DOCSLIB.ORG

2015 Connecticut Wildlife Action Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2015 Connecticut Wildlife Action Plan 2015 Connecticut Wildlife Action Plan CHAPTER 4 - TABLE OF CONTENTS CONSERVATION ACTIONS FOR CONNECTICUT’S KEY HABITATS AND SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED Introduction .......................................................................................................................1 Development of Priority Actions.........................................................................................1 Objectives – Driven Conservation Actions and Opportunities.............................................3 Conservation Opportunity Areas ‐ Guiding the Implementation of Conservation Actions...4 Sources for Inclusion of Habitats and Species........................................................5 Methods for Developing COAs................................................................................5 How Conservation Opportunity Areas Can be Used ...............................................6 Statewide Conservation Actions.......................................................................................13 Administration .......................................................................................................13 Planning................................................................................................................14 Law, Policy, and Enforcement...............................................................................19 Education and Outreach .......................................................................................20 Technical Assistance ............................................................................................22 Data Collection and Analysis ................................................................................24 Direct Management of Natural Resources ............................................................29 Land and Water Acquisition and Protection ..........................................................31 Taxon and Species‐specific Actions...................................................................................33 Mammals ..............................................................................................................33 Birds......................................................................................................................34 Reptiles and Amphibians ......................................................................................35 Fish .......................................................................................................................35 Invertebrates.........................................................................................................36 Plants....................................................................................................................37 Conservation Actions to Conserve Key Habitats and GCN Species ....................................38 Upland Forest Habitat ...........................................................................................38 Upland Woodland and Shrub Habitat....................................................................45 Upland Herbaceous Habitat..................................................................................51 Forested Inland Wetland Habitat...........................................................................59 Shrub Inland Wetland Habitat ...............................................................................64 Herbaceous Inland Wetland Habitat .....................................................................68 Tidal Wetland Habitat............................................................................................73 Freshwater Aquatic Habitat...................................................................................80 Estuarine Aquatic Habitat......................................................................................89 Unique; Natural or Man-Made Habitats.................................................................96 Chapter 4 References .....................................................................................................106 4-i 2015 Connecticut Wildlife Action Plan Chapter 4 List of Figures Figure 4.1: Composite Conservation Opportunity Areas Map depicting areas of significant value to Connecticut GCN species. ......................................................... 6 Figure 4.2: Upland Forest Conservation Opportunity Areas. ......................................................... 7 Figure 4.3: Upland Herbaceous Conservation Opportunity Areas. ................................................ 7 Figure 4.4: Forest Inland Wetland Conservation Opportunity Areas............................................. 8 Figure 4.5: Herbaceous Inland Wetland Conservation Opportunity Areas.................................... 8 Figure 4.6: Cold Water Habitat Conservation Opportunity Areas.................................................. 9 Figure 4.7: Lake Protection Conservation Opportunity Areas........................................................ 9 Figure 4.8: Diadromous Basin Conservation Opportunity Areas.................................................. 10 Figure 4.9: Tidal Wetland Conservation Opportunity Areas. ....................................................... 10 Figure 4.10: Horseshoe Crab Conservation Opportunity Areas. .................................................. 11 Figure 4.11: Tautog Conservation Opportunity Areas.................................................................. 11 Figure 4.12: Winter Flounder Conservation Opportunity Areas. ................................................. 12 Figure 4.13: Sturgeon Conservation Opportunity Areas. ............................................................. 12 List of Tables Table 4.1: Types of actions identified by northeastern states’ Wildlife Action Plans .................... 2 Table 4.2: Climate change adaptation actions for specific habitats............................................. 16 Table 4.3: GCN Species of Upland Forest Habitat......................................................................... 40 Table 4.4: GCN Species of Upland Woodland and Shrub Habitat. ............................................... 46 Table 4.5: GCN Species of Upland Herbaceous Habitat. .............................................................. 52 Table 4.6: GCN Species of Forested Inland Wetland Habitat. ...................................................... 61 Table 4.7: GCN Species of Shrub Inland Wetland Habitat............................................................ 65 Table 4.8: GCN Species of Herbaceous Inland Wetland Habitat. ................................................. 69 Table 4.9: GCN Species of Tidal Wetland Habitat......................................................................... 74 Table 4.10: GCN Species of Freshwater Aquatic Habitat.............................................................. 82 Table 4.11: GCN Species of Estuarine Aquatic Habitat................................................................. 91 Table 4.12: GCN Species of Unique; Natural or Man‐Made Habitats. ......................................... 99 4-ii 2015 Connecticut Wildlife Action Plan CHAPTER 4 CONSERVATION ACTIONS FOR CONNECTICUT’S KEY HABITATS AND SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED INTRODUCTION This chapter addresses Element 4 and presents the highest priority actions developed to address Elements 1, 2, and 3. The Connecticut Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) conservation planning process began with the identification of conservation targets and objectives. Chapter 1 described Element 1 ‐ Connecticut’s fish and wildlife species of greatest conservation need (GCN). Chapter 2 described how Connecticut identified Element 2 ‐ key fish and wildlife habitats. The WAP process then identified the key problems and threats facing these species and their key habitats, Element 3, presented in Chapter 3. This chapter focuses on the priority conservation actions to address these threats to Connecticut’s GCN species and their associated key habitats. Only the highest priority conservation actions, research, survey, and monitoring needs are presented in this chapter and are organized according to the threats they address. Many additional actions were identified and are presented in Appendix 4. Three different levels of actions were identified. First, the most broad, statewide actions are presented, as they apply to most or all GCN species and key habitats. Second, actions that are more specific to a particular taxonomic group or group of species are listed by taxon. Finally, specific actions are listed for each key habitat, and apply to many or all of the GCN species associated with those habitats. Identifying conservation actions and research, survey, and monitoring needs provides the foundation for the dynamic process of developing accurate and current information on Connecticut’s GCN species and key habitats. Use and dissemination of this information enables the important step of incorporating it into land‐use decisions and key conservation efforts across the state. Implementation of the actions will require the efforts of many conservation partners working together to incorporate the needs of GCN species and key habitats into their programs and plans throughout the next decade. DEVELOPMENT OF PRIORITY ACTIONS To meet the goal of keeping common species common, fish and wildlife managers and their cooperators use a collection of tools and actions to address the many diverse threats to fish, wildlife, and their habitats. In 2005, a survey was conducted
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Edgartown Produced in 2012
    BioMap2 CONSERVING THE BIODIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS IN A CHANGING WORLD Edgartown Produced in 2012 This report and associated map provide information about important sites for biodiversity conservation in your area. This information is intended for conservation planning, and is not intended for use in state regulations. BioMap2 Conserving the Biodiversity of Massachusetts in a Changing World Table of Contents Introduction What is BioMap2 – Purpose and applications One plan, two components Understanding Core Habitat and its components Understanding Critical Natural Landscape and its components Understanding Core Habitat and Critical Natural Landscape Summaries Sources of Additional Information Edgartown Overview Core Habitat and Critical Natural Landscape Summaries Elements of BioMap2 Cores Core Habitat Summaries Elements of BioMap2 Critical Natural Landscapes Critical Natural Landscape Summaries Natural Heritage Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife 1 Rabbit Hill Rd., Westborough, MA 01581 & Endangered phone: 508-389-6360 fax: 508-389-7890 Species Program For more information on rare species and natural communities, please see our fact sheets online at www.mass.gov/nhesp. BioMap2 Conserving the Biodiversity of Massachusetts in a Changing World Introduction The Massachusetts Department of Fish & Game, through the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife’s Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), and The Nature Conservancy’s Massachusetts Program developed BioMap2 to protect the state’s biodiversity in the context of climate change. BioMap2 combines NHESP’s 30 years of rigorously documented rare species and natural community data with spatial data identifying wildlife species and habitats that were the focus of the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife’s 2005 State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP).
    [Show full text]
  • Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2
    Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) by Boris C. Kondratieff, Paul A. Opler, Matthew C. Garhart, and Jason P. Schmidt C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 March 15, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration (top to bottom): Widow Skimmer (Libellula luctuosa) [photo ©Robert Behrstock], Stonefly (Perlesta species) [photo © David H. Funk, White- lined Sphinx (Hyles lineata) [photo © Matthew C. Garhart] ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Copyrighted 2004 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………….…1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………..…………………………………………….…3 OBJECTIVE………………………………………………………………………………………….………5 Site Descriptions………………………………………….. METHODS AND MATERIALS…………………………………………………………………………….5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………..…...11 Dragonflies………………………………………………………………………………….……..11
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • Block Island Sound Rhode Island Sound Inner Continental Shelf
    Ecology of the Ocean Special Area Management Plan Area: Block Island Sound Rhode Island Sound Inner Continental Shelf Alan Desbonnet Carrie Byron with help from Elise Desbonnet, Barry Costa-Pierce, Meredith Haas and the PELL LIBRARY STAFF and MANY, MANY Researchers The Ecology of Rhode Island Sound, Block Island Sound and the Inner Continental Shelf GEOLOGY 2,500 km2 31 m average 60 m max 1,350 km2 40 m averageAcadian vs. Virginian 100 m maxecoregions The Ecology of Rhode Island Sound, Block Island Sound and the Inner Continental Shelf Boothroyd 2008 SLR 2.5-3.0 mm per year (1/10th inch) Glacial Origins--- a key element E. Uchupi, N.W. Driscoll, R.D. Ballard, and S.T. Bolmer, 2000 The Ecology of Rhode Island Sound, Block Island Sound and the Inner Continental Shelf Boothroyd 2009 Downwelling – Combined Flow Circulation/currents shaped by the geology Bottom habitats are dynamic/ever changing The Ecology of Rhode Island Sound, Block Island Sound and the Inner Continental Shelf Boothroyd 2008 Winter = NW (stronger) Summer = SW (milder) WINDS NOT a major driver of circulation Av.Big Wave implications height for stratification = 1-3 m Max = 7 m (9 m 100 yr. wave) The Ecology of Rhode Island Sound, Block Island Sound and the Inner Continental Shelf Spaulding 2007 Most recent Cat3 = Esther in 1961 Most recent = Bob (Cat2) in 1991 No named hurricane 18 years 17 RI hurricanes: 7 Category 1 8 Category 2 2 Category 3 The Ecology of Rhode Island Sound, Block Island Sound and the Inner Continental Shelf NOAA Hurricane Center online data 2010 Important
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of the Lepidoptera Fauna in Birch Mountains Wildland Provincial Park
    Survey of the Lepidoptera Fauna in Birch Mountains Wildland Provincial Park Platarctia parthenos Photo: D. Vujnovic Prepared for: Alberta Natural Heritage Information Centre, Parks and Protected Areas Division, Alberta Community Development Prepared by: Doug Macaulay and Greg Pohl Alberta Lepidopterists' Guild May 10, 2005 Figure 1. Doug Macaulay and Gerald Hilchie walking on a cutline near site 26. (Photo by Stacy Macaulay) Figure 2. Stacey Macaulay crossing a beaver dam at site 33. (Photo by Doug Macaulay) I TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 1 METHODS .............................................................................................................................. 1 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................ 3 DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................... 4 I. Factors affecting the Survey...........................................................................................4 II. Taxa of particular interest.............................................................................................5 A. Butterflies:...................................................................................................................... 5 B. Macro-moths ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter of the Biological Survey of Canada
    Newsletter of the Biological Survey of Canada Vol. 40(1) Summer 2021 The Newsletter of the BSC is published twice a year by the In this issue Biological Survey of Canada, an incorporated not-for-profit From the editor’s desk............2 group devoted to promoting biodiversity science in Canada. Membership..........................3 President’s report...................4 BSC Facebook & Twitter...........5 Reminder: 2021 AGM Contributing to the BSC The Annual General Meeting will be held on June 23, 2021 Newsletter............................5 Reminder: 2021 AGM..............6 Request for specimens: ........6 Feature Articles: Student Corner 1. City Nature Challenge Bioblitz Shawn Abraham: New Student 2021-The view from 53.5 °N, Liaison for the BSC..........................7 by Greg Pohl......................14 Mayflies (mainlyHexagenia sp., Ephemeroptera: Ephemeridae): an 2. Arthropod Survey at Fort Ellice, MB important food source for adult by Robert E. Wrigley & colleagues walleye in NW Ontario lakes, by A. ................................................18 Ricker-Held & D.Beresford................8 Project Updates New book on Staphylinids published Student Corner by J. Klimaszewski & colleagues......11 New Student Liaison: Assessment of Chironomidae (Dip- Shawn Abraham .............................7 tera) of Far Northern Ontario by A. Namayandeh & D. Beresford.......11 Mayflies (mainlyHexagenia sp., Ephemerop- New Project tera: Ephemeridae): an important food source Help GloWorm document the distribu- for adult walleye in NW Ontario lakes, tion & status of native earthworms in by A. Ricker-Held & D.Beresford................8 Canada, by H.Proctor & colleagues...12 Feature Articles 1. City Nature Challenge Bioblitz Tales from the Field: Take me to the River, by Todd Lawton ............................26 2021-The view from 53.5 °N, by Greg Pohl..............................14 2.
    [Show full text]
  • RI State Pilotage Commission Rules and Regulations
    STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS STATE PILOTAGE COMMISSION RULES AND REGULATIONS State Pilotage Commission C/o Division of Law Enforcement 235 Promenade Street Providence, RI 02908 Telephone (401) 222-3070 Fax (401) 222-6823 Commission Members: Capt. E. Howard McVay, Jr., Chairman Larry Mouradjian, Member Steven Hall., Member Capt. J. Peter Fritz, Member Ms. Joanne Scorpio, Secretary Gary E. Powers, Esq., Legal Counsel 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Description of Pilotage Commission and Members RULE 1 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT42-35 AS AMENDED RULE 2 ORGANIZATIONS AND METHOD OF OPERATIONS RULE 3 PRACTICE BEFORE THE COMMISSION RULE 4 PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS RULE 5 HEARINGS RULE 6 PETITIONS FOR RULE MAKING, AMENDMENT OR REPEAL RULE 7 DECLARATORY RULINGS RULE 8 PUBLIC INFORMATION RULE 9 APPRENTICE PILOT PROGRAM FOR BLOCK ISLAND SOUND RULE 10 APPRENTICE PILOT PROGRAM FOR NARRAGANSETT BAY RULE 11 CLASSIFICATION OF BLOCK ISLAND PILOTS RULE 12 CLASSIFICATION OF RHODE ISLAND PILOTS FOR WATERSNORTH OF LINE FROM POINT JUDITH TO SAKONNET POINT RULE 13 PILOTAGE SYSTEM FOR THE WATERS OF NARRAGANSETT BAY AND ITS TRIBUTARIES RULE 14 PILOT BOATS RULE 15 PILOTS RULE 16 RATES OF PILOTAGE FEES, WHICH SHALL BE PAID TO STATE LICENSED PILOTS IN BLOCK ISLAND SOUND RHODE ISLAND STATE PILOTAGE COMMISSION The State Pilotage Commission consists of four (4) members appointed by the Governor for a term of three (3) years one of whom shall be the Associate Director of the Bureau of Natural Resources of the Department of Environmental Management, ex officio; one shall be the Director of the Department of Environmental Management, ex officio; one shall be a State Licensed Pilot with five (5) years of active service on the waters of this State; and one shall represent the public.
    [Show full text]
  • Macrolepidoptera Inventory of the Chilcotin District
    Macrolepidoptera Inventory of the Chilcotin District Aud I. Fischer – Biologist Jon H. Shepard - Research Scientist and Crispin S. Guppy – Research Scientist January 31, 2000 2 Abstract This study was undertaken to learn more of the distribution, status and habitat requirements of B.C. macrolepidoptera (butterflies and the larger moths), the group of insects given the highest priority by the BC Environment Conservation Center. The study was conducted in the Chilcotin District near Williams Lake and Riske Creek in central B.C. The study area contains a wide variety of habitats, including rare habitat types that elsewhere occur only in the Lillooet-Lytton area of the Fraser Canyon and, in some cases, the Southern Interior. Specimens were collected with light traps and by aerial net. A total of 538 species of macrolepidoptera were identified during the two years of the project, which is 96% of the estimated total number of species in the study area. There were 29,689 specimens collected, and 9,988 records of the number of specimens of each species captured on each date at each sample site. A list of the species recorded from the Chilcotin is provided, with a summary of provincial and global distributions. The habitats, at site series level as TEM mapped, are provided for each sample. A subset of the data was provided to the Ministry of Forests (Research Section, Williams Lake) for use in a Flamulated Owl study. A voucher collection of 2,526 moth and butterfly specimens was deposited in the Royal BC Museum. There were 25 species that are rare in BC, with most known only from the Riske Creek area.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of Lepidoptera of the Wainwright Dunes Ecological Reserve
    SURVEY OF LEPIDOPTERA OF THE WAINWRIGHT DUNES ECOLOGICAL RESERVE Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 159 SURVEY OF LEPIDOPTERA OF THE WAINWRIGHT DUNES ECOLOGICAL RESERVE Doug Macaulay Alberta Species at Risk Report No.159 Project Partners: i ISBN 978-1-4601-3449-8 ISSN 1496-7146 Photo: Doug Macaulay of Pale Yellow Dune Moth ( Copablepharon grandis ) For copies of this report, visit our website at: http://www.aep.gov.ab.ca/fw/speciesatrisk/index.html This publication may be cited as: Macaulay, A. D. 2016. Survey of Lepidoptera of the Wainwright Dunes Ecological Reserve. Alberta Species at Risk Report No.159. Alberta Environment and Parks, Edmonton, AB. 31 pp. ii DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the policies of the Department or the Alberta Government. iii Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... vi 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................. 2 3.0 METHODS ................................................................................................................... 6 4.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • RI DEM/Water Resources
    STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Water Resources WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS July 2006 AUTHORITY: These regulations are adopted in accordance with Chapter 42-35 pursuant to Chapters 46-12 and 42-17.1 of the Rhode Island General Laws of 1956, as amended STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Water Resources WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS RULE 1. PURPOSE............................................................................................................ 1 RULE 2. LEGAL AUTHORITY ........................................................................................ 1 RULE 3. SUPERSEDED RULES ...................................................................................... 1 RULE 4. LIBERAL APPLICATION ................................................................................. 1 RULE 5. SEVERABILITY................................................................................................. 1 RULE 6. APPLICATION OF THESE REGULATIONS .................................................. 2 RULE 7. DEFINITIONS....................................................................................................... 2 RULE 8. SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS............................................... 10 RULE 9. EFFECT OF ACTIVITIES ON WATER QUALITY STANDARDS .............. 23 RULE 10. PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS, TREATMENT AND PRETREATMENT........... 24 RULE 11. PROHIBITED
    [Show full text]
  • Coleoptera: Carabidae) Diversity
    VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AS INDICATORS OF GROUND BEETLE (COLEOPTERA: CARABIDAE) DIVERSITY BY ALAN D. YANAHAN THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Entomology in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2013 Urbana, Illinois Master’s Committee: Dr. Steven J. Taylor, Chair, Director of Research Adjunct Assistant Professor Sam W. Heads Associate Professor Andrew V. Suarez ABSTRACT Formally assessing biodiversity can be a daunting if not impossible task. Subsequently, specific taxa are often chosen as indicators of patterns of diversity as a whole. Mapping the locations of indicator taxa can inform conservation planning by identifying land units for management strategies. For this approach to be successful, though, land units must be effective spatial representations of the species assemblages present on the landscape. In this study, I determined whether land units classified by vegetative communities predicted the community structure of a diverse group of invertebrates—the ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Specifically, that (1) land units of the same classification contained similar carabid species assemblages and that (2) differences in species structure were correlated with variation in land unit characteristics, including canopy and ground cover, vegetation structure, tree density, leaf litter depth, and soil moisture. The study site, the Braidwood Dunes and Savanna Nature Preserve in Will County, Illinois is a mosaic of differing land units. Beetles were sampled continuously via pitfall trapping across an entire active season from 2011–2012. Land unit characteristics were measured in July 2012. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordinated the land units by their carabid assemblages into five ecologically meaningful clusters: disturbed, marsh, prairie, restoration, and savanna.
    [Show full text]
  • Sweetened Water Preserve
    SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN The Southern Woodlands Reservation Oak Bluffs, Massachusetts Management Plan December 20, 2010 Approved by the Oak Bluffs Town Advisory Board () Approved by the Martha's Vineyard Land Bank Commission () Approved by the Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy & Environmental Affairs Julie Russell – Ecologist Maureen McManus Hill – Administrative Assistant Matthew Dix – Property Foreman Jeffrey Komarinetz, Jean-Marc Dupon and James Dropick – Conservation Land Assistants SECOND HALF (APPENDIX) 1 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN Appendix A: Locus and Topography Maps 2 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 3 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 4 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN Appendix B: Surveys, Deeds and Preliminary Management Plan Goals Deeds and larger copies of the surveys are on file at the land bank office. They include the following: 5 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 6 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 7 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 8 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 9 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 11 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 12 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 13 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 14 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 15 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 16 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 17 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 18 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 19 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 20 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 21 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 22 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 23 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 24 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN Appendix C: Soils Maps and Descriptions 25 SOUTHERN WOODLANDS RESERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN The dominant soil on the preserve is Carver Loamy Coarse Sand.
    [Show full text]