches coastal and inland waters. Knowledge of hydric soils is are considered organic soils, while soils with less organic particularly useful in distinguishing the drier wetlands content are mineral soils. For a technical definition, the from uplands, where the more typical wetland plants are reader is referred to Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff less common or absent. This chapter focuses on the char­ 1975). acteristics, distribution and extent of Rhode Island's hy­ dric soils. Tiner and Veneman (1987) describe charac­ Accumulation of organic matter results from prolonged teristics and field recognition of New England's hydric anaerobic soil conditions associated with long periods of soils. flooding and/or soil saturation during the growing sea­ son. These saturated conditions impede aerobic decom­ position (or oxidation) of the bulk organic materials, such Definition of Hydric Soil as leaves, stems and roots, and encourage their accumula­ tion as peat or muck over time. Consequently, most or- Hydric soils have been defined by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service (1987) as follows: "A hydric soil is a soil that is saturated, flooded or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic condi­ Table 11. Criteria for hydric soils (U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation tions in the upper part." This definition includes soils that Service 1987). are saturated with water at or near the soil surface and Criteria for Hydric Soils virtually lacking free oxygen for a significant period of the growing season and soils that are ponded or frequently 1. All Histosols (Organic soils) except Folists, or flooded for long periods during the growing season. Table 2. Soils (Mineral soils) in Aquic suborders, Aquic subgroups, II lists criteria for hydric soils. Allbolls suborder, Salorthids great groups, or Pell great groups of Vertisols that are: Soils that were formerly wet, but are now completely a. somewhat poorly drained and have water table less than drained, are not considered hydric soils or wetlands, ac­ 0.5 feet from the surface for a significant period (usually a cording to the Service's wetland classification system week or more) during the growing season, or (Cowardin, et ai. 1979). These soils must be checked in b. poorly drained or very poorly drained and have either: the field to verify that drainage measures will remain (1) watertable at less than 1.0 feet from the surface for a functional under normal or design conditions. Where significant period (usually a week or more) during failure of a drainage system results, such soils can revert the growing season if permeability is equal to or to hydric conditions. This condition must be determined greater than 6.0 inches/hour in all layers within 20 inches, or on a site-specific basis. Soils that were not naturally wet, but are now subject to periodic flooding or soil saturation (2) water table at less than 1.5 feet from the surface for a significant period (usually a week or more) during for specific management purposes (e.g., waterfowl im­ the growing season if permeability is less than 6.0 poundments) or flooded by accident (e.g., highway­ inches/hour in any layer within 20 inches, or crcated impoundments) are considered hydric soils (see 3. Soils (Mineral soils) that are ponded for long duration (more criteria 3 and 4 in Table 11). Hydrophytes are usually than 7 days) or very long duration (more than 1 month) during present in these created wetlands. Better-drained soils the growing season, or that are frequently flooded for short intervals (usually less 4. Soils (Mineral soils) that are frequently flooded for long dura­ than one week) during the growing season, are not con­ tion (more than 7 days) or very long duration (more than 1 sidered hydric soils. month) during the growing season. Hydric Soils High Water Level Y!:e.:" ..;,.\iN",·Q.·U->.,o.c,,, ....

Low Water Level ,\7l;QtiF''''"''Q'V2;,g'

Gleyed Zone

UJ Somewhat poorly Drainage Well-drained Moderately well Poorly Very poorly

o I ! A dark brown A very dark bL A A dark brown ! I black o ' organic 1 , I B A black 20 'B I brown Bw ~ olive brown W, brown Bw gray Cg: gray '8 40 Cg u brown .c 0. 60l-BC 1 brown grayish brown o

'f.J.Jir'{~:p}{9Y!iJ;.f&~1' Figure 14. Soil characteristics change with landscape position 120 I),..-,--;v:<;:>-:(j mottled, gray from welJ-drained uplands to very poorly drained ~~f~%~~~f?~~ wetlands, (Source: Tiner and Veneman 1989) 32 tivity of certain soil microorganisms. These microorgan­ with wetlands in the state (E. Stuart, pers. comm.). Table isms reduce iron when the soil environment is anaerobic, 14 outlines acreages of potential hydric soils for each that is, when virtually no free oxygen is present, and county based on SCS soil mapping (Rector 1981). when the soil contains organic matter. If the soil condi­ tions are such that free oxygen is present, organic matter is absent, or temperatures are too low (below 41°F or 5°C) Hydric Soil Descriptions to sustain microbial activity, gleization will not proceed and mottles will not form, even though the soil may be This subsection briefly describes key features of each saturated for prolonged periods of time (Diers and Ander­ hydric soil associated with Rhode Island's wetlands. This son 1984). information was obtained from Rector (1981); for more detailed descriptions, please contact the Soil Conserva­ In Rhode Island, one well-drained soil may appear to tion Service in West Warwick. (Note: The Wareham se­ be a hydric soil due to dark surface and subsurface layers. ries is not included in the descriptions because it is of The Newport series (Typic Fragiochrepts) may have a minor importance and was not mapped as a soil map unit black to dark gray or dark brown surface layer with a dark during SCS's soil survey; its characteristics are, however, gray to dark grayish brown or olive gray subsoil (to about presented in Table 13, since it does occur in the state.) 19 inches deep). These dark grayish colors are not associ­ ated with a reducing (anaerobic) environment, but result Adrian Series from the soil parent materials of dark sandstone, con­ glomerate, argillite, and phyllite. The Adrian series consists of very poorly drained or­ ganic soils (mucks). They are usually found in depres­ sions and drainageways of glacial till uplands and out­ National List of Hydric Soils wash plains. This soil is characterized by a layer of shallow, black muck about 20 inches thick (range: 16 to To help the Service clarify its wetland definition, the 50 inches). The water table is at or near the surface for V.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) agreed to most of the year, usually from November through May. develop a list of hydric soils. Work on the list began in the Flooding occurs in a few areas. Adrian muck is found in late 1970's and the list underwent a few revisions prior to all counties, with nearly half of the state's acreage in its most recent printing in 1987. The national hydric soils Washington County. list is reviewed annually and updated and republished as needed. This list summarizes in tabular form the charac­ Carlisle Series teristics of each designated hydric soil. State lists of hydric soils have been prepared from the national list and Carlisle soils are very poorly drained organic soils are available from the V.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (mucks) associated with depressions in glacial till uplands National Wetlands Inventory Project. and outwash plains. These soils are represented by a deep, black and dark reddish brown muck more than 51 inches thick. The water table is at or near the surface for Rhode Island's Hydric Soils most of the year, usually from September into June. Flooding or ponding of surface water may occur for vari­ In Rhode Island, 14 soil series have been identified as able periods. Carlisle muck occurs in every county, but is hydric soils. These series are very poorly drained or most common in Washington County, which possesses poorly drained soils. Table 13 lists these soils along with over 60 percent of the state's acreage of this soil. selected characteristics. Examples of Rhode Island's hy­ dric soils and non-hydric soils are shown in Plates 1-6. Ipswich Series

The Ipswich series is represented by very poorly County Acreage of Hydric Soils drained organic soils (peats) associated with estuarine tidal marshes. It is characterized by a very dark brown Recent SCS soil mapping in Rhode Island identified surface peat about 11 inches thick, overlying a very dark 112,690 acres of "potential" hydric soils. This represents grayish brown subsurface mucky peat about 60 inches about 17 percent of the state's land surface area. In Rhode thick. The organic layer is more than 51 inches thick. The Island, somewhat poorly drained soils were not separated soil is saturated with salt water and subjected to frequent from the poorly drained soils in soil mapping, therefore, tidal flooding. Although Ipswich peat occurs in Bristol, the total acreage of "potential" hydric soils is actually Kent, and Washington counties, over 90 percent of the higher than the true acreage of hydric soils associated state's acreage of this soil is present in Bristol County. 33

Table 13. Hydric soils of Rhode Island, including soil taxonomic names (series and soil subgroups), drainage class (VP-very poorly drained, P-poorly drained, SP-somewhat poorly drained), depth (below the soil surface), frequency and applicable period of high water table (+ denotes water level above the soil surface; + V indicates flooding at variable depths) or flooding, and hydric criteria number (see Table II). An asterisk (*) indicates that the series may include non-hydric members. Note: Some New England soils classified as poorly drained actually include somewhat poorly drained members which may be non-hydric. (Sources: Modified from Tiner and Veneman 1987; Rector 1981).

High Water Table Flooding Hydric Drainage Criterion Series Soil Subgroup Class Depth (rt) Period Frequency Duration Period Number

Adrian Terrie Medisaprists VP +1.0-1.0 Nov-May None I Adrian, Terrie Medisaprists VP +1.0-0.5 Nov-May Frequent Long Nov-May 1,4 flooded Carlisle Typic Medisaprists VP +0.5-\.0 Sep-Jun None 1 Carlisle, Typic Medisaprists VP +0.5-1.0 Sep-Jun Frequent Long Nov-May 1,4 flooded Ipswich Typic Sulfihemists VP + 1.0-0.0 Jan-Dec Frequent V. Brief Jan-Dec I * Leicester Aeric Haplaquepts P 0.0-1.5 Nov-Mar None 2A;2B2 Mansfield Typic Humaquepts VP +1.0-0.5 Nov-Jul None 2B2 Matunuek Typic Sulfaquents VP + 1.0-0.0 Jan-Dec Frequent V. Brief Jan-Dec 2Bl * Raypol Aeric Haplaquepts P 0.0-1.0 Nov-May None 2A;2B2 *Ridgebury Aeric Fragiaquepts SP, P 0.0-1.5 Nov-May None 2A;2B2 * Rumney Aerie Fluvaquents P +V--1.5 Nov-Jun Frequent Brief Oct-May 2A;2B2 Scarboro Histic Humaquepts VP + 1.0-1.0 Nov-lui Rare 2BI *Stissing Aeric Fragiaquepts P 0.0-1.5 Oct-May None 2B2 *Walpole Aeric Haplaquents P 0.0-1.0 Nov-Apr None 2A;2B2 * Wareham Humaqueptic SP,P 0.0-1.5 Sep-Jun None 2A;2B2 Psammaquents * Wareham , Humaqueptic SP,P +V-1.5 Sep-Jun Occasional Brief Mar-May 2A;2B2;4 flooded Psammquents Whitman Typic Humaquepts VP + 1.0-0.5 Sep-Jun None 2B2

Table 14. County summaries of hydric soils acreage in Rhode Island (taken from Rector 1981). *Note: Soil map units that include somewhat poorly drained soils that are usually non-hydric.

Bristol Kent Newport Providence Washington State % of State Soil Map Unit Name County County County County County Thtals Covered

Adrian muck 45 2,540 530 2,505 5,\80 10,800 1.6 Carlisle muck 5 1,790 850 3.070 9,255 14,970 2.2 Ipswich peat 525 30 20 575 0.1 Mansfield mucky silt loam 65 1,940 5 200 2,210 0.3 Mansfield very stony mucky silt loam 15 1,630 105 1,750 0.3 Matunuck mucky peat 390 175 1,070 115 1,805 3,555 0.5 Raypol silt loam* 15 285 15 55 2,090 2,460 0.4 Ridgebury fine sandy loam* 105 80 275 1,450 245 2,155 0.3 Ridgebury, Whitman and Leicester 390 6,955 805 26,040 11,230 45,420 6.7 extremely stony fine sandy loams* Rumney fine sandy loam* 15 415 25 750 795 2,000 0.3 Scarboro mucky sandy loam 260 1,330 585 1,720 4,075 7,970 I.2 Stissing silt loam * 395 40 6,885 35 1,485 8,840 1.3 Stissing very stony silt loam * 245 730 40 480 1,495 0.2 Walpole sandy loam* 475 1,805 90 3,100 3,020 8,490 3.3 Thtals 2,945 15,445 15,430 38,885 39,985 112,690 16.6 34

Leicester Series 4 inches thick and an 18-inch subsurface layer of light olive brown mottled silt loam, overlying a grayish brown The Leicester series consists of poorly drained mineral and yellowish brown, mottled gravelly sand to a depth of soils (extremely stony fine sandy loams). These soils are 60 inches or more. The water table is within one foot of found in depressions and drainageways in glacial till up­ the surface from November into May and flooding or lands. They are characterized by a very dark grayish ponding does not take place. Raypol soils are found in all brown fine sandy loam surface layer about 8 inches thick counties, but are mostly in Washington County which and a light brownish gray and light yellowish brown possesses about 85 percent of the state's acreage of this mottled fine sandy loam subsurface layer about 18 inches soil. thick over a gray, mottled gravelly sandy loam to a depth of 60 inches or more. Stones and boulders cover 10-35 Ridgebury Series percent of the mapped area of this soil. The water table is within 1.5 feet of the surface from November into March The Ridgebury series contains poorly drained mineral and ponding or flooding does not occur, yet the soils are soils with a 10-35% areal coverage of stones and boul­ saturated for long periods. Leicester soils are mapped as a ders (extremely stony fine sandy loams). These soils are complex with Ridgebury and Whitman soils; it has been associated with depressions and drainageways in glacial mapped in each county, but is most abundant in Provi­ till uplands. Ridgebury soils are characterized by a 4-inch dence County. thick black fine sandy loam surface layer, a l6-inch gray­ ish brown fine sandy loam subsoil layer that is mottled in Mansfield Series the lower portion, and a yellowish brown substratum of mottled gravelly fine sandy loam to a depth of 60 inches Mansfield soils are very poorly drained mineral soils or more. A perched water table is within 1.5 feet from (mucky silt loams or very stony mucky silt loams). They November into May. These soils were mapped as part of a are associated with depressions and small drainageways soil complex with Whitman and Leicester. This complex of drumlins in the southeastern part of the state. These was mapped in all counties, with more than half of the mineral soils are characterized by an 8-inch thick black state's acreage of this type mapped in Providence County. mucky silt loam surface layer overlying a dark gray and olive gray silt loam subsurface layer to a depth of 60 Rumney Series inches or more. The water table is within 0.5 feet of the surface from November into July. Mansfield soils are Rumney soils are poorly drained mineral soils (fine most abundant in Newport County, which has 90 percent sandy loams). They are found in recent alluvium on of the state's acreage of this soil, but they also occur to a floodplains. They are characterized by a very dark gray­ limited extent in Washington, Bristol, and Providence ish brown fine sandy loam surface layer about 5 inches Counties. thick, a dark grayish brown, mottled fine sandy loam about 17 inches thick, and a gray and dark grayish brown Matunuck Series sand substratum 60 inches or greater in thickness. The high water table is at about 0.5 feet from November into Although called mucky peat, the Matunuck series con­ June. The soil is also subject to frequent brief floods. sists of very poorly drained mineral soils having shallow Rumney soils are found in every county but are most organic surface layers. They are found in estuarine tidal abundant in Washington and Providence Counties which marshes. These soils are characterized by a shallow sur­ contain about 77 percent of the state's acreage of this soil. face layer of very dark gray mucky peat about one foot thick overlying a gray sand subsurface layer to a depth of Scarboro Series 60 inches or more. The water table is at the surface and tidal flooding with salt water is frequent throughout the Scarboro soils are very poorly drained mineral soils, year. Matunuck mucky peat occurs in every county, with with a high content of organic matter (mucky sandy about 80 percent of the state's acreage of this soil in loams). They are found in drainageways and depressions Washington and Newport Counties. on terraces and outwash plains. These soils are character­ ized by a 6-inch thick very dark grayish brown mucky Raypol Series sandy loam surface layer overlying a deep substratum composed of two layers: the upper layer-a gray, mottled Raypol soils are poorly drained mineral soils (silt loamy sand and the lower layer-a light brownish gray, loams). They are found in depressions or terraces and mottled coarse sand. In some areas, the soil may have an outwash plains. Raypol soils are represented by a very organic layer (mucky peat or muck) up to 16 inches thick. Ui:1fll. gnlybh bruWH ~i1l1ualll ;'!lIallow "mfavc laycr about Tho wutor table itl within u foot of the 8Urfo.,;,,, from 35

November into July and ponding with up to one foot of ized by a 7-inch thick very dark brown sandy loam sur­ surface water may occur. Flooding takes place in a few face layer, a 12-inch thick light brownish gray, mottled areas. Scarboro soils are mapped in every county, but sandy loam subsoil, and a dark yellowish brown and more than half of the state's acreage of this soil is found in grayish brown, mottled gravelly sand substratum extend­ Washington County. ing to a depth of 60 inches or more. The water table lies within one foot, often within 6 inches, of the surface from Stissing Series November into April. Walpole sandy loams occur in all counties, but are most prevalent in Providence and Wash­ The Stissing series consists of poorly drained mineral ington Counties, which comprise nearly 75 percent of the soils (silt loams or very stony silt loams, depending upon state's acreage of this soil. the extent of stones and boulders present). These soils occur in the southeastern part of the state on glacial Whitman Series upland hills and drumlins. They are characterized by a very dark gray silt loam surface layer about 8 inches thick The Whitman series consists of very poorly drained overlying a 7 -inch thick dark grayish brown mottled silt mineral soils with a 10-35 percent areal coverage by loam subsoil and a dark gray, mottled silt loam sub­ stones and boulders (extremely stony fine sandy loams). stratum extending to a depth of 60 inches or more. A These soils are found in drainageways and depressions in perched water table is within 1.5 feet from October into glacial till uplands. They are characterized by a lO-inch May. Stissing soils have been mapped in each county, but thick surface layer of black fine sandy loam overlying a nearly 75 percent of the state's acreage of this soil is gray gravelly fine sandy loam substratum that is mottled found in Newport County. for more than 18 inches. The water table is within 0.5 feet of the surface from September into June and surface water Walpole Series may pond to a depth of one foot. Whitman soils are mapped as a complex with Ridgebury and Leicester soils Walpole soils are poorly drained mineral soils (sandy and are found in every county, with over half of the state's loams) associated with depressions and small drainage­ acreage of this complex mapped in Providence County. ways on terraces and outwash plains. They are character-

References

Aandahl, A.R., S.w. Buol. D.E. Hill, and H.H. Bailey (editors). 1974. Rector, D.D. 1981. Soil Survey of Rhode Island. U .S.D.A. Soil Con­ Histosols: Their Characteristics, Classification. and Use. Soil Sci. servation Service, West Warwick, RI. 200 pp. + maps. Soc. Am. Special Pub. Series No.6. 136 pp. Soil Survey Staff. 1951. Soil Survey Manual. U.S. Department of Bouma, 1. 1983. Hydrology and soil genesis of soils with aquic moisture Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington. De. Agricul­ regimes. In: L.P. Wilding, N.E. Smeck, and G.F. Hall (editors). ture Handbook No. 18. 502 pp. Pedogenesis and Soil Taxonomy 1. Concepts and Interactions. EI· Soil Survey Staff. 1975. Soil Taxonomy. U.S. Department of Agricul­ sevier Science Publishers, B. V. Amsterdam. pp. 253-281. ture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC. Agriculture Hand­ Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter. F.e. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classi­ book No. 436. 754 pp. fication of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Tiner, R. W., Jr. and P.L.M. Veneman. 1987. Hydric Soils of New U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWSiOBS-79i31. 103 pp. England. University of Massachusetts Cooperative Extension, Am­ Diers, R. and JL. Anderson. 1984. Part I. Development of Soil Mot· herst. Bulletin C·183. 27 pp. (Note: Reprinted with minor updating in tling. Soil Survey Horizons (Winter): 9-12. 1989.) Parker, W.B., S. Faulkner, B. Gambrell, and W.H. Patrick, Jr. 1984. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Hydric Soils of the United Soil wetness and aeration in relation to plant adaptation for selected States. In cooperation with the National Technical Committee for hydric soils of the Mississippi and Pearl River Deltas. In: Pmc. of Hydric Soils. Washington, De. Workshop on Characterization, Classification, and Utilization of Veneman, P.L.M., M.1. Vepraskas, andJ. Bouma. 1976. The physical Wetland Soils (March 26-April 24). Internal. Rice Res. Inst., Los significance of soil mottling in a Wisconsin toposequence. Geoderma Banos, Laguna, Philippines. 15: 103-118. Ponnamperuma, F.N. 1972. The chemistry of submerged soils. Ad­ vances in Agronomy 24: 29-96. CHAPTER 6. Vegetation and Plant Communities of Rhode Island's Wetlands

Introduction Appendix of this report. This list contains 1,335 species of plants that may occur in Rhode Island's wetlands, Rhode Island's wetlands are largely colonized by including 74 species of aquatics, 52 species of ferns and plants adapted to existing hydrologic, water chemistry, fern allies, 121 species of grasses, 150 species of sedges, and soil conditions, although some wetlands (e.g .• tidal 21 species of rushes, 664 species of forbs (other herba­ mud flats) are devoid of macrophytic plants. Most wet­ ceous plants), 131 species of shrubs, 93 species of trees, land definitions have relied heavily on dominant vegeta­ and 28 species of vines. The Service recognizes four tion for identification and classification purposes. The types of plants that occur in wetlands: (1) obligate wet­ presence of "hydrophytes" or wetland plants is one of the land (OBL), (2) facultative wetland (FACW), (3) faculta­ three key attributes of the Service's wetland definition tive (FAC), and (4) facultative upland (FACU). Obligate (Cowardin, et ai. 1979). Vegetation is usually the most hydrophytes are those plants which nearly always (more conspicuous feature of wetlands and one that may be than 99% of the time) occur in wetlands under natural often readily identified in the field. In this chapter, after conditions. The facultative types can be found in both discussing the concept of "hydrophyte," attention will wetlands and uplands to varying degrees. Facultative focus on the major plant communities of Rhode Island's wetland plants usually occur in wetlands (from 67 percent wetlands, The Appendix contains a list of plant species to 99 percent of the time), while purely facultative plants that occur in Rhode Island's wetlands. show no affinity to wetlands or uplands (equally likely to occur in both habitats) and are found in wetlands with a frequency of occurrence between 34-66 percent. By con­ Hydrophyte Definition and Concept trast, facultative upland plants usually occur in uplands, but are present in wetlands between 1-33 percent of the Wetland plants are technically referred to as "hydro­ time. When present, they are often in drier wetlands phytes." The Service defines a "hydrophyte" as "any where they may dominate or at higher elevations (e.g., plant growing in water or on a substrate that is at least hummocks) in wetter areas. Table 15 shows the number periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive of plant species in each wetland indicator status category. water content" (Cowardin, et al. 1979). Thus, hYdro­ Examples of the four major types of wetland plants for phytes are not restricted to true aquatic plants growing in Rhode Island are presented in Table 16. Field guides for water (e.g., ponds, lakes, rivers, and estuaries), but also identifying wetland plants are available (Magee 1981; include plants morphologically and/or physiologically Tiner 1987, 1988b). adapted to periodic flooding or saturated soil conditions typical of marshes, swamps, bogs, and bottomland for­ ests. The concept of hydrophyte applies to individual plants and not to species of plants, although certain spe­ Table 15. Wetland indicator status of various life fonns of Rhode cies may be represented entirely by hydrophytes, such as Island's wetland plants. Number of species in each smooth cordgrass (Spartina aiternijlora) and broad­ category is listed. Plants not assigned an indicator leaved cattail (Typha latifolia). For example, certain indi­ status are listed under NI (No Indicator). Note: Cate- gories FACW, FAC, and FACU include those species viduals of white pine (Pinus strobus) can be considered designated with a + and on the list in the Appendix. hydrophytes since they grow in undrained hydric soils (P. Reed, pers. cornm.) (Tiner 1988a). Wet ecotypes of many plant species un­ doubtedly exist. All plants growing in wetlands have Life Form OBL FACW FAC FACU NI adapted in one way or another for life in periodically Aquatics 74 flooded or saturated, anaerobic soils. Consequently, these Ferns and Allies 8 19 13 12 individuals are considered hydrophytes. Grasses 23 32 22 43 Sedges 96 33 9 12 The Service has prepared a comprehensive list of plant Rushes 8 7 4 2 species that are found in the Nation's wetlands to help Forbs 235 127 107 183 12 Shrubs 22 29 35 39 6 clarify its wetland definition (Reed 1988). A list of plant Trees 5 24 23 38 3 species that occur in Rhode Island's wetlands has been Vines 2 10 14 2 extracted from the national list and is included in the 471 273 223 343 25 37

Table 16. Examples of four wetland plant types occurring in Rhode Island.

Hydrophyte Type Plant Common Name Scientific Name

Obligate Royal Fern Osmunda regalis White Water Lily Nymphaea odorata Smooth Cordgrass Spartina aile rnifiora Bluejoint Caiamagrostis canadensis Tussock Sedge Carex stricta Three-way Sedge Dulichium arundinaceum Broad-leaved Cattail Typha latifoiia Water Willow Decodon verticillatus Leatherleaf Chamaedaphne caiyculata Big Cranberry Vaccinium macrocarpon Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis Atlantic White Cedar Chamaecyparis thyoides Facultative Wetland Cinnamon Fern Osmunda cinnamomea Salt Hay Grass Spartina patens Common Reed Phragmites australis Boneset Eupatorium perfoliatum Reed Canary Grass Phalaris arundinaceum Speckled Alder Alnus rugosa Highbush Blueberry Vaccinium corymbosum Steeplebush Spiraea tomentosa Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica American Elm Ulmus americana Rose Bay Rhododendron maximum Facultative Foxtail Grass Setaria geniculata Wrinkled Goldenrod Solidago rugosa Purple loe-Pye-weed Eupatoriadelphus purpureus Poison Ivy Toxicodendron radicans Sweet Pepperbush Clethra alnifolia Sheep Laurel Kalmia angustifolia Oblong-leaf Shadbush Amelanchier canadensis Red Maple Acer rubrum Yellow Birch Betula alleghaniensis Ironwood Carpinus carotiniana Facultative Upland Ground-pine Lycopodium obscurum Bracken Fern Pteridium aquilinium Partridgeberry Mitchella repens Black Huckleberry Gaylussacia baccata American Holly /lexopaca White Ash Fraxinus americana White Pine Pinus strobus Hemlock Tsuga canadensis

Wetland Plant Communities have a profound effect on plant compoSitIon. This is particularly evident in coastal marshes where mosquito Many factors influence wetland vegetation and com­ ditching has increased the abundance of high-tide bush munity structure, including climate, hydrology, water (Iva jrutescens), especially on spoil mounds adjacent to chemistry, and human activities. Penfound (1952) identi­ ditches. Repeated timber cutting and severe fires may fied the most important physical factors as: (I) location of also have profound effects on wetland communities. the water table, (2) fluctuation of water levels, (3) soil Many former Atlantic white cedar swamps in the North­ type, (4) acidity, and (5) salinity. He also recognized the east are now red maple swamps because most of the cedar role of biotic factors, i.e., plant competition, animal ac­ has been harvested. tions, and human activities. Many construction projects alter the hydrology of wetlands through channelization Rhode Island's wetlands fall within five ecological sys­ and drainage or by changing surface water runoff pat­ tems inventoried by the NWI: Marine, Estuarine, River­ terns. especially in urban areas. These activities often ine, Lacustrine and Palustrine. In coastal areas, the es- 38

tuarine marshes, which include salt marshes and tidal and exposed to air twice daily. These flats are generally mudflats, are most abundant, with marine wetlands gen­ devoid of macrophytes, although smooth cordgrass erally limited to rocky shores and intertidal beaches along (Spartina alterniflora) may occur in isolated clumps on Block Island and Rhode Island Sounds. Overall, how­ mud flats. Microscopic plants, especially diatoms, eu­ ever, palustrine wetlands predominate, representing glenoids, dinoflagellates and blue green algae, are often about 87 percent of the state's wetlands, whereas es­ extremely abundant, yet inconspicuous (Whitlatch 1982). tuarine wetlands represent only II percent. Palustrine wetlands include the overwhelming majority of freshwa­ Estuarine Emergent Wetlands ter marshes, swamps, and ponds. Wetlands associated with the riverine and lacustrine systems are largely re­ Differences in salinity and tidal flooding within estu­ stricted to nonpersistent emergent wetlands, aquatic aries have a profound and visible effect on the distribution beds, and nonvegetated flats. The following sections ad­ of emergent vegetation. Plant composition changes mark­ dress major wetland types in each ecological system. edly from the more saline portions to the brackish areas Descriptions are based on field observations and a review further inland. Even within areas of similar salinity, vege­ of scientific literature. tation differs largely due to the frequency and duration of tidal flooding and, locally, due to freshwater runoff. Marine Wetlands Salt marshes are the typical estuarine emergent wet­ The Marine System includes the open ocean overlying lands in Rhode Island. They have fonned on the intertidal the continental shelf and the associated high-energy shores of salt and brackish tidal waters in three major coastline. Deepwater habitats predominate in this sys­ types of areas: (1) salt ponds (e.g., Winnapaug, Ninigret, tem, with wetlands generally limited to sandy intertidal and Potter Ponds), (2) coastal rivers (e.g., Pettaquam­ beaches, cobble-gravel shores, and rocky shores along scutt, Barrington, and Warren Rivers), and (3) coves, Block Island and Rhode Island Sounds and sand bars at harbors and other coastal embayments (e.g., Colonel the mouths of coastal inlets (Figure 15). Vegetation is Willie Cove, Coggeshall Cove, Wickford Harbor, Dutch sparse and scattered along the upper zones of beaches. Harbor, Mill Cut, and Mount Hope Bay). Plates 7-8 Vascular plants, such as sea rocket (Cakile edentula), show examples of Rhode Island's salt marshes. beach grass (Ammophila breviligulata), beach orach (Atriplex arenaria), and beach pea (Lathyrus japonicus) Based on differences in tidal flooding, two general occur in these areas. Rocky shores are often colonized by vegetative zones are recognized within salt marshes: (I) macroalgae, mainly rockweeds (Fucus spp. and As­ regularly flooded low marsh and (2) irregularly flooded cophyllum nodosum). high marsh (Figure 17). The vegetation of each zone is different due to flooding frequency and duration, among Estuarine Wetlands other factors. The low marsh is flooded at least once daily by the tides. Above this level is the high marsh which is The Estuarine System consists of tidal salt and brackish flooded less often than daily. waters and contiguous wetlands where ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the A single plant-the tall fonn (approximately 3-6 feet land. It extends upstream in coastal rivers to fresh water high) of smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora)-dom­ where no measurable ocean-derived salts (less than 0.5 inates the low marsh from approximately mean sea level parts per thousand) can be detected. A variety of wetland to the mean high water mark. This zone is generally types develop in estuaries largely because of differences limited to creek banks imd upper borders of tidal flats. A in salinity and duration and frequency of flooding. Major recent study in Connecticut found that the tall form of estuarine wetland types include: (1) intertidal flats, (2) smooth cord grass was an accurate indicator of the land­ emergent wetlands, (3) scrub-shrub wetlands, and (4) ward extent of mean high tide (Kennard, et al. 1983). aquatic beds. The vegetation of the high marsh often forms a com­ Estuarine Intertidal Flats plex mosaic rather than a distinct zone. Plant diversity increases with several species being abundant, including Intertidal flats of mud and/or sand are extremely com­ a short fonn of smooth cordgrass, salt hay grass (Spartina mon in estuaries, particularly between salt marshes and patens), spike grass (Distichlis spicata), glassworts (Sali­ coastal waters (Figure 16). Small gravel flats are present cornia spp.), marsh orach (Atriplex patula), sea lavender in isolated areas of Narragansett Bay (F. Golet, pers. (Limonium nashii), salt marsh aster (Aster tenuifolius), comm.). Estuarine tidal flats are typically flooded by tides and black grass (Juncus gerardii). Pools and tidal creeks 2

4 6

Plates 1-6. Examples of four hydric soils and two nonhydric soils: (I) Carlisle muck, (2) Scarboro mucky sandy loam (3) Wareham loamy sand, (4) Ridgebury fine sandy loam (hydric), (5) Ridgebury fine sandy loam (nonhydric), and (6) Sudbury sandy loam. Compare Plates 4 and 5 which show hydric and non hydric members of the Ridgebury series. Note the position of the gray subsoils in each - immediately below the surface layer in the hydric soil and below 20 inches in the nonhydric soiL The nonhydric Sudbury soil is clearly much brighter colored than the dull-colored hydric soils. Plate 7. Salt marsh (estuarine intertidal emergent wetland) in Tiverton. Note the developing marsh (clumps of smooth cordgrass) on the tidal flat.

Plate 8. Salt marsh adjacent to Winnapaug Pond, We sterly. Note the regularly flooded low marsh along the creek and mixed vegetation pattern of the irregularly flooded high marsh Plate 9. Freshwater wetlands in Frying Pan Pond (Wood River), Richmond. Note the distinctive plant zonation: water-hearts in shallow pennanently flooded area, pickerelweed and bayonet rush in the semipennanently flooded zone, and sedges, grasses, and shrubs in the seasonally flooded area.

Plate 10. Seasonally flooded marsh (palustrine emergent wetland) along the Chipuxet River, West Kingston . Plate 11. Seasonally flooded marsh on Block Island. Note the diverse plant community.

Plate 12. Grazed wet meadow in Tiverton. Sweet flag and soft rush dominate this saturated palustrine wetland. Plate 13. Diamond Bog, Richmond in aUlumn Lealherleaf, a broad-leaved evergreen shrub , dominales lhis saluraled scrub-shrub wetland .

Plate 14. NewlOn Marsh, Weslerly. It is a good example of a di verse, seasonall y flooded paluslrine deciduous scrub-shrub welland. Plate 15. Atlantic white cedar swamp (palustrine evergreen forested wetland) bordering Ell Pond, Rockville . A leatherleaf bog forms a fi oating mat along the shoreline.

Plate 16. Red maple swamp (palustrine deciduous forested wetland), Richmond . Most of these swamps occur in depressions, but some occur on seepage sl opes. 39

Figure 15. Marine intertidal wetlands fonn much of the Rhode Island coastline: (1) bedrock rocky shore at Beaver Tail (left) and (2) cobble­ gravel unconsolidated shore at Point Judith (right), within the salt marshes may be vegetated with widgeon These pannes are subjected to extreme temperatures and grass (Ruppia maritima), sea lettuce (Viva lactuca), or salinity. Summer salinities may exceed 40 parts per thou­ other algae, sand (Martin 1959), while after heavy rains they may be filled with fresh water. Although they may be devoid of The short form of smooth cordgrass forms extensive plants, many pannes are colonized by a short form of stands just above the low marsh. Within these and higher smooth cordgrass, glassworts, and spike grass, while areas, shallow depressions called pannes can be found. blue-green algae may form a dense surface mat.

-",-.-j, , '" .;;~---­ ... "" ... L .. ~

Figure 16. Estuarine emergent wetland and exposed tidal flat (low tide) at Succotash Marsh in Jerusalem. 40

Upland (or National Low Open Wetland) High Marsh Marsh Flat Water I I

Marsh Border Upper Pool Panne Lower High High Marsh Middle High Marsh Marsh

Smooth Cord grass Rockweeds Gla~sworts Sea Lavender • - Salt Hay Grass - Spike Grass - Widgeon Grass Eelgrass Black Grass - Salt Marsh Aster Salt Marsh Bulrush High-tide Bush Seaside Goldenrod - Common Reed Switchgrass _ Slough Grass _ Groundsel Tree _ Grassleaved Goldenrod _ Bayberry •

Figure 17. Generalized plant zonation in southern New England salt marshes: 0) low marsh and (2) high marsh. The high marsh can be further divided into several subzones. Note that plant diversity increases toward upland.

Above the short cordgrass marsh, two grasses and one salt hay grass. Black grass, which is actually a rush, is rush predominate: salt hay grass, spike grass, and black found in abundance at slightly higher levels, often with grass (a member of the Rush Family). Salt hay grass often high-tide bush (Iva frutescens). Other common high forms nearly pure stands, but it is frequently intermixed marsh plants include: seaside arrow grass (Triglochin with spike grass. Spike grass usually forms pure or nearly maritima), salt marsh bulrush (Scirpus robustus), seaside pure stands in the more poorly drained high marsh areas plantain (Plantago maritima), sea lavender, marsh orach, where standing water is present for extended periods. The salt marsh aster, seaside gerardia (Agalinis maritima), sea short form of smooth cordgrass also frequently occurs in blite (Suaeda maritima), seaside goldenrod (Solidago this middle high marsh zone and is often intermixed with semvervirens), and sand spurrey (Spergularia maritima). 41

Creeks and ditches throughout the high marsh are often ways, widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima) was the domi­ immediately bordered by a tall or intermediate form of nant aquatic bed plant. With increased salinities after smooth cordgrass, while old spoil mounds adjacent to breachway construction, eelgrass (Zostera marina) re­ these mosquito ditches may be colonized by high-tide placed much of the widgeon grass (Lee 1980). Other bush. aquatic species reported in salt ponds include sago pond­ weed (Potamogeton pectinatus), clasping-leaved pond­ At the upland edge of salt marshes, switchgrass (Pani­ weed (P. perJoliatus), narrowleaf pondweed (P. pusillus cum virgatum), slough grass (Spartina pectinata), com­ = P. berchtoldii), homed pondweed (Zannichellia pal­ mon reed (Phragmites australis), groundsel tree (Bac­ ustris), naiads (Najas spp.), and muskgrasses (Chara charis halimifolia), high-tide bush, and red cedar spp.) (Wright, et al. 1949). Thome-Miller and others (Juniperus virginiana) frequently occur. Other plants (1983) recently mapped the distribution of submerged present in border areas include bayberry (Myrica pen­ aquatic bed vegetation in five of Rhode Island's coastal sylvanica), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), seaside ponds. goldenrod, grass-leaved goldenrod (Euthamia gram­ inifolia), sweet grass (Hierochloe odorata), red fescue Riverine Wetlands (Festuca rubra), wild rye (Elymus virginicus), purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), and marsh pink (Sabatia The Riverine System encompasses all of Rhode Is­ stellaris). Where freshwater influence from the upland is land's freshwater rivers and their tributaries, including strong, narrow-leaved cattail (Typha angustifolia), three­ the freshwater tidal reaches of coastal rivers where salin­ squares (Scirpus american us and S. pungens), marsh fern ity is less than 0.5 ppt. This system is composed largely (Thelypteris thelypteroides), rose mallow (Hibiscus mos­ of deepwater habitats and nonvegetated wetlands, with cheutos), creeping bent grass (Agrostis stolonifera var. the wetlands occurring between the riverbank and deep compacta), spikerushes (Eleocharis spp.), Canada rush water (6.6 feet and greater in depth). (Juncus canadensis), and other species may occur. These areas resemble brackish marshes which are more exten­ Although many of the state's freshwater vegetated wet­ sive in adjacent states. lands lie along non tidal rivers and streams, only a small fraction of these are considered riverine wetlands accord­ Two Fish and Wildlife Service reports on New England ing to the Service's classification system (Cowardin, et salt marshes (Nixon 1982; Teal 1986) serve as useful al. 1979). Riverine wetlands are by definition largely references on the ecology of New England salt marshes. restricted to shallow bottoms and aquatic beds within the channels and to fringes of nonpersistent emergent plants Estuarine Scrub-Shrub Wetlands growing on river banks or in shallow water. Contiguous wetlands dominated by persistent vegetation (i.e., trees, Estuarine shrub wetlands are not common along the shrubs, and robust emergents) are classified as palustrine Rhode Island coast. Where present, they are usually dom­ wetlands. inated by high-tide bush. This shrub is especially com­ mon along mosquito ditches in salt marshes where it has Riverine wetlands are most visible along slow-flowing, become established on mounds of deposited material and meandering lower perennial rivers and streams. Here non­ along the upper edges of salt marshes. Salt hay grass, persistent emergent plants such as burreeds (Sparganium spike grass, and black grass are often co-dominants with spp.), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), arrowheads high-tide bush in the high marsh. Groundsel tree may also (Sagittaria spp.), arrow arum (Peltandra virginica), wild be present along the upland border of salt marshes. rice (Zizania aquatica), rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzoides), true forget-me-not (Myosotis scorpioides), and smart­ Estuarine Aquatic Beds weeds colonize very shallow waters and exposed shores. Aquatic beds may also become established in slightly Shallow coastal embayments called "salt ponds" are a deeper waters of clear rivers and streams. Important dominant feature along Rhode Island's coast. In Wash­ aquatic bed plants include submerged forms of burreeds ington County, these ponds lie between the mainland and and arrowheads, pondweeds and riverweeds (Potamo­ narrow barrier beaches. Most are connected to the ocean geton spp.), spatterdock (Nuphar luteum), and white wa­ by manmade channels (breachways), while two ponds­ ter lily (Nymphaea odorata). Trustom Pond and Cards Ponds are not permanently con­ nected to the sea. Ponds with breachways have higher Palustrine Wetlands salinities and are subjected to daily tidal action, while Trustom and Cards Ponds are brackish due to intermittent Palustrine wetlands are the most common wetlands in tidal influence. Prior to the building of permanent breach- Rhode Island. They represent the most floristically di- 42 verse group of wetlands in the state and include freshwa­ regime in freshwater marshes greatly affects plant com­ ter marshes. wet meadows. swamps, bogs, and shallow munity composition. ponds. This collection of wetlands encompasses a wider Semipermanently flooded emergent marshes may be range of water regimes than wetlands of other systems, dominated by broad-leaved cattail (Typha latifolia), bay­ with the more common water regimes being permanently onet rush (Juncus militaris), spatterdock, pickerelweed, flooded, semipermanently flooded, seasonally flooded, common three-square (Scirpus pungens), arrow arum, and saturated. Certain tidally influenced freshwater areas water willow (Decodon verticillatus), and burreeds. As­ are also considered palustrine wetlands. While numerous sociated plants include duckweeds, white water lily, plants may be restricted to one or two major hydrologic pondweeds, water parsnip (Sium suave), umbrella pen­ regimes, many plants. such as red maple (Acer rubrum) nywort (Hydrocotyle umbellata), soft-stemmed bulrush and purple loosestrife, tolerate a wide range of flooding (Scirpus validus), arrowheads, and a variety of submer­ and soil saturation conditions. Although their tolerances gent aquatics. may be high, some wetland species are usually more prevalent under certain conditions and may, therefore, be Dominant plants of seasonally flooded emergent wet­ used as indicators of certain water regimes. Examples of lands include rice cutgrass, broad-leaved cattail. narrow­ plant -water regime relationships are presented in Table 10 leaved cattail, common soft rush (luncus ejJusus), (Chapter 4). Palustrine wetland plant communities are Canada rush (1. canadensis), water willow, reed canary discussed by class in the following subsections. The grass (Phalaris arundinacea), bluejoint (Calamagrostis reader must recognize that due to the diversity of these canadensis), sweet flag (Acorus calamus), arrow arum, communities, this discussion characterizes only the major manna grasses (Glyceria canadensis and others), wool types in general terms. Moreover, it is based largely on grass (Scirpus cyperinus), three-way sedge (Dulichium observations made during the inventory, since few studies arundinaceum), tussock (Carex stricta), other have been conducted in Rhode Island's freshwater wet­ sedges (e.g., C. lurida, C. stipata, and C. vulpinoidea), lands. and grass-leaved goldenrod (Euthamia graminifolia), Soft rush and sweet flag are especially common in grazed Palustrine Aquatic Beds wet meadows which may be seasonally flooded or satu­ rated (Golet and Davis 1982), Sweet flag also occurs with Small ponds, many of which were artificially-created, broad-leaved cattail in seasonally flooded marshes. Other are common throughout the state. These permanently or common plants are jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), semipermanently flooded water bodies comprise the wet­ arrow-leaved tearthumb (Polygonum sagittatum), purple test of palustrine wetlands. Many shallow ponds have loosestrife, smartweeds, sensitive tern (Onoclea sen­ aquatic beds covering all or part of their surfaces or sibilis), marsh fern, boneset (Eupatorium perfoliatum), bottoms. Common dominance types include green algae, grasses (Agrostis sp, and others), green bulrush (Scirpus floating species such as duckweeds (Lemna spp .. Spiro­ atrovirens), asters (Aster spp.), broad-leaved arrowhead dela polyrhiza, and others) and bladderworts (Utricularia (Sagittaria latifolia), spikerushes, loe-Pye-weeds (Eu­ spp.), and rooled vascular plants, such as spatterdock, patoriadelphus spp.), bedstraw (Galium tinctorium), white water lily, water shield (Brasenia schreberi), water­ common three-square, swamp milkweed (Asclepias in­ cress (Nasturtium officinale), and pondweeds. carnata), and water purslane (Ludwigia palustris). Other emergents in seasonally flooded marshes and wet mead­ Palustrine Emergent Wetlands ows include blue flag (Iris versicolor), bugleweeds (Ly­ copus spp.), marsh St. John's-wort (Triadenum virgini­ Palustrine emergent wetlands are primarily freshwater cum), other St. John's-worts (Hypericum spp.), umbrella marshes and wet meadows dominated by persistent and sedges (Cyperus spp.), false nettle (Boehmeria cylin­ nonpersistent grasses, rushes, sedges, and other herba­ drica), swamp dock (Rumex verticillatus), bittersweet ceous or grass-like plants. Nearly all of these wetlands are nightshade (Solanum dulcamara), soft-stemmed bulrush, nontidal, with tidal freshwater marshes being virtually blue vervain (Verbena hastata), water parsnip, horsetail nonexistent in Rhode Island (F. Goler, pers. comm.). (Equisetum sp.), dodder (Cuscuta gronovii), swamp can­ Plates 9-12 show examples of palustrine emergent wet­ dles (Lysimachia terrestris), rough-stemmed goldenrod lands, (Solidago rugosa), mad-dog skullcap (Scutellaria later­ ijlora) , skunk cabbage (Symplocarpus foetidus), and Nontidal freshwater emergent wetlands are common panic grasses (Panicum spp. and Dichantehlium spp.). throughout the state (Figure 18). Compared to the pal­ Shrubs, such as willows (Salix spp.), buttonbush (Cepha­ ustrine forested and shrub wetlands, however, these lanthus occidentalis), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), emergent wetlands represent only a small portion (three swamp rose (Rosa palustris), northern arrowwood (Vi­ percent) of the state's freshwater wetlands. The water burnum reco~nitum), common elderberry (Sambucus 43

Figure 18. Freshwater marsh near Woodville. dominated by tussock sedge. canadensis}, speckled alder (Alnus rugosa), steeplebush ters, and others. These emergent wetlands are less com­ (Spiraea tomentosa), broad-leaved meadowsweet (Spi­ mon than the seasonally flooded types. raea latifolia), highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corym­ bosum), and silky dogwood (Comus amomum), and sap­ Palustrine Scrub-shrub Wetlands lings of red maple may be scattered within these emergent wetlands. Scrub-shrub wetlands represent just less than 10 per­ cent of Rhode Island's inland wetlands. They are charac­ Seasonally flooded emergent wetlands called "fens" terized by the dominance of shrubs or tree saplings less are represented by an herbaceous community of woolly­ than 20 feet tall. Two general types of scrub-shrub wet­ fruit sedge (Carex lasiocarpa), twig-rush (Cladium mar­ lands are present in the state: (I) deciduous scrub-shrub iscoides), bluejoint, and buckbean (Menyanthes trifo­ wetlands and (2) evergreen scrub-shrub wetlands, with liata), with shrubs, mainly sweet gale (Myrica gale) and the former group being most abundant. Mixtures of these leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata), also common types occur. Also, many shrub wetlands are intermixed (Golet and Davis 1982). Emergent "bogs" carpeted with with emergent wetlands. Examples of scrub-shrub wet­ peat mosses (Sphagnum spp.) and having a saturated land communities are presented in Table 17 and are pic­ water regime are commonly dominated by beaked sedge tured in Plates 13-14. (Carex rostrata), white beak-rush (Rhynchospora alba) or twig-rush, with cottongrass (Eriophorum virginicum) Deciduous shrub swamps may be dominated by one or usually present (F. Golet, pers. comm.). Soft rush and more of several species including buttonbush, sweet gale, Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica) may also oc­ high bush blueberry, swamp azalea (Rhododendron vis­ cur. cosum), winterberries (flex verticillata and I. laevigata), northern arrowwood, alders (Alnus rugosa and A. ser­ Temporarily flooded emergent wetlands may support rulata), sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), silky dog­ soft rush, reed canary grass, common reed, goldenrods wood, swamp rose, and saplings of red maple (Acer (Solidago spp. and Euthamia sPp.), Joe-Pye-weeds, as- rubrum). The first two species usually occur in the wettest 44

Table 17. Examples of palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands in Rhode Island.

Location Dominance Type Associated Vegetation (County)

Highbush Blueberry Common Winterberry, Swamp Azalea, Red Maple, Spikerush, Peat Moss, Tussock Sedge, Providence Chokeberry, Serviceberry, Black Gum, White Pine, Cinnamon Fern, Canada Mayflower, Blue Flag, Gray Birch, Sheep Laurel, and Broad-leaved Meadowsweet Buttonbush Tussock Sedge, Alder, Bluejoint, Swamp Rose, and Broad-leaved Cattail Kent Well-Mixed Red Maple, Ash, Northern Arrowwood, Willow, Smooth Winterberry, Swamp Rose, Newport Deciduous Shrubs Multiflora Rose, Grape, Serviceberry, and Poison Ivy Well-Mixed Sweet Pepperbush, Highbush Blueberry, Swamp Azalea, Maleberry, Peat Mosses, Soft Newport Deciduous Shrubs Rush, Twig-rush, Virginia Chain Fern, Red Maple, and Cotton grass Highbush Blueberry! Mosses, Red Maple, Cinnamon Fern, White Pine, Ash, and Black Gum Providence Sweet Pepperbush Leatherleaf! Broad-leaved Meadowsweet, Peat Moss, Yellow Pond Lily, Steeplebush, Sweet Pepper­ Kent Tussock Sedge bush, and Red Maple Leatherleaf!Sweet Gale! Tussock Sedge, Atlantic White Cedar, and White Pine Kent Sweet Pepperbush/Broad­ leaved Meadowsweet Red Maple (saplings) Tussock Sedge, Bugleweed, Peat Moss, Blunt Manna Grass, and Sedge Providence Silky Dogwood Swamp Rose, Speckled Alder, Red Maple, Joe-Pye-weed, Boneset, Sedge, Jewelweed, Bristol Sensitive Fern, Horsetail, Soft Rush, Northern Arrow wood, Grasses, Tussock Sedge, and Green Ash Red Maple Highbush Blueberry, Common Winterberry, Sweet Pepperbush, Northern Arrowwood, Bristol Poison Ivy, Gray Birch, Cinnamon Fern, Sensitive Fern, and Skunk Cabbage Swamp Rose Northern Arrowwood, Elderberry, Sensitive Fern, Skunk Cabbage, Broad-leaved Cattail, Newport Red Maple, Serviceberry, Willow, and Reed Canary Grass Well-Mixed Sweet Gale, Swamp Rose, Sweet Pepperbush, Common Winterberry, Swamp Azalea. Washington Deciduous Shrubs Highbush Blueberry, Poison Ivy, Black Chokeberry, Red Maple, Peat Moss, and Marsh Fern Highbush Blueberry! Cinnamon Fern, Sweet Pepperbush, Peat Moss, White Pine, Skunk Cabbage, Serviceberry, Providence Water Willow! Canada Mayflower, Wild Calla, and Maleberry; Edges: Red Maple, Blue Flag, Broad­ Swamp Azalea leaved Meadowsweet, and Gray Birch Speckled Alder!Willow! Red Maple, Buttonbush, Swamp Rose, and Steeplebush with various emergents Providence Common Winterberry areas, often in shallow water along the shores of lakes, may be present in great abundance, especially in boggy ponds or rivers, whereas the other species are generally areas. associated with seasonally flooded wetlands (Figure 19). Water willow may be intermixed with buttonbush in Evergreen scrub-shrub wetlands are represented by many shallow water areas. Leatherleaf is sometimes an two types of communities: (1) leatherleaf bogs and (2) associate of sweet gale (Golet and Davis 1982). Wright Atlantic white cedar sapling swamps. The former type is (1941) observed royal fern (Osmunda regalis), northern dominated by leatherleaf, with associated species includ­ wild raisin (Viburnum cassinoides), leatherleaf, male­ ing pitcher plant (Sarracenia purpurea), rose pogonia berry (Lyonia liguslrina), and hoary willow (Salix can­ (Pogonia ophioglossoides), round-leaved sundew (Dros­ dida) in mixed deciduous shrub swamps within the Great era rotundifolia), cotton-grasses (Eriophorum virginicum Swamp in Washington County. Other common shrubs and E. tennellum), and bog clubmoss (Lycopodium in­ include oblong-leaf shadbush (Amelanchier canadensis), undatum) (Wright 1941), Sweet gale, sweet pepperbush, steeplebush, broad-leaved meadowsweet, chokeberries broad-leaved meadowsweet, tussock sedge, white pine (Aronia spp.), common elderberry (Sambucus cana­ (Pinus strobus), and Atlantic white cedar (Chamaecy­ densis), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), and wil­ paris thyoides) may also be present. Golet and Davis lows (Salix spp.), Occasionally bayberry (Myrica pen­ (1982) observed peat mosses, black huckleberry (Gaylus­ sylvanica) and gray birch (Betula JJ.opulifolia) are found sacia baccata), sheep laurel (Kalmia angustifolia), and in palustrine wetlands. A variety of herbaceous plants are cranberries (Vaccinium macrocarpon and V. oxycoccus) common in shrub swamps. Peat mosses (Sphagnum spp.) in this wetland type. Other bog species include white 45

Figure 19. Palustrine scrub-shrub wetland in Chapman Swamp in Westerly. beak-rush, dwarf huckleberry (Gaylussacia dumosa) , woody plants 20 feet or taller. Three general types of water willow, grass pink (Calopogon tuberosus), and forested wetlands occur in Rhode Island: (1) broad-leaved Dragon's Mouth (Arethusa bulbosa) (F. Golet, pers. deciduous forested wetlands, (2) needle-leaved evergreen comm.). Wright (1941) described a regenerating Atlantic forested wetlands, and (3) mixtures of deciduous and white cedar swamp in the Great Swamp. Plants associated evergreen forested wetlands. The former type is by far the with Atlantic white cedar in this swamp included rose bay more abundant type. Most of the state's forested wetlands (Rhododendron maximum), mountain holly (Nemopan­ are seasonally flooded; hillside swamps are saturated, thus mucronata), poison sumac (Toxicodendron vernix), while temporarily flooded wetlands are uncommon. Table grass pink, rose pogonia, round-leaved sundew, bunch­ 18 presents examples of forested wetland plant commu­ berry (Comus canadensis), c1intonia (Clintonia boreal­ nities in Rhode Island, while Plates 15-16 illustrate two is), sweet white violet (Viola blanda), goldthread (Coptis of them. trifolia), white fringed orchis (Platanthera blephariglot­ tis), and pitcher plant. Leatherleaf and sweet gale may The majority of the broad-leaved deciduous forested also be present in this type of wetland (F. Golet, pers. wetlands are red maple swamps. Red maple dominates comm.). these wetlands, with numerous other plants occurring as associates. Common subordinates in these swamps in­ Palustrine Forested Wetlands clude black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), white pine, Atlantic white cedar, and hemlock (Tsuga canadensis). White Palustrine forested wetlands are the state's most abun­ pine is frequently co-dominant. Other trees may also be dant wetland type,. representing about 73 percent of the present in lesser abundance, such as yellow birch (Betula state's wetlands and 83 percent of the nontidal wetlands. allegheniensis), gray birch, green ash (Fraxinus pennsyl­ These wetlands are common along rivers and streams, in vanica), white ash (Fraxinus americana), American elm isolated depressions, and in drainage ways on hillsides. (Ulmus americana), pitch pine (Pinus rigida), black Forested wetlands are characterized bv the dominance of cherry (Prunus serotina). oblonl!-leaf shadbush. swamp 46

Thble 18. Examples of palustrine forested wetlands in Rhode Island.

Location Dominance Type Associated Vegetation (County)

Red Maple Trees: American Elm, Ironwood Providence Shrubs: Spicebush. Northern Arrowwood, Barberry, Northern Wild Raisin Herbs: Skunk Cabbage, Wood Anemone, False Hellebore, Canada Mayflower, Tall Meadow-rue, Jewelweed, Sedge, Aster Red Maple Shrubs: Sweet Pepperbush, Northern Arrowwood, Elderberry, Highbush Blueberry, Providence Northern Wild Raisin Herbs: Marsh Marigold. Skunk Cabbage, Tussock Others: Common Greenbriar Red Maple Trees: Yellow Birch, Black Gum, White Pine Providence Shrubs: Highbush Blueberry, Sweet Pepperbush Herbs: Skunk Cabbage, Cinnamon Fern, Canada Mayflower, Blue Flag Others: Peat Moss, other Mosses Red Maple Shrubs: Sweet Pepperbush, Spicebush, Elderberry, Serviceberry Providence Herbs: Jewelweed, Skunk Cabbage, Cinnamon Fern, Grass, Canada Mayflower, Wood Anemone, Turk's-cap Lily, ~orthern White Violet, Tall Meadow-rue, Horsetail, False Hellebore. Goldenrod Red Maple Trees: Atlantic White Cedar, White Oak Washington Shrubs: Rose Bay, Highbush Blueberry, Common Winterberry Herbs: Cinnamon Fern Red Maple Shrubs: Rose Bay, Swamp Azalea, Sweet Pepperbush Washington Herbs: Skunk Cabbage, Jack-in-the-pulpit, Cinnamon Fern Others: Peat Mosses, Swamp Dewberry Red Maple Shrubs: Sweet Pepperbush, Common Winterberry, Swamp Azalea Newport Herbs: Skunk Cabbage, Sensitive Fern, Royal Fern, Sedge Others: Greenbriar, Poison Ivy Red Maple/ Shrubs: Northern Arrowwood, Highbush Blueberry, Common Winterberry, Swamp Rose Bristol Swamp White Oak! Sensitive Fern, Grass, Skunk Cabbage, Jewelweed, Clearweed, Blue Flag, American Elm Herbs: Crowfoot Others: Poison Ivy Red Maple/White Pine Shrubs: Highbush Blueberry, Sweet Pepperbush, Northern Wild Raisin, Swamp Azalea, Kent Broad-leaved Meadowsweet, Chokeberry, Elderberry, Sheep Laurel, Mountain Holly Herbs: Tussock Sedge. Skunk Cabbage, Cinnamon Fern, Goldthread, Turk's-cap Lily, Tall Meadow-rue, Sensitive Fern, Canada Mayflower. Sedge, Violet, Goldenrod Others: Peat Mosses, Grape Red Maple/White Pine Trees: Yellow Birch, Ash Providence Shrubs: Alder, Northern Arrowwood, Sweet Pepperbush, Swamp Azalea, Silky wood, Highbush Blueberry, Black Cherry, Northern Wild Raisin, Maleberry, Broad-leaved Meadowsweet, Swamp Rose, Smooth Gooseberry Herbs: Skunk Cabbage, Wood Anemone, Canada Mayflower, Cinnamon Fern, Tall Meadow-rue, False Hellebore, Sedge. Bellflower, Goldenrod, Bluejoint, Sensi­ tive Fern, Whorled Aster, Marsh Blue Violet Red Maple/White Pine Trees: Yellow Birch, White Oak Newport Shrubs: Alder, Highbush Blueberry, Common Winterberry. Sweet Pepperbush, Sheep Laurel, Northern Arrowwood Herbs: Cinnamon Fern, Aster Others: Peat Mosses, Grape Red Maple/White Pine Trees: Pitch Pine Providence Shrubs: Sheep Laurel, Highbush Blueberry, Swamp Azalea, Northern Arrowwood, Broad-leaved Meadowsweet, Common Winterberry Herbs: Ground Pine, Canada Mayflower, Cinnamon Fern, Marsh SI. John's-wort, Royal Fern, Skunk Cabbage, Three-way Sedge Others: Peat Mosses, Greenbriar 47

Table 18. (Continued)

Location Dominance Type Associated Vegetation (County)

Red Maple! Trees: Yellow Birch, White Pine Washington Atlantic White Cedar Shrubs: Highbush Blueberry, Swamp Azalea, Rose Bay, Northern Wild Raisin, Sweet Pepperbush Herbs: Cinnamon Fern, Skunk Cabbage, Starflower, Marsh Fern, Wild Sarsaparilla Others: Peat Mosses Red MapleiHemlock Trees: Gray Birch, White Pine Providence Shrubs: Highbush Blueberry, Northern Wild Raisin, Winterberry, Broad-leaved Mead­ owsweet, Spicebush, Chokeberry, Maleberry, Sheep Laurel Herbs: Skunk Cabbage, Turk's-cap Lily. Blue Flag, Northern White Violet, Goldenrod or Aster, Tussock Sedge Others: Peat Mosses, other Mosses, Swamp Dewberry White Pine/Red Maple Trees: Atlantic White Cedar, Ash, Red Oak Washington Shrubs: Sweet Pepperbush, Spicebush, Common Winterberry. Swamp Azalea, Poison Sumac Herbs: Skunk Cabbage. New York Fern, Royal Fern, Shining Clubmoss Others: Ground Strawberry White Pine/Red Maple Shrubs: Highbush Blueberry, Sweet Pepperbush, Swamp Azalea, Inkberry. Common Washington Winterberry, Northern Wild Raisin Herbs: Cinnamon Fern, Skunk Cabbage, Ground Pine, Starftower Others: Peat Mosses, Partridgeberry White Pine Trees: Red Maple, White Oak Kent Shrubs: Sweet Pepperbush. Northern Wild Raisin, Highbush Blueberry, Sheep Laurel, Swamp Azalea, Wintergreen Herbs: Cinnamon Fern, Skunk Cabbage Others: Common Greenbriar, Peat Mosses, other Mosses, Ground Pine, Partridgeberry Atlantic White Cedar Trees: Hemlock, Red Maple, White Pine, Red Oak Kent Shrubs: Highbush Blueberry Herbs: Cinnamon Fern, Skunk Cabbage Others: Peat Mosses Atlantic White Cedar Trees: Red Maple, Black Gum Washington Shrubs: Sweet Pepperbush, Highbush Blueberry, Swamp Azalea, Mountain Laurel Others: Peat Mosses, other Mosses Hemlock Trees: Yellow Birch, Black Gum, Red Maple Providence Shrubs: Mountain Laurel, Spicebush, Alder Herbs: Skunk Cabbage, Sedge, Marsh Marigold, False Hellebore Others: Peat Mosses, other Mosses white oak (Quercus bicolor),and ironwood (Carpinus sawbriar (S, glauca), climbing hempweed (Mikania carolinianus). Red maple swamps typically have a dense scandens), ground-nut (Apios americana), grape (Vilis shrub understory comprised mostly of sweet pepperbush, sp.), and Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia) highbush blueberry, swamp azalea, rose bay, northern (personal observations; F. Golet, pers. comm,). The her­ arrowwood, common winterberry (flex verticillata), baceous layer in these swamps is variable, with areal smooth winterberry (I. laevigata), swamp sweetbells coverage ranging from 0.2 percent to 70 percent in six (Leucothoe racemosa), and spicebush (Lindera benzoin) red maple swamps studied by Lowry (1984). Common (Figure 20). Less common shrubs that may be locally plants in this layer are cinnamon fern (Osmunda cin­ common include maleberry, northern wild raisin, mead­ namomea), sensitive fern, royal fern, marsh fern, Massa­ owsweet, silky dogwood, black chokecherry (Aronia chusetts fern (Thelypteris simulata), jewelweed, tussock melanocarpa), swamp rose, alder buckthorn (Rhamnus and other sedges, skunk. cabbage, violets (Viola pallens frangula), sheep laurel, and common elderberry. Witch and V. cucullata), netted chain fern (Woodwardia areo­ hazel (Hamamelis virginiana) may occur along the upper lata), marsh marigold (Caltha palustris), and water hore­ edges of these swamps. Several vines have been ob­ hounds (Lycopus spp.). Less common plants include served in Rhode Island red maple swamps, including crested fern (Dryopteris cristata), wood reed (Cinna poison ivy, common greenbriar (Smilax rotundifolia), arundinacea), blue fiag, cardinal flower (Lobelia cardi- 48

Figure 20. Red maple swamps are the predominant wetland type in the state. Rose bay is a common understory species.

nalis), tall meadow-rue (Thalictrum pubescens), Turk's­ nity was slightly higher in elevation than the adjacent red cap lily (Lilium canadense ssp. michiganense), false maple swamp community. This mixed type was repre­ hellebore (Veratrum viride), jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema sented by several species of oak, including white oak triphyllum), clearweed (Pilea pumila), and turtle head (Quercus alba), black oak (Q. velutina), red oak (Q. (Chelone glabra). At higher levels in the swamp, Canada rubra), swamp white oak (Q. bicolor), and pin oak (Q. mayflower (Maianthemum canadense), ground pine (Ly­ palustris), and other trees. such as red maple, yellow copodium obscurum), shining clubmoss (Lycopodium lu­ birch, white ash, black gum. and white pine. American cidulum), partridgeberry (Mitchella repens), wild sar­ holly (flex opaca) was quite common in this community, saparilla (Aralia nudicaulis), painted trillium (Trillium while it was only scattered throughout other forested undulatum), starflower (Trientalis borealis), and wood wetland types in the Great Swamp. anenome (Anenome quinquefolia) may be present (per­ sonal observations; Wright 1941). Peat mosses form Evergreen forested wetlands are dominated by one of abundant groundcover in depressions within many sea­ three conifers: (1) Atlantic white cedar, (2) white pine, sonally flooded and saturated red maple swamps. Swamp and (3) hemlock. While most people associate white dewberry (Rubus hispidus) is also a common ground­ cedar with wetlands, many people think of white pine as cover plant. A study on plant-soil relationships along the an upland plant. Although white pine appears to be preva­ transition zone of Rhode Island's red maple swamps has lent on well-drained upland sites, it is also quite common been completed (Allen, et al. 1989). Davis (1988) ex­ in Rhode Island's wetlands. In fact, Bromley (1935), in amined vegetation-hydrology gradients in red maple his discussion of the original forest types of southern New swamps. In the near future. a Fish and Wildlife Service England, reported that at the time of settlement white pine report on the ecology of red maple swamps will be pub­ was probably abundant only in swamps and moist sandy lished (Golet, et al. 1990). pine fiats, and on exposed ridges. This distribution was attributed to white pine's susceptibility to fire. Today, Wright (1941) reported a mixed deciduous forested wildfires are greatly suppressed, so white pine can thrive wetland community in the Great Swamp. This commu- on better drained sites than it could originally. Surpris- 49 ingly, however, Mader (1976) in studying growth and other mosses are common groundcover plants in cedar productivity of white pine in Massachusetts found that the swamps. better sites were associated with the poorer drainage classes of soils (e.g., poorly drained and somewhat White pine swamps are more abundant in central and poorly drained). northern Rhode Island which lie within the White Pine Region of southern New England characterized by Brom­ ley (1935). As in the cedar swamps, red maple is the most Atlantic white cedar swamps are not as common as common tree intermixing with white pine to varying de­ they were in the past. Many cedar swamps have been grees. In many areas, red maple often co-dominates, replaced by hardwood swamps or white pine-hemlock forming mixed evergreen/deciduous forested wetlands. swamps (Bromley 1935). Most of the swamps called Less common tree associates include Atlantic white ce­ "Cedar Swamp" in Rhode Island (e.g., in Woonsocket, dar, ash, red oak, white oak, and yellow birch. The shrub West Greenwich, and Wood River Junction) on the layer contains several common species, including sweet U.S.G.S. topographic maps are now red maple swamps. pepperbush, highbush blueberry, swamp azalea, spice­ Atlantic white cedar swamps are most abundant in Wash­ bush, and rose bay. Other shrubs observed in lesser ington County and the western parts of Kent and Provi­ amounts are winterberry, wintergreen (Gaultheria pro­ dence Counties (Laderman, et al. 1987). They are associ­ cumbens), northern wild raisin, sheep laurel, mountain ated with the state's largest wetlands, namely Chapman laurel (Kalmia latifolia), inkberry, poison sumac, and par­ Swamp (Westerly), Indian Cedar Swamp (Charlestown), tridgeberry. Herbaceous plants, such as skunk cabbage, and Great Swamp (South Kingston, Richmond, and goldthread (Coptis trifoiia), cinnamon fern, royal fern, Charlestown). In the remaining cedar swamps, red maple New York fern (Thelypteris noveboracensis), ground appears to be the most common tree associated with the pine, shining c1ubmoss, and starflower may be present cedars, whereas black gum, gray birch, yellow birch, Peat mosses may be found in varying amounts. black birch (Betula lenta), white oak, white pine, hem­ lock, and pitch pine are less abundant. Hemlock may be Hemlock swamps are less common than the other two common in the understory in some cedar swamps. In a evergreen forested wetland types and are relatively un­ few swamps in northwestern Rhode Island, Atlantic common in Rhode Island. One such swamp observed in white cedar is associated with black spruce (Picea mar­ Foster had yellow birch, skunk cabbage, peat mosses, iana) and larch (Larix laricina) (Laderman, et ai. 1987). and other mosses as common associates. Plants in lesser Lowry (1984) found an average of 16 shrub species grow­ amounts included mountain laurel, black gum, red ma­ ing in six Atlantic white cedar swamps in southern Rhode ple, and marsh marigold. Contiguous hemlock Island. Common shrubs included sweet pepperbush, rose areas were co-dominated by red maple and white pine. bay, swamp azalea, highbush blueberry, swamp sweet­ bells, common winterberry, and smooth winterberry. Lacustrine Wetlands Sweet pepperbush was the most abundant shrub. Moun­ tain holly, inkberry (/lex glabra), and sheep laurel may The Lacustrine System is principally a deepwater hab­ also be present in lesser amounts. The herbaceous stratum itat system of freshwater lakes, reservoirs and deep generally is not as extensive as in red maple swamps, ponds. Consequently, wetlands are generally limited to except where the tree canopy is more open. Lowry (1984) shallow waters and exposed shorelines, as in the Riverine observed herbaceous covers ranging to 29 percent, with System. While algae are probably more abundant in these most of the study swamps having less than 4 percent waters, vascular macrophytes are often more conspic­ coverage. This low coverage resulted from dense shading uous. A variety of life forms can be recognized: (I) free­ by the cedars and the shrub understory. Common herba­ floating plants, (2) rooted vascular floating-leaved plants, ceous plants in cedar swamps include water willow, (3) submergent plants, and (4) nonpersistent emergent broad-leaved arrowhead, sedges (Carex trisperma, C. plants. The first three life forms characterize aquatic rostrata, and C. lasiocarpa), cinnamon fern, marsh fern, beds, whereas the latter dominates lacustrine emergent and starflower. Other herbaceous plants of interest in­ wetlands. clude round-leaved sundew, pitcher plant, bladderworts, buckbean, marsh S1. John's-wort, arrow arum, grass Lacustrine Aquatic Beds pink, Massachusetts fern, and cotton-grasses. Canada mayflower and creeping wintergreen (Gaultheria his­ Floating-leaved and free-floating aquatic beds are com­ piduia) may be found on the hummocks at the bases of the mon in shallow lacustrine waters. Common fioating­ cedars, while wild calla (Calla palustris) or marsh mar­ leaved plants include white water lily, spatterdock, water igold (Caltha palustris) may occur in shaded pools (per­ shield, pondweeds, and floating heart (Nymphoides aqua­ sonal observations; Bromley 1935). Peat mosses and tica). Duckweeds (Lemna spp. and Spirodela polyrhiza) 50

Figure 21. Lacustrine nonpersistent emergent wetland along Worden Pond in South Kingston. Bayonet rush predominates. comprise free-floating aquatic beds, while bladderworts nonpersistent emergent plants may include bayonet rush, are also free-floating, but are typically submerged. Sub­ common three-square, yellow-eyed grass (Xyris sp.), mergent aquatic beds may include pondweeds, bushy pipeworts (Eriocaulon spp.), pickerelweed, burreeds, ar­ pond weeds (Najas spp.), wild celery (Vallisneria amer­ rowheads, water parsnip, three-way sedge, and spike­ icana), waterweeds (Elodea spp.), water milfoils (Myr­ rushes. Some of these plants are usually persistent, but iophyllum spp.), mermaidweed, coontail (Ceratophyllum along lake shores are subject to ice-scouring and there­ demersum), and fanwort (Cabomba caroliniana). fore, may be considered nonpersistent. In many areas, persistent plants like cattails, reed canary grass, blue­ Lacustrine Emergent Wetlands joint, water willow, buttonbush, sweet gale, leatherleaf. swamp rose and others may form part of the lacustrine Emergent wetlands commonly border the margins of boundary. These persistent plants, however, represent lakes, reservoirs, and deep ponds (Figure 21). Common palustrine wetlands along the lake shore.

References

Allen, S.D., F.c' Golet, A.F. Davis, and T.E. Sokoloski. 1989. Soil­ Golet, F.c, and A.F. Davis. 1982. Inventory and Habitat Evaluation of vegetation Correlations in Transition Zones of Rhode Island Red the Wetlands of Richmond, Rhode Island. University of Rhode Is­ Maple Swamps. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, land, College of Resource Development, Kingston. Occas. Paper in Biological Report 89(8). 47 pp. Env'tal Science No. I. 48 pp. Bromley, S.w. 1935. The original forest types of southern New En­ Golet, F.D., A. Calhoun, D. Lowry, W. DeRagon, and A.I. Gold. 1990 gland. Ecol. Monog. 5(1): 61-89. (in press). Ecology of Red Maple Forested Wetlands in the Glaciated Cowardin, L.M., V. Caner, F.c, Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classi­ Northeastern United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wash­ fication of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. ington, DC. Biological Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-79131. 103 pp. Kennard, W.C., M.W. Lefor, and D.L. Civco. 1983. Analysis of Davis, A.F. 1988. Hydrologic and Vegetation Gradients in the Transi­ Coastal Marsh Ecosystems: Effects of Tides on Vegetational Change. tion Zone of Rhode Island Red Maple Swamps, M.S. thesis, Natural Univ. of Connecticut, Institute of Water Resources, Storrs. Res. Proj. Res;ourcclii: University of Rhone I«hmo, KinadC\um, 1 ~n PI" p1n<; T.ech Ch"""pl ... tiQn RQFt. ,l,it:-014 CONN. 110 pp' appendices. Laderman, A.D., F.e. Golet, B.A. Sorrie, and H.L Woolsey. 1987. 51

Atlantic white cedar in the Glaciated Northeast. In: A.D. Ladennan Simpson, R.L, R.E. Good, M.A. Leek, and D.E Whigham, 1983, (editor). Atlantic White Cedar Wetlands, Westview Press, Boulder, The ecology of freshwater tidal wetlands. BioScience 33: 255-259, CO. pp, 19-34. Thome-Miler, B., M.M, Harlin, G.B. Thursby, M.M. Brady­ Lee, V. 1980. An Elusive Compromise: Rhode Island Coastal Ponds and Campbell, and B.A. Dworetzky, 1983. Variations in the distribution Their People. University of Rhode Island, Coastal Resources Center, and biomass of submerged macrophytes in five coastal lagoons in Narragansett. Mar, Tech. Report. 73. 82 pp. Rhode Island, U.S ,A. Bot. Mar. 26:12. Lowry, DJ. 1984, Water Regimes and Vegetation of Rhode Island Tiner, R. W, Jr. 1987. A Field Guide to Coastal Wetland Plants of the Forested Wetlands, M,S. Thesis, Plant and Soil Science, University Northeastern United States, Vniversity of Massachusetts Press, Am­ of Rhode Island, Kingston. 174 pp. herst. 286 pp. Mader, D.L 1976, Soil-site productivity for natural stands of white Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1988a, The occurrence of eastern white pine in New pine in Massachusetts, Soil Science Society of America Journal England wetlands. Massachusetts Assoc. of Conservation Commis­ 40(1): 112-115. sions, Medford, MACC Newsletter XVII(6):1O, Magee, D.W 1981. Freshwater Wetlands: A Guide to Common Indica­ Tiner, R. W., Jr. 1988b. Field Guide to Nontidal Wetland Identification. tor Plants of the Northeast. University of Massachusetts Press, Am­ Maryland Dept. of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD and U.S. Fish herst. 246 pp. and Wildlife Service, Newton Comer, MA. Cooperative publication. Martin, WE. 1959. The vegetation of Island Beach State Park, New 283 pp. + 198 color plates. Jersey. EcoL Monogr. 29(1): 1-46. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National List of Scientific Nixon, S,W. 1982. The Ecology of New England High Salt Marshes: A Plant Names. Vol I. List of Plant Names. SCS-TP-159. 416 pp. Community Profile, U,S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWSIOBS-81/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1982. Preliminary list of hydrophytes 55. 70 pp. for the northeastern United States, Unpublished mimeo. Odum, WE., T.1. Smith III, lK. Hoover, and c.c. Mdvor, 1984. The Whitlatch, R.B. 1982. The Ecology of New England Tidal Flats: Com­ Ecology of Tidal Freshwater Marshes of the United States East Coast: munity Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWSIOBS-81101. A Community Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWSiOBS- 125 pp. 83/17. 177 pp. Wright, K. E. 1941. The Great Swamp. Torreya 41(5): 145-150. Penfound, W.T. 1952. Southern swamps and marshes. Bot. Rev, 18: Wright, T.1., V.I. Cheadle, and E.A. Palmatier. 1949. A Survey of 413-446, Rhode Island's Salt and Brackish Water Ponds and Marshes, Rhode Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Island Department of Agriculture and Conservation, Division of Fish Wetlands: 1988 National Summary. V.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Game, Providence. Pittman Robertson Pamphlet No.2. 42 pp. National Ecology Center, Ft. Collins, CO. BioL Rep. 88(24). 244 pp. CHAPTER 7. Wetland Values

Introduction Fish and Wildlife Values

Rhode Island's wetlands have been traditionally used Fish and wildlife utilize wetlands in a variety of ways. for hunting, trapping, fishing, berry harvest, timber and Some animals are entirely wetland-dependent, spending salt hay production, and livestock grazing. These uses their entire lives in wetlands. Others use wetlands only tend to preserve the wetland integrity, although the quali­ for specific reasons, such as reproduction and nursery tative nature of wetlands may be modified, especially by grounds, feeding, and resting areas during migration. salt hay production and timber harvest. Human uses are Many upland animals visit wetlands to obtain drinking not limited to these activities, but also include destructive water and food. In urbanizing areas, the remaining wet­ and often irreversible actions such as drainage for agricul­ lands become important habitats-a type of refuge-for ture and filling for industrial or residential development. "upland" wildlife displaced by development (F. Golet, In the past, many people considered wetlands as waste­ pers. comm.). Wetlands are also essential habitat for nu­ lands whose best use could only be attained through merous rare and endangered animals and plants. "reclamation projects" which led to the destruction of many wetlands. To the contrary, wetlands in their natural Fish and Shellfish Habitat state provide a wealth of values to society (Table 19). Due to their linkage with adjacent waters, Rhode Is­ These benefits can be divided into three basic categories: land's coastal and inland wetlands are important fish hab­ (1) fish and wildlife values, (2) environmental quality itats. Estuarine wetlands are also essential habitats for values, and (3) socio-economic values. The following grass shrimp, crabs, oysters, clams, and other inverte­ discussion emphasizes the more important values of brates. Rhode Island's wetlands, with significant national exam­ ples also presented. For an in-depth examination of wet­ Approximately two-thirds of the major U.S. commer­ land values, the reader is referred to Wetland Functions cial fishes depend on estuaries and salt marshes for nur­ and Values: The State of Our Understanding (Greeson, et sery or spawning grounds (McHugh 1966). Among the al. 1979). In addition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service more familiar wetland-dependent fishes are menhaden, has created and maintains a wetland values database bluefish, flounder, white perch, sea trout, mullet, croak­ which records abstracts for over 5000 articles. er, striped bass, and drum. Forage fishes, such as an­ chovies, killifishes, mummichogs, and Atlantic silver­ sides, are among the most abundant estuarine fishes. Narragansett Bay and its associated wetlands are impor­ tant spawning and nursery grounds for many fish species (T. Lynch, pers. comm.). Winter flounder spawn in the Table 19. List of major wetland values. shallow shoals of the Bay on beds of sea lettuce (Ulva "'ish and Wildlife Values Socio-economic Values lactuca), with peak spawning taking place from January to March. These same beds are used in the spring by • Fish and Shellfish Habitat • Flood Control spawning tautogs. Other nearshore spawners include • Waterfowl and Other Bird • Wave Damage Protection scup, butterfish, and squid. Coastal ponds serve as Habitat • Shoreline Erosion Control • Mammal and Other Wildlife • Ground-water Recharge spawning areas for tomcod beginning in November. As Habitat • Water Supply many as 63 fish species use Narragansett Bay as a nursery • Timber and Other Natural ground, with highest use in the fall. Environmental Quality Values Products • Energy Source (Peat) Coastal wetlands are also important for shellfish in­ • Water Quality Maintenance • Livestock Grazing • Pollution Filter • Fish and Shellfishing cluding bay scallops, grass shrimp, blue crabs, oysters, • Sediment Removal • Hunting and Trapping quahogs and other clams. A critical stage of the bay • Oxygen Production • Recreation scallop's life cycle requires that larvae attach to eelgrass • Nutrient Recycling • Aesthetics leaves for about a month (Davenport 1903). Blue crabs • Chemical and Nutrient • Education and Scientific and grass shrimp are abundant in tidal creeks of salt Absorption Research • Aquatic Productivity marshes. Estuarine aquatic beds, in general, also provide • Microclimate Regulator important cover for juvenile fishes and other estuarine • World Climate (O",one layer) organisms (Good, ct al. 1978). 53

d Figure 22. Migratory birds depend on Rhode Island wetlands: Ca) black duck, (b) Canada goose goslings, (c) American bittern, and (d) yellow warbler.

Freshwater fishes also find wetlands essential for sur­ Waterfowl and Other Bird Habitat vival. In fact, nearly all freshwater fishes can be consid­ ered wetland-dependent because: (I) many species feed In addition to providing year-round habitats for resi­ in wetlands or upon wetland-produced food, (2) many dent birds, wetlands are particularly important as breed­ fishes use wetlands as nursery grounds, and (3) almost all ing grounds, over-wintering areas and feeding grounds important recreational fishes spawn in the aquatic por­ for migratory waterfowl and numerous other birds tions of wetlands (Peters, et al. 1979). Many rivers and ure 22). Both coastal and inland wetlands are valuable streams along Rhode Island's coast are spawning grounds bird habitats. for alewife and a few rivers are also used by sea-run brown trout, rainbow smelt, and American shad, Com­ Rhode Island's salt marshes are used for nesting by mon fishes in Rhode Island's freshwater rivers, Jakes, and birds such as common terns, clapper rails, king rails, ponds include northern pike, chain pickerel, largemouth mallards, black ducks, blue-winged teals, mute swans, bass, smallmouth bass, bluegill, common sunfish, yellow willets, herring gulls, great black-backed gulls, red­ perch, brown bullhead, brook trout, rainbow trout, and winged blackbirds, marsh wrens, sharp-tailed sparrows, white perch (Guthrie and Stolgitis 1977; RI DEM, pers. and seaside sparrows. Red-winged blackbirds and seaside comm.). Northern pike spawn in early spring in flooded sparrows prefer stands of the short form of smooth cord­ marshes and aquatic beds, while chain pickerel prefer grass (Spartina alternifiora) which border permanent salt aquatic beds. White perch are also early spring spawners, ponds, while marsh wrens prefer stands of the tall form spawning in ponds and brackish coastal waters. Small­ of smooth cord grass bordering tidal creeks and ditches mouth bass spawn in about two feet of water from late (Reinert, et aI. 198 l). ~foreover, the availability of open May to early June. For all fish species, the presence of water and I or the short form smooth cordgrass community aquatic vegetation helps juvenile fishes avoid predator are directly related to the density of all breeding species. anacK5, 50 wenanas are tmponant nursery grounas. Btra breeamg aensltles are over 2.5 tlmes hlgher III un- 54 ditched salt marshes than in ditched marshes (Reinert, et glllla rail, ruby-throated hummingbird, red-winged ai. 1981). Wading birds, such as little blue herons, black­ blackbird, northern oriole, common grackle, common crowned night herons, glossy ibises, cattle egrets, snowy flicker, downy woodpecker, eastern kingbird, great­ egrets and great egrets, also feed and nest in and adjacent crested flycatcher, purple finch, American goldfinch, to Rhode Island's coastal wetlands. Great blue herons eastern phoebe, tree swallow, blue jay, black-capped feed in these wetlands, but nest inland. The U.S. Fish and chickadee, red-breasted nuthatch, northern waterthrush, Wildlife Service (Erwin and Korschgen 1979) has identi­ common yellowthroat, Canada warbler, American robin, fied nesting colonies of coastal water birds in Rhode wood thrush, veery, cedar waxwing, black and white Island and other northeastern states. Ospreys also nest in warbler, yellow warbler, ovenbird, song sparrow, and wetlands along the coast. swamp sparrow (F. Golet, pers. comm.). (Note: Diamond Bog, located in the town of Richmond, is a mosaic of Southern New England coastal marshes are important forested, scrub-shrub, and emergent wetlands with some feeding and stopover areas for migrating raptors, water­ open water.) In a study of eight red maple swamps in fowl, shorebirds and wading birds. In Rhode Island, inter­ western Massachusetts, Swift (1980) found 46 breeding tidal mudflats are principal feeding grounds for migratory species. The most common breeders included common shorebirds (e. g., sandpipers, plovers, and yellowlegs), yellowthroat, veery, Canada warbler, ovenbird, northern while swallows can often be seen feeding on flying insects waterthrush, and gray catbird. Anderson and Maxfield over the marshes. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (1962) studied birdlife in a red maple-Atlantic white winter waterfowl survey found an annual average of cedar swamp in southeastern Massachusetts and found 9,700 scaup, 3,000 Canada geese, and 2,700 black ducks the same species plus ruffed grouse, hairy woodpecker, as well as hundreds of canvasbacks, mallards, mergan­ downy woodpecker, blue jay, black-capped chickadee, sers, mute swans, scoters and other waterfowl overwinter­ American robin, wood thrush, black-and-white warbler, ing in Rhode Island between 1980-1986. and common grackle.

Coastal beaches are used for nesting by piping plover Wetlands are, therefore, crucial for the existence of (a Federal threatened species), American oystercatcher, many birds, ranging from waterfowl and shorebirds to and least tern. Rocky shores are nesting sites for gadwall, migratory songbirds. Some spend their entire lives in double-crested cormorant, roseate tern, and common tern wetland environments, while others primarily use wet­ CR. Enser, pers. comm.). lands for breeding, feeding or resting.

Rhode Island's inland wetlands are used by a variety of Mammal and Other Wildlife Habitat birds, including waterfowl, wading birds, rails and song­ birds. Among the more typical species are black duck, Many mammals and other wildlife inhabit Rhode Is­ wood duck, mallard, green-winged teal, Canada goose, land wetlands. Muskrats are perhaps the most typical and mute swan, green-backed heron, great blue heron, least widespread wetland mammal (Figure 23). Other fur­ bittern, American bittern, Virginia rail, sora, common bearers inhabiting wetlands include river otter, mink, moorhen, spotted sandpiper, marsh wren, winter wren, beaver, raccoon, skunk, red fox, fisher, and weasel. red-winged blackbird, belted kingfisher, tree swallow, Hardwood swamps are reported to be the favorite habitat northern rough-winged swallow, Acadian flycatcher, wil­ of raccoons in Rhode Island (Cronan and Brooks 1968). low flycatcher, eastern kingbird, warbling vireo, swamp Beaver populations in the state have been growing since sparrow, and woodcock. Most of these species are associ­ re-introduction in the 1950's. Beaver are most abundant ated with freshwater marshes and open water bodies. in the Moosup River system in central western Rhode Wood duck, Acadian flycatcher, barred owl, northern Island (C. Allin, pers. comm.). Smaller mammals also saw-whet owl, northern waterthrush, Louisiana water­ frequent wetlands such as eastern cottontail, New En­ thrush, Canada warbler, and white-throated sparrow nest gland cottontail, snowshoe hare, meadow vole, boreal in forested wetlands. Among the birds breeding in shrub red-backed vole, southern bog lemming, water shrew, swamps are woodcock and willow flycatcher. Lowry and meadow jumping mouse, while large mammals may (1984) reported on numerous observations made over a also be observed. White-tailed deer depend on Atlantic seven-year period in red maple swamps and Atlantic white cedar swamps for shelter and food during severe white cedar swamps. Forty-four bird species were seen in winters, but often use palustrine deciduous forested wet­ the maple swamps, whereas only 25 species were found lands and scrub-shrub wetlands for resting and escape in cedar swamps. Similar results were reported for south­ cover (Cronan and Brooks 1968; RI OEM, pers. comm.). ern New Jersey by Wander (1980). Among the birds Another group of mammals-bats-also use wetlands. nesting or assumed to nest in the 30-acre Diamond Bog They can often be seen in considerable numbers feeding are mallard, black duck, wood duck, ruffed grouse, Vir- over ponds, marshes, and other waterbodies in summer. 55

endangered. or of special interest or concern to the state due to their low numbers (R. Enser, pefs. comm.). Ofthis list, approximately half (132 species) of the plants are considered wetland plants (Table 20). Among the wetland habitats where most of these plants occur are coastal plain pond shores (28 species), salt marshes, estuarine waters, and beaches (15 species), and bogs and fens (15 species).

Environmental Quality Values

Besides providing habitat for fish and wildlife, wet­ lands play a less conspicuous but essential role in main­ taining high environmental quality, especially in aquatic habitats. They do this in a number of ways, including Figure 23. The muskrat is the most familiar and widespread purifying natural waters by removing nutrients, chemical wetland mammal in the state. and organic pollutants, and sediment, and producing food which supports aquatic life.

Besides mammals and birds, other forms of wildlife Water Quality Improvement make their homes in wetlands. Reptiles (i.e .• turtles and snakes) and amphibians (i.e .• toads, frogs. and sala­ Wetlands help maintain good water quality or improve manders) are important residents. DeGraaf and Rudis degraded waters in several ways: (1) nutrient removal and (1983) described the non-marine reptiles and amphibians retention, (2) processing chemical and organic wastes, of New England including their habitat and natural his­ and (3) reducing sediment load of water. Wetlands are tory. Turtles are most common in Rhode Island's freshwa­ particularly good water filters because of their locations ter marshes and ponds and the more common ones in­ between land and open water (Figure 24). Thus, they can clude the eastern painted, spotted, box, stinkpot, wood, both intercept runoff from land before it reaches the water and snapping turtles. Common snakes found in and near and help filter nutrients, wastes and sediment from flood­ wetlands include northern water, northern redbelly, east­ ing waters. Clean waters are important to humans as well ern garter, eastern ribbon, eastern smooth green, and as to aquatic life. northern black racer. Among the more common toads and frogs in Rhode Island are Fowler's toad, American toad, First, wetlands remove nutrients, especially nitrogen northern spring peeper, green frog, bullfrog, wood frog, and phosphorus, from flooding waters for plant growth pickerel frog, and gray tree frog. Less common species and help prevent eutrophication or overenrichment of include the northern leopard frog (a state special interest natural waters. Much of the nutrients are stored in the species) and the eastern spadefoot (state threatened) (R. wetland soil. Freshwater tidal wetlands have proven ef­ Enser, pers. comm.). Adults of the red-spotted newt live fective in reducing nutrient and heavy metal loading from in ponds with an abundance of submerged vegetation, surface water runoff from urban areas in the upper Dela­ while the juveniles are terrestrial. Many salamanders use ware River estuary (Simpson, et al. 1983c). Wetlands in temporary ponds or wetlands for breeding, although they and downstream of urban areas in Rhode Island probably may spend most of their years in upland or streamside also perform this function. It is, however, possible to habitats. Nearly all of the approximately 190 species of overload a wetland and thereby reduce its ability to per­ amphibians in North America are wetland-dependent at form this function. Every wetland has a limited capacity least for breeding (Clark 1979). Salamanders common in to absorb nutrients and individual wetlands differ in their Rhode Island wetlands include the mudpuppy, spotted, ability to do so. northern dusky, and northern two-lined salamanders, while the four-toed and marbled salamanders are less Wetlands have been shown to be excellent removers of common and are considered species of concern (R. Enser, waste products from water. Sloey and others (1978) sum­ pers. comm.). marize the value of freshwater wetlands at removing ni­ trogen and phosphorus from the water and address man­ Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Plants agement issues. They note that some wetland plants are so efficient at this task that some artificial waste treatment Currently, the Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program systems are using these plants. For example, the Max is tracking 261 plant species that are rare, threatened, Planck Institute of Germany has a patent to create such 56

Table 20. Plant species of special concern to Rhode Island that occur in wetlands (R. Enser, pers. comm.). Plant Species Common Name State Status J Equisetum fluviatile Water Horsetail State Special Interest Equisetum hyemale Rough Horsetail Species of Concern Lycopodium inundatum var. robus/um Northern Bog Clubmoss State Endangered lsoetes engelmannii Engelmann's Quillwort State Special Interest Isoetes muricata Pointed Quillwort State Special Interest /soetes ripuria var. canadensis River Quillwort State Special Interest Matteuccia slruthlopteris Ostrich Fern Species of Concern Larix laricina American Larch State Threatened Picea mariana Black Spruce Species of Concern Sparganium minimum Small Bur-reed State Extirpated Najas gUadalupensis Naiad State Threatened Scheuchzeria palustris Pod Grass State Endangered Sagitarria graminea Grassleaf Arrowhead State Special Interest Sagittarin sabulata var. gracillima River Arrowhead State Extirpated Sagittaria teres Slender Arrowhead State Endangered Panicum philadelphicum Philadelphia Panic Grass State Special Interest Spartina cynosuroides Salt Reed Grass State Special Interest Tripsacum dactylaides Northern Gamagrass State Threatened Zizania aquatica Wild Rice Species of Concern Carex collins!i Collin's Sedge State Endangered Carex exilis Bog Sedge State Threatened Cyperus aristatus Awned Cyperus State Extirpated Eleocharis equisetoides Horse-tail Spike-rush State Special Interest Eleacharis melanocarpa Black-fruited Spike-rush State Endangered Eleocharis tricostata Three-angle Spike-rush State Endangered Eriophorum gracile Slender Cotton-grass State Threatened Eriophorum vaginatum Hare's Tail State Endangered Eriophorum viridicarinatum Bog Cotton-grass State Special Interest Fuirena pumila Umbrella Grass S tate Endangered Psilocarya sCirpoides Long-beaked Bald Rush State Endangered Rhynchospora inundata Drowned Homed Rush State Endangered Rhynchospora macrostachya Beaked Rush State Threatened Rhynchospora torreyana Torrey's Beaked Rush S tate Threatened Scirpas etuberculatus Untubercled Bulrush State Endangered Scirpus hudsonianus Cotton Club Rush State Extirpated Scirpus longi! Long's Bulrush State Endangered Scirpus marittmus var. jernald;; Saltmarsh Bulrush State Special Interest Scirpus robustus Leafy Bulrush State Special Interest Scirpus smithii Smith's Bulrush State Threatened Scirpus torrey! Torrey's Bulrush State Special Interest Scleria reticularis Reticulated Nut-rush State Threatened Orontium aquaticum Golden Club State Endangered Xyris montana Northern Yellow-eyed Grass State Threatened Xyris smailiana Small's Yellow-eyed Grass Species of Concern Juncus debilis Weak Rush State Special Interest Aleclris jarirwsa Cohcroot Species of Concern Smilacina Irifolia Three-leaved False Solomon's Seal State Extirpated Streptopus roseus Rosy Twisted Stalk State Threatened Trillium erectum Purple Trillium State Threatened Lachnanthes caroliniana Carolina Redroot State Threatened Arethusa bulbosa Swamp Pink Species of Concern Calopogon tuberosas Tuberous Grass Pink Species of Concern Corallorhiza trifida Early Coralroot State Special Interest Cypripedium calceolus Yellow Lady's-slipper State Threatened Lipar!s loeselii Yellow Twayblade State Threatened Malaxis unifolia Green Adder's Mouth State Endangered Platanthera blephariglottis White-fringed Orchis State Threatened Platanthera ciliaris Yellow-fringed Orchis State Endangered Platamhera flava var. herbiola Pale Green Orchis State Endangered Platanthera hyperborea Northern Green Orchis State Threatened Platanthera psycodes Small Puple-fringed Orchid State Special Interest Spiranlhes lucida Shining Ladies' -tresses State Extirpated Saururus cernuus Lizard's Tail State Endangered Salix pedicel/aris Bog Willow State Extirpated Ulmus rubra Slippery Elm State Special Interest Arceuthobium pusillum Dwarf Mistletoe State Endangered Polygonum glaucum Seabeaeh Knotweed State Threatened Polygonum puritanorum Pondshore KnOlweed State Endangered Polygonum setaceum var, interjectum Strigose Knotweed State Extirpated Atriplex glabriuscula Smooth Orache State Special Interest Chenopodium leptophyllum Goosefoot State Special Interest Suaeda maritima Sea-blite Species of Concern Amaranthus pami/us Seabeaeh Amaranth State Extirpated Honkenya pep/aides Sea-beach Sand wort Species of Concern Anemone riparia Large Anemone State Extirpated Ranunculus aqaatilis White Water Crowfoot State Extirpated Ranunculus cymbalaria Seaside Buttercup State Extirpated Ranunculas flabellaris Yellow Water Crowfoot Species of Concern 57

Table 20. (Continued) Plant Species Common Name State Status' Draba replans Carolina Whitlow-Grass State Extirpated Drosera filiform is Thread-leaved Sundew State Endangered Podostemum ceratophyllum Riverweed State Extirpated Parnassia glauca Grass-of-Parnassus Stale Extirpated Sa'ifraga pensylvanica Swamp Saxifrage State Threatened Dalibarda repens Dewdrop State Endangered Crotalaria sagittalis Rattlebox State Threatened Poly gala cruciata Cross-leaved Milkwort State Threatened Hypericum adpressum Creeping St. John's-wort Stale Threatened Hypericum ellipticum Pale St. John's-wort Slate Speci.llnterest Viola incognita Large-leaf White Violet State Special Interest Elatine americana American Waterwort State Special Interest Rajala ramosior Toothcup State Endangered Circaea alpina Small Enchanter's Nightshade Species of Concern Epilobium palustre Marsh Willow-herb State Special Inlerest Ludwigia sphaerocarpa Round-fruited False Loosestrife State Endangered Myriophyllum alterniflorum Alternate-flowered Water-milfo;l State Extirpated Myriophyllum pinnatum Pinnate Water-mil foil Stale Extirpated Angelica atropurpurea Large Angelica State Extirpated Hydrocotyle verticil/ata Saltpond Pennywort State Endangered Ligusticum scothicum Scotch Lovage State Threatened Ptilimnium capillaceum Mock Bishop's Weed State Special Interest Andromeda polifolia Bog Rosemary State Endangered Gaultheria hispidula Creeping Snowberry State Special Interest Gaylussacia dumosa var. bigeloviana Dwarf Huckleberry Species of Concern Kalmia polifolia Pale Laurel State Endangered Leucathoe racemosa Vat. projecra Projecting Fetter-bush SpeCies of Concern Rhododendron peric/ymenoides Pinxter-flower Slate Extirpated Glaux maritima Sea Milkwort State Extirpated Hollonia infiata Featherfoil State Special Interest Fraxinus nigra Black Ash Species of Concern Gentiana andrewsii Closed Gentian State Extirpated Gentiana clausa Bottle Gentian State Special Imere,t Gentianopsis crinita Fringed Gentian State Threatened Sabatia kennedyana Plymouth Gentian State Endangered Sabatia stellaris Sea Pink State Threatened Physostegia virginiana False Dragon-head State Special Interest Stachys hyssopifolia Hyssop-leaf Hedge-nettle Stare Endangered Agalinis maritima Seaside Gerardia Species of Concern Limosella australis Mudwort Species of Concern Utricularia bifiora Two-flower Bladderwort S tate Threatened Utricularill geminiscapa Paired Bladderwort State Special Interest Utricularill gibba Humped Bladderwort Stare Special Interest Utricularia intermedia F1atleaf Bladderwort State Special Interest Utricularia minor Small Bladderwort State Extirpated Utricularia resupinata Reversed Bladderwort State Threatened Utricularia subulata Zigzag Bladderwort State Threatened Viburnun nudum Swamp-haw State Threatened Lobelia dortmanna Water Lobelia Species of Concern Bidens cannata Swamp Beggar-ticks State Special Interest Bidens coronala Tickseed Sunflower State Special Interest Coreopsis rasea Pink Tickseed State Threatened Eupatorium leucolepis var, novae-angliae New England Boneset State Endangered Sclerolepis uniflora Sclerolepis State Endangered

I Definitions of State Status: "State Endangered" are native species in imminent danger of extirpation from Rhode Island; these species meet one or more of the following criteria: 1, A species currently listed, or proposed by the U ,S, Fish and Wildlife Service as Federally endangered or threatened, 2, A species with I or 2 known or estimated total occurrences in the state, 3, A species apparently globally rare or threatened, and estimated to occur at approximately 100 or fewer occurrences range-wide, "State Threatened" are native species which are likely to become state endangered in the future if current trends in habitat loss or other detrimental factors remain unchanged; these species meet one or more of the following criteria: 1, A species with 3 to 5 known or estimated occurrences in the state, 2, A species with more than 5 known or estimated occurrences in the state, but especially vulnerable to habitat loss, "State Special Interest" are native species not considered to be State Endangered or State Threatened at the present time, but occur in 6 to 10 sites in the state, "Species of Concern" are native species which do not apply under the above categories but are additionally listed by the Natural Heritage Program due to various factors of rarity andi or vulnerability. "State Extirpated" are native species which have been documented as occurring in the state but for which current occurrences are unknown, When known, the last documentation of occurrence is included, If an occurrence is located for a State Extirpated species, that species would automatically be listed in the State Endangered category, 58

Figure 24. Wetlands are important for water quality improvement as well as flood water storage. Their location between the upland and the water facilitates these functions. systems, where a bulrush (Scirpus iacustris) is the pri­ phosphorus, 4.3 tons of ammonia, and 138 pounds of mary waste removal agent. Numerous scientists have nitrate. In addition, Tinicum Marsh adds 20 tons of oxy­ proposed that certain types of wetlands be used to process gen to the water each day. domestic wastes and some wetlands are already used for this purpose (Sloey, et al. 1978: Carter. et ai. 1979; Swamps also have the capacity for removing water Kadlec 1979). It must, however, be recognized that indi­ pollutants. Bottomland forested wetlands along the AI­ vidual wetlands have a finite capacity for natural assim­ covy River in Georgia have been shown to filter im­ ilation of excess nutrients and research is needed to deter­ purities from flooding waters. Human and chicken wastes mine this threshold (Good 1982). In the meantime, it may grossly pollute the river upstream, but after passing be prudent to use artificial wetlands for treatment of sec­ through less than 3 miles of swamp, the river's water ondary wastes and then run the tertiary products into a quality is significantly improved. The value of the 2,300- natural wetland, rather than having natural wetlands pro­ acre A1covy River Swamp for water pollution control was cess the entire wasteload. Godfrey and others (1985) estimated at $1 million per year (Wharton 1970). In New discuss ecological considerations of using wetlands to Jersey, Durand and Zimmer (1982) have demonstrated treat municipal wastewaters. the capacity of Pine Barrens wetlands to assimilate excess nutrients from adjacent agricultural land and upland de­ Perhaps the best known example of the importance velopment. Rhode Island's wetlands undoubtedly func­ of wetlands for water quality improvement is Tinicum tion similarly to these wetlands. Marsh (Grant and Patrick 1970). Tinicum Marsh is a 512- acre freshwater tidal marsh lying just south of Phila­ Wetlands also playa valuable role in reducing turbidity delphia, Pennsylvania. Three sewage treatment plants of flooding waters. This is especially important for aquat­ discharge treated sewage into marsh waters. On a daily ic life and for reducing siltation of ports, harbors, rivers basis, it was shown that this marsh removes from flooding and reservoirs. Removal of sediment load is also valuable waters: 7.7 tons of biological oxygen demand, 4.9 tons of because sediments often transport adsorbed nutrients, 59

2500 Salt Marsh

2000 Tropical Fresh- Rain water Forest Wetland

1500

1000 Warm Temperate Mixed Forest Land Grassland 500 Forest

NET PRIMARY PRODUCTIVITY OF SELECTED ECOSYSTEMS (g/m 2/year) ADAPTED FROM LIETH (1975) AND TEAL AND TEAL (1969)

Figure 25. Relative productivity of wetland ecosystems in relation to other ecosystems (redrawn from Newton 1981). Salt marshes and freshwater marshes are among the world's most productive systems. pesticides, heavy metals and other toxins which pollute Recently, the ability of wetlands to retain heavy metals our Nation's waters (Boto and Patrick 1979). Depres­ has been reported (Banus, et al. 1974; Mudroch and sional wetlands should retain all of the sediment entering Capobianca 1978; Simpson, et al. 1983c). Wetland soils them (Novitzki 1978). In Wisconsin, watersheds with 40 have been regarded as primary sinks for heavy metals, percent coverage by lakes and wetlands had 90 percent while wetland plants may playa more limited role. Wa­ less sediments in water than watersheds with no lakes or ters flowing through urban areas often have heavy con­ wetlands (HindaIl1975). Creekbanks of salt marshes typ­ centrations of heavy metals (e.g., cadmium, chromium, ically support more productive vegetation than the marsh copper, nickel, lead, and zinc). The ability of freshwater interior. Deposition of silt is accentuated at the water­ tidal wetlands along the Delaware River in New Jersey to marsh interface, where vegetation slows the velocity of sequester and hold heavy metals has been documented water, causing sediment to drop out of solution. In addi­ (Good, et al. 1975; Whigham and Simpson 1976; Sim­ tion to improving water quality, this process adds nu­ pson et al. 1983a, 1983b, 1983c). Wetlands along heavily trients to the creekside marsh which leads to higher plant industrialized rivers in Rhode Island probably are retain­ density and plant productivity (DeLaune, et al. 1978). ing various heavy metals also. Additional study is needed to better understand retention mechanisms and capacities The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has investigated in wetlands. the use of marsh vegetation to lower turbidity of dredged disposal runoff and to remove contaminants. In a 50-acre Aquatic Productivity dredged material disposal impoundment near George­ town, South Carolina, after passing through about 2,000 Wetlands are among the most productive ecosystems in feet of marsh vegetation, the effluent turbidity was similar the world and they may be the highest, rivaling our best to that of the adjacent river (Lee, et al. 1976). Wetlands cornfields (Figure 25). Wetland plants are particularly have also been proven to be good filters of nutrients and efficient converters of solar energ/. Through photosyn­ heavy metal loads in dredged disposal effluents (Windom thesis, plants convert sunlight into plant material or bio­ 1977). mass and produce oxygen as a by-product. Other mate- 60

ESTUARINE WATERS

~ MULLET

Figure 26. Simplified food pathways from estuarine wetland vegetation to commercially and recreationally important fishes and shellfishes. rials, such as organic matter, nutrients, heavy metals, and ter supply and ground-water recharge, harvest of natural sediment, also are captured by wetlands and either stored products, livestock grazing and recreation. Since these in the sediment or converted to biomass (Simpson. et al. values provide either dollar savings or financial profit, 1983a). This biomass serves as food for a multitude of they are more easily understood by most people. animals, both aquatic and terrestrial. For example, many waterfowl depend heavily on seeds of marsh plants, while Flood and Storm Damage Protection muskrats eat cattail tubers and young shoots. Surpris­ ingly, one of the favorite winter foods of the eastern In their natural condition, wetlands serve to tempo­ cottontail is the tender new growth of red maples (Cronan rarily store flood waters, thereby protecting downstream and Brooks 1968). property owners from flood damage. After all, such flooding has been the driving force in creating these wet­ Although direct grazing of wetland plants may be con­ lands to begin with. This flood storage function also helps siderable in freshwater marshes, their major food value to to slow the velocity of water and lower wave heights, most aquatic organisms is reached upon death when reducing the water's erosive potential. Rather than having plants break down to form "detritus." This detritus forms all flood waters flowing rapidly downstream and destroy­ the base of an aquatic food web that supports higher ing private property and crops, wetlands slow the flow of consumers, e.g., commercial fishes. This relationship is water, store it temporarily and slowly release stored wa­ especially well-documented for coastal areas. Animals ters downstream (Figure 27). Wetlands, thereby, help like zooplankton, shrimp, snails, clams, worms, killifish, reduce the peak flood heights as well as delay the flood and mullet eat detritus or graze upon the bacteria, fungi, crest. This becomes increasingly important in urban diatoms and protozoa growing on its surfaces (Crow and areas, where development has increased the rate and vol­ Macdonald 1979; de la Cruz 1979). Forage fishes (e.g., ume of surface water runoff and the potential for flood anchovies, sticklebacks, killifishes, and silversides) and damage (Figure 28). grass shrimp are the primary food for commercial and recreational fishes, including bluefish, flounder, weak­ In 1975, 107 people were killed by flood waters in the fish, and white perch (Sugihara, et ai. 1979). A simplified U . S. and potential property damage for the year was food web for estuaries in the Northeast is presented as estimated to be $3.4 billion (U. S. Water Resources Coun­ Figure 26. Thus, wetlands can be regarded as the farm­ cil 1978). Almost half of all ftood damage was suffered by lands of the aquatic environment where great volumes of farmers as crops and livestock were destroyed and pro­ food are produced annually. The majority of non-marine ductive land was covered by water or lost to erosion. aquatic animals also depend, either directly or indirectly, Approximately 134 million acres of the conterminous on this food source. U.S. have severe flooding problems (Figure 29). Of this, 2.8 million acres are urban land and 92.8 million acres are Socio-economic Values agricultural land (U.S. Water Resources Council 1977). Many of these flooded farmlands are wetlands. Although The more tangible benefits of wetlands to society may regulations and ordinances required by the Federal Insur­ be considered socio-economic values and they include ance Administration reduce ftood losses from urban land, flood and storm damage protection, erosion control, wa- agricultural losses are expected to remain at present levels 61

Lower flood crest and "",. lower flows ,, , , " , WETLANDS , , 1 I ',...... , ...... NO WETLANDS ------1 ...... ------.

TIME •

Figure 27. Wetlands help reduce flood crests and slow flow rates after rainstorms (adapted from Kusler 1983).

or increase as more wetland is put into crop production. Protection of wetlands is, therefore, an important means n I, to minimizing flood damages in the future. I 250 ,I AFTER DEVELOPMENT I'II The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers have recognized II i I \ the value of wetlands for flood storage in Massachusetts. II Ii In the early 1970's, they considered various alternatives 200 ~ I \ I \ to providing flood protection in the lower Charles River I \ I watershed near Boston, including: (1) a 55.000 acre-foot reservoir, (2) extensive walls and dikes, and (3) perpetual v protection of8,500 acres of wetland (U.S. Army Corps of ~ ISO Engineers 1976). If 40 percent of the Charles River wet­ "' lands were destroyed. flood damages would have in­ ~ BEFORE DEVELOPMENT creased by at least $3 million annually. Loss of all basin =..: ~ 100 wetlands would cause an average annual flood damage Q cost of $17 million (Thibodeau and Ostro 1981). The Corps concluded that wetlands protection-"Natural Valley Storage" -was the least-cost solution to future flooding problems. In 1983, they completed acquisition of approximately 8,500 acres of Charles River wetlands for flood protection.

.JO 15 20 TIME (hr) This protective value of wetlands has also been re­ ported for other areas. Undeveloped floodplain wetlands Figure 28. Urban development increases peak discharge in rivers. in New Jersey protect against floo::l damages (Robichaud Comparisons of hydrographs for a watershed before and and Buell 1973). In the Passaic River watershed, annual after development (redrawn from Fusillo 1981). property losses to flooding approached $50 million in 62

Figure 29. Wetland destruction accelerates flood damages,

1978 and the Corps of Engineers is considering wetland erosion, while their trunks and branches slow the flow of acquisition as an option to prevent flood damages from flooding waters and dampen wave heights. The banks of escalating in the future (1.:. S. Army Corps of Engineers some rivers have not been eroded for 100 to 200 years due 1979). A Wisconsin study projected that floods may be to the presence of trees (Leopold and Wolman 1957; lowered as much as 80 percent in watersheds with many Wolman and Leopold 1957; Sigafoos 1964). Among the wetlands compared with similar basins with few or no freshwater grass and grass-like plants, common reed wetlands (Novitzki 1978). Pothole wetlands in the Devils (Phragmites australis) and bulrushes (Scirpus spp.) have Lake basin of North Dakota store nearly 75 percent of the been regarded as the best at withstanding wave and cur­ total runoff (Ludden, et ai. 1983). rent action (Kadlec and Wentz 1974; Seibert 1968). Com­ mon three-square (Scirpus pungens) often forms fringing Rhode Island's wetlands also serve as temporary stor­ marshes along the margins of many Rhode Island lakes age basins for retaining flood waters, thereby reducing and ponds. Along the coast, salt marshes of smooth cord­ potential flood damages. The 3,000-acre Great Swamp, grass (Spartina alternijlora) are considered important Chapman Swamp and numerous other wetlands provide shoreline stabilizers because of their wave dampening great flood storage for the Pawcatuck River in Wash­ effect (Knudson, et al. 1982). While most wetland plants ington County and without these wetlands flooding of need calm or sheltered water for establishment, they will downstream uplands would be enormous. The Pawtuxet effectively control erosion once established (Kadlec and River system, in marked contrast. has fewer wetlands Wentz 1974; Garbisch 1977). Wetland vegetation has (many wetlands were filled) and less flood storage area. been successfully planted to reduce erosion along U.S. Consequently, Warwick and Cranston experience serious waters. Willows (Salix spp.), alders (Alnus spp.), ashes flooding problems. Annual flood losses in 1978 for the (Fraxinus spp.), cottonwoods and poplars (Populus spp.), Pawtuxet River basin were about $1.5 million. Corps of maples (Acer spp.), and elms (Ulmus spp.) are particu­ Engineers projections for 1990 suggest that increased larly good stabilizers (Allen 1979). Successful emergent urbanization in the basin would raise flood losses to $3.6 plants include reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), million for a 20-year flood and $5.5 million for a 50-year common reed, cattails (Typha spp.), and bulrushes in flood (F. Golet, pers. comm.). freshwater areas (Hoffman 1977) and smooth cordgrass along the coast (Woodhouse, et al. 1976). Shoreline Erosion Control Water SuppJy Located between watercourses and uplands. wetlands help protect uplands from erosion. Wetland vegetation Most wetlands are areas of ground-water discharge and can reduce shoreline erosion in several ways, including: their underlying aquifers may provide sufficient quantities (I) increasing durability of the sediment through binding of water for public use. In neighboring Massachusetts, 40 with its roots, (2) dampening waves through friction, and percent to 50 percent of the wetlands may indicate the (3) reducing current velocity through friction (Dean location of productive underground aquifers-potential 1979). This process also helps reduce turbidity and there­ sources of drinking water. At least 60 municipalities in the by helps improve water quality. state have public wells in or very near wetlands (Motts and Heeley 1973). Prairie pothole wetlands store water which Obviously, trees are good stabilizers of river banks. is important for wildlife and may be used for irrigation and Thelr roms btnct the soli, makmg it more reSistant to livestock watering by farmers during droughts (Leitch 63

Figure 30. Cows often graze in wet meadows.

1981). These situations may hold true for Rhode Island cranberries, blueberries, and wild rice. Wetland grasses and other states. Wetland protection and ground-water are hayed in many places for winter livestock feed. Dur­ pollution control could be instrumental in helping to solve ing other seasons, livestock graze directly in numerous current and future water supply problems. New England wetlands (Figure 30).

Ground-water Recharge In the 49 continental states, an estimated 82 million acres of commercial forested wetlands exist (Johnson Ground-water recharge potential of wetlands varies 1979). These forests provide timber for such uses as home according to numerous factors, including wetland type, construction, furniture, newspapers and firewood. 'Most geographic location, season, soil type, water table lo­ of these forests lie east of the Rockies. where oak, gum, cation and precipitation. In general, most researchers cypress, elm. ash and cottonwood are most important. believe that most wetlands do not serve as significant The standing value of southern wetland forests is $8 ground-water recharge sites (Carter, et ai. 1979). A few billion. These southern forests have been harvested for studies, however, have shown that certain wetland types over 200 years without noticeable degradation, thus they may help recharge ground-water supplies by adding water can be expected to produce timber for many years to to the underlying aquifer or water table. Shrub wetlands come, unless converted to other uses. Rhode Island's in the Pine Barrens may contribute to ground-water re­ forested wetlands provide timber for fuelwood and build­ charge (Ballard 1979). Depressional wetlands, like cy­ ing construction. Braiewa (1983) reported on the biomass press domes in Florida and prairie potholes in the Da­ and fuel wood production of red maple stands in the state. kotas, may also contribute to ground-water recharge (Odum, et ai. 1975; Stewart and Kantrud 1972). Many wetland-dependent fishes and wildlife are also utilized by society. Commercial fishermen and trappers Floodplain wetlands also may do this through bank make a living from these resources, From 1956 to 1975, water storage (Mundorff 1950; Klopatek 1978). In urban about 60 percent of the U.S. commercial landings were areas where municipal wells pump water from streams fishes and shellfishes that depend on wetlands (Peters, et and adjacent wetlands, "induced infiltration" may draw al. 1979). Nationally, major commercial species associ­ in surface water from wetlands into public wells. This ated with wetlands are menhaden, salmon, shrimp, blue type of human-induced recharge has been observed in crab and alewife from coastal waters and catfish, carp and Burlington, Massachusetts (Mulica 1977). These studies buffalo from inland areas. In Rhode Island, the 1985 and others suggest that certain wetlands do help recharge commercial harvest of wetland-dependent coastal fishes ground-water and that additional research is needed to (I.e., flounders, bluefish, weakfish, striped bass, shad, better assess the role of different types of wetlands in and white perch) had a value of $3.25 million, while the performing this function. hard-shell clam or quahog harvest alone was valued at more than $14 million according to National Marine Fish­ Harvest of Natural Products eries Service commercial catch and value data. The fish­ eries value of Rhode Island's coastal ponds is discussed A varietv of natural products are produced bv wetlands bv Lee (1980). Recreational fishing and shellfishing are including timber, fish and shellfish, wildlife, peat moss, important activities for many Rhode Island residents. 64

Nationally, furs from beaver, muskrat, mink, nutria, and partment of the Interior and Department of Commerce otter yielded roughly $35.5 million in 1976 (Demms and 1982). Pursley 1978). Louisiana is the largest fur-producing state and near! y all furs come from wetland animals. In Rhode Island, muskrat harvest was valued at near $60,000 in Summary 1980 and only about $6,500 in 1988 due to declining pelt prices (L. Suprock and M. Lapisky, pers. comm.). Cur­ Marshes, swamps and other wetlands are assets to rently, muskrats are an under-harvested resource. society in their natural state. They provide numerous products for human use and consumption, protect private Recreation and Aesthetics property and provide recreational and aesthetic apprecia­ tion opportunities. Wetlands may also have other values Many recreational activities take place in and around yet unknown to society. For example, a microorganism wetlands. Hunting and fishing are popular sports. Water­ from Pine Barrens swamps of southern New Jersey has fowl hunting is a major activity in wetlands, but big game been recently discovered to have great value to the drug hunting is also important locally. In 1980, 5.3 million industry. In searching for a new source of antibiotics, the people spent $638 million on hunting waterfowl and other Squibb Institute examined soils from around the world migratory birds (U.S. Department of the Interior and De­ and found that only one contained microbes suitable for partment of Commerce 1982). Moreover, nearly all fresh­ producing a new family of antibiotics. From a Pine Bar­ water fishing is dependent on wetlands. In 1975 alone, rens swamp microorganism, scientists at the Squibb In­ sportfishermen spent $13 I billion to catch wetland­ stitute have developed a new line of antibiotics which will dependent fishes in the U.S. (Peters, et al. 1979). Fishing be used to cure diseases not affected by present antibiotics was reported to be the second most popular leisure sport in (Moore 1981). This represents a significant medical dis­ America in a 1985 Gallup Poll (Sport Fishing Institute covery. If these wetlands were destroyed or grossly pol­ 1986). Fishing was the top activity for adult men with 44 luted, this discovery might not have been possible. percent participating. Since 1977, there has been a steady increase in the percent of Americans fishing. Destruction or alteration of wetlands eliminates or min­ imizes their values. Drainage of wetlands. for example, Other recreation in wetlands is largely non-consump­ eliminates all the beneficial effects of the wetlands on tive and involves activities like hiking, nature observation water quality and directly contributes to flooding prob­ and photography, and canoeing and other boating. Many lems (Lee, et at. 1975). While the wetland landowner can people simply enjoy the beauty and sounds of nature and derive financial profit from some of the values men­ spend their leisure time walking or boating in or near tioned, the general public receives the vast majority of wetlands and observing plant and animal life. This aes­ wetland benefits through flood and storm damage control, thetic value is extremely difficult to place a dollar value erosion control, water quality improvement and fish and upon, although people spend a great deal of money travel­ wildlife resources. It is, therefore, in the public's best ing to places to enjoy the scenery and to take pictures of interest to protect wetlands to preserve these values for these scenes and plant and animal life. In 1980, 28.8 themselves and future generations. Since over half of the million people (17 percent of the U. S. population) took Nation's original wetlands have already been destroyed, special trips to observe, photograph or feed wildlife. the remaining wetlands are even more valuable as public Moreover, about 47 percent of all Americans showed an resources. active interest in wildlife around their home (U. S. De-

References

Allen, H.H. 1979. Role of wetland plants in erosion control of riparian Boto, K.G. and W.H. Patrick, Jr. 1979. Role of wetlands in the removal shorelines. In: P.E. Greeson, el al. Wetland Functions and Values: of suspended sediments. In: P.E. Greeson, el al. Wetland Functions The State of Our Understanding. Amer. Water Resources Assoc. and Values: The Slate of Our Understanding. Amer. Water Resources pp.403-414. Assoc. pp. 479-489. Anderson, K.S. and H.K. Maxfield. 1962. Sampling passerine birds in Braiewa, M.A. 1983. Biomass and Fuelwood Production of Red Maple a wooded swamp in southeastern Massachusetts. Wilson Bull. 74(4): (Acer rubrum) stands in Rhode Island. M.S. theseis, University of 381-385. Rhode Island, Kingston. 134 pp. Ballard, J 1. 1979. Fluxes of water and energy through the Pine Barrens Carter, v., M.S. Bedinger. R.P. Novitski and W.O. Wilen. 1979. Water ecosystems. In: R.T.T. Forman (editor). Pine Barrens: Ecosystem resources and wetlands. In: P.E. Greeson, et al. Wetland Functions and Landscape. Academic Press, Inc., New York. pp. 133-146. and Values: The State of Our Understanding. Amer. Water Resources Banus, M., I. Valiela, and J.M. Teal. 1974. Expon of lead from salt Assoc. pp. 344-376. marshes. Mar Poll RuB 'i: 1'\-9 Clark:, J E 1979 Fre.h wat", wetlands: hahiillt< fOT aquatic inverte- 65

brates, amphibians, reptiles, and fish. In: P. E. Greeson, ei at. Management in Rhode Island Lakes and Ponds. R.t Dept. of Nat. Wetland Functions and Values: The State of Our Understanding. Res., Div. of Fish and Wildlife. Fisheries Rept. NO.3. 256 pp. Amer. Water Resources Assoc. pp. 330-343. Hindal!, S.M. 1975. Measurements and Prediction of Sediment Yields Cronan, lM. and A. Brooks. 1968. The Mammals of Rhode Island. in Wisconsin Streams. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Rhode Island Dept. of ~atural Resources. Wildlife Pamphlet No.6. Investigations 54-75. 27 pp. 133 pp. Hoffman, G.R. 1977. Artificial establishment of vegetation and effects Crow, lH. and KB. MacDonald. 1979. Wetland values: secondary of fertilizer along shorelines of Lake Oahe and Sakakawea main­ production. In: P.E. Greeson, el al. Wetland Functions and Values: stream Missouri River reservoirs. In: Proc. Workshop on the Role of The State of Our Understanding. Amer. Water Resources Assoc. Vegetation in Stabilization of the Great Lakes Shoreline. Great Lakes pp. 146-161. Basin Commission, Ann Arbor, MI. pp. 95-109. Davenport, C.B. 1903. Animal ecology of the Cold Spring Harbor sand Johnson, R.L. 1979. Timber harvests from wetlands. In: P.E. Greeson, spit. Decennial Pub. Univ. of Chicago 11: 157-176. et al. Wetland Functions and Values: The State of Our Understanding. Dean, R.G. 1979. Effects of vegetation on shoreline erosional pro­ Amer. Water Resources Assoc. pp. 598-605. cesses. In: P.E. Greeson, et al. Wetland Functions and Values: The Kadlec, lA. and W.A. Wentz. 1974. State-of·the-art Survey and Eval­ State of Our Understanding. Amer. Water Resources Assoc. pp. 415- uation of Marsh Plant Establishment Techniques: Induced and Natu· 426. ral. Vol. I: Report of Research. Tech. Rept. D-74-9. U.S. Army DeGraaf, R.M. and D.D. Rudis. 1983. Amphibians and Reptiles of Engineers Waterways Expt. Stat., Vicksburg, MS. New England: Habitats and Natural History. UniverSity of Mas­ Kadlec, R.H. 1979. Wetlands for tertiary treatment. In: P.E. Greeson, sachusetts Press, Amherst. 85 pp. el al. Wetland Functions and Values: The State of Our Understanding. de la Cruz, A.A. 1979. Production and transport of detritus in wetlands. Amer. Water Resources Assoc. pp. 490-504. In: P.E. Greeson, et at. Wetlands Functions and Values: The State of Klopatek. lM. 1978. Nutrient dynamics offreshwater riverine marshes Our Understanding. Amer. Water Resources Assoc. pp. 162-174. and the role of emergent macrophytes. In: R.E. Good, D.F. Whig­ DeLaune, R.D .. WH. Patrick, Jr. and R.1. Buresk. 1978. Sedimenta­ ham, and R.L. Simpson (editors). 1978. Freshwater Wetlands, Eco­ tion rates dttermined by 137Cs dating in a rapidly accreting salt logical Processes and Management Potential. Academic Press Inc., marsh. Nature 275: 532-533. New York. pp. 195-216. Demms, E.F., Jr. and D. Pursley (editors). 1978. North American Knudson. P.L., R.A. Brocchu, WN. Seelig and M. Inskeep. 1982. Furbearers: Thcir Management, Research and Harvest Status in Wave dampening in Spartina altemiftora marshes. Wetlands (Journal 1976. International Assoc. of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 157 pp. of the Society of Wetland Scientists) 2: 87-104. Durand, 1.B. and B. Zimmer. 1982. Pineland, Surface Water Quality. Kusler, J. A. 1983. Our National Wetland Heritage. A Protection Guide­ Part I. Rutgers Univ., Center for Coastal and Environmental Studies, book. Environmental Law Institute, Washington, DC. 167 pp. New Brunswick, NJ. 196 pp. Lee, C.R., R.E. Hoeppel, P.G. Hunt and C.A. Carlsong. 1976. Feasi­ Erwin, R.M. and C.E. Korschgen. 1979. Coastal Waterbird Colonies: bility of the Functional Use of Vegetation to Filter, Dewater, and Maine to Virginia, 1977. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWSI Remove Contaminants from Dredged Material. Tech. Rept. D-76-4. OBS-79/08. 647 pp. + appendices. U.S. Army Engineers, Waterways Expt. Sta., Vicksburg, MS. Fusillo, T.V. 1981. Impact of Suburban Residential Development on Lee, G.F., E. Bentley, and R. Amundson. 1975. Effects of marshes on Water Resources in the Area of Winslow Township, Camden County, water quality. In: A.D. Hasler (editor). Coupling of Land and Water New Jersey. U.S. Geol. Survey, Water Resources Div., Trenton. N.J. Systems. Springer-Verlag, New York. pp. 105-127. Water Resources Investigations 8-27. 28 pp. Lee, V. 1980. An Elusive Compromise: Rhode Island Coastal Ponds and Garbisch, E.W., Jr. 1977. Marsh development for soil erosion. In: Their People. University of Rhode Island, Coastal Res. Ctr., Nar­ Proc. of the Workshop on the Role of Vegetation in Stabilization of ragansett. Marine Tech. Rept. 73. 82 pp. the Great Lakes Shoreline. Great Lakes Basin Commission, Ann Leitch, J.A. 1981. Wetland Hydrology: State-of-the-art and Annotated Arbor, MI. pp. 77-94. Bibliography. Agric. Expt. StaL, North Dakota State Univ., Fargo, Godfrey, P.l, E.R. Kaynor, S. Pelczarski, and l Benforado (editors). ND. Res. Rept. 82. 16 pp. 1985. Ecological Considerations in Wetlands Treatment of Municipal Leopold, L.B. and M.G. Wolman. 1957. River Channel Patterns­ Wastewaters. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York. 474 pp. Braided, Meandering, and Straight. U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper Good, R.E. (editor). 1982. Ecological Solutions to Environmental 282-B. Management Concerns in the Pinelands National Reserve. Proceed­ Lowry, D. 1984. Water Regimes and Vegetation of Rhode Island For­ ings of a conference, April 18-22, 1982. Rutgers UnIV., Div. of ested Wetlands. M.S. thesis, Univ. of Rhode Island, Kingston. 174 Pinelands Research, New Brunswick, NJ. 47 pp. pp. Good, R.E., l Limb, E. Lyszczek, M. Miernik, C. Ogrosky, N. Psuty, Ludden, A.P., D.L. Frink, and D.H. Johnson. 1983. Water storage l Ryan, and F. Stickels. 1978. Analysis and Delineation of Sub­ capacity of natural wetland depressions in the Devils Lake Basin of merged Vegetation of Coastal New Jersey: A Case Study of Little Egg North Dakota. l Soil and Water Cons. 38(1): 45-48. Harbor. Rutgers Univ., Center for Coastal and Environmental Stud· McHugh, J.L. 1966. Management of Estuarine Fishes. Amer. Fish ies, New Brunswick, NJ. 58 pp. Soc., Spec. Pub. No.3: 133-154. Good, R.E., R.W Hastings, and R.E. Denmark. 1975. An Environ­ mental Assessment of Wetlands: A Case Study of Woodbury Creek Moore, M. 1981. Pineland germ yields new antibiotic. Sunday Press and Associated Marshes. Rutgers Univ., Mar. Sci. etr., New Bruns­ (September6, 1981), Atlantic City, NJ. wick, NJ. Tech. Rept. 75-2. 49 pp. Motts, W.S. and R. W. Heeley. 1973. Wetlands and groundwater. In: Grant, R.R., Jr. and R. Patrick. 1970. Tinicum Marsh as a water 1.S. Larson (editor). A Guide to Important Characteristics and Values purifier. In: Two Studies of Tinicum Marsh. The Conservation Foun­ of Freshwater Wetlands in the Northeast. University of Massachu­ dation, Washington, D.C. pp. 105-123. setts, Water Resources Research Center. Pub. No.3!. pp. 5-8. Greeson, P.B., J.R. Clark and lE. Clark (editors). 1979. Wetland Mudroch, A. and 1. Capobianco. 1978. Study of selected metals in Functions and Values: The State of Our Understanding. Proc. of the marshes on Lake SL Clair, Ontario. Archives Hydrobiologic. 84: 87- National Symposium on Wetlands. November 7-10, 1978. Amer. 108. Water Resources Assoc., Minneapolis, Minnesota. 674 pp. MuJica, W. S. 1977. Wetlands and Municipal Ground Water Resource nnthrie. R.C' and l.A. Stolgitis, 1977. Fi,heries Investigations and Protection. In: R.B. Pojasek (editor). Drinkifil! Water Quality En- 66

hancement Through Source Protection Ann Arbor Science Publish­ Sport Fishing Institute. 1986. Gallup poll points to increased fishing ers, Michigan. pp. 297-316. participation. SFI Bulletin 372: 7. Mundorff, M.J. 1950. Floodplain Deposits of North Carolina Piedmont Sugihara, T., C. Yearsley, 1.B. Durand, and N.P. Psuty. 1979. Com­ and Mountain Streams as a Possible Source of Groundwater Supply. parison of natural and Altered Estuarine Systems: Analysis. Rutgers N.e. Div. Mineral Res. Bull. 59. Univ., Center for Coastal and Environmental Studies, New Bruns­ Newton, R.B. 1981. New England Wetlands: A Primer. University of wick, Nl Pub. No. Nl!RU-DEP-Il-9-79. 247 pp. Massachusetts, Amherst. M.S. thesis. 84 pp. Swift, B.L. 1980. Breeding Bird Habitats in Forested Wetlands of West­ Novitzki, R.P. 1978. Hydrology of the Nevin Wetland Near Madison. Central Massachusetts. M.S. Thesis. Univ. of Massachusetts, Am­ Wisconsin. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations herst. 90 pp. 78-48. 25 pp. Thibodeau, FR, and B.D. Ostro. 1981. An economic analysis of wet­ Peters. D.S., D.W Ahrenholz, and TR. Rice. 1979. Harvest and value land protection. J. Environ. Manage. 12: 19-30. of wetlands associated fish and shellfish. In: Greeson, et al. Wetland U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1976. Natural Valley Storage: A Part­ Functions and Values: The State of Our Understanding. Amer. Water nership with Nature. New England Division, Waltham, MA. Resources Assoc. pp. 606-617. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1979. Passaic River Basin Study. Plan Reinert, S.E., Fe. Golet, and W.R. DeRagon. 1981. Avian use of of StUdy. New York District. 240 pp. ditched and unditched salt marshes in southeastern New England: a U.S. Department of the Interior and Department of Commerce. 1982. preliminary report. In: Proceedings from the 27th Annual Meeting of 1980 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife Associated the Northeastern Mosquito Control Association (November 2-4, Recreation. Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Census. 156 pp. 1981, Newport, RI). pp. 1-20. U.S. Water Resources Council. 1977. Estimated Flood Damages. Ap­ Robichaud, B. and M.F. Buell. 1973. Vegetation of New Jersey: A pendix B. Nationwide Analysis Report. Washington, De. Study of Landscape Diversity. Rutgers Univ. Press, New Brunswick, U.S. Water Resources Council. 1978. The Nation's Water Resources NJ. 340 pp. 1975-2000. Vo!' I: Summary. Washington, De. 86 pp. Seibert, P. 1968. Importance of natural vegetation for the protection of Wander, W. 1980. Breeding birds of southern New Jersey cedar the banks of streams, rivers, and canals. In: Nature and Environment swamps. N.J. Audubon VI(4): 51-65. Series (Vol. Freshwater), Council of Europe. pp. 35-67. Wharton, C.H. 1970. The Southern River Swamp-A Multiple Use Sigafoos, R.S. 1964. Botanical Evidence of Floods and Floodplain Environment. School of Business Administration, Georgia State Uni­ Deposition, Vegetation, and Hydrologic Phenomena. U.S. Geol. versity. 48 pp. Survey Prof. Paper 485-A. Whigham, D.F. and R.L. Simpson. 1976. The potential useoffreshwa­ Simpson, R.L., R.E. Good, B.l. Dubinski, 1.1. Pasquale and K.R. ter tidal marshes in the management of water quality in the Delaware Philipp. 1983a. Fluxes of Heavy Metals in Delaware River Freshwa­ River. In: 1 Tourbier and R. W. Peirson, Jr. (editors). Biological ter Tidal Wetlands. Rutgers University, Center for Coastal and En­ Control of Water Pollution. Univ. of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 173- vironmental Studies, New Brunswick, NJ. 79 pp. 186. Simpson, R.L., R.E. Good, MA. Leek, and D.F Whigham. 1983b. Windom, H.L. 1977. Ability of Salt Marshes to Remove Nutrients and The ecology of freshwater tidal wetlands. BioScience 33(4): 255- Heavy Metals from Dredged Material Disposal Area Effluents. Tech­ 259. nical Rept. D-77-37. U.S, Army Engineers, Waterways Expt. Sta., Simpson, R.L., R.E. Good, R. Walker, and B.R. Frasco. 1983c. The Vicksburg. MS. role of Delaware River freshwater tidal wetlands in the retention of Woodhouse, WW., E.D. Seneca, and S.W. Broome. 1976. Propagation nutrients and heavy metals. J. Environ. Qual. 12(1): 41-48. and Use of Spartina alterniflora for Shoreline Erosion Abatement. Sloey, WE., R.L. Spangler, and C.W. Fetter, Jr. 1978, Management of L.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center. Tech. Rept. 76-2, freshwater wetlands for nutrient assimilation. In: R.E. Good, D.F Wolman, WG, and L.B. Leopold. 1957, River Floodplains. Some Whigham, and R.L. Simpson (editors). Freshwater Wetlands, Eco­ Observations on Their Formation. U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper logical Processes and Management Potential. Academic Press, Inc., 282-C. New York, pp. 321-340. CHAPTER 8. Wetland Protection

Introduction suits were filed nationwide against the Corps by con­ cerned environmental organizations over the 1982 regula­ A variety of techniques are available to protect our tory changes. Under an out-of-court settlement agreement remaining wetlands, including land-use regulations, di­ (National Wildlife Federation vs. Marsh), the Corps is­ rect acquisition, conservation easements, tax incentives, sued regulations in November 1986 requiring closer Fed­ public education, and the efforts of private individuals eral and state review of proposals to fill wetlands. Imple­ and corporations. These techniques are discussed in nu­ mentation of these new regulations needs to be monitored merous sources including Kusler (1983), Burke and oth­ to assess their effectiveness of protecting wetlands. ers (1989), and Rusmore and others (1982). Wetlands are regulated by the State of Rhode Island under two programs: (1) Coastal Resources Management Wetland Regulation Program and (2) Fresh Water Wetlands Program. The former program is administered by the Coastal Resources Several Federal and state laws or programs regulate Management Council and deals with a wide range of certain uses of Rhode Island wetlands. The more signifi­ coastal resources of which coastal wetlands are but one cant ones include the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and part (Olsen and Seavey 1983). The latter program is the Clean Water Act of 1977 at the Federal level and the administered by the Department of Environmental Man­ Coastal Resources Management Program (1977) and agement (OEM). Both programs require permits for regu­ Fresh Water Wetlands Act of 1971 at the state level. Key lated activities in these wetlands. points of these laws are outlined in Table 21. In addition, Executive Order 11990-" Protection of Wetlands"­ Besides the Federal and state permit programs, Section requires Federal agencies to develop gUidelines to mini­ 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act gives the state another mize destruction and degradation of wetlands and to pre­ powerful tool to protect wetlands. Any Federal permit or serve and enhance wetland values. license which may involve a discharge to waters of the United States requires a Section 401 water quality cer­ The foundations of Federal wetland regulations are tification from the state. The state reviews these permits Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 to see if they meet state water quality standards. If they of the Clean Water Act. Federal permits for many types of do not, then 40 I certification is denied and the Federal construction in wetlands are required from the U.S. Army permit cannot be issued. Consequently, DEM has the Corps of Engineers, but normal agricultural and silvi­ authority to issue, condition, waive or deny water quality cultural activities are exempt from permit requirements. certification for Federal permits including Section 404 The Service plays an active role in the permit process by permits. This program provides the state with another reviewing permit applications and making recommenda­ powerful tool to protect wetlands. tions based on environmental considerations, under au­ thority of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. Al­ though the Federal laws in combination apply to virtually Wetland Acquisition all of Rhode Island's wetlands, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' 1982 regulations for Section 404 of the Clean Wetlands may also be protected by direct acquisition or Water Act reduced its effectiveness for protecting wet­ conservation easements. Many wetlands are owned by lands. In particular, the widespread use of "nationwide public agencies or by private environmental organiza­ permits" and the lack of strong enforcement were major tions, although the majority are privately-owned. weak points. Under the nationwide permit system, there was no required reporting or monitoring system, conse­ The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wildlife quently there was no record of wetland loss and no effort Refuge System was established to preserve important to promote environmental or other public interest con­ migratory bird wetlands at strategic locations across the cerns. In Rhode Island, many wetlands lie above desig­ country. Four National Wildlife Refuges are located in nated headwaters or exist in isolated basins and they were Rhode Island: Trustom Pond (642 acres), Ninigret (408 not protected under the 1982 regulations. Numerous law- acres), Sachuest Point (242 acres), Block Island (46 68

Table 21. Summary of primary Federal and state laws requiring permits for wetland alteration in Rhode Island.

Name of Lawl Administering Types of Regulation Agency Wetlands Regulated Regulated Activities Exemptions Comments

Rivers and U.S. Army Corps Tidal wetlands Structures and/or work in or af­ None specified July 22, 1982 Regulations; U.S. Harbors Act of of Engineers below the mean fecting the navigable U. S., in­ Fish and Wildlife Service and 1899 (Section high water cluding dredging and filling state wildlife agency review per­ 10) mark; nontidal mit applications for environmen­ wetlands below tal impacts by authority of Fish the ordinary and Wi ldlife Coordination Act. high water mark

Clean Water U.S. Army Corps Wetlands Discharge of dredge or fill mate­ Normal farming, sil­ July 22, 1982 Regulations; U.S. Act of 1977 of Engineers un- contiguous with rial viculture, and ranching Environmental Protection Agency (Section 404; der guidelines de- al! waters of the activities (including oversight; U.S. Fish and Wildlife formerly Fed- veloped by the U.S. minor drainage); mainte­ Service and state wildlife agency eral Water Pol- U.S. Environ- nance of existing struc­ review proposed work for envir­ lution Control mental Protection tures; construction or onmental impacts by authority of Act of 1972) Agency maintenance of farm Fish and Wildlife Coordination ponds, irrigation ditches Act. Permits cannot be issued or maintenance of irriga­ without State certification that tion ditches; construction proposed discharge meets State of temporary sedimenta­ water quality standards. Individ­ tion basins; construction ual permits are required for spe­ or maintenance of farm cific work in many wetlands; roads, forest roads or regional permits for certain cate­ temporary mining roads gories of activities in specified (within certain specifica­ geographic areas; nation-wide tions) permits for 25 specific activities and for discharges into wetlands above headwaters or not part of surface tributary system to inter­ state or navigable waters of U.S. State takeover of permit program is encouraged. New regulations were issued in October 1984.

State of Rhode Coastal Coastal wetlands In Type I (conservation) and Type "Special exceptions" are Type I through 6 waters are Island Coastal Resources (salt marshes 2 (low-intensity use) waters, all granted for activities of shown on maps and coastal wet­ Resources Management and contiguous alterations are prohibited except compelling public pur­ lands designated for preservation Mgmt. Pro- Council freshwater Of minimal alterations required by pose (special require­ in type 3, 4, 5, and 6 waters are gram (as brackish wet- construction Of repair of an ap- ments) that minimize also shown on maps. Field deter­ amended June lands) proved structural shoreline protec- environmental impacts minations of wetland boundaries 28, 1983) tion facility. In type 2 waters, and for which no reason­ are required. The Council may re­ minor disturbances associated able alternative is avail­ quire creation of replacement salt with residential docks and walk- able (subject to proper marsh of similar size for any al­ ways meeting certain standards notice, public hearings terations. are permitted. In other waters and necessary condi­ (types 3, 4, 5, and 6-high- tions) intensity boating, multipurpose, commercial/recreational harbors, and industrial waterfronts/ commercial navigation channels, respectively), salt marshes not designated for preservation may be altered if (a) the alteration is made to accomodate a designated priority use for that water area, (b) the applicant has examined all reasonable alternatives and the Council has determined that the selected alternative is the most reasonable, and (c) only the mini- mum alteration necessary to sup- port the priority use is made.

Fresh Water Department of Fresh water wet- Drain, fill, excavate, dam, dike, None specified Regulations also pertain to ac­ Wetlands Act Environmental lands (e.g., or divert water, place trash, gar- tivities on uplands within 50' of (1971, 1979 Management marshes-l acre bage, sewage, highway runoff, wetland. Activities in rivers and amendments) or larger in size; drainage ditch effluents and other on flood plains and river banks swamps-3 materials and effluents upon, are regulated as fresh water wet­ acres or more; change or otherwise alter the lands. ponds-more character of any fresh water wet- than 1/4 acre) land 69 acres), and Pettaquamscutt Cove (26 acres). The State of ence to effectiveness of State and Federal wetland Rhode Island possesses much wetland acreage. Many protection efforts and periodically update the Na­ wildlife management areas include some large wetland tional Wetlands Inventory in problem areas, complexes, such as Great Swamp (South Kingstown! Kingston), Burlingame (Charlestown), and Blackhut 11. Increase public awareness of wetland values and (Burrillville). Wetlands are also located in various state the status of wetlands through various media and parks and other conservation areas in Rhode Island (e.g., environmental education programs. Audubon Society's Norman Bird Sanctuary in Middle­ town). 12. Conduct research to increase our knowledge of wetland values and ecology.

Future Actions Private Options: In an effort to maintain and enhance remaining wet­ lands, many opportunities are available to both govern­ 1. Rather than drain or fill wetlands, seek more en­ ment and the private sector. Their joint efforts will deter­ vironmentally compatible, alternative uses of those mine the future course of our Nation's wetlands. Major areas, e.g., timber harvest, waterfowl production, options have been outlined below: fur harvest, hay and forage, wild rice production, and hunting leases. Government Options 2, Donate wetlands to private or public conservation I. Strengthen Federal, State and local wetlands pro­ agencies for tax purposes. tection. 3. Maintain wetlands as open space and seek appropri­ 2. Ensure proper implementation of existing laws ate tax relief. and policies through adequate staffing and im­ proved surveillance and enforcement programs. 4. When selling property that includes wetlands, con­ sider incorporating into the property transfer, a deed 3. Increase wetland acquisition in vulnerable areas. restriction or a covenant preventing future alter­ ation and destruction of the wetlands and an appro­ 4. Remove government subsidies for wetland drain­ priate buffer zone. age. 5. Work in concert with government agencies to help 5. Scrutinize cost-benefit analyses and justifications educate the public on wetland values, threats, and for flood control projects that involve channeliza­ losses, for example. tion or other alteration of wetlands and water­ courses. 6. Construct ponds in upland areas and manage them for wetland and aquatic species. 6. Provide tax incentives to private landowners to encourage wetland preservation. 7. Purchase Federal and State duck stamps which sup­ port wetland acquisition. 7. Increase support for the Water Bank and Conser­ vation Easement Programs. 8. Support in various ways, public and private efforts to protect and enhance wetlands. 8, Increase the number of marsh creation projects, especially related to mitigation for unavoidable wetlands losses by government-sponsored water Public and private cooperation is needed to secure a resource projects; this should include restoration promising future for our remaining wetlands. In Rhode of degraded or former wetlands. Island, as competition for wetlands between development and environmental interests increases, ways have to be 9. Enhance existing wetlands through improving wa­ found to achieve economic growth, while minimizing ter quality and establishing buffer zones. adverse environmental impacts. This is vital to preserving wetland values for our future generations and for fish and 10. Monitor wetland changes especially with refer- wildlife species. 70

References

Burke, D.G., EJ. Meyers, R.W. Tiner, Jr., and H. Groman. 1989. Resource Management Program as amended on June 28, 1983. Protecting Nontidal Wetlands. American Planning Association, Chi­ Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island, Kingston. cago, IL. Planning Advisory Rept. 412/413.76 pp. 127 pp. Kusler, J.A. 1983. Our National Wetland Heritage. A Protection Guide­ Rusmore, B., A. Swaney, and A.D. Spader (editors). 1982. Private book. Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C. 167 pp. Options: Tools and Concepts for Land Conservation. Island Press, Olsen, S. and G.L. Seavey. 1983. The State of Rhode Island Coastal Covelo, CA. 292 pp. Appendix. List of Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands

71 Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands

GENUS-SPEGIES-AUTHOR-TRIHOMIAL-TRIHOMIAl AUTHOR RIIND GENUS-SPEGIES-AUTHOR-TRIHOMIAL-TRINOMIAl AUTHOR RIIND

ABIES 8ALSAI1EA (L) I1ILL FAG AI1ARANTHIJS RETROFLEXUS L FACU ACALYPHA RHOI1BOIOEA RAF. FAGU- AI1ARANTHIJS SPINOSUS L FACU ACALYPHA VIRGINICA L FAGU- AI18ROSIA ARTEl1lSffFOLfA L FACU ACER NECUNOO L FAG+ AI18ROSIA TRIFIOA L FAC ACER PENSYLVANICIJI1 L FAGU AI1ELANCHIER ARBOREA (11ICHX. F.) FERN. FAC­ ACER RIJ8RIJI1 L FAG AI1ELANCHIER CANADENSIS (L) I1fOIC. FAC ACfR RUBRIJI1 L VAR. TRILOBIJI1 TORR. & GRAY EX K. KOCH FAGW+ AI1ELANCHlfR SPfCATA (LAI1.) K. KOCH FAGU ACfR SACCHARINIJI1 L FACW AI1110PHILA BRfVIUCIJLATA FERNALD FACU­ ACfR SACCHARIJI1 I1ARSHALL FAGU- AI10RPHA FRIJTICOSA L FACW ACfR SPfCATUI1 LAI1. FAGU- AI1PHICARPAEA 8RACTfATA (L) FERNALfJ FAG ACHILLEA I1ILLEFOLIIJI1 L FACU ANOROl1fOA GLAIJCOPHYLLA oaL ACORUS CALAI1IJS L OBL ANOROI1EOA POLlFOLlA L oaL AOIANTUI1 PEfJATlJ11 L FAG- ANOROPOGON GfRARfJlI VITI1AN FAG AfGOPODfLfl1 POfJAGRARI A L FAGU ANDROPOGON GLOl1fRATUS iI/ALT[R) B. S. P. FAGW+ ACALINIS I1ARITII1A (RA~) RAF. FAGW+ ANOROPOGON VIRGINICUS L FACU ACALINIS OBTIJSIFOLIA (RA~) PfNNfLL FAGU ANfl10Nf QIJINOIJEFOLIA L FAGU AGAL/NIS PAIJPfRCIJLA (CRAY) 8RITTON FAGW+ ANfl10NE RIPARIA FfRNALD HI ACALtNIS PIJRPIJREA (t.) RAF. FAGW- ANfl10NE VIRGINIANA L HI ACALtNIS TENIJIFOLtA (VAHL) RAF. FAG ANGELICA ATROPIJRPlJRfA L OBL ACERATfNA ALTfSSII1A (L) R.I1. KING & H. R08. FAGU- ANCfLfCA LUCIDA L FAG* ACRI110NIA GRYPOS[PALA gALL~ FAGU ANTHfl1lS COTlJLA L FAGU­ ACRI110NIA STRIATA I1ICHX FAGU- ANTHOXANTHlJl1 ODORATlJl1 L F AGU ACROPYRON CANINlJl1 BEAUV. FAGU APIOS AI1ERICANA I1EDIC. FAGW ACROPYRON RfPfNS (L) 8EAlJV. FAG\!- APOCYNlJl1 CANNA81NlJI1 L. FAGU ACROPYRON TRACHYCAlJLlJI1 (LINK) I1ALTf EX H. F. LEgIS FAGU APOCYNlJl1 SI81RIClJI1 JACQ. FAG ACROSTfS AL8A L F AGW AQlJI LEGI A CANAOfNSIS L FAG ~ ACROSTfS CAN INA L FAGU ARA81S DRlJI1110NOff GRAY FAGU - ACROSTfS GIGANTfA ROTH HI ARALIA NlJOICAIJLfS L FACU AGROSTfS HY[I1ALfS (gALTER) 8. S. P. FAG ARALIA SPINOSA L FAC AGROSTfS PERENNANS (IlALTfR) TUCKfRI1AN FAGU ARCTOSTAPHYLOS lJVA-IJRSI (L) SPRENG. HI AGROSTfS SCA8RA gILLO. FAC ARENARIA SERPYLLlFOLfA L FAC AGROSTIS STOLONIFERA L FAGW ARETHIJSA BlJL80SA L OBL AILANTHlJS ALTISSII1A (I1ILL) SIlINGLE HI ARISAfl1A ORACONTfUI1 (L) SCHOTT FAGW ALETRIS FARINOSA L FAG ARISAfl1A TRIPHYLLUI1 (L.) SCHOTT FAGW­ AU SI1A PLANTACO-AQlJATfCA L OBL ARI10RACI A RlJSTfCIINA P. GAfRTN.. B. I1ErER & SCHERB. HI AUSI1A SIJBCOROATUI1 RAF. OBL ARONIA ARBIJTfFOLfA (L) ELLIOTT F AGIO ALLfIJI1 CANAOENSE L. FACU ARONIA I1ELANOCARPA (11ICHX.) ELLIOTT FAG ALLfIJI1 TRICOCCIJI1 AlT. FAGU+ ARONIA PRIJNIFOLfA (I1ARSH.) REHDER. FAGW ALLlIJI1 VINfALE L. FACU- ARRHfNATHERUI1 ELATfIJS (L) J. & K. PRfSL FAGU ALNIJS GLUTfNOSA (L.) CAfRTN. FAGW- ARTEI1ISIA BIENNIS IIILLO. FACU­ ALNIJS INCANA (L) 110ENCH HI ARTEI1ISIA STELLERANA BESS[R FACU ALNIJS I1ARITfI1A (I1ARSH.) I1lJHL OBL ASCLEPIAS EXALTATA L FAGU* ALNUS RUGOSA (OIJ ROt) SPRENG. FAGW+ ASCLEPIAS INCARNATA L OBL ALNIJS SERRIJLATA (AlT.) IIILLO. OBL ASCLfPIAS PURPURASCfNS L F AGU ALOPfCURUS GfNICIJLATIJS L OBL ASPARAGIJS OFFICINALIS L FAGU ALOPECURUS I1YOSIJROIDES HUDS. FACW ASPLfNfLfl1 PLATYNEURON (L) OAIiES F AGU ALOPfCURUS PRATENS I S L F ACW ASTER 01J110SIJS L FAG ALTHAfA OFFICINALIS L FACW+ ASTfR fRICOIOfS L FAGU A,IfARANTHIJS ALBIJS L FACU ASTfR JIJNCIFORI1IS eYOB. OBl A,IfARANTHUS 8UTOIOfS S. gATS. HI ASTfR LATERIFLORUS (L) BRITTON FAGW­ AffARANTHIJS CANNA81NIJS (L) SAIJER OBl ASTfR LUCIOIJLUS (GRAY) g/fCANO FACW AffARANTHIJS PIJI1ILUS RAF. FAGW* ASTER Nfl10RALlS AlT. FACW+

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland). FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land). NI (no indicator assigned), • (limited ecological infonnation), + (higher portion of frequency range), and - (lower portion of frequency range). See discussion of hydropbyte definition and concept in Chapter 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued)

GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINOMIAl-TRINOMIAL AUTHOR RIIND GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINOMIAl-TRINOMIAl AUTHOR RIIND AST[R NOVA[-ANCUA[ L rACk- CABOIIBA CAROLINIANA CRAY OBl AST[R NOVI-B[LCI! L rACW+ CAKILE [D[NTULA (BIC[L) HOOK. FACU AST[R PRA[ALTUS POIR. FACW CALAIIACROSTIS CANAD[NSIS (IIICHX.) 8[AW. FACW+ ASTfR PUNIC[US L OBL CALAIIACROSTIS CINNOID[S (IIUHL) 8ARTON OBl ASTfR RADULA AlT. OBL CALLA PALlJSTRIS L OBl AST[R SIIIPLEX ~/LLD. FACW CALLITRICH[ H[T[ROPHYLLA PURSH OBl AST[R SUBULATUS IIICHX. OBL CALLITRICH[ V[RNA L OBL AST[R T[NUIFOLIUS L OBl CALLlJNA VULCARIS (L ) HULL FAC* AST[R TRAD[SCANT I L FACW CALOPOCON TU8[ROSUS (L) B. S. P. FACW+ AST[R UIIB[LLATUS IIILL rACW CALTHA PALUSTRIS L OBl AST[R VIIIINfUS LAII. FAC CALYSTfClA S[PIUI'f (L.) R. BR. FAC­ AST[R X BLAK[I (~ PORT[R) HOUS[ FACW+ CAIIPANULA APARINOIO[S PURSH OBl AST[R X LANC[OLATUS ~/LLD. NI CANNA81S SATIVA L FACU ATHYR/u1I F/ LlX-F[IIINA (L) ROTH FAC CAPSfLLA BURSA-PASTORIS (L II[OIC. FACU ATHYR/u1I THfLYPT[ROfD[S (1'fICHX.) O[SV. FAC CAROMIN[ 8UL80SA (SCHR[B. IIUHL) 8 .. S. P. OBl ATRIPLEX AR[NARIA NUTT. FAC- CAROMIN[ HIRSUTA L FACU ATRIPLEX CLA8RlUSCULA [OIlONST. NI CAROAIIIN[ PARVIFLORA L FACU ATRIPLEX PATULA L rACk CAROAIIIN[ P[NSYLVANICA I'fUHL [X ~ILLO. OBl 8ACCHARIS HALIIIIFOLIA L FACW CARDAl'fIN[ PRAT[NSIS L OBl 8AR8AR[A VULCARIS ~ 8~ rACU CAR[X A8SCONOITA IIACK[N~ r AC BARTONIA PANICULATA (IIICHX.) I'fUHL OOL CAR[X AL80LIJT[SC[NS SCH~[INITZ rACW 8ARTONIA VIRCINICA (L.) B. S. P. rACW CAR[X AIIPHI80LA ST[UO. FAC 8[RB[RIS THUN8[RCII OC. FACU CAREX ANN[CT[NS (BICKN.) BICKN. FACW B[R8[RIS VULCARIS L FACU CAR[X ATLANTICA L H. BAILEr FACW+ BETULA ALLECHANI[NSIS 8RITTON FAC CAR[X AUR[A NUTT. FACW B[TULA L[NTA L FACU CAR[X BICKN[LLII 8RITTON FACU » 8[TULA NICRA L rACk CAR[X 8LANOA o[~[r FAC N BETULA PAPrRIFfRA IIARSHALL FACU CAREX BROIIOIO[S SCHKUHR FACW BETULA POPULIFOUA IIARSHALL FAC CAREX BRUNN[SC[NS (P[RS.) POIR. FACW BIO[NS C[RNUA L OOL CAR[X BULLATA SCHKUHR OBl BW[NS COIIOSA (CRAy) ~ I fCANO FACW CAREX BUSH II I'fACK[N~ FACW BIO[NS CONNATA IIUHL. EX ~/LLD. FACW+ CAR[X 8UX8AUIIII ~AHL[NB. OBl BIO[NS CORONATA (L.) BRITTON OOL CAR£X CAN[SC[NS L OBl BW[NS OISCOIO[A (TORR. & CRAY) 8RITTON FACW CAR[X C[PHALOIO[A O[~[Y FAC+ 8W[NS [ATONI F[RNALO OBl CAR[X C[PHALOPHORA IIUHL. [X ~I LLO. FACU BID[NS FRONOOSA L FACW CAR[X COLLINSII NUTT. OBl B I D[NS LA[V I S (L) B. S. P. OOl CAREX COIIOSA 800TT OBl 8ID[NS TRIPARTITA L OOl CAR[X CONOIO[A SCHKUHR FACU BO[HI'f[RIA crUNDRICA (L) S~ARTZ FACW+ CAR[X CRA~[I O[~EY FACW 80LTONI A AST[ROID[S (L) L' H[R. r ACW CAR[X CRA~FORDII F[RNALD FAC BOTRYCHIUI'f DISS[CTUI'f SPR[NC. FAC CAR[X CRINITA tAli. OBl 80TRYCHlUII LANC[OLATUII (S. C. CII[L) RUPR. FACW CAREX CRISTATfLLA 8RITTON FACW BOTRrCHlU1I LUNARIA (L) SJiARTZ FACW CAR£X CRynOLEPIS I'fACI([N~ OBl BOTRYCHIUI'f I'fATRICARIIFOLlUI'f A. BRAUN FACU CAR£X O[BI US I'fICHX. FAC BOTRrCHIUI'f SIIIPLEX [. HI TCHC. FACU CAR£X D[II£YANA SCHJI£lNITZ FACU BOTRrCHIUI'f VIRCINIANUII L SJiARTZ FACU CAR£X D/ANORA SCHRANK OOL BRAS[NIA SCHR[8[RI J. F. OBL CAR£X [CHINATA IIURRAY OBl* 8RIZA II[OIA L FAC CAR[X [XI LIS O[Ji[Y OOL BROIIUS CIUATUS L. FACio! CAR[X FLAVA L. OOL BROIIUS DUOLEY! F[RNALD FAC+ CAR£X FO[N[A II/UO. HI .g,,?OI'fUS LATlCLlJI'fIS (SH[AR) HI TCHC. FACio! CAR£X CRACILUI'fA SCHII£lN/TZ FACU" BUL80STrus CAPILLARIS (L) C. B. CLARK[ rACU CAR[X HAYO[N!! O[IIEY OOL

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological information), + (higher portion of frequency range), and (lower pOltion of frequency range). See discussion of hydrophyte definition and concept in Chapter 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued) GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINOftlAL-TRINOftIAL AUTHOR RIIND GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINOHIAL-TRINOHIAL AUTHOR RIIND

CAR£X HORHATHOO£S FERNALO OBL CASSIA H£BECARPA F£RNALO rAC CAREX HOJl£ I HACI(£NI. OBL CASSIA NICTITANS L rACU- CAREX HYSTERIC INA IflJHL £X JlI LLD. OBL CASTILLEJA COCCIN£A (L) SPRENG. fAC CAREX INT£RIOR L H. BAILEY OBl C[LASTRlJS SCAND£NS L FACU- CAREX INTlJH£SC£NS RlJDG[ FACW+ C[LTIS OCCIO[NTALIS L rACU C AREX LAClJSTR IS JlI LLD. OBL C[NTAlJRllJH lJIfB£LLATlJlf GIL/~ EX F£RNALD FAC- CAR£X LA[VIVAGINATA (KlJ£K[NTH.) IfACK[NZ. OBL CEPHALANTHlJS OCCID[NTALIS L OBL CAR£X LASIOCARPA [HRH. OBL C[RASTllJlf VlJLGATlJlf L FACU- CAREX LAXIFLORA LAII. fACU" C[RATOPHYLLlJH O[H[RSlJlf L OBL CAR[X LEPIOOCARPA TAlJSCH OBL C[RATOPHYLLlJH HlJRICATUH CHAIf. OBL CAREX LEPTALEA JlAHLENB. OBL CHAIIA£CYPARIS THYOID[S (L) B. S. P. OBL CAR[X LlHOSA L OBL CHAHA£OAPHN[ CAL YClJL AT A (L ) '!O£NCH OBl CAR£X LONCII IfAClf[NI. OBL CH£LON[ CLABRA L OBl CAREX WPlJLlNA IflJHL EX JlILLD. OBl CH£NOPODIlJIf ALBlJlf L FACU+ CAR[X LlJRIOA JlAHLEN& OBL CH[NOPODllJlf AHBROSIOID[S L rACU CAR£ X If£ AD /I O£JI£Y fAC CH[NOPODllJIf CLAlJCUIf L FACII- CAR[X NIGRA (L.) R£ICHARO FACII+ CH£NOPODIlJIf LEPTOPHYLWIf (If00.) NlJTT. £X S. JlATS. FAC CAR[X NORIfALlS IfACK[NZ. rACU CH[NOPOOIlJIf RlJBRlJlf L FACII CAR[X NOVA£-ANCLIA[ SCHJI£INITZ FACU" CHRYSOSPLENllJlf AIf£RICANUIf SCHJI£INITI Olll CAREX PAlJP£RClJLA IfICHX. OIlL CIClJTA BlJLBIF£RA L Olll CAR£X POLYHORPHA IflJHL FACU C I ClJT A IfAClJ LATA L OBL CAR£X PRASINA JlAHLEN& OBL CINNA ARlJNDINACEA L FACII" CAR£X PS[UOOCrp[RlJS L OBL CIRCAEA ALPINA L fACIi CAR[X R£TRORSA SCHJI[INITZ FACW+ CIRCA£A WT[T1ANA L rACU CAR[X ROSTRATA J. STOKES OBL C I RS I lJIf ARV[NS£ (L ) SCOP. rACU CAR£X SCABRATA SCHJI[INITZ OBL CIRSIlJIf HORRIDlJWIf IfICHX. FACU- CAR£X SCHJI£INITZII O[JI£r OBL CIRSllJlf IflJTIClJlf IfICH~ OIlL 1-v.. CAREX SCOPAR I A SCHIWHR £ X JI I LLO. rACW CIRSIlJIf VlJLGAR£ (SAVI) T[NORE FACU- CAR£X S[ORSA £. C. HOJl£ rACW CLAOIlJIf HARISCOIO[S (lflJHL) TORR. OIlL CAR£X SPARGANIOIO£S IflJHL EX JlI LLO. rACU CLAYTONIA VIRGINICA L rACU CAR£X SOlJARROSA L FACW CLElfATlS VIRGINIANA L r AC CAREX STRAlfIN[ A JlI LLO. OBl CLETHRA ALNIFOLIA L rAC+ CAR[X STRICT A LAIf. OBl CLINTONIA BOR£ALlS (AlT. ) RAF. rAC CAR£X SJlANI I (F[RNALD) IfACK£NZ. FACU CO£LOCLOSSlJlf VIRID[ (L) HARTIf. f ACU CAREX TEN£RA OEN£Y FAC COLLINSONIA CANAO£NSIS L FAC+ CAR[X TORTA 800TT FACW CMANORA lJlfB£LLAT A (L) NlJTT. FACU- CAR£X TRIBlJLOIO[S JlAHLEN~ rACW+ COIfIf£LlNA COlflflJNIS L FAC- CAR£X TRISP[RHA O[JI£Y OBl CONllJlf IfAClJLATlJIf L FACW CAR£X TlJCK£RHANII 800TT OBL COPTIS TRIFOLIA (L ) SALlS8. FACW CAREX V[SICAR/A L OBL CORALLORRHIIA IfACULATA (RAF. ) RAF. fACU CAR£X VULPINOIO£A IflCHX. OBL CORALLORRHIIA TRlflOA CHAT. fACW CAR[X NALT£RANA L H. BAI LEY OBL COR[OPSIS LANC£OLATA L FACU CAR[X JlI[CANOII IfACK[NZ OBL COR£OPS I S ROS£ A NlJTT. fACW CAR[X X ALATA TOR~ OBl COR£OPSIS T1NCTORIA NUTT. fAC- CAR£X X STIPATA IflJHL [X JlILL~ OBL CORISP[RlflJlf HYSSOPIFOLIlJIf L FACU CARPINlJS CAROLINIANA JlALT[R fAC CORNlJS AIfOlflJlf ifILL fACW CARrA COROIFORlflS (JlANG£NH. ) K. /lOCH fACU+ CORNlJS CANAOENSIS L FAC- CARrA GLABRA (ifILL.) SJI££T FACU- CORNlJS F LORlbA L f ACU- CARrA LACIN/OSA (lflCHX. F.) LOlJO. rAC CORNlJS FO£lflNA ifILL. f AC CARYA OVALIS (JlANG[NH.) SARG. NI CORNlJS STOLONIF£RA IflCHX. fACW+ CARrA OVATA (HILL.) K. KOCH rACU- CORYLlJS AIf[RICANA JlALT£R fACU- CASSIA FASCIClJLATA If/CHX. rACU CORYLlJS CORNlJTA IfARSHALL f ACU-

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological information). + (higher portion of frequency range), and (lower portion of frequency range). See discussion of hydrophyte definition and concept in Chapter 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued) GEHU$-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRIHOMIAL-TRIHOMIAL AUTHOR RIIND GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINO"'AL-TRINO"IAL AUTHOR RIIND CRATAfCUS CRUS-CALLI L FACU ORYOI'T[RIS X TRIPLOIO[A NHfRRY FAC CRAT AfCUS I'HAfNOPYRUI'! (L F.) /'IfOlC. FAC OtlLlCHlU1I ARtlNOINAC£UI'! (L.) BRITTON OBL CRYI'TOTAfNIA CANAOfNSIS (L) OC. FAC [CHINOCHLOA CRUSCALL! (L.) B[AUV. FACU CUI'Hf A v I SCOS I SS I!fA J ACO. FAC­ [CHINOCHLOA I'!URICATA (B[AUV.) F[RNALO FACW+ CYP[RUS ARISTATUS ROTTB. FACW+ [CHINOCHLOA NALT[RI (I'URSH) A. H[LLfR FACI/+ CYI'[RUS O[NTATUS TORR. fACW+ [CHINOCYSTIS LOBATA (I'!ICHX) TOR~ & CRAY FAC CYI'[RUS OIANORUS TORR. FACW fLATIN[ AI'![RICANA (I'URSH) ARN. OBL CYI'[RUS [RYTHRORHIZOS I'!UHL fACW+ [LATIN[ I'!INII'!A (NUT~) FISCH. & C. A. I'![Y[R OBL CYI'[RUS [SCULfNTUS L fACW [LfOCHARIS ACICULARIS (L) RO[I'!. & J. A. SCHULTES OBL CYP[RUS FILICINUS VAHL OBL fLfOCHARIS [NC[U/ANNII ST£lIO. FACI/+ CYPfRUS FLAV[SC[NS L OBL [LfOCHARIS [OUISETOIO[S (ELLIOTT) TORR. OBL CYP[RUS ODORATUS L FACW [LfOCHARIS [RYTHROPOOA ST[Uft OBL CYP[RUS RIVULARIS KUNTH FACW+ [LfOCHARIS FALLAX N[ATH[RBY OBL CYI'[RUS STRICOSUS L FACW [LfOCHARIS HALOPHfLA (F[RNALO & A. BRACKETT) FfRNALO & A. BRACKETT OBL CYI'RII'£OIUI'! ACAULf AlT. FACU [LfOCHARIS I'!fLANOCARI'A TORR. FACW+ CYI'RII'[OIUI'! CALCfOLUS L FAC+ [LfOCHARIS OBTUSA (NILLO.) J. A. SCHULTES OBL CYSTOI'T[RIS BULBIFfRA (L) BfRNH. FAC [LfOCHARIS OLlVAC[A TORR. OBL CYSTOI'T[RIS FRACILIS (L.) B[RN~ FACU fLfOCHARIS OVATA (ROTH) RO[~ & ~ ~ SCHULTES OBL OACTYLIS CLOl'!fRATA L FACU [LfOCHARIS I'AWSTRIS (L) RO[I'!. & ~ A. SCHULTES OBL OALIBAROA R[l'fNS L FAC [LfOCHARIS I'ARVULA (RO[I'!. 8. J. A. SCHULTES) LIN/! [X BWFF 8. rtNC[RH. OBL OANTHON I A COI'!I'R[SSA AUST. FACU­ [LfOCHARIS I'AUCIFLORA (L!CHTF.) LINK OBL OANTHONIA S[RICfA NUTT' FACU fL[OCHARIS ROBBINSI I OAKES OBl O[COOON V[RTICILLATUS (L) nUOTT OBL [LfOCHARIS ROST[LLATA (TORR.) TORR. OBL O[SCHAI'!I'S/A C[SP/TOSA (L.) B[AUV. FACW [L[OCHARIS SI'!ALLII BRITTON OBL OfSI'!OOlU1'! CANAO[NS[ (L. ) OC. fAC fL[OCHARIS TENUIS (NILLO.) J. A. SCHULTES FACW+ OICHANTHfLlUI'! ACUI'!INATUI'! (S/oIARTZ) COULD & C. A. CLARK FAC [[[OCHARIS TRICOSTATA TORR. OBL )- OICHANTHfUUI'! CLANO[STlNUI'! (L) COULO FAC+ [LfOCHARIS TUB[RCULOSA (1'IICHX.) RO[I'I. 8. J. A. SCHULTES OBL J,. OICHANTHf LlUI'! CO/'lI'!UTATUI'! (J. A. SCHULTfS) coutO FACU+ [LfOCHARIS UNltLlllIlS (LINk) J. A. SCHULTES OBL OICHANTH[UU/'l OICHOTOI'!UI'! (L) COULD FAC [LfUSIN[ INOICA (L.) CA[RTN. FACU­ OICHANTH[UUI'! LATlFOLlUI'! (L.) HARVILL FACU­ [LOOfA CANAO[NSIS I'! I CHX. OBL OICHANTH[UUI'! LAXIFLORUI'! (L) COULD FACU [LOOfA NUTTALLII (PLANC~) ~ ST. JOHN OBL OICHANTHfLIUI'! OLICOSANTH[S (J. A SCHULTES) COULD FACU fLYI'!US CANAO[NSIS L. FACU+ OICHANTHfUUI'! SA8ULORUI'! (LAI'!. ) COULD & C. A. CLARK FACU [[YI'!US RIPARIUS /oIlfC.4NO FACW OICHANTH[LIUI'! SCABRIUSCULUI'! (fLLIOTT) COULO & ~ ~ CLARK OBL [[YIIUS VILLOSUS I'!UHL. [X NILLO. FACU­ OICHANTH[UUI'! SCOI'ARIUI'! (LAI'!.) COUtO FACW [LY/'IUS VIRCINICUS L. FACW­ OICHANTH[LlUI'! SI'HAfROCARPON (ELLIOTT) COULD FACU [I'IL08IUI'I ANCUSTlFOLlUI'! L. FAC OICITARIA SANCUINALIS (L) SCOI'. FACU­ [PIL08IUI'I COLORATUI'! BI[HL[R OBL OIOSCOR[A VILLOSA L FAC+ [I'I LOB WII HI RSUTUI'! L. FACII OIOSI'YROS VIRCINIANA L FAC­ £1'/ LOBIUII LfPTOPHrLLUII RAF. OBL OII'SACUS SYLV[STRIS HUOS. I'll fl'l LOB WI'! PAWSTR[ L. OOL OIRCA PALUSTRIS L FAC [PI LOBWII STRICTUII I'!UHL £X SI'R[NC. OBL OISTlCHUS SP/CATA (L) CR[fN[ FACW+ [OUISETUII ARV[NS[ L. FAC ORACOC[PHAWI'! I'ARVIFLORUII NUTT. FACU­ fOU/SUUI'! FLUVIATlL£ L. OBL OROS[RA rt LlFORI'!IS RAF. OBL [OU/SUUI'! HY[I'!AL[ L. FACW OROS[RA INT[Rl'!fOIA HAYN[ OBL [QU/SUUI'! PALUSTR[ L. FACII OROSfRA ROTUNOIFOLI A L OBL [Qu/SETUI'! SYLVATlCUII L FACII ORYOI'TERIS CLINTON/ANA (0. C. [AT.) P. oO/oln FACW+ fRACROSTlS CILI.4N[NSIS (ALL.) LINK £X I'!OSH[R FACU ORYOI'T[RIS CRISTATA (L) CRAY FACW+ fRACROST/S I'[CTINAC[A (1IICHX.) N[[S FAC ORYOI'T[RIS INT[RI'![OIA (/oIILL~) CRAY FACU [R[CHT/TfS HI[RACI !FOLIA (L.) RAF. EX ~C. FACU ORYOl'TfRIS I'!ARCINALIS (L.) CRAY FACU­ fRIC[RON ANNUUS (L ) I'[RS. FACU ORYOI'T[RIS SPINULOSA (0. F. l'!unL.) /oIATT FAC+ fRIC[RON PHILAOfLPHICUS L FACU ORYOl'TfRI S X BOOTTII (TUCK[RIIAN) UNOfRN. FACW [R/C[RON PULCHfLWS I'!ICHX. FACU

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land), NI (no indicator assigned), • (limited ecological information), (higher portion of frequcncy range), and - (lower portion of frequcncy range). See discussion of hydrophytc definition and concept in Chapter 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued)

CENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINO"IAL-TRINO"IAL AUTHOR RII NO GENUS-SP£CIES-AUTHOR-TRINO"IAL-TRINO"IAL AUTHOR Rl tNO [RfC£RON STRfCOSUS I1UHL EX IIfLL[). fACU+ C[RAN/UI1 I1ACULATUI1 L f ACU [RfOCAULON PARK[Rf B. ROB. OBL C[UI1 ALfPPfCUI1 JACQ. FAC [RfOCAULON SfPTANCULAR[ II/TH. OBL C[UI1 CANA[)[NS[ JACQ. FACU [RfOPHORUI1 ALPINUI1 L OBL O[UI1 LACINIATUI1 I1URRAY FAC+ [RIOPHORUI1 ANCUSTIFOLIUI1 HONCK. OBl CfUl1 RIVALf L OBL [RIOPHORUI1 GRACILf II. KOCH OBL C[UI1 VIRCINIANUI1 L FAC- [RIOPHORUI1 SPISSUI1 F[RNALD OBL CLAUX I1ARITlI1A L OBl [RIOPHORUI1 TfNELWI1 NUTT. OBL CLfCOI1A H[[)[RAC[A L FACU fR/OPHORUI1 VACINATUI1 L OBL CLf[)ITSIA TRIACANTHOS L FAC- fRIOPHORUI1 VIRGINICUI1 L OBL CLYC[RIA ACUTIFLORA TORR. OBL [RIOPHORUI1 VIRI[)ICARINATUI1 ([NGfLI1.) F[RNAL[) OBL CLYC[RIA BOR[ALIS (NASH) BATCH. OBL fRYSII1UI1 CH[IRANTHOIDfS L FAC CLYC[RIA CANA[)[NSIS (111CHX.) TR/~ OBL [UONYI1US ATROPURPUR[US JACQ. FACU CLYC[RfA FWITANS (L) R. BR. OBL [UPATORIA[)ELPHUS [)UBIUS (II/LLD. EX POIR.) R.I1. KINC 8 H. ROB. FACII CLYC[RIA I1AXII1A (HARTI1.) a ~ HOLI1B[RC DBL fUPATORIADfLPHUS FlSTULOSUS (BARRATT EX HOOK.) R.I1. lUNG 8 H. ROB. FACW CLYC[RIA OBTUSA (I1UHL) TRIN. OBL £UPATORIADfLPHUS I1ACULATUS (L) R.I1. KINC II H. ROB. FACW CLYC[RIA S[PT[NTRIONALIS A. H/TCHC. OBL £UPATORIUI1 L[UCOLfPfS (OC.) TORR. II GRAY FAC\!+ CLYC[RIA STRIATA (LAI1.) A. HI TCHC. DBL [UPATORIUI1 PfRFOLIATUI1 L FACW+ COODYfRA PUB[SCfNS (III LLD.) R. BR. FACU- [UPATORIUI1 PILOSUI1 IIALTfR FACW COO[)Y[RA RfP[NS ( L) R. BR. IN II. T. AlT. FACU+ [UPATORIUI1 ROTUNDIFOLIUI1 L fAC- COO[)Y[RA TfSS[ LAT A LO[)M C. FACU- [UPATORIUI1 S[ROTlNUI1 11 I CHX. FAC- CRATIOLA AUR[A PURSH OBl [UPHORBIA I1ACULATA L f ACU- CRATIOLA N[CLfCTA TOR~ DBL [UPHORBIA POLYCONIFOlIA L fACU CRINDfLlA SQUARROSA (PURSH) DUNAL fACU £UTHAI1/A GRAI11NIFOLIA (L) NUTT. FAC HACK[LlA VIRCINIANA (L) I. JOHNST. FACU FACUS GRAN[)IFOlIA [HRH. f ACU HAI1AI1[LIS VIRCINIANA L FAC- F[STUCA ARUNDINAC[A SCHR[B. FACU HAST[OLA SUAV[OLfNS (L ) POJARK. ,IIC- ;:... F[STUCA OBTUSA BI[HLfR FACU H[LfNIUI1 AI1ARUI1 (RAF.) H. ROCK fACU- I U1 F[STUCA PRAT[NSIS HU[)S. FACU- HfLfNlU11 AUTUI1NALf L FACW+ FfSTUCA RUBRA L FACU H[ LfN IUI1 FLf XUOSUI1 RAF. fAC- FlLACINELLA ULICINOSA (L) OPIZ FAC H[ Lf ANTHUS ANNUUS L fAC- FlI1BRISTYLlS AUTUI1NALIS (L ) RO[I1. II J. A. SCHULTES FACW+ H[ L/ ANTHUS DfCAPfT ALUS L FACU FRAGARIA VIRGIN/ANA DUCH[SN[ fACU H[LlANTHUS C/CANT£US L FACW FRAXINUS AI1[RICANA L FACU H[llANTHUS TUBfROSUS L FAC FRAXINUS NIGRA I1ARSHALL FACW Hfl11CARPHA 111CRANTHA (VAHL) PAX FACW+ FRAXINUS P[NNSYLVANICA I1ARSHALl FACW HfRACLfUI1 lANATUI1 111CHX. FACU- FUIR[NA PUI11LA TOR~ OBL HIBISCUS 110SCH[UTOS L DBl GALlUI1 APARIN[ L FACU HI[ROCHLO[ ODORATA (L ) B[AW. FACW GALIUI1 ASPR[LlUI1 111CH~ OBL HOLCUS LANATUS L FACU GALlUI1 OBTUSUI1 BICfL fACW+ HONK[NYA PfPLOltJ[S (L) [HRH. FACU CALlUI1 PAWSTR[ L. OBL HORD[UI1 JUBATUI1 L FIIC GAllUI1 TINCTORIUI1 L OBL HOTTONIA INFlATA [llIOTT OBl GALIUI1 TRIFltJUI1 L FIICII+ HOUSTONIA CAfRULfA L FACU GAL/UI1 TRIFLORUI1 111CHX. ,ACU HUI1ULUS JAPONICUS SI[BOLD 8 ZUCCA~ FACU GAULTHfRIA HISPftJULA (L) !fUHL fX TORR. FACW HU!fULUS LUPULUS L NI GAULTH[RIA PROCU!fBfNS L FIICU HYDROCOTrLf A!f[RICANA L DBl GAYlUSSACIA BACCATA (IIANC[NH.) K. IWCH FIICU HYDROCOTYLf UI1BfLLATA L OBl GAY WSSAC I A DUI10SA (ANtJR.) TORR. & CRAY FAC HYtJROCOTrLf V[RTICILL.4TA THUNB. OBl GAYWSSAC/A FRONtJOSA (L) TORR. & CRAY FIIC HYP[RICUI1 AtJPR[SSU!f ~ BARTON OBl G[NT! ANA ANDR[IIS" CR / SfB. FIICW HYP[R/CUI1 BOR[ALf (BRITTON) BICKN. DBl G[NT!ANA CLAUSA RAF. FACW HYPfRICUI1 CANA[)[NS[ L. FACW G[NT/ANA SAPONARIA L FACW HYP[RICUI1 DISSII'lULATUI1 BfCKN. FACW C[NTIANOPSIS eRINITA (FRO[L) !fA OBl HYPfRICUI1 fLLlPT!CUI1 HOOK. DBl

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological infonnation), + (higher portion of frequency range), and - (lower portion of frequency range), See discussion of hydrophyte definition and concept in Chapter 6, Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued) G£NUS-SP£CI£S-AUTHOR-TRINOftIAl-TRINOftIAl AUTHOR RI rND G£NUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRrNOKIAl-TRrNOKIAl AUTHOR Rf rND HYP[RICUIf IfAJUS (CRAY) BRITTON FACW lACTUCA S[RRIOLA L F AC­ HYPERICUIf IfWILlIIf L fAell LAPOHT£A CANAD[NSIS (L.) JI[f)f). fAew HYP[RICUIf PROL/FlCUIf L FACU LARIX LARICINA (DU ROI) K. KOCH FACW HYP[RICUIf PUNCTATUIf LAII. FAC- LATHYRUS JAPONICUS IIILLD. FACU­ HYPOXIS HIRSWA (L) COVILU FAC LATHYRtlS pALlIsrRIS L FACII+ lUX GLABRA (L) CRAY FACW- U[RSIA ORYZOID[S (L) SIIARrz OBl lUX LAEVICArA (PtlRSH) A. CRAY OBl U[RS/A VIRC/NICA II/UD. FACII lUX OpACA SOLAND. /N AlT. FACU+ UlfNA IfINllfA HUlfB. EX PHILIPPI NOl1EN SlfpERFL NONCHEV. OBl lUX V[RTlC! LLArA (L) CRAY FACII+ UlfNA IfINOR L OBl IlfpAT/ENS CApENSIS IfEERB. FACII UlfNA PERplfSILLA TORR. OBl IlfPAT/ENS pALLlDA NlfTT. FACII UlfNA TR/SlfLCA L OBL IPOlfOEA COCCINEA L FACU UnwA VALDIVIANA PHILIPPI OBl IRIS PRISlfATlCA PURSH OBl UP/Dtulf NNSIFLORlflf SCHRAD. FAC IRIS PS[UDACORUS L OBl UP/Dtulf VIRCINIClflf L FACU­ IRIS VERSICOLOR L OBl UPTOCHLOA FASCICtlLARIS (LAI1.) CRAY FACII ISoa[s fCHINOSPORA DlfRIElf OBl USPEOEZA ANClfSTlFOLlA (pURSH) fLLlOTT FAC ISO£TES [NCE LIIANN I I A. BRAUN OBl USP[OEZA CAP/TATA I1ICHt. FACU­ ISOET£S RIpARIA ENCELII. EX A. BRAUN OBl uucorHOE RACElfOSA (L) CRAY rACIl /soa[s TUCKERI1ANII A. BRAlfN EX ENCELII. OBL LlArR/S SP/CATA (L) IIILLD. FAC+ ISOTR/A If[D[OLO/D[S (PlfRSH) RAF. FACU LI&USTlClfl1 SCOTHIClflf L FAe ISOTR/A VERT/CILLATA (lfUHL EX IIILLD.) RAF. FACU U&USTRlflf VlfLCARE L FACU IVA FRlfTESCENS L FACW+ LI LAfOPSIS CHINENSIS (L) KlfNTZ[ OBl JlfGLANS ClN[REA L FACU+ LlLlUIf CANADENSE L FAC+ JUCLANS NICRA L FACU LlLIUIf pHILADfLPHIClf/'f L FACU+ JlfNCUS AClfl1INATUS IfICHX. OOl LI UUIf Slfp[RBlflf L FACII+ JUNClfS ARTlCULArlfS L OOL UlfOIItulf CAROL/NIANtlIf (IIALTER) BRITTON OBl >.' JUNCUS BALTIClfS IIILLD. FACII+ UlfONtulf NASHII SlfALL OBl 01 JUNCUS BREVICAlfDATUS (ENC[LII.) FERNALD OBl LllfOS[LLA SlfBlfLATA E. IVES OBl JlfNCUS BlfFONtuS L FACW LlNDERA B[NZOIN (L) BLlJI1E FACII­ JUNClfS CANADENSIS ~ CAY OBl LIND[RWIA ANACALLID[A (/'fICHt.) PENNELL OBl JUNCtlS DEB/LIS CRAY OOl LINDERNIA DlfBIA (L.) PENNELL OBl JUNCUS DICHorOlfUS ELLIOTT FACW LlNNAfA BOREALIS L FAC JlfNCUS EFFUSlfS L FACW+ UNUIf "EDWIf (PLANCH.) BRITTON FACU JUNClfS GERARDII LOISEUlfR FACW+ LINUIf STRIATlflf IIALTER FACII JUNCUS CREENEI OAKES 8 TlfCK£RlfAN FAC LlNUIf VIRCINIANlflf L FACU JUNCUS IfARGINATUS ROSTIC FACII LlpARIS U UIFOU A (L.) L. C. RICH. EX K[R-CAIIL FACU­ JUNCUS If/ UTARIS BIC[L OBl LlPARIS LO[SfLlI (L) L C. RICH. FACII JUNClfS NODOSUS L OBL UR/OOENDRON TlfLlP/FERA L FACU JUNClJS PfLOCARplJS E. If£Y[R OOL LlST[RA CORDATA (L) R. BR. FACII+ JlJNCUS pLATYPHYLLlfS (1I1ECAND) FERNALD FAC LOBELIA CARDINALIS L FACII+ JlJNCUS SCIRpOID[S LAIf. FACW LOBELIA OORTlfANNA L OBl JtlNCUS S[CUNDUS BEAlIV. FACU LOB[LlA INFLATA L FACU JUNCUS TENUIS IIILLD. FAC- LOB[LlA SP/CATA LAIf. FAC­ JUNIPERUS HORIZONTALIS IfO[NCH FACU LOLlU" p£RENN[ L FACU­ JUNIPERUS VIRCINIANA L FACU LONIC[RA DIOICA L FACU KALlflA ANGlfSTlFOLlA L FAC LONIC[RA HIRSlfTA A. EAT. FAC KALIIIA LATIFOLIA L FACU LONICERA JApONICA THlfN£ FAC­ KALIIIA POLIFOLIA IIANCENH. OBl LONICERA OBLONCIFOLIA (COLDIE) HOOK. OOL KICKXIA fLAT/NE (L) DtllfORT. FAC LONICERA SElfPfRVIRENS L FACU LACHNANTH[S CAROL/NI ANA (LAIf.) DANDY OOl LOTUS CORNIClfLATUS L FACU­ [ACTlfCA BIENNIS (I10ENCH) FERNALD FACU LlIDIIICIA ALT£RNIFOLIA L FACII+ LACTUCA CANAD[NSIS L. FACU- LlJDIIICIA pALlJSTRIS (L) ELLIOTT OBl

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological infonnation), + (higher portion of frequency range), and - (lower portion of frequency range). See discussion of hydrophyte definition and concept in Chapter 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued) GENUS-SP£CIES-AUTHOR-TRINO"IAl-TRINOftIAl AUTHOR RIIND GENUS-SPEClES-AUTHOR-TRINO"IAl-TRINO"IAl AUTHOR RIIND

LUO~/CIA SPHA£ROCARPA £LLIOTT OBl HITCH£LLA R[P£NS L ,ACU LUO~/GIA X LACUSTRIS ~ £AH£S OBl HOEHRINCIA LATERIFLORA (L) FrNZL FAC LUZULA ACUH/NATA RAF. FAC HOLLUGO V[RTICILLATA L FAC LUZULA HULTIFLORA (£HRH. [X HOFFH.) LEJ. FACU HONAROA OIOYHA L FAC+ LYCHNIS FLOS-CUCULI L FACU HOWOTROPA UNIFLORA L , ACU­ LYCOPODIUH ANNOT/NUH L ,AC HUHLENB£RG/A FRONOOSA (POIR.) FrRNALO ,AC LYCOPODIUH APPR[SSUH (CHAPIf.) LLOYO 8 UNO[R~. , ACII+ IIUHLENBERGIA GLOIIERATA (~/LLO.) TRIN. ,ACW LYCOPOO/UH CLAVATUH L , AC IIUHLENBERGIA II£XICANA (L.) TRIN. FACII LYCOPODIUH COHPLANATUH L FACU­ IIUHLENB£RGIA SCHREDER I J. F. CHEL FAC LYCOPOD/UH O[NOROIO£UH H/CHX. FACU IIUHLENBERGIA SYLVATICA TOR~ EX GRAY , AC+ LYCOPODIUH INUNDATUH L OBl IIUHLENB[RGI A UNIFLORA (HUHL. ) FERNALD OBl LYCOPOOIUH LUC/DULUH HICHX. FACII­ IIYOSOTIS LAXA LEHII. OBl LYCOPOD/UH OBSCURUH L FACU IIYOSOTIS SCORPIO IDES L OBl LYCOPUS AN[R/CANUS HUHL [X V. BARTOW OBl IIYOSOTIS VERNA NUTT. ,AC­ LYCOPUS AHPLECT[NS RAF. OBl IIYRICA GALE L OBL LYCOPUS RUB[LLUS HO[NCH OBl IIYRICA P[NSYLVANICA LOISELEUR ,AC LYCOPUS UNIFLORUS HICHX. OBl HYRIOPHYLLUII HETEROPHYLLUII HICHX. OBl LYCOPUS VIRGIN/CUS L OBl IIYRIOPHYLLUII HUIlILE (RAF.) HORONC OBl LYGOOIUH PALHATUH (B[RNH. ) SNART? FACII IIYRIOPHYLLUII PlNNATUH (~ALT£R) B. S. P. OBl LYONIA LtGUSTRINA (L) DC. ,ACII IIYRIOPHYLLUII T[N[LLUH BIGEL OBl LYONIA HAR/ANA (L) O. DON ,AC­ NAJAS FLEXILIS (~/LLO.) ROSTK. 8 II. L E. SCHHIOT OBl LYSIHACHIA CILIATA L FACII NAJAS GRAC/ LLlIIA (A. BRAUN) HAGNUS OBl LYSIHACHIA HYBRIOA HICHX. OBl NAJAS CUAOALUP[NSIS (SPR[NG.) HORONC OBl LYSIHACHIA NUHHULARIA L OBl NASTURTlUH OFFICINALE R. BR. IN II. T. AlT. OBl LYSIHACHIA QUADRIFOLIA L ,ACU­ N[HOPANTHUS HUCRONATUS (L. ) TRELEASE OBl LYSIHACHIA T[RR[STRIS (L) B. S. P. OBl N[PETA CATARIA L FACU ~ LYSIHACHIA THYRSIFLORA L OBl NUPHAR LUTWH (L) SIBTH. & J. ~ SIIITH OBl , LYSIHACHIA VULGARIS L ,AC+ NYHPHAEA OOORATA SOLANft IN A/~ OBl -l LYSIHACHIA X PROOUCTA (GRAY) F[RNALD ,AC* NYHPHOIOES COROATA ([LLIOTT) F[RNALO OBl LYTHRUH ALATUH PURSH ,ACII+ NYSSA SYLVATICA HARSHALL FAC LYTHRUH HYSSOPIFOLIA L OBl NYSSA SYLVATICA HARSHALL VAR. BIFLORA (IIALT[R) SARG. FACII+ LYTHRUH SALICARIA L FACII+ OENOTHERA BI£NNIS L rACU­ HAIANTH[HUH CANAO[NS[ O[SF. ,AC­ OENOTHERA FRUTICOSA L rAC HALAXIS UNIFOLIA HICHX. FAC OENOTHERA PARVIFLORA L rACU­ HATRICARIA HATRICARIOIO[S (LESS.) T. PORTER FACU OENOTH[RA PER£NNIS L. rAC­ HATTWCCIA STRUTHIOPT[RIS (L) TOOARO FACII ONOCLEA S[NSID/ LIS L FACI! H£GALODONT A B[CK /I (TORR.) CR[[N[ OBl OPH/OGLOSSUII VULCATUH L FACII HELAHPYRUH LIN[AR[ DES~ FACU ORN/THOGALUII UIIB[LLATUH L FACU H£LANTH/UH VIRGINICUH L FACW+ OROBANCHE UNIFLORA L FACU HELl LOTUS ALBA H£OIC. ,ACU­ ORONTlUII AQUATlCUH L OBl H£LILOTUS OFFICINAL/S LAN. ,ACU­ OSIIORHIlA CLAYTON II (HICHX.) C. B. CLARK[ ,ACU­ H[NTHA ARVENSIS L FACII OSIIORH/ ZA LONG/ STY LIS (TORR. ) DC. FACU HENTHA CAROIACA BAKER FACII OSHUNOA C/NNAHOIIEA L FACW HENTHA CITRATA £HRH. ,ACII+ OSHUNOA CLAYTONIANA L. rAC HENTHA SPICATA L ,ACW+ OSHUNOA RECALlS L OBL HENTHA X PIPERITA L ,ACII+ OSTRYA VIRG/N/ANA (HILL.) /(. KOCH FACU­ HENYANTHES TRIFOLIATA L OBl OXALIS CORNICULATA L FACU HIKANIA SCANOENS (L) ~/LLO. ,ACW+ OXALtS HONTANA RAF. ,AC­ HIHULUS ALATUS AlT. OBl PAN/CUH ANARUH ELLIOTT ,ACU­ HIHULUS RING[NS L OBl PAN/CUH CAP/LLARE L FAC­ HIRABILIS NYCTAGINEA (HICHX.) HACHIL FACU­ PAN/CUH O/CHOTOH/FLORUH HICHX. FACI!­ HISCANTHUS SINENSIS ANOERSS. FACU PAN/CUll LONGIFOLlUH TORR. OBl

Symbology: OEL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological information), + (higher portion of frequency range), and (lower portion of frequency range). Sec discussion of hydrophyte definition and concept in Chapter 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued)

GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINonIAl-TRINOMIAl AUTHOR RIINO GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINonIAl-TRINonIAl AUTHOR RIINO

PANICUH RICIDULUH BOSC [X N[[S fACW+ POA PRATENSIS L. fACU PANICUIf TUCK[RlfANII F[RNALD fAC­ POA TR/V/AUS L FACW PANICUIf V[RRUCOSUIf IfUHL FACW PODOPHYLWH P[LTATIJH L FACU PAN ICUIf V I RCATUIf L. fAC PODOST[HUH C[RATOPHY LLUIf HICHX. OBl PARI[TARIA P[NSYLVANICA IfUHL. [X NILLft FACU­ POCONIA OPHIOCLOSSOID[S (L) JUSS. OBl PARNASSIA CLAUCA RAF. OBl POLEHONIUH R£PTANS L. FACU PARTH[NOCISSUS QUINQIJUOLIA (L) PLANCH. fACU POLYCALA 8R[VIFOLIA NIJTT. OBl PARTH[NOCISSIJS VITACEA (KN[RR) A. HI TCHC. FACU POLYCALA CRIJCIATA L fACN+ PASPAWIf LA[V[ IfICHX. FAC+ POLYCALA NIJTTALLII TOR~ 8 CRAY FAC PASPALIJH S[TAC[IJIf If I CHX. fACU+ POLYGALA PAIJCIFOUA NILLD. FACU P[DICIJLARIS CANAD[NSIS L FACU POLYCALA SANCU/N[A L FACU P[DICULARIS LANC[OLATA HICHX. FACW POLYCALA SENECA L FACU P[LTANDRA VIRCINICA (L.) KUNTH OBl POLYCONATUH 81FLORIJH (NALT[R) [LLIOTT FACU P[NST[HON DICITALIS NIJTT. FAC POLYCONATUH COHHIJTATIJH (J. A. 8 J. H. SCHIJLT[S) A. [)I£TR. FACU P[NST[HON LA[VICATIJS SOLANO. FACU POLYCONUH AHPHIBIIJH L OBl P[NTHORIJH S[ooID[S L. OBl POLYCONIJH ARIFOLIIJH L. OBl PHALARIS ARIJNDINAC[A L FACW+ POLYCONIJH AV ICIJLAR[ L FACU PHALARIS CANAR/ENS/S L fACU POLYGONIJH CAR[YI OLNEY fACI! PHLEUIf PRAT[NS[ L f ACU POLYCONUH CONVOLVULUS L fACU PHLOX PAN/CULATA L fACU POLYCONUH CUSPIDATUH SI[80LO 8 ZIJCCAR. FACU­ PHRAGlfIT[S AIJSTRALIS (CAV.) TR/~ [X ST[lJft f ACW POLYGONUH [R[CTIJH L. FACU PHYSALIS ANGULATA L FAC POLYGONUH GLAUCUH NIJTT. FACU PHYSALIS PIJ8[SC[NS L FACU­ POLYCONUH HYDROPIP[R L OBl PHYSOCARPUS OPULlFOLlUS (L) HAXIIf. FACW­ POLYCONIJH HYDROPlP[ROIO[S H/CHX. OBl PHYSOST[CIA VIRGIN/ANA (L) 8[NTH. FAC+ POLYCONUH LAPATHIFOLIUIf L FACW+ PHYTOLACCA AIf[RICANA L FACU+ POLYCONIJH OP[LOUSANUH RID[)[LL [X SHALL OBl > PlC[ A GLAUCA (HO[NCH) VOSS fACU POLYCONUH ORIENTALE L FACU­ Oc PlC[A HARIANA (HILL.) 8. S. P. f ACW­ POLYCONUH PENSYLVANICIJH L fACW PILEA PUHILA (L) CRAY fACW POLYCONUH P[RSICARIA L fACW PINIJS R[SINOSA SOLANO. IN AlT. f ACU POLYCONUH PUNCTATUH [LLIOTT OBl PlNIJS RICIDA Ifl LL. FACU POLYCONUH RAHOSISSIHUH H/CHX. f AC PINUS STR08IJS L. FACU POLYCONUH R08UST/IJS (SHALL) FERNALD OBl PLANT ACO IfAJOR L. FACU POLYCONUH SACITTATUH L OBl PLANTACO HARITllfA L FACW POLYCONIJH SCAN[)[NS L. FAC PLANTACO RUC[UI D[CN£. fACU POLYCONIJH SfTAC£lJH 8ALON. OBl PLATANTH[RA 8LEPHARICLOTTIS (NILLD.) LlNDL OBl POLYCONIJH VIRCIN/ANUH L fAC PLATANTH[RA CILIARIS (L) LlNDL FACW POLYSTlCHUIf ACROSTICHOID[S (HICH~) SCHOTT fACU­ PLATANTH[RA FLAVA (L) LlNDL FACW PONT[D[RIA CORDATA L OBl PLATANTH[RA CRANDIFLORA (8IC[L) LlNDL FACW POPIJWS 8ALSAHIF[RA L. fACW PLATANTH[RA HOOK[RI (TORR.) LlNDL fAC POPULIJS D[LTOID[S N. BARTRAH [X HARSHALL FAC PLATANTH[RA HYP[RBOR[A (L) LlNDL fACW POPULUS CR AND I DENT AT A HI CHX. FACU­ PLATANTHERA LAC[RA (HICHX.) C. DON f ACW POPIJLUS TR[HULA L fACU PLATANTHERA ORBICIJLATA (PURSH) LINDL fAC PORTULACA OLERAC[A L FAC PLATANTH[RA PSYCHOD[S (L) LlN[)L fACW POTAlfOC[TON AHPLIFOLIIJS TIJCK[RHAN OBl PLATANTH[RA X CLAV[LLATA (HICH~) LIJ[R fACW+ POTAlfOC[TON 81CUPULATIJS F[RNAL[) OBl PLATANIJS OCCI D[NT ALIS L. fACW­ POTAlfOCfTON CONF[RVO/D[S R£/CH[N8. OBl PWCH[A PIJRPURASC[NS (SNARTZ) DC. OBl POTAHOC[TON CRISPIJS L OBl POA ANCUST/FOLIA L. f ACU­ POTAHOC[TON EPIHY[)RIJS RAF. OBl POA ANNUA L fACU POTAHOCfTON FOLlOSIJS RAF. 2V OBl POA COHPRESSA L. fACU POTAHOC£TON CRAHIN[US L OBl POA N[lfORALlS L. fAC POTAlfOC[TON NATANS L. OBl POA PAWSTRIS L. FACW POTAHOC£TON NODOSUS POIR. OBl

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological information), + (higher portion of frequency range), and - (lower portion of frequency range). See discussion of hydrophyle definition and concept in Chapler 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued)

GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINOHIAl-TRINO"IAl AUTHOR R liND GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINOHIAl-TRINOHIAl AUTHOR RIIND POTAHOCETON OAKESIANUS J.N. ROBBINS OBl RANUNCUWS AQUATlLlS L. OBl POTAI'fOCETON OBTUSIFOLIUS F. I'fERTENS 8 II. KOCH OBl RANUNCULUS CYI'fBALARIA PURSH OBl POTAI'fOCETON PECT INATUS L OBl RANUNCUWS FASCICULARIS I'fUHL EX BICEL FACU POTAI'fOCETON PERFOLIATUS L OBl RANUNCULUS FLABELLARIS RAF. OBl POTAI'fOCETON PULCHER TUCKERI'fAN OBl RANUNCULUS I'fICRANTHUS NUT~ FACU POTAI'fOCETON PUSILLUS L OBl RANUNCULUS PENSYLVANICUS L F. OBl POTAI'fOCETON ROBBINS I I OAKES OBl RANUNCULUS RECURVATUS POIR. FAC+ POTAI'fOCETON SPIRILLUS TUCK£RI'fAN OBl RANUNCULUS R£PENS L. FAC POTAI'fOCETON VASEYI J. N. ROBBINS OBl RANUNCUWS SCELERATUS L. OBl POTAI'fOCETON ZOSTERIFORI'fIS FERNALO OBl RANUNCULUS TRICHOPHYLLUS 0. CHAIX OBl POTENTI LLA ANSERINA L OBl RHEXIA VIRGINICA L OBl POTENTILLA FRUTICOSA L FACW RHINANTHUS CRISTA-CALLI L FAC POTEKT I LLA NORVECICA L FACU RHODOOENORON CANAOENSE (L) B. S. P. FACW POTEKTILLA SII'fPLEX I'fICHX. FACU­ RHODOOENORON !lAX II'fUI'f L FAC PRENANTHES ALBA L FACU RHODODENORON PERICLYI'fENOIOES (1'fICHX.) SHINNERS FAC PRENANTHES ALTISSII'fA L FACU­ RHOOODENORON PRINOPHYLLUI'f (SI'fALL) I'fILLAIS FAC PROSERPINACA PALUSTRIS L OBl RHODOOENORON VISCOSUI'f (L) TORR. OBl PROSERPINACA PECTINATA LAH. OBl RHUS COPALLlNUI'f L NI PROSERPINACA X INTERI'fEOIA I'fACKENZ. OBl RHYNCHOSPORA ALBA ( L.) VAHL OBl PRUNELLA VULCARIS L FACU' RHYNCHOSPORA CAPITELLATA (1'fICH~) VAHL OBl PRUNUS AI'fERICANA I'fARSHALL FACU­ RHYNCHOSPORA FUSCA (L.) II. T. AlT. OBl PRUNUS PENSYLVANICA L F. FACU­ RHYNCHOSPORA INUNOATA (OAKES) FERNALD OBl PRUNUS SEROTINA EHRH. FACU RHYNCHOSPORA I'fACROSTACHY A TORR. OBl PRUNUS VfRCINIANA L FACU RHYNCHOSPORA TORREY ANA CRAY FACW+ PSILOCARYA SCIRPOllJES TORR. OBl RIBES AHERICANUI'f I'fILL. FACW PTELEA TRIFOLIATA L FAC RIBES HIRTELWI'f I'fICHX. FAC > PTERIOIUI'f AQUILlNUI'f(L) IWHN FACU RIBES OOORATU!I H. L. IIENOL FACU , PTlLlI'fNIUI'f CAPILLAC£U1'f (1'fICHX.) RAF. OBl RIBES TRISTE PALLAS OBl \0 PUCCINELLIA DlSTANS (L) PARLAT. OBl ROBINIA PSEUDOACACIA L. FACU­ PUCCINELLIA FASCICULATA (TOR~) BICKN. OBl RORIPPA PALUSTRIS (L.) BESSER OBl PUCCINELLIA LANCEANA (BERLIN) SOREN~ EX HULTEN FACW+ RORIPPA SYLVESTRIS (L) BESSER FACW PUCCINELLIA I'fARITlI'fA (HUlJS.) PARLAT. OBl ROSA ACICULARIS LINDL U FAC PUCCINELLIA PALLllJA (TOR~) ~ T. CLAUSEN OBl ROSA BLANOA AlT. FACU PUCC I NELLI A PUI'f!LA (VASEY) A. HI TCHC. FACW ROSA I'fICRANTHA ~ E. SI'fITH FACU PYCNANTHEI'fUI'f I'fUTlCUI'f (1'fICHX.) PERS. FACW ROSA I'fULTIFLORA THUNR FACU PrCNANTHEI'fUI'f TENUIFOLlUI'f SCHRAlJ. FACW ROSA NITIDA JlIUD. FACW+ PrCNANTHEI'fUI'f VERTlCIUATUI'f (1'fICHX.) PERS. FAC ROSA PALUSTRIS I'fARSHALL OBl PYCNANTHEI'fUI'f VIRGINIANUI'f (L) TH.DURAND8B. O. JACKS. EX B. ROB. 8F£RNALD FAC ROSA RUCOSA THUNR FACU­ PrROLA ROTUNOIFOLIA L FAC ROSA VIRCINIANA I'fILL FAC PYROLA SECUNOA L FAC ROTALA RAHOSIOR (L.) KOEHNE OBl PYROLA UNIFLORA L FAC RUBUS ALLEGHENIENSIS ~ PORTER FACU­ QUERCUS ALBA L FACU­ RUBUS ALUI'fNUS LH. BAILEY FACU­ QUERCUS BICOLOR NI UO. FACW+ RUBUS ASCENOENS ~H. BLANCH. FAC QUERCUS FALCATA I'fICH~ FACU­ RUBUS ENSLENII TRATT. FACU QUERCUS I'fACROCARPA I'fICHX. FAC­ RUBUS FLORICOI'fUS II. H. BLANCH. FACU QUERCUS PAWSTRIS I'fUENCHH. FACW RUBUS HISPIOUS L. FACW QUERCUS PRINOIOES IIILL[). NI RUBUS IOA£US L. FAC­ QUERCUS RUBRA L FACU­ RUBUS LAIIRENC£I L. H. BA I Ln OBl RANUNCULUS ABORTIVUS L FACW­ RUBUS PUBESCENS RAF. FACW RANUNCUWS ACRIS L FAC+ RUBUS SE!I'SETOSUS ~ H. BLANCH. FAC RANUNCULUS ALLECHENIENSIS BRITTON FAC RUBUS SETOSUS BICEL. FACW+ RANUNCULUS AI'fBIGENS S. IIATS. OBl RUBUS STRICOSUS I'fICHX. NI

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), fo'ACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological information), + (higher portion of frequency range), and -. (lower portion of frequency range). See discussion of hydrophyte definition and concept in Chapter 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued) GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRIHO"IAL-TRIHO"IAL AUTHOR RIIHD GEHUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINO"IAL-TRIHO"IAL AUTHOR RIIHD

RUBUS X CROUT I ANUS ~. H. BLANCH. rAC SANICULA CRECARIA BICAN. fACU RUDBECKIA HIRTA L FACU- SANICULA HARILANblCA L HI RUHEX ALTISSIHUS A. ~OOD fACW- SAPONAN/A OFF/CINAL/S L rACU- RUH£X CRISPUS L fACU SARRACEN / A PURPURE A L OBL RUHEX OOHEST/CUS HART~ rAC SASSAFRAS ALB/DUH (NUTT.) N[[S rACU- RUHEX HARIT/HUS L rACW SAURURUS CERNUUS L OBL RUHEX OBTUS/FOLIUS L rACU- SAX/FRAGA PENSYLVAN/CA L OBL RUHEX OR81CULATUS CRAY OBL SAX/FRAGA VIRGIN/ENSIS HICHX. fAC- RUH£X TRIANGULIVALVIS (DANSER) RECH. F. FACU SCMfUCHZER/A PALUSTRIS L OBL RUHEX VERTICILLATUS L OBL SCHIZACHN[ PURPURASCENS (TORR.) S~ALLfN FACU- RUPPIA HARITIHA L OBL SCHIZACHYRfUH SCOPARfUH (HICHX.) NASH FACU- SABAT I A OODECANDRA (L) B. S. 1'. OBL SC/RPUS ACUTUS HUHL EX 81GEL OBL SA8ATIA K[NN[DYANA FERNALD OBL SCIRPUS AH[RICANUS PERS. OBL SA8ATIA ST[LLARIS PURSH fACII+ SCIRPUS ATROCINCTUS FERNALD fACII+ SAGINA DECUH8[NS (ELLIOTT) TORR. & GRAY FAC SCIRPUS ATROVIRENS ~/LL~ OBL SACINA PROCUH8ENS L rACII- SCIRPUS CYf'£RINUS (L ) f.UNTH fACII+ SAG/TTARIA CALYCINA ENGELH. OBL SC/RPUS EXPANSUS FERNALD OBL SAGITTAR/A ENCELHANNIANA ~ ~ SH/TH OBL SC/RPUS FLOV/AT/LIS (TORR.) CRAY OBL SACfTTARIA CRAH/NEA HICHX. OBL SCIRPUS G[ORCIANUS ~ H. HARPER OBL SACfTTARIA LATIFOLIA ~/LLD. OBL SCIRPUS H[T[ROCHAETUS CHASE OBL SACfTTARIA RICfDA PURSH OBL SCIRPUS HARITIHUS L OBL SAGfTTARIA STACNORUH SHALL OBL SCIRPUS HICROCARPUS ~ I K. PRESL OBL SAGITTAfNA SU8ULATA (L) 8UCHENAU OBL SCIRPUS PECA'l1 8RITTON OBL SALICORNIA 81CELOVII TORR. OBL SCIRPUS PEDICELLATUS FERNALD OBL SALICORNIA EUROPAEA L OBL SCIRPUS POLYPHYLLUS VAHL OBL SALICORNIA VIRCINICA L OBL SCIRPUS PURSHIANUS FERNALD OBL :;> SALIX ALBA L fACW SCIRPUS R08USTUS PURSH OBL .- SALIX AHYCDALOIDES ANDERSS. fACIl SCIRPUS SHITHII CRAY DBL 0 SALIX 8A8YLONICA L fACII- SCIRPUS SU8TERHINALIS TORR. OBL SALIX 8E881ANA SARG. fACIl SCIRPUS TORR£YI OLNEY OBL SALIX DISCOLOR HUHL rACIl SCIRPUS VALIDUS VAHL OBL SALIX ERIOCEPHALA HICHX. fACIl SCLfRAlfTHUS ANNUUS L fACU- SALIX EXICUA NUTT. OBL SCLfRIA RETICULARIS HICHX. OBL SALIX FRACILIS L fAC+ SCLfRIA TRICLOHERATA HICHX. rAC SALIX HUHILIS HARSHALL fACU SCLfROLff'lS UNIFLORA (~ALTER) B. S.P. OBL SALIX wCIOA HUHL. rACIl SCROPHULARIA LANCEOLATA PURSH fACU+ SALIX HYRICOIDES HUHL. rAC SCROPHULARIA HARILANDICA L fACU- SALIX NIGRA HARSH.4LL rACII+ SCUT[LLARIA CALfRICULATA L OBL SALIX PEDICELLARIS PURSH OBL SCUTELLARI A INTECRIFOLI A L. rACW SALIX PETIOLARIS ~~ SHITH OBL SCUTELLARIA LATERIFLORA L. fACW+ SALIX PURPUREA L. HI SHAG/NHLA APODA (L.) SPRING rACIl SALIX RIGIOA HUHL OBL SENECIO AUREUS L. rACIl SALIX SERICEA HARSHALL OBL SENECIO 080VATUS HUHL. EX ~I UD. FACU- SALIX VIH/NALIS L fACW- SENECIO PAUPERCULUS HICHX. FAC SALSOLA KALI L. fACU SENECIO VULCARIS L. FACU SALSOLA PESTIFER A NEL~ rACU- SETARIA C[NICULATA (LAH.) B[AW. rAC SAHBUCUS CANADENSIS L fACII- SETARIA GLAUCA (L) BEAW rAC SAHBUCVS RACEHOSA L FACU SETARIA ITALICA (L) BEAW. rACU SAHOWS PARV/FLORUS RAF. OBL S[TARIA VERTICILLATA (L.) BEAW. rAC SANCU/NARIA CANAOENSIS L HI SICYOS ANGULATUS L. rACU SANCUISOR8A CANADENSIS L fACW+ SISYHBRIUH ALTISSIHUH L. rACU- SANGUISOR8A HINOR SCO~ FAC SISYRINCHIUH ANCUSTIFOLIUH HILL rACW-

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up­ land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological information), + (higher portion of frequency range), and - (lower portion of frequency range). See discussion of hydrophytc definition and concept in Chapter 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued)

GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINOMIAl-TRINOMIAl AUTHOR RIINIl GENUS-SP[CIES-AUTHOR-TRINonIAl-TRINonIAl AUTHOR RIIND

SISYRINCHIUH AR[NICOLA BICKN. fACU SPIRANTHES OOORATA (NUT~) LINDL OBl SISYRINCHIUH ATLANTlCUH BICKN. fACU SPIRANTHES PRAECOX (~ALTfR) S. ~ATS. OBl SISYRINCHIUH HONTANUH CREENE fAC SPIRANTH[S ROlfANZOFFIANA CHAIf. OBl SISYRINCHIUH HUCRONATUH HICHX. fAC+ SPIRANTH[S VERNALIS ENCEL!f. I CRAY fAC SIUH CARSONII [. ~ DURAND [X CRAY OBl SPIRODELA POLYRHIZA (L ) SCHLEID. OBl SIUH SUAVE ~ALT[R OBl STACHYS ASPERA If I CHX. FACW SHI LACINA RAC[HOSA (L) D[SF. f ACU­ STACHYS CORDATA RIDDELL fAC SHI LACINA STELLATA (L) D[SF. fACU STACHYS HISPIDA PURSH OBl SHILACINA TRIFoLlA (L) D[SF. OBl STACHYS HYSSOPIFOLIA HICH~ fACW+ SHILAX CLAUCA ~ALT[R fACU STACHYS PALlJSTRIS L OBl SHILAX HERBACEA L fAC STACHYS TENu/FOLIA ~/LLD. fACW+ SHI LAX PULV[RULENTA HICHX. fACU STAPHYLEA TRIFOLIA L fAC SHILAX ROTUNDIFOLIA L fAC STELLARI A CALYCANTHA (LEDEB.) BONC. fACW SOLANUH AH[RICANUH HILL fACU­ STELLARIA CRAlflNEA L FACU­ SOLANUH DULCAHARA L fAC­ STELLARIA LONCIFOLIA IfUHL EX ~/LLD. fACW SOLANUIf NICRUH L fACU­ STREPTOPUS ROS[US IfICHX. fAC­ SOLIDACO ALTISSIHA L fACU­ STROPHOSTY LES HELVOLA (L) ELLIOTT fACU­ SOLIDACO CA[SIA L fACU SUAEDA AlffRlCANA (PfRS. ) FERNALD OBl SOLIDACO CANAD[NSIS L fACU SUAEDA LlNEARIS (ELLIOTT) IfOQ. OBl SOLIDACO ELLIOTTII TOR~ 8 CRAY OBl SUAEDA IfARITllfA (L ) DUHORT. OBl SOLIDACO FLEXICAULIS L fACU SYIIPHORICARPOS ALBUS (L) BLAKE fACU­ SOLIDAGO CICANTEA AlT. fACU SYlfPLOCARPUS FOETIDUS (L) SALISB. OBl SOLIDACO NUTTALLII CR[[N[ fACU+ TARAXACUIf OFFICINALE ~H. ~EBER fACU­ SOLI DACO PUBfRULA NUTT. fACU­ TAXUS CANAD[NSIS IfARSHALL fAC SOLIDACO RUCOSA ifILL fAC TEUCRIUIf CANADENSE L fACW­ SOLIDACO S[lfPERVIRENS L fACU THALICTRUIf DASYCARPUIf FISCH. 8 AVE-LALL fACU ;J;> SOLIDACO SPATHULATA DC. f ACU­ THALlCTRUIf DIOICUIf L. fAC I SOLIDACO STRICTA AlT. fACU THALICTRUH PUBESCENS PURSH fACW+ SOLIDACO ULICINOSA NUTT. OBl THELYPTERIS HEXACONOPTERA (lfICHX.) ~EATHERBY fAC SOLIDACO X ASPERULA DESF. OBl* THELYPTfRlS NOVEBORAC[NSIS (L) NIEU~L fAC SONCHUS ASPER (L) J. HILL fAC THELYPTERIS SllfULATA (DAVENP. ) NI[U~L fACW SPARCANIUIf AlfERICANUIf NUTT. OBl THELYPTERIS THELYPT£ROIDES (lfICHX.) J. HOWB fACW+ SPARCANIUIf ANDROCLADUIf (ENCELH.) HORONC OBl THLASPI ARVENSE L NI SPARCANIUIf CHLOROCARPUIf RYDB. OBl THUJA OCCID[NTALIS L fACW SPARCANIUIf EURYCARPUH ENCELIf. EX CRAY OBl TILIA AlfER/CANA L FACU SPARCANIUH HINllfUIf (HARTH.) FR. OBl TOXICODENDRON QUfRCIFOLIA (HICHX.) CR££NE fACU SPARTINA ALT[RNIFLORA LOISELEUR OBl TOXICODENDRON RADICANS (L) KUNTZE fAC SPARTINA CAESPITOSA A. A. [AT. OBl TOXICODENDRON RYDBERCII (SlfALL EX RYDB.) CR££NE fAC­ SPARTINA PATENS (AlT. ) IfUHL fACU+ TOXICODENDRON VERNIX (L) KUNTZE OBl SPARTINA nCTlNATA LINK OBl TRIADENUIf FRASERI {SPACH) CLEASON OBl SPERCULARIA CANADENSIS (PERS.) D. DON OBl TRIADENUIf VIRCINICUIf (L) RAF. OBl SPERCULARIA HARINA (L) CRISEB. OBl TRIDENS FLAVUS (L) A. HI TCHC. f ACU* SPERCULARIA RUBRA (L) J. 8 K. PRESL fACU TRIENTALIS BOREALIS RAF. FAC SPHENOPHOLIS OBTUSATA (lfICHX.) SCRIBN. fAC­ TRIFOLIUIf HYBRIDUIf L FACU­ SPHENOPHOLIS PENSYLVANICA (L) A. HI TCHC. OBl TRIFOLlUIf PRATENSE L FACU­ SPIRA[A JAPONICA L. F. fACU­ TRIFOLlUIf REPENS L FACU­ SPIRAEA LATlFOLlA (AlT.) BORKH. fAC+ TRICLOCHIN HARITIHUIf L OBl SPIRAEA TOHENTOSA L fACU TRICLOCHIN PALUSTRE L OBl SPIRANTHES CfRNUA (L) L C. RICH. fACW TRILLIUH CERNUUII L fACW SPI RANTHES CRArt AlfES fACU­ TRI LLlUII ERECTUII L f ACU­ SPI RANTHES LACERA (RAF. ) RAF. fACU­ TRI LLlUH UNDULATUH ~I LLO. FACU* SPIRANTH[S LUCIDA (H.H. EAT.) AHES fACW TRIODANIS PERFOLIATA (L) NIEU~L fAC

Symbology: OBL (Obligate). FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up. land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological infonnation), + (higher portion of frequency range), and - (lower portion of frequency range). See discussion of hydrophytc definition and concept in Chapter 6. Plant Species that Occur in Rhode Island's Wetlands (Continued)

GENUS~SPECIES~AUTHOR~TRINOMIAl~TRINOMIAl AUTHOR RIIND GENUS-SPECIES-AUTHOR-TRINOMIAl-TRINOMIAl AUTHOR RIIND

TRIPSACUH OACTYLOIOES (L.) L FACII VIOLA BLANOA ~/UO. FACII TSUCA CANAOENSIS (L) CARR/ERE FACU V lOLA CONSPERSA HE/CHENe. rAew TUSSILACO FARFARA L FACU VIOLA CUCULLATA AlT. FACII+ TYPHA ANCUSTIFOLIA L OBl VIOLA INCOGNITA BRAINERO FACU TYPHA LATlFOLlA L OBl VIOLA LANCEOLATA L OBL TYPHA X CLAUCA COO~ OBl VIOLA NEPHROPHYLLA CREENE FACW ULHUS AHERICANA L ,ACII~ VIOLA PALLENS (BANKS) BRAINERD oal ULHUS RUBRA HUHL. FAC VIOLA PAPILIONACEA PURSH FAC URTICA OIOICA L. , ACU VIOLA PENSYLVANICA HICHX. FACU UTRICULARIA BIFLORA LAH. OBl V lOLA PRIf1UUFOLI A L. FAC+ UTRICULARIA CORNUTA HICHX. OBl V lOLA PUBESCENS AlT. FACU­ UTRICULARIA C[HINISCAPA L BENJ. OBl VIOLA ROTUNOIFOLIA HICHX. FAC+ UTRICULARIA CIBBA L OBl VIOLA SACITTATA AlT. FACII UTRICULARIA INT[RH[OIA HAYN[ OBl VIOLA SEPTENTRIONALIS GREENE FACU UTRICULARIA HACRORHIZA LECONT[ OEl VIOLA SORORIA NI Uf). FAC­ UTRICULARIA HINOR L oal VIOLA STRIATA AlT. FACW UTRICULARIA PURPUREA ~ALTER oaL VITIS AESTlVALlS HICHX. FACU UTRICULARIA RAOIATA SHALL oal VITIS LA8RUSCA L. H. BAILEY FACU UTRICULARIA R[SUPINATA ~ CREENE OBL VI TIS NOVAE-ANCLIAE FERNALD HI UTRICULARIA SUBULATA L OBL VITIS RIPARIA IfICHX. FACW UVULARIA PERFOLIATA L. ,ACU VITIS VULPINA L , AC UVULARIA SESSILIFOLIA L FACU~ I/OOOI/AROI A AREOLATA (L) T. 1100RE FACW+ VACCINIUH ANCUSTlfOLlUH AlT. FACU~ 1I000ilAROIA VIRGINICA (L.) J. E. SHITH OBl VACCINIUH CAESARIENSE HACIIENZ. OBl XANTHIUH SPiNOSUIf L. FACU VACC IN 1Uf1 CORY f1BOSUH L. FACW­ XANTHIUH STRUlfARIUH L. r AC >- VACCINIUf1 HACROCARPON AlT. oal XY'RIS CAROLINIANA IIALTER FACW+ , VACCINIUH OXYCOCCOS L OBl XYRIS OIFFORHIS CHAPH. OBl tv VACCINIUH STAf1/NEUf1 L FACU­ XYRIS HONTANA RIES oal VALLISNER/A Af1ERICANA f1ICHX. OBl XYRIS Sf1ALL/ANA NASH OBl VERATRUH VIRIOE AlT. ,ACW+ XYRIS TORT A J.E. Sf1ITH OBl VERBENA HAST AT A L. FACII+ ZANNICHELLIA PALUSTRIS L. OBl VERBENA OFnC/NALlS L FACU­ ZllANIA AQUATICA L. OBl VERBENA URTICIFOLIA L FACU ZIllA APTERA (CRAy) FERNALD FAC VERBESINA ALTERNlfOLlA (L.) BRITTON FAC ZlZIA AUREA (L.) 1/. liOCH , AC VERBESINA ENCELIOIOES (CAV.) BENTH. & HOOK. £X GRA; FACU­ ZOSTERA HARINA L. OBl VERNONIA NOV[BORACENSIS (L.) f1ICHX. FACW+ VERONICA AHERICANA SCH~£/NITZ EX 8ENTH. OBl VERONICA ANACALLlS~AOU.4T1CA L. OBl VERONICA ARVENSIS L Nl V[RONICA OFFICINALIS L. FACU­ VERONICA PERECRINA L. FACU­ VERONICA SCUT[LLATA L OBl VERONICA SERPYLLIFOLIA L. FAC+ VERONICASTRUH VIRCINICUH (L.) FAR~. FACU VI BURNUf1 CASS INOI DES L. ,ACW VIBURNUf1 OENTATUH L FAC V I BURNUH LANT ANO I OES HI CHX. FAC V I BURNUH LENT AGO L. FAC VI BURNUH NUOUH L. OBl ~'IBURNUf1 RECOCNITUH F£RNALlJ FACW­ VICIA SATIVA L. FACU­ VIOLA AOUNCA J. E. Sf1ITH FAC

Symbology: OBL (Obligate), FACW (Facultative Wetland), FAC (Facultative), FACU (Facultative Up· land), NI (no indicator assigned), * (limited ecological information), + (higher portion of frequency range), and - (lower portion of frequency range). See discussion of hydrophyte definition and concept in Chapter 6. As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under U.S. administration.

U.S. Department of the Interior THIRD CLASS BOOK RATE Fish and Wildlife Service One Gateway Center Newton Corner, MA 02158