TAMARACK ENERGY, INC.
WATERTOWN RENEWABLE POWER PROJECT
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY
OCTOBER 2007
Prepared by:
TAMARACK ENERGY, INC.
WATERTOWN RENEWABLE POWER PROJECT
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY
OCTOBER 2007
Prepared by:
TAMARACK ENERGY, INC.
WATERTOWN RENEWABLE POWER PROJECT
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 METHODS ...... 3 2.1 Plant Community Characterization...... 3 2.2 Wetlands and Watercourses...... 5 2.3 Wildlife ...... 9 2.4 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species...... 10 3.0 RESULTS ...... 13 3.1 Upland Plant Communities (Facility Site)...... 13 3.1.1 Old field Community ...... 13 3.1.2 Hardwood Sapling Stand Communities...... 16 3.1.3 Betula populifolia–Quercus rubra sapling stand...... 16 3.1.4 Quercus alba–Viburnum acerifolium sapling stand ...... 17 3.1.5 Quercus rubra sapling stand...... 18 3.2 Interconnect Plant Communities...... 19 3.3 Wetlands (Facility Site) ...... 20 3.3.1 Riparian Forest Community...... 20 3.3.2 Wetland Functions and Values ...... 22 3.4 Wildlife (Facility Site) ...... 23 3.4.1 Old Field...... 23 3.4.2 Hardwood Sapling Stands...... 25 3.4.3 Riparian Forested Wetland ...... 26 3.5 Interconnect Route Wildlife...... 27 3.6 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species...... 28 4.0 IMPACTS ...... 29 4.1 Upland Plant Communities...... 29 4.2 Wetlands ...... 31 4.3 Wildlife ...... 32 4.4 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species...... 33 5.0 MITIGATION...... 34 5.1 Upland Plant Communities...... 34 5.2 Wetlands ...... 35 6.0 LITERATURE CITED...... 38
- i - Table of Contents Cont’d LIST OF TABLES
Table 2–1. Summary of plant community metrics...... 5 Table 3–1. Approximate areal extent of upland plant communities...... 13 Table 3–2. Old field community...... 14 Table 3–3. Betula populifolia-Quercus rubra sapling stand...... 17 Table 3–4. Quercus alba-Viburnum acerifolium sapling stand...... 18 Table 3–5. Quercus rubra sapling stand...... 19 Table 3–7. Riparian forest community...... 20 Table 3–8. Observed and expected wildlife species within the old field...... 23 Table 3–9. Observed and expected wildlife species within the hardwood sapling stand...... 25 Table 3–10. Observed and expected wildlife species within the Riparian forested wetland...... 26 Table 3–11. Observed and expected wildlife species within the interconnect route...... 27 Table 4–1. Comparison of ambient screening criteria (ug/m3), averaging time, and modeled FBG ambient impacts...... 31
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1–1. Site locus map...... 2 Figure 2–1. Location of study plots...... 4 Figure 2–2. State and federally listed species locations in Watertown...... 12 Figure 3–1. Plant community map...... 15
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Agency Correspondence Letters Appendix B Soil Report by a CT Certified Soil Scientist Appendix C Stormwater Wetland: Water Quality Basin and Planting Details (Soil Resource Consultants, 2007)
- ii -
TAMARACK ENERGY, INC.
WATERTOWN RENEWABLE POWER PROJECT
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Tamarack Energy, Inc. proposes to construct the Watertown Renewable Energy Project, a 30MW (megawatt) biomass energy facility with attendant structures on a 33–acre industrially zoned parcel of land located in Watertown, Connecticut. The facility will be fueled solely by wood (biomass) and will utilize advanced, low-emission fluidized bed gasification technology. The project’s principal source of wood fuel will consist of forest management residue, although it is anticipated that some amount of primary mill waste and recycled wood waste may also be made available. The facility will not accept painted or treated wood and as designed, will purchase and consume approximately 360,000 tons of clean waste wood per year to produce 30 MW of clean, renewable energy.
The 33-acre parcel is located within the central Naugatuck valley on Echo Lake road approximately one mile west of the Naugatuck River and Route 8 (Figure 1–1). To the east and north of the parcel are undeveloped tracts of land associated with the Mattatuck State Forest. Immediately to the west of the site is an industrial park. Bisecting the site is the perennial Turkey Brook which originates in a large wetland complex situated off of the property and to the northwest. Floodplain wetlands associated with Turkey Brook occupy a significant portion of the center of the property. The entire 33-acre site was clearcut approximately 10 years ago and is now densely overgrown.
Approximately 1000 feet to the north of the site are two, existing 115 kV Connecticut Light & Power (CL&P) transmission lines including (1) Frost Bridge to Campville Line No. 1191 and (2) Frost Bridge to Carmel Hill Line No. 1238. As proposed, the Project’s switchyard will connect with one of these lines by means of a buried 115kV electrical interconnect. The proposed interconnect route will utilize an existing ATV trail that passes through the Mattatuck State Forest and a conditional easement has been granted by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
- 1 - Existing CL&P Transmission Line
Proposed Line Tap
Proposed 115 kV Electrical Interconnect
Project Site
Legend Scale: AS SHOWN Tamarack Energy, Inc. Project No: Essex, CT TransmissionLines 1523-001 Watertown Biomass Facility 1 of 1 Project Boundary Filename: Biological Characterization SiteLocus.mxd Miles Drawn By: Site Locus KPN 3 5 P r a t t S t . S u i t e 2 0 1 Date Drawn: E s s e x , C T 0 6 4 2 6 T e l e p h o n e : ( 8 6 0 ) 7 6 7 - 5 0 6 9 F a x : ( 8 6 0 ) 7 6 7 - 5 0 9 7 1-1 0.09 0 0.09 0.18 0.27 09-13-2007 w w w . K l e i n s c h m i d t U S A . c o m
2.0 METHODS
The methods used to characterize the resources affected by the project are presented within this section. Natural resources examined included wetland plant communities; upland plant communities; wildlife; rare, threatened, and endangered species and habitat; and Turkey Brook aquatic habitat. Agency correspondence letters are provided in Appendix A and a report issued by a CT Certified Soil Scientist is provided in Appendix B.
2.1 Plant Community Characterization
The assessment of plant communities on the facility site consisted of the following components:
• A characterization of the species composition of each plant community based on reconnaissance surveys; • A delineation of the vegetative communities or cover types present on the basis of field observations, including the identification and delineation of any unusual habitats or natural communities; • Documentation of the composition of these communities through the use of representative sample plots; • A screening-level assessment of impacts to sensitive plants associated with air emissions in accordance with the thresholds established in the USEPA document “A Screening Procedure for the Impacts of Air Pollution Sources on Plants, Soils, and Animals” (USEPA, 1980); and • Identification and evaluation of reasonable mitigation measures regarding the vegetation impacts identified.
Plant communities encountered on the facility site were sampled with 22 semi– randomly located 5 meter (m) x 5 m square plots and 22 nested 1m x 1m herb plots on August 29, 2007 (Figure 2–1). In sum, a total of 550 m2 (0.12 acres) were sampled. Plots were situated within each plant community/cover type encountered so as to be representative of general conditions. Within each plot, tree, shrub, herb, fern, lichen, and moss species present in the plot were identified to the level of species where possible.
- 3 - 20 19
18
17 16
14 9 11 10 12 13 15 8
6
2 1 7 5 4 3 21 Road Lake ho 22 Ec
Scale: AS SHOWN Tamarack Energy, Inc. Legend Project No: Essex, CT 1523-001 Watertown Biomass Facility Project Boundary 1 of 1 Filename: Biological Characterization Study Plots StudyPlots.mxd Drawn By: Location of Study Plots Feet KPN 3 5 P r a t t S t . S u i t e 2 0 1 Date Drawn: E s s e x , C T 0 6 4 2 6 T e l e p h o n e : ( 8 6 0 ) 7 6 7 - 5 0 6 9 F a x : ( 8 6 0 ) 7 6 7 - 5 0 9 7 2-1 0 150 300 450 600 09-14-2007 w w w . K l e i n s c h m i d t U S A . c o m
Each plant species encountered in the plot, in addition to non-vegetated cover, i.e. leaf litter, was assigned an estimated percent cover. For each habitat type sampled, four descriptive metrics were reported including (1) species richness; (2) relative dominance; (3) relative frequency; and (4) an Importance Value identifying those plant species that are essentially most important, i.e. most dominant and occur most frequently within the given community (Table 2–1).
Table 2–1. Summary of plant community metrics. Metric Formula Variables Defined Species Richness (R) NA R = numbers of species ⎛ n ⎞ ⎜ PC ⎟/ A Relative Dominance (DR) ∑ species TOTAL PCspecies = summed percent cover for species x in plots 1…n; ⎝ i=1 ⎠ Atotal = total area sampled DR =100* n D Dspecies = summed dominance for species 1…n ∑ species i=1 ⎛ n ⎞ nspecies = number of plots 1…n in which species x occurs; Relative Frequency (FR) ⎜ n ⎟ / N Ntotal = total number of plots sampled; ∑ species TOTAL F = 100 * ⎝ i=1 ⎠ Fspecies = summed frequency for species 1…n R n ∑ Fspecies i=1 Importance Value (IV ) D = relative dominance ave IV = ()D + F / 2 R ave R R FR = relative frequency
The proposed 1,000 foot 115kV electrical interconnect route was surveyed by Kleinschmidt ecologists on August 29, 2007. The field activities were geared towards characterizing general plant community composition and type within the boundaries of the proposed corridor, with the ATV trail used as the centerline. Plant communities were also assessed within the vicinity of the proposed line tap. Plant community types encountered along the proposed 115kV electrical interconnect route were characterized with a qualitative, meander survey. Tree, shrub, herb, fern, lichen, and moss species were identified to the level of species where possible. Plant communities were sketched onto a scaled site plan, digitized, and then plotted onto a plant community cover type map.
2.2 Wetlands and Watercourses
The assessment of Connecticut jurisdictional alluvial soils on the site was conducted by Soil Resource Consultants under the auspices of David H. Lord, a CT
- 5 -
certified soil scientist. Wetland and watercourse boundaries were delineated with blue flagging (flag series WF–1 through WF–86). Wetland and alluvial soil boundary flags were surveyed by a licensed land surveyor and then plotted onto a scaled site plan.
Wetland plant communities encountered on the facility site were sampled by Kleinschmidt Associates with randomly located 5m x 5m square plots on August 29, 2007. Plots were situated so as to be representative of general conditions. Within each plot, tree, shrub, herb, fern, lichen, and moss species present in the plot were identified to the level of species where possible. Each plant species encountered in the plot, in addition to non–vegetated cover, i.e. standing water, muck etc., were assigned an estimated percent cover. Wetland plant communities encountered along the 115kV electrical interconnect route were assessed qualitatively and the dominant plant species were determined visually.
Turkey Brook aquatic habitat was assessed qualitatively and included recording information on channel width, depth, geometry, substrate type, flow. Water temperature was also treated qualitatively whereby temperatures were described in the field as being cold, cool, warm etc.
Using the wetland field data, a Wetland Functions and Values Assessment conducted in accordance with the ACOE Highway Methodology was used to help assess the probable nature of direct and indirect impacts. As discussed in “The Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement: Wetland Functions and Values (A Descriptive Approach)”, wetland functions are defined as those properties that are intrinsic to the wetland system, e.g. nutrient cycling, hydrology etc. In contrast, wetland values are properties ascribed to the wetland system by society. In large part, the values ascribed to a wetland stem from the functions themselves.
The descriptive approach referred to in the Highway Methodology supplement is a means through which the principles of basic wetland science and the societal aspects of wetlands are brought together. Ultimately, through a synthesis of the descriptive approach and best professional judgment, the extent and nature of wetland impacts can be
- 6 -
arrived at. Wetland functions and values are also used to compare project alternatives, avoid and minimize project impacts, and weigh environmental impacts against project benefits.
As defined in the ACOE Highway methodology guidance, there are eight wetland functions and five wetland values. Considerations and Qualifiers specific to each function and value are used to justify the assignment of wetland functions and values to a resource. The following sections define each of the wetland functions and values.
Wetland Functions
Groundwater Recharge/Discharge – This function considers the potential for a wetland to serve as groundwater recharge and/or a recharge area. As it applies in this case, recharge includes those waters that contribute to an aquifer, whereas discharge refers to the discharge of groundwater to the surface.
Floodflow Alteration (Storage and Desynchronization) – This function considers the effectiveness of the wetland in reducing flood damage by attenuating floodwaters following heavy precipitation events.
Fish and Shellfish Habitat – This function considers the effectiveness of seasonal or permanent waterbodies associated with the wetland in question for fish and shellfish habitat.
Sediment/Toxicant/Pathogen Retention – This function reduces or prevents degradation of water quality.
Nutrient Removal/Retention/Transformation – This function relates to the effectiveness of the wetland to prevent adverse effects of excess nutrients entering aquifers or surface waters.
- 7 -
Production/Export (Nutrient) – This function relates to the effectiveness of the wetland to produce food or useable products for humans and other living organisms.
Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization – This function relates to the effectiveness of a wetland to stabilize streambanks and shorelines against erosion.
Wildlife Habitat – This function considers the effectiveness of the wetland to provide habitat for various types and populations of animals typically associated with wetlands and the wetland edge.
Wetland Values
Recreation (Consumptive and Non–Consumptive) – This value considers the effectiveness of the wetland and associated watercourses to provide recreational opportunities.
Educational/Scientific Value – This value considers the effectiveness of the wetland to serve as a site for an outdoor classroom.
Uniqueness/Heritage – This value relates to the effectiveness of the wetland or its associated waterbodies to produce certain special values, e.g. unique plant species.
Visual Quality/Aesthetics – This value relates to the visual and aesthetic qualities of the wetland.
Threatened or Endangered Species Habitat – This value relates to the effectiveness of the wetland or associated waterbodies to support threatened or endangered species.
Using the data collected in the field, functions and values were ascribed to each wetland in accordance with the guidance provided in “The Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement: Wetland Functions and Values (A Descriptive Approach)”. Justification for each wetland function and value associated with each wetland and
- 8 - watercourse was based upon the considerations/qualifiers provided in “Appendix A: Wetland Evaluation Supporting Documentation; Reproducible Forms” of the Highway Methodology Workbook.
2.3 Wildlife
The facility site and 115kV electrical interconnect route was surveyed for general wildlife species by Kleinschmidt ecologists on August 29, 2007. The wildlife survey activities were geared towards characterizing habitat composition, identifying habitat types, and assessing their potential to support wildlife species either directly or indirectly. It is worth noting that species not observed on the site may have been missed due to the timing of the survey and may actually be present. This environmental report incorporates a summary of the following site–specific information:
• A characterization of wildlife including mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles that occur on or within the vicinity of the project site based on reconnaissance surveys and supplemented by available data, including an identification and delineation of any unusual habitats or natural communities which could support listed species or species of special concern; • A list of the species of mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles reasonably likely to occur on, or within the vicinity of the project site based on site observations and supplemented by publicly available sources; • An analysis of the impact of operation on the wildlife (including listed rare species or species of special concern, that have been identified by resource agencies as potentially occurring on or within the vicinity of the site), wildlife habitats, and wildlife travel corridors; and • An identification and evaluation of reasonable mitigation measures regarding wildlife impacts identified.
Within each plant community sampled, wildlife habitat attributes were noted, e.g. snags, and observed wildlife species were identified to the level of species. As an added measure, published accounts of species occurrences by habitat type described in DeGraaf & Rudis (1986) were used to generate master taxa lists by habitat type. In addition to the
- 9 -
direct observation of individual species, indirect evidence of wildlife presence, e.g. scat, tracks, vocalizations, burrows were also recorded.
2.4 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species
According to correspondence received by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Natural Diversity Database (NDDB) (Julie Victoria, Franklin Swamp Wildlife Management Area) dated June 14, 2007, the American kestrel (Falco sparverius) has been noted within the vicinity of the project site. In this regard, NDDB mapping prepared by the CTDEP indicates that rare species and associated habitats occur approximately 1.25 miles to the northeast of the site (Figure 2–2). As such, a habitat based approach was used to assess the likelihood of the presence of the American kestrel on the property, rather than a full survey for the species. The following sections summarize the autecology of the American kestrel, i.e. the relationship of the given organism with its environment, in addition to a summary of specific threats and approved mitigation measures.
American Kestrel (Falco sparverius)
The American kestrel is characterized by pointed wings; a reddish back and tail; and two black stripes on each side of white sides of head. The male has blue-gray wings; averages 27 cm long; with a wingspan that measures 58 cm. This species is slightly smaller than the Eurasian kestrel, which has only a single black mark on each side of the head. The average territory size for the American kestrel is 109.4 hectares (ha) and 129.6 ha as reported in two western U.S. studies (Cade, 1982). The home range diameter during the breeding season ranges from approximately 0.5–2.4 km.
Preferred breeding habitats for the American kestrel include various open and semi-open habitats including riparian edges; woodland streams; cliff; cropland/hedgerow; grassland/herbaceous; old field; savanna; suburban/orchard; and woodlands. Non– breeding habitat includes various open and semi–open habitats. As an obligate secondary cavity nester, special habitat features include standing snags/hollow tree; natural holes in
- 10 - trees; abandoned woodpecker holes; holes in buildings or cliffs; abandoned magpie nests; and similar sites. The American kestrel will readily use nest boxes, which may dramatically increase density of nesting pairs in some areas.
The immature kestrels are carnivores/invertivores, whereas the adult food preference shifts and becomes strictly that of a carnivore. During the summer, the American kestrel feeds on insects such as grasshoppers and crickets, in addition to small vertebrates including snakes, lizards, birds, mice, and in some instances, bats. In the winter, the kestrel feeds mainly on birds and mice.
Surveys have indicated a significant decline in the kestrel population in northeastern North America, particularly in Connecticut. Kestrel surveys within the northeastern United States estimate a statistically significant declining trend in the kestrel population size of –1.4 % per year during the1976–2003 time period (p <0.05). Historically, human-related causes of death, including shooting and road kills were a significant source of mortality. The American kestrel also was affected by dichloro- diphenyl-trichloroethane (DDT), but the extent of effects at the population level is not known. Presently, the status of the species globally and in the U.S. and Canada is considered secure, although it is considered imperiled in both Connecticut and Newfoundland.
- 11 - \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ W \\ \ \\ \ h
Marsh Point Schermerhorn Hill i Guernsey Hill t M g Curtis Pd M u \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ w \\ \\ \\ \ \\ e
o a a ad
S Su rs \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ m \\\\ \\ \\ e l o h enn P F m k \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ B \\\\ \\ w \\\\\\ ct Nort n edi n HARWINTON o en P e B k t and l me i R l o B Wood a Wi \\\ \ \\\ h \\\\ H \\ ffe \ \\ \\\\\\ h i i fie M i i n n d r n Wig u s d e d r Point Folly t esle ld r a W k g s \\\ \\\ Bla \\\\ c Cam \ \\ \\\\\\ m G E G el V s B e B t P n h er a da i le \\ C w \\ r \\\ l \ ro \\\\\\ s o s H d a h i l d t l n k e a i o p o a s l \\ \ \\ e \\\ l \\\ \\\\\\\\ A m B t n v n k n slee rtiss k Sto Oa ke i Cu u la P dR y B B l \\\\ \\ \\ t \\ R l \\ \\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ r H e e i k il e n q
to l u m o \\\\ unet M \\ \\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ Bristol Res No 7 Br Hi r a Marsh Pd s o buc \\\\ \\\\ wt in \\\\ e s l M
r Beaver Pd e e kin l ch n op t u H o Fo o N un y \\\\B \\\\\\\ \\ tainhead k \\\\ p s Cr R \\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\ os \\\\ \ s \\ \\ s h a it C m Minor Pd L \\\ \\ \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\ S \ \ r W Wh ld e e O O st k i l \\\\ \\ \\\ \\\\\ i \\\\ \\\\ l a \ g t i a Bantam L Northfield Pd e v w T i k L Morosani Pd No 2 u e \\ \\\\ \\\\\ a \\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\ \\ d m \\\\ w a b
m wm
STATE AND FEDERAL LISTED SPECIES m l R Camp Hill White Flower Pd l e
o a Bristol Res No 3 s \\ \\\\ \\ \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\ \\ \ \\\ e b \\\\ a C s B r t P a h a S o Marsh ss it k p o n Deer Island way \\ \\ aiah Sm \\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\m o \\\\ \ \ \\\ k \\\\ Is p Sh ew Ba \\ \\\ \\ \\\ \\\\\ Pitch Res \\\\\ \\\\\\ Hi ife \\\\ \ \\\ n Vi \\\ ittle hady Kn ill tai L S \\ \\\ \\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\ ll \\\\H \\\oun \\ \\\ on M P s S l LITCHFIELD a S Holt Hill ym 209 \\\\ \\\ \\ thers \\\ \\\\\\ \\ \\\\\\ \\\\ c \\\ \\\ \\\ Es M F Æÿ nd AND SIGNIFICANT NATURAL COMMUNITIES ne y m Pi ort in h a F e ro l \\ \\\ \\ \\\ \\\ \\ h a \\\\At i \\\\\ \\\ ou Esther rt t n s No M A h r Is w n b \\ \\\ \ \ \\\\\\ tw\\\\ \\ a \\ \\\ \ t Sandy Beach h me o s L o c m Pal Northfield o illia i k k o B \\ \\\ \ t \\\ \\\\\\ \ \\ \\ \ W Stoddard d ch d
B u H C r
\\\\\\ \\\ \ \\ \\\\\\\\ \\\ \ r \ \\ \\\\\\\\\\ \\ f 222 g Æÿ g i Whiskers e o el t n South B s o n e ay \\\\ \\\ \\ \\\\\\\\ \\\ \ n \ st \\\\\\\\\\ T r d r nd re t o o P a Gaylords Pd Apple Hill S l u P r \\\\ \\\ \ \\\\\ \\\ il in \\ \ \\ i \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ BRISTOLy \ l H M H T n S T De a n Tw i e y t r w i b e \\\\ \\\ \\\\\ r r ot \ \\\\\ d \\ e g \\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \ y a o e r d M e M o s h g ud i ta Morosani Pd No 1 G Lo J r a nt t h \\\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\\ \\\\\ s \ e \\ \\ \\\\\\\\ WATERTOWN, CT eta l t Y l a acht u a i is t Club T H da r em he o w n a B m d y A \\\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\\ \\\\\ u y n \\ \\ e \\\\\\\\ E o k r d Terryville Res No 3 G C e ado B o r e a e r e e w ld e w rn k d y r n M u c P nor C i a \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\ T nn \\ \\ \\ \\\\\\\\e o s Mi r pi b H m r o H o e l id la B Al la d S K e h Ea k or n MORRIS st k i k g l \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\ \ \\\\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ 254 k \ \\ \\ \\ \ d \ \ n l e i Æÿ n y B S e Smi o H r R lk e a a H E
l h r t n S e R s
u n h \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \ \\\\\b \\ \\ \\\\\ \\\ ti p \ \\ co \ risti r nn \ s h t B p C a y r o L
m a S t a i
a N g h i a i v
L illt Ba ruster C M b n i Arm u \\\\\\\\\ D \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \ \\\\\\\\ \\ \\ \\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\ \\ e s i E
Fa H H h h s A a to r
g r o W W bb c s e a t on r ot and M \\\\\\\\\\\ w \\\\\\\\\ \\ \ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\ \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\ l s n \ \ \\ t S p i a a il s n a m d tt
o Vi h d Pi te l h t ia e N T e n nu ic w \\\\\\\\\\\ \\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\ \\\\ \\\ \ \\ L \\ tr tinH u Upper Pd Pa s Ps l o r t y l ge t t ia Bobbin n \\\\\\\\\ r \\\\\\\\ o\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\ \ \\\ La H rr S t \ \\ t w S Ca n h Lattin Hill Morris w ee il ice he Æÿ72 n l l n e \\\\\\\\\\\ y \\\\\ n \\\ \\\ \ \ \\ \\\ ye \\\ r \\ \\ \ \\\ dwe e Ed B ll D r n m lett d E \\ \\\\\ \\ \\\ \ \ \ \\ \\ View \\\ an \\Bart \\\\\l \ \\\ Lakeside ea W o w im y Th Northfield Res Exit 40 K l a G am n h i Tr G \\ \ \\\\\ \\ \ \\ \\ e \\\ ro \\\\\\\\ \\\ n n ve e H o ar o Lakesid F ge l cent M d our s m to L ve Cre e i Walnut Hill d a Middle Pd a \\ \ g a \\ \\ i H lro \\ H d\\\\\o \ \\\ n m b s br o on ai W E ill w is R ind s t Nystrom Pd s R i LEGEND \\ t \\ i r o \\ \\ rn t \\ \\\\\\\\m d \\\\\\\\\ es e f s ey i e W r o c Zeiner Pd e n h i ld m e ood h er Richmond d K l E o e Thomaston Res S r g \\ \\ S \\ s \\ W ll k \\ \\\\\\ e a \\\\\\\\ a o i e M i e t h C o H s nd To l t o s EagleLockCoPdl Haase n \\\ \\ \ \\ t M \\ ry s \\\\\\o C \\\ Jones Pd u o o S hu M et Evanoski g i B k e m t r Sa t c h T ic s ad f A H g ur \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \\\\\ f rch or H r u Terryville h B l 109 u r l Ol d t i Un Æÿ o a o Wo l M o T n n u rn l ir d le r W M Terryvil l P s \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \\ \\\\\ \\\ s r lt r t a h Town Garage i d p B o a a s e z o a le am e ne m Seymours Pd o T k o l N c r ir B r n K t n h \\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\\ \\\ \\ t k L u a e s n d w l y c i n a i c o e k e s B o sh it W P P Bristol Res No 1 t r h ll e h i arn i e r dB q u \\\\ \\\\\\\ \\ \\\ \\ n \\\ ch t r u t l C n r a J B i i O P k o o B h w s bu J h o B n ead O e Ma W bM T a r R W l i J c S l u ip e a f d l o e f an to Morris Res s w k i \\\\\ \\ \\ \\\ a o \\ \ \ ey k f n u Listed Species and Natural Communities * n i ie a r T Ag R o a bb e s n s y ey h k k l a o r ep h D Bk l l a l a d \\\\\\\ \\\\\ \\ \\\ d t \ \\ \\\ \ sev on s rt s r r i H der V e A e n tt l a A o Thomaston al h o A m w h le Fr ickory \\\\\\\ \\\\\ P \ \\ \\\ H Nova L Hickory Hill ic y y N s e el l c r N B e e l V t s h y i e u s t o \ \\\\\ \\ a e id t slie o w n Stoughton r Adams h o Le B r h ch s n m ill W C G a ickoryH \ \\\\\\\ \\\\\ \\ H a c H Elec Town Hill i i m Eugene Park Pd l S State Boundary i o l o il Platt Farm l l t Jan \\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\ \\ o l sid r h B \ roadview Ht Ro n d h e T lm s Plymouth a W wa ic Morton Pd b k lv \\\\ \\\ \ \ \\\\\ l r \ y nr e i U E n S Ka n n s a n wy G n a e r M n Ps o Ly e d \\\ \ \\ \\\\\ M i P \ l r ree t erg d n d o Exit 39 d a Ev r n County Boundary a ra a G n e B In r G Ma n \ \\ \\ \\\\\ W in e n i B ay n I as n a v h el o B u e e p ing li \ \\ \\\\\ \\\\ m r es to i g l a b n n East Morris Bk e D Kenyo e Brid Rive T Higgin h Scott Pd s c \\\\\ \\\\ r o \ \\ l d i r d a Town Boundary M r s y C ake ne l M \\\ \\\\\ \\\\ t Haney B Masterbone Pd \\ Co Pi e o e wnLin c anal To r nt C e G \\\ \\\\ \\\ \\ r i le er p s e a s pl s Tu \\\ \\ \\\\ \\\ T \\ \\ o a o Ea Te M st n Railroads ill r n Washi n gemannH o ngton el THOMASTON S Ber P e \\\ \\ \\\ w \ \\ lsid \\ rre l Hi c
n \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\\ \\ ot n
l L is e l t
i Fa Primary Route \\ \\\ \\\\ n ld Morr \\ y re
T O Str e e Pratt Pd awbe rn G o PLYMOUTH rm r \\ w \\\\ ry Pa Bu d o rk ad c Pine Hill T e h Auncient Oak d Westside Dam M M \\\\ \\ Hancock Pd ow ng c Lo r H French Mountain C i T \\ \\ n Secondary Route i B Wigwam Res McCoy Pd t ha o l Shaw Pd r l l n dd in \\ te \\\\\\\ \ e i p le e b l el h l H i \\\\\\\ \ K A W L o a G a k llo T Local Road \\\\\\\ d Stevens Dam t o e y wn H O o w ss an aterbury d ro co Old W s \ \\\\\\\ \\\ l o \\ t C H ck Gro Bronson Lockwood Res n d K i B French Pd w h ll k o B e g e i \ \\\\\\\ \\ r e \\ an g S h g Kn c d t m \\\\\\\ nP \\ \\\a Water, Shore Long Meadow Pd h L f u W e i B E e th e n h ig p Jackson n o T Ma k u nc h m d r e \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ ra tu \\\ a a B S o g e d R ld S n L i n O d o k l r Br d i \ \\ \\\\ \\\\ \\ \\ ch an \\\ a Todd Hill e H ch PineHill e Bas ee H pe St re \ \ \ k Intermittent Water Br o D o o B W e n anc l s l ollwood \ m \\\\ e d Reynolds Bridge o Kn oo e h S y t a B P w Sh w k e h t o k u
d t C Bro own L a \ e t e \ \\ \ t \ t c i B R r Exit 38 a r B
s u li e n r a l k othy R v t k
e l k or e o g o n d f D \e \ b \\ \ e \ e L Dam k ai f n a e
k S b Wa k i T
Hi P W a L r en h a nt l a B de o k \\ \\ \ \ \\ \\i \ y
e S i
t F e ow g E L m e wn c k s t n Bethlehem Res
Sp r e ou e h a
s pl o a \\ \\ \\ \\ ad e u e
f g p
pl M L i ak L e a t b L el h l M i
A L e Mattatuck Pd r Dredged Channel a \\ \\ \\ \\ \ s in d m y e k
e r y e e \\ \\\\\ \\ \ S
k Black Rock u k Eagle Rock v Plymouth L r a b k S ie r n
Ceda L \\\\ \\\ \\ Bassett Pd e \ B le t e w r H te
ke Aqueduct \\\\ \\\ \\\ a ck a a a son o i Kas C c L w W n W \\\ \\\ \ i n Black Rock L e y i H a llam d os Benjamin Pd e o ie B Re l r \ rg \ \ \\\ \\\ \ yn H i ol o ds B ev S ri O dg Yo V d e \\ \ \\\ Border Line Pd \\ \\ \\\\ k u l a m a Pleongs Pd Fall Mountain L Water Still rk l Hill l B L le Hil \\ \ Barbian\\\ Farm Pd n \\ \\\\ \\ \\ \\ ran il \\\\ \\\\\ mi L oub chB ak D d k H Lane Hill
M tV \\\ \ \\\ \\ \\\\ \\ \\ \ k \\ \\ \\\ \\\\\ Buttermilk Pd c e u i L e v n i o \\ \\ \\\\ \\\\\ \ nt \\ \ \\\\\ w e g n ya Eastview i n Br y Wilton Pd l w e l r i \ \ g \\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\ kRo \\\\\ H r c e Ma H n n L Intermittent Water so a bu a Fall Mountain \ \ \\\\ \\ arm \\\\\\\\\\ an r \\\\\ L a or d F Fr Judd Road Pd ud Bl e k 61 J t Wilt Æÿ i on e \ \ z \\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\ o Waterville Rod & Gun Club Pd \ n \\\\ \\\\\ ll \\\\\\ Wa \\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\ zy Kno Alfieri Pd Brophy Pd \\ \\ \\\\\\ \\\ Bree \\\\\\ \\ \\ \\\\\\ stone 132Æÿ Merriman Pd Grey Bk Tidal, Sand Flats Wo \\ \\\\\\ \\ \\\ \\\\\\ \\ \ \\ \\ \\\\\\ k ll S L i r c i e od \\\ R \\\\\\ a \\\\\\\\ \\ \ \\ \\ \\\\\\ o Indian Heaven Pd \\ nfo Judd Pd Res n H w e rd k l nc l o e Cr y Bethlehem f \\\ Bird Pd \\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\\ \ \\ \ \\ \\\ \\\\\\ a \\ East i e T el n Art Lockes Pd m West M H w h e e o \\\ \\ \\\ \\ \\\\\\ \\ \\\ l \\\\\\\\\ d H ow d o oll e e y H n tc d P i a Pad o th p W E a u e Rocks in Water a r \\\\ \\l \\\\\\ \\ B \\\ r u C a W n e n C s t T s \\ t \\ \\\\\\ Mount Tobe \\\\\\ \\\\ g T o t Spr N Smith Pd Magnolia Hill i eekee o \\ \\\\\\ wn \\ s \\\\\\ d \\\\\ \ \\\\ o Birdsall Pd b Meyers Pd
W el
n i Ma JoshuaT i e n gnolia H ownRoad \\\\\\ n ill \\ \\\\\ \ L
wn gB hf
e in t k o
r Bk t Inundated Area \\\\\\ w \\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\ e y B k r n a Meyers Wood Key Hill o P e No g \\\\\\ \\ \\ t \\\\\\\ l BETHLEHEM u l a a n g g i H r r l A \\\\ k \\\ \\\\\\\\\\ k a n u b Ju H so B n \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ r Mu P b \ \\\ l \\ \\\\\\\\\ r a l
e J i g Tomlinson Pd d s Ni u rd \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ n so o Hi Marsh dg i \ \\\\ \\ \\\\\\\ \ \\\ n r C Sm y n H \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ p e Ridg \\ \ o Kill\orin \\\\\\\ Marino\\\ Pd \\ i S k ll u i Roc W ne
y th ard
t S H d n \\ s \ \\\ \\\ Plainville Fish & Game\\\ Club\\ Pd t h m Po a r Ho t nn ee
y i t on
E u t \\\ \\\ h n Birch Hill o P x Maddox l O S d n Hill e c l Gree o P l l l T r Hannon Pd d Dam i d d son o d s 2 o n Wo d ew F o rm h 6 M vi a \\ u r B \\ Guild Hollow Pd Thomson Fa a o F Jo W d 2 o s t Ma r w k M S m u Ol d J i n \\ y \\ \\ rch Bridge uns e er k e A a t y t e a a y u n B c m \ e r S dg B \\ hi d \\ \\ k is C o w k t i o o lto e h h s n w k L Ot
\ \ \\\ \\ \\\ ic g \ \\\ o c i r B i n k Trolane e r \\\ \\\ \ H \\\\ \\\ J o H \ \\\ B o k e F k e HancockBkL l t s \\ \ \\ a e \\ T \\\ G e odd H e r Jeric a ew ollow B t ho r O n u S S d \ \\ St n \ \\\ r H l r e A il o mi e i r l o t l nH \\ n o \ r t Johnson Brothers Pd Ea k llow h c s Ho a a v l e st e P B h l i i S e y d C H pr w tow D \\\ eR B e in ia i g k t JerichoBkPd a m m \\\ \\ n o \
e B R A s c u in o A e k bre k \\ \\ g y p S \\ \\\ lle \\ p Ho n e u a d nt e \\ \\ a \\ \\ \\ R ow k n w Hinma ov l e k e N l o n Becar Hill i e \\ \\\ \\\ c \\ L C c Guilds Hollow n o ante o rn k \ W \\\ \\\ c re \\ N n ron nH B a st r Sh o e \\\ od \\ \\\ \\ Ha t \\ a Ro e w k b o S t n e i d r t r o H t L Whi a l ea \\\ w \\\\ \\ ee \\\ m \ Greystone Pd \\ Clinton Hill\\ a the e od il r l B Se C l e e TO USE MAP \\\ er \\\\ \\ \ uc \\\w \M \\ B B h e k k k lo o D w \\\ \\ \\ \ in \\\s \\\\ un o d S n g Turkey Bk Vil r 63 rk n t lage t a o ha p r Æÿ dp \\ \\ es Woo t \\\ \\\\ T T \\\ We W H Wi Vocarros Pd yr i A s m re n dgew o ll w oo i a d Bird Hill \\ \\\\\ d c Cl \\\\ be e \\\ i le k Kay H v w Ellen m o a \\\ lo \\ E \\\ W o r \\\ l a t H Locate project boundaries and any additional affected areas on the map. If the project is not within r x ay a o h i y a y t Fai i o il B c ll H s T t se \\\ Cr \\ e \\ \\\ ane e t n s n a er n ri Hol s o u t t lo n S o u es on w WATERTOWN s 8 r s a shaded area; or overlapping a lake, pond or wetland that has any shading; or upstream or downstream \\ a \\ p \\\ n i nd Æÿ d r l e r M V e S Pa et r E l P C i l ie n B w a f M lls vie c s Churchelow Pd g a e lf h C a F o cAc (by less than 1/2 mile) from a shaded area, the project is unlikely to affect any known occurrence of Burritt Hill M n y i a G o t d Porter B \\\ r n err O Hill iam e Old Ice Pd la n N o c s k L R rc ou h n a s B u h l \\\ e N dg \\\\\\\\\ y i B at n m i v a tg o dge Je R listed species or significant natural community. If any part of the project is within a shaded area; r rd es y rs ri e W e c k g t Do o e Du n ud \\ i y e ar \\\\\\\\\ H r u l w P e k e J s l S S ak a ss L tB W o o o t a e h Al wd t B c Ec u s \\\ \\\\ n r \\\\\\\o\\\ or overlapping a lake, pond, or wetland that has any shading; or upstream or downstream (by less than eel B r m H w W L co t o ee s B k a r Ro e ar e E c H n M t Bk \\\ \\\\\ Pin e t \\ e\\\\\\\\\\ e t s F n a nr o rthwe view Riflec Range Pd l y t a n w r No 1/2 mile) from a shaded area, then the project may have a potential conflict with a species or natural b B ng H E r \\\ \ e Lo \\ ru \\\\\\\\\\ \ B e l p o Bucks Hill le o d i M i l l r m n oo n c il t o S p D p le H H t ng hw N a k u ate S i e N Spri t \\\ \\\ l o \ S l y v e l M B es B l ing i a l a C k community. Complete a Data Base Request Form and submit to the Natural Diversity Data Base along v er n H H n e i N e i per t l e r e er sp r e g k Chip o o t w \\\\ i r r h W v t a v th 262 l a r w h o o w Æÿ l u l o o e i l e nH Wh W r o ay 2 kB f er a
rt t B n y le t c f \\\ \\ G r H d C Watertown o n i C h Heminway Pd H with a project description and a copy of a map clearly showing the project boundaries. C n s 62 o t l B h a
ho o P g a n nc s n e ud hee e i e i e e Cl ia l c k St d i d \\\\\\\ \\ l st P m ow k s m e nLa klan W K e m Ha c Hid uc B h t J F f r l ind D dg ra Be a l Pl Cu u Mad R c a T a c \\ \\\\\\\ o i h in ie i e f y r H G b y N gB l r a s G N B Co ico P St y h e L C u d ks ld ro t a o or u u \\ o l o n n l o t en D e l la e l e k t n F a r yH n rt n r J i o F e r o e se w r M zi e e d n a h P d a s k e rm t Ch i l a h H V ny o \\\ o l eB o i w a C e Sl w S L ta Flanders Wildlife Center Pd o y o m O C Br ll a e T s Welton Pd ookd \\ \\ W gus u d ale i g B Exit 37 u k r C P w d e E o k od h a s wo E Au e Deep ass W y n H Echol L yB e a d g inw i s wn r em n a b o H l a hH \\ in r k u k r e i ch b o c o to t R t o e r W gh o c r o S i e l f G d u T s d y e C n d c r l u E gmeadow h H v m Lon e e a to r L R o C De ake l n o e
r rn u B y u eR s G C e Lak oo t B n y o Hill c e h de ea t urc D C Ch f t L c st h WOLCOTTK y H C j l f b an a u p s I e r w y n ur ew e o w a a S w t i al Co r k m n n ed ck i u e min i o In y to h T v db v x s se s t l n a u o d I e ll c P a o i l d ton c o t r e Jea k i g e c ds s o E Church Hill w er r o Be y u l ar W y B as n B nd t T stn n 6 e a re le O p d n M
£ ad t r a he i ¤ c J d a H e \\\ le k a e t P u a i d l C o r r V n coln
u n e i i a L e e s o K a c m L Che k st t a r F nut G at N u w Sylvan L i a k t Pa t B k C d \\ \\\ M Buckridge Sperry Hill r t e e rm A e apl h d k e l s H n H
i a r kland l a Fr m c r \\ w i gh C A en a Bu W c h l a i F i e e l h es n N v We r l
l H Ta Or or R ll Chestnut Hill Res r l Quail Run L e t Ch Fl i Bu Sh w E u th D a \\ n R Ri e H S ne a gle a a a r m ie u d y Wo Co n
DATA SOURCES n o n v c Fi t E r i e g n ve a ill M E v b n h e e ch e dg d le rle g y w a d ake er \\\\\\\ od E er e n l ay Downes Fa y d wL n s e s in o do O r r ewo w g t B toe Mea n o c w n o C t e l Mo a n a l u O l t s h s l kl i r rm d r P nn o Meadow od r r i l y Ly \\\\\\t d o i B H \\\ l ga d l de y l o o a c i le H d t d o L Ph p an an F l re w tucc t F l m e m S il r n it l M \\\\\\ l a C s \\\ e p ie a B s l F S t a e D C f s k Li a k o t f de Brushy Hill Q H a d \\\ \\\\\\ r B y \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ os R u we F lon t o W e he O R Ca as To E a y B n \\\ \\ \\\\\\ i e \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ l \ K n r S H S d ee v u i g k BASE MAP INFORMATION - Political boundaries, railroads, and hydrography originally derived r s O ld ni e ie Oakville Slade n a ig ry T B l n ale mel e d r r ta ma i a fi oo gh i e w ys l Waterville e n \\\ \\\ \\ l \\\\\\ r e \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ a \ ockw u w lac Cem y k e L u h p d l i id Y ll N e d t q o e L ire n g ee i D en S Viol w k h n a L y H a o T Pond s B Hi sh \\\ o \\ u \\\\\\ \\ d s \\\\\\ \\\ n e \ from 1:24,000 scale 7.5 Minute U.S. Geological Survey Digital Line Graphs and enhanced by the ru Frank Atwood Bk ottage a a B Cooper vo r B n C p t F r in e t g a or y D yB
ll Bk E B gg h e F a m i ee h e S a a \\\\\ \\ \\\ ir \\\\\\ \\ ry all l r 8 r \\\ l w l Ed a g lintlo n s i d M A D K ut Hil k Ro a M as ll m s Artillery ain f i a He O c a n
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. The data is based on 1:24,000 scale Topographic h t F Chestn \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\ kd e \\\ u Balmoral Farm Pd r G ge e S a St n hL M m L Wequapauset ll ld wamp le e C C ve H Paw r g el ti r e c w E w ery ll e e i ll c \\\ rti \ \\\ \\\ \\\ e A h i Cat l m a e B Hungerford S e Candee Hi a l R T y k m k i a ecu e Ya Quadrangle maps published between 1969 and 1984. The roads and road names are based on the o a y n t g r h l ipper Ha h e y o o k se rva d r Ex e n a C \\\ \\\ \\\ \\ \ \\\ \ \\\ V r S i rd y S e nt l S oyden r w B o e e e l p u D ood d e w e w Mi h be h K R r a n \\\ \\ \\\ n \\\ \ \\\ Ed Morro c Hi n Exit 36 l Hocks Pd Connecticut Street Network State Plane, TIGER/Line 2000 database a statewide database of address-ranged ield e th r e n F C m i i B ve Goff F dd o i k l s W r i e l \\\ \\ \\\ \\\ t r di l e k a P K ge e n h r r d l la u tarlet o r eb r v O S Pin Shop Pd orthrid T o J ns \\\ \\ m \ \\\ Ma N Pa B Chestnut Hill street segments compiled from the Census 2000 TIGER/Line files by the University of Connecticut Center l l te Ell u C l ani tt e o Kavanaugh Hill M e oon e s t d wo M M s ur M y Z wo a ne e r n rt or t 73 rr u h n n k M s e r Æÿ e r sa \ \\\\\\ \ \\\ e o S o lla \\\\\ c u a m e o H y ace g pl e f ol ere ho s D ar s iday Hil io r h ll V a i e t n T c Ha a for Geographic Information and Analysis. Annotation derived in part from U.S. Geological Survey i o L ch e \ \\\\\\ use \\\ a M \\ M P r C n l\\\\\ w R r e Os R C o do F H e e s oset e D a nt na i a L od i lon ting gh a eter y6 d r t n r al N \\ 2 \\\\\\ \\ \\\\\ p w H u ino n o Do P F n S n a t i H a Geographic Names Information System and information on file at the Connecticut Department of rn w l o e a i LWinnemaug o e l a l i o ayug r i nt a Morehouse Pd g C \\ \\\\\\ \\ l so m \\\\\ \\\\ r H r T ls ospect ew r ey a Kearn e t C Pr ht t N l e B m m t l n o Ra r l e Nottingham W a n p rson t a S e M i a n \\ \\\\\\ d \\ o \\\\ d ll o C mont Fulke id H Lily Bk Pd Environmental Protection. The base map data may be neither current nor complete. E s r e i a i Perkins C s S d a Bel V Q s g a O e le e p v W t s a l a M rm b w o N e e u \\\\\\ k e a \\\\\\\\\ dU be er e e el x n a Edgehill l B k l w a M c R l Ca H rid Ch F a l it C o n O \\\ r g liamson \\\\\\\\\ Pu Fairmount m ey Fox r u e S Wil s t r Lone O Lakewood t G G uf c ak Ni o y r mi b fo E k ch p w ro n lk S e a \ N \\\ ll b r \\\\\\\\\ a ry orth v Bonair ur S Ta o lp a e B res gat d l S l e te t n s B * NDDB INFORMATION - Locations of listed species and natural communities are based on data collected a e e h anta s is e
s g u t y n Me n \\ \\\ \ go \\\ \\\\ l k in C l a a y l rd p A g av Wh n a E Fo i n ite R d D l eB C h
va Mar \\\\ \\\\\\ y n Mar g Gre B lb k Fl a ok o a p i M by the CT Department of Environmental Protection, private conservation groups and the scientific ow a cAr Teresa e Charles Stockwell Dam M Elena lo Mildred B w B a b n e p o k l i d
K a r K lv a k sBk Hogpen Hill Mount Vernon er o o \ \\\\\\\ W m ro e Great Bk Res e a u il t a v t ry
ad Ch R y l l O n n e e
r i ttle M n w y r Ol r f u a h o t Fanni e lo or O o n o F c n a \\\\\\\ n a community and compiled by the Natural Diversity Data Base. The information is not necessarily the result S t c W e k se W i a o w e o Co t s M Kaynor p l d k si d ille st G e d d e Plumb Brook F l l v g e x r a n r Tan \\ l e i k g w R Englekee Pd O W l d in Leffingwell g ee a ll w e u l d r t Dra Fai R a stv e G g oo m l k y r e n o o of comprehensive or site-specific field investigations; in some cases locations have been derived from p u rv rnw ie l Co \\ \\ Ea a y o e \\ u r s ee w lh f u C e O n a n w g le w M d o y x e l n a H r Tosu me i d ran is n le H Lake Winnemau V A o Mo n e I C a d il n G o Park Pd e s o t i Soucy l \\ n \\ At \\L e l Tho w Nu en l li eR l De y P N w n
t e e l e l o G s wn d e a a m D na n r S
literature or museum searches or historic records. Exact locations have been buffered to produce r B i M l a o
M m u R r n t M i u Burnt Hill u w n ro a rto i r t M c r n d me
k o s s ark a r
\\ \\ o \\ e e Ri \\ m n Wattles Pd r H e o C r o r i m o n ve e o c
y n v
i e e l i h l d r y M l L m Ar gV l
l ns Sprain B a d on he l o Ho st t
e k e m
c u F \\ B i \\\\ a ar ll \\ d r g e M Be generalized locations. The exact species or community location falls somewhere within the shaded Hi Calum C y d B a M e C r i i ee
l y A k e
k i R e a H t l o c f st l ompki l c s e Ken Sk a i T ro l e B L \\\\le \\ e i M el l \\\\\ Mad R w H e
n e Sprain Brook l l a la d t Kenilworth e n Nic To y
M l e o w r a Nichols Hill n y la a n Fi Bk n n e ak Lin area and not necessarily in the center. Information on this map does not include Natural Area Preserves, \\\\ H n \\\\\\\\\\
zens rm a i r ward o it e r V d B fi C y Wat d t o t re r d E ce Samuel a t sk i e e W H d on r l s a n r x u a r l md d ate w t
G u \\ r \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ p l
Fleming Ca H r a i St d o a n d e e lm r n ne rvingt l
a ge I n co i a designated wetland areas or wildlife concentration areas. ta so D I i Heri H e o n Na st rest ll \\ n N i i \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ P d R d s o h Demo G w o tha n Tudor P u H Upper Fulton Park Pd C Bunkern n Hilln la S h wn s e k i d e Wa n L t \\ \\\\\ od eto ug ll B o y s s a \\\\\\\\\\\\\\r Sp o g Bu g h a r ena V o g W t a w C e k W eo ist l Ji d u Ro l Hauser r E a \\ \\ ie \\\\\ w G a lo E Ear n m e \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ G i C C m r n Ri o w F V Ne d u e B t e R a nn ut e r w c o Lannen o i k \\ \\ \ \ \\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\ s J m \\ \\\\\\\\\ n e idg Kat lview c h e e a l Hil City Mills i o r R in i a c WOODBURY r d Rei y S d Ar S Hoop Pol av o ct L n h h P \\\\ Reichenback Pd \ \ \\\\\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\ per F \\\ aron \\\\\ F e e Hill k e ar mo uni e r Au S y il J d mi idg d B l a ne d o R h B g \\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\ oo ngton \\\ Hotchkissville Bk e e r
C o dy z Lower Fulton Park Pd i w r l s n k w owes r i en L e l a n Cas d s i o in a de m t i s m lar o n l r h \\ \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ K Sabal e i \\\ \\\ t g d nc s al C C d G wo y
u Co 47 n V e e e nes
P
l a Æÿ l r O e d d Ard i n y a Wayla te
n Tre B r m w b P \\\\\\\\ \ \\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ w o Overlook \\\ n \\\ m l b o i l d Fox Run o a e nt t P i a n l o t
v a n f re Exit 35 E k
i e o Y
da m n fi W A T \\\\\\\\\\ \ e \\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ W C n r s \\\ y Peacock Hill K o i le o s t t u t e P t o Bald Hill
l r d P u n i Cl
Ruffi n
gR B m i Long Hillr tod a Platt s i o \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ d el b \\\ er a u b e ill S r Co H t en p East er S en e o F E b Co o ai nk u n G n t l l B B p e rro ba r R r w \\\\ \\ \\\ \\\\\o \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ riggs d l l B Fe T wa y nd St so Parkins Pd Lower a v Inman Fox a al d t F r o Katina o ea e S a Wa n u e ay u i B n a o f ad e l D Date of Map: December 2006, H n Ma Hop f y Bra f a N e nd l P \\\\ \\\\ n \\ \\ \\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ W Ludlow rm iv e rn G Easy d e rd o W i co S t e t s is a Parkins Pd Upper o g e n ng Hill t
Cla en s ion m Lo e e R r c W r t K Woodlaw h Crown i t Q p i h k p re a r B r e n n i Qu u \\\\ \\\\ No \\ k \\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ r re in l o n s e i t r l Natural Diversity Database Digital Data u av ec e s ve r a k fi u so B v l p R in s n a t h Re dl r F L e e un
ow l P Wi h \\\\ \\\ \\\\ \\ \\ k r \\\\ e W I d ar a s d a l C M i r Buckingham F t Saw Pit Hill De l M n e i s l d m ssa a t dm t er u Mi C e lawa hes L Or e Ha F l Tr anhan c H \\\\ \\\\\\\ \\ F B \\\\ \\\ o n B l st urt n
n Be k W k re o Kellogg on cu a c r a h ph e r oo r s B o a e on a a w w C r Map i i e p i t r r \\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\\ n \\ \\\\ \ \\\ p nson W s W \ l a d k Sperry Pd rv t Bro e Pritchard s I o n W For inquiries about the State and Federal O 2 l a s e e nso a li sc l e r i r ec s e od i o De f O o t d r W ut l c i n Irio w S r Ricker Pd u o o \\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ Tom \\ \ von G e f e n o Fros ow J \ r d s W a V W nw d g n a u Cro o d w Hawkins oo h ll a r i ve ran 1 i E Atwood Pd W tmont P t Listed Species and Significant Natural ee a t Iv k m Lem o W o d \\ \\ p \\ \\\ \\\\ R ood t V Wi es \\ m s National £ H a e n s r d k o Waterbury y l a s e r la s e ee y m a on WATERBURYe a
dv Grove e Ar t S rd wi t c F \\ \\ r \\\\ \\\\ \\ \\\ \\\\ \\ Ann s y \\ F l i s a own Communities map: Contact DEP, Camp llmore r C h t p u M t W wif s n dw A Highlawn k t t u e w s i i R e d wo b e o y m s o c R \\\\ \\ e \\\\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\ \\\\ l \\\ \\\ e a s Sawpit Hill d e l a l i m S C me B rt a w t Albert e t M l c a E c N l o Janet e g H G E a a M Bureau of Natural Resource, Wildlife Division. t i d o f e o o fney
ll A o o d r s r a \\ n \\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ s e ol g r i hley n e e h a H e c
l o e o u lle d r Exit 34 e R a use w H l k al
u l n R M W A
B r h Ca
r o W a Lightho C a wB a i C J p
H n u o \\ \ \\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\\ \\ \ \\\ \\\ o y e u ig Bri e t n d Tel: 860-424-3011 gR Sc t Miry Pd No 2 L s a h sf rat h G w C n g W ad Myrtl d Mill Plain r ch e Y ht M n n p vill B Ha o e o m M e g e W d C n aher l \ \\\ \\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\ \ \ \\\\\\\ \\\ \\\ te M o i k w g a a y M i d n h e a a u t t M n M a o he o n m h L o rk i
g e t l Mo r r h o rr l rc d a r Wall d il a \\\ \\\\ \\\\\\ \ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ \\\ s tla i y p l n l n Gat i r d State Plane Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 3526 S S J s B r l C le o u e B l u e e o B Cl o Miry Dam Pd l w m n Starview h t M y H n k i O Pl l M r \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\ \\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ \\\ Ol R ille ro t A ag y r k Swan Co S a o a P r Lambert Conformal Conic Projection r n F ght i el C b e G o l a s N a p o C Alexander k m l o o ne r n West Side Hill a h a ei l n b a i \\\\\ \\\\\\ \\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ l \\ \\\ r n \\ h i c Bk y b Oakhil n o y En o W r x n F e Scov yl e o F d B p S North American Datum of 1983 on r l d e G d t l k in R l l Ne i i W a r o S Gle l e a N l h \\\\ \\\\\ \\ \\\\\\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ T n \\\ la R \\ B Arden M e n T a u r o t i Cr w i d e ky S wa v hr e e Le l g Ru a r L T k w w cliffe c Buc i d Exit 20 e e l Rad l w o a n t e e l o W \\\\ \\ Cat Swamp Pd \\\ \\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ \\\ g i t o Bo h \\ ow i o st e e r Exit 21 a d n t St o si s g mp f Pa H N n d F a e r rn d o t a i k e i o e T d d M e eP \\\\ \\\\\\\ \\ \\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ Tracys Pd o o Mad u k s n M C r l e Fe e Little Tracys Pd r d w g outhwic h S n r eR R i 84 e e \\\\ \\\\\\\ \\ \\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \ a l ri i k d l id Frost Road Pd it n § e ¨¦ r d o Jo Ann 84 Me n R L o e l Pa J y i r er g d B l P l y C ad e M Hi - a M \\\\ \\ \\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\ \ o ad n I a hu k S d ew to Mi p g on a c ow Ayers M Cemeteryvi Pd n son ll F r i w w n lm k i Whit o d l vie Thomp r n i l a e c r d i l ast o a n h E k s l \\ eD \\\\\\\\ \\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ r ey \ h \\\ River n L H t Ver o C Railt en O e WOld r er Exit 31 ra M c a o o Lak e er th y s n De Exit 22 r r da e R ide F u c r \\ ock \\\\\\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ r low o rr Exit\\\ 18 D g W t r D Anawan e Exit 19 m d o ol Un k s ay G N b d r Clay Dube o Circular w Carmen y o a h k ia h k d a ine H y o Dove r ree Hill N P H t L C a r od Roc \\ r \\\\\ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ e \\\ a M n lk B N a F
B orest m wo h Woodbine o Ba id F a E i o w r o North Woodbury o r p h Brass Pd atertow e l er t a od k W p o M unthill t m H
p ar a a H H Mid Sch \\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\ Westw k e \ \ \ Bergen n r e nf Me Oa D y P e B ke m d h Homestead er i n e t am i m l a s r b O n llc d o k Char ff s Bond l e i o a i b e r \\ \\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ id \\\ \\\\ \ Gal e h l on Pine Hill n u l Liberty i s S it iv io Melrose l an a l h an Woodfield c e r ep g r T M od m i o i e P law r l c e n y
st n r m t lb r s Sw d d s \\ \\ \\\\\\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\ Sout i u hwo r i a s on e R a a a n er ma s e e i Su v a l A d Er d a Caleb Hill n w Greenleaf t tt r Si a
g Birc o e r rk d t n
Ri Ri k Hillcrest J R t A d n ne Saint Jos E E SCALE W \\ l \ \\ \\\ \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ a r B F n wood B r o g l e a A La ma a t u Pa d se High l X i ul Ac Ridgefield v ou Breakneck Hill o b h c a n l Good Hill Bk o r h v i Hil O y c u a A o i a le M h
\\ \ \\ \\\ L n \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\ e n e h e w M m w y Orenaug Hills g P a l r o d v r s e i a d Cl d r t L k w Kn Rive R r t re s a i rs B e w i rd e e Fair Lawn k e \\ \ \\\\\\ \\\ m \\ r mont e \\\\\\\ y \\\\\\\ Alber u \\\\\\ e s r H i e h e h ak r Wh oll lly d Larch t t g W 101MILE1/2 a e ta n r K a B D Woodbury ne s n ox t e h a e Ha d Me yl l h F c \ \\\\\\ \\ \\ c \\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\ n \ \\ W S W i Pine Abbotts Pd o B
k u e xi C n rri oos ri e o l M e d s H
l u n R t a i y S it I ll e r o l M h il m e o t \ \\\ \\\\\\ u \\ \\\\\\\ t b \\\\\\\ e in o e
Co a n e t Bla Exit 25 l a o r ni n m
ns u f h Tree H nchard Goo al l t Porter ilt o em e c dHi d e u i u m
Keefe h 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET a K ll L QuassapaugTylers Cove oloni a r T C d C k r on C \ \\\ \ \\\\\\ y \\\\\\\ l o d g o e o F t s M ry o Blackmans Hill No L nk W Oronoke h d la r n n a S P e no S a Gr B a or A e e i Exit 23 f 317 E a n l o ke oo t \ \\\ \ \\\ \\\\\\ \\ r \\\\\\\ r 3rd Lu R Æÿ d ad l H ey d nq M l r Exit 30 e i n i le o r s a n a i R o Va R m o w t o al d a wl l a a gt H l G Old i s iage 11/2 0 1 KILOMETER owb \\\ \ \ \\\ \\\\\\\ \\ \ \\ p 4th y g ui er a d e u a an c C Art l G M t Carr Lou Sycamore C n ashin i y d City Mills Pds Orenaug Rocks le f B d wo i St s n l n h y W sbury I i ll h 5th l raffts le and Grassy Hill k e n e r \\\ \ \ Cr \\\\\\\\\ \ \\ \ a \ \\ se l a s w h i nt e c o T m ghl A C s oo t o l e p s Bry S k r i Hi e n n y co d Lav s lle Ho r a Ch P em d l i h Ro W s Townl Plot Hill al v e r \\\ \ \\ \\\ \\\\\\ \ \\ Le N k B n w d o S a er k d h a a e l a Ro Ro Scovill Pd fi lo e is F M ei c oo G a l st o a y adison n Exit 24 e P r R s w ot r M \\ \\\ \\ \\\\\\ \\\ o nd r o G la ll le S r o l Hi y o s aHill F igh a es t t d u 4 na S h k ro H i a l ylva o g I tB d n y l a o a s Glen n l t o d n Gr s y e os G Westview Heights E n r de b n r e \\ J \\\ \\ \\ a -8 ct i k p i r e e le V I k c Ge B r t H n y Wel e t e Woodsi a r o r Ch f i e r sF B i l d e B l M a Wil s r n a r T a a r w s e ill le o e e \\ \\ \ \\\ \\ c y s ed k ll P F a rp as s a d n L QuassapaugBig Cove l B nd e k r a f t O t a f l t i
en W n w t a k B T w M u H t H h s Go e d i Kuk r e o r tev g n a FennC Pd e ay n m a \\ \ r \\\\ e S e e M B g a e H t a Orenau MIDDLEBURY o V a Fa t P e n Ha
s Ce Exit 17 S in B s u e Brook l r n r o oh t n rR U o r o n
ntr l se b l g y d s l o i C \\\\ \\ e s r vo u For i al r u a m S Como e ss A e awk n p t t h r uth d e n on u n ky M u N e l n r r e o
r Regan Pd iff H o ield p a a S irf A ho t F \\\\\\\ n l \\ \\\\ \\ d Straw Pd r a t ll u F w
e o M y ac R Cong lk d l wnsen B o o o ga G Ha o
t P e rk r T r le o e t
e B e S h d
yd ke w \\\\\\\\\\ \\ \\\\ k s
Great Hill g k a W r d P e a Cedar Grove g w g d
l t a r o an e t C i d e p k d P l e H d e P a e Noy E i i d
e es u n oc h
\\\\\\\\\\ o g \\\\ J We ar d o E i on o
enn n n e r Hesseky Meadow Pd o tR T w i s b ver
a H oy W o m i Joshua Hill F ohn A M o L Quassapaug t J s rt o etery m r w pl t v S W it t y l ch \\\\\\\\ \\\\ Wes Cem r le ti o \\\\ s S r e r le hit y e er s n C e a O n n p e m Tem k t K
P ss No c Ya o y t e La k n l i e o \\\\\\\\ g \ H \\\\\\ h e E pl \\\\ l na k a o t l u R e C c d P e A a b c a u r s os Hopeville m g i r u r r t r l t in t o D e in m e STATE OF CONNECTICUT a e e d \\\\\\\\\\n \\\ \\ \\\ \\ ol e P h ha E p r T W a s i t Gr di D Map & Digital Data Available at the L e n n s y P a No s o Brig e o M W o Dinatali \\\\\\\\\\v \\\ \\ \\ \\ \\\ is t r e r a l l p r n dswo P H t e n n DEPARTMENT OF y g l y B r B o e t o East Mountaino B e ley Pritchards Pd ledge m o n e t s ock a L Sw r l R d \\\\\\\\\\ \\\ \\\\ \\ \\\ p r e rad o R th i E sp n n v a ac o DEP Store a B Georg B t m Yeat Welland y r M e Sage a mon as o e ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ans k v idge Po k Middlebury Piner ct a r e m b B H T w i \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\ \\ \\\\ s s \\ u i d e l l r ll r e T h p k tM d i C a w t A n e o o w i l 79 Elm St, Hartford, CT 06106-5127 B o r t ry n l K Ha W 79 Elm Street \\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ n i s \\ \\ u t wHa o l k el w o A o e S S g n s ch Fleetwood t c i s u o o u e e o d r pr o Cr n i o i y l u w n k u o S \\\\\\\ \\ \\ So d \\\\\\\\\\\ C N \\e H d \\ 860.424.3555 fax 860.424.4088 a d i n L Ne Fr ain w Hartford, CT 06106-5127 a r ng K k a nt e t er Old l u Turtle Pd y t a ie a un a
Li Meadow Lark Ab er a o h r l n ne L L e a 188 f tie S \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\ re e l ai g m b Æÿ a d r tM Q l r G h r ttemo a a as Whi n M s o g E c t W b ar s i ni p n i [email protected] t l e n i Pe n d t \\ \\ r \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ o y g s \\ Murphy L y C nd h Darre r o e Sherman Hill o r Cu c ri dl t i Ta Or a g Jenson en n Sco o a a l i t u in J tt d T odie Gina McCarthy, Commissioner \\ \\\\\\ d b \\ J n t y e F h K t w u r Sp b C 64 e u r a Æÿ l W t c H H hy s Mid He S u e t h i HillsPdNo1 rp i ey B r e \\ \l \\\\\\e \\ h rm d s \\ ew n o East Mountain Res u l t r r e k man H l Gr k M M o l y o l d Ju h p v k l n r e ighvi e i i B c k l i B Tr ill i H wi t t n Te a l a Sherman Pd s ol e u B s t M W ointe i d w S o h \\ \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\ \\ \\ ro ee \\\ \\ l H is aund Radey Pd S t s e d Taft P ld Wyoming e hOr d w ut i LElise Br op J a ers t c C rm O a o o le d a r he n w n n H er ryl So ldS\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\ \\ \\ \\\\ n \\\To \\\ W r e n o a n a a o s B y r H h se h Meadow Brook e h k d u e d o \\\\\\rma \\\\\ m \\ \\\\ \\\ S S B la P i o y P Woo a n nH r ll E Clubhouse h d o e Cleone M H n M t a W aria Hotchkiss \\\\\ \\ \\\\r \\ r H e i o l he B u d ill u l t s s o a e e o ide S h f r P t r S t n Bear Hill S d r Hills Pd No 2 s e \\\ \\ gMe \\\\ \\ i P s d i h o e L s t t s H i r e PROSPECT Lubec a n e e a d u bu mp to y ld n Deering u on l H s o i a r h \\\\\ \\ \\\\\\\ \\ l e Ca t l e Bedlam Hill r o h Scuppo O l l c r NOTE: This map is not colorfast. Protect from light and moisture. Hickory i L l ard S o Prospect Res y HopBkL o l h u \\\\\ \\ \\\\S \\\ Summit Pd \\\ Lockhart H Judd Hill Pd H Q Printing: December 1, 2006 02:27 PM \\\\\ \\ \\\ \\\
3.0 RESULTS
3.1 Upland Plant Communities (Facility Site)
With the exception of the wetland that comprises the central portion of the property, the plant communities have been altered by previous owners through activities ranging from the localized dumping of bulk solid waste to the extensive clearcutting of mature vegetation. Of the two disturbance types, the clearcutting had the most significant impact and has largely shaped the plant communities observed on the site. In this regard, the facility site supports a total of two overarching upland plant community types including (1) an old field community; and (2) an extremely dense hardwood stand comprised of stump sprouts. This latter community is comprised of three sub–stands observed on the eastern edge of the site; the western hillside; and the northeastern corner of the property (Table 3–1; Figure 3–1).
Table 3–1. Approximate areal extent of upland plant communities. Plant Community Type Acreage Quercus rubra Sapling Stand 3.96 Betula populifolia - Quercus rubra Sapling Stand 14.30 Viburnum acerifolium - Quercus alba Stand 8.00 Old Field 0.38 TOTAL 26.6
3.1.1 Old field Community
The old field community was noted within a small opening in the southeastern portion of the site adjacent to Echo Lake road, and was punctuated by scattered clumps of shrubs such as Sambucus canadensis (American elder). Overall, this community comprises a small percentage of the plant communities on the site and has been disturbed by dumping activities. Specifically, piles of bulk solid waste, e.g. hot water heaters and scrap metal, were observed. An ATV trail passes through this community type.
- 13 -
Plant species in the old field community include a suite of herbs and grasses dominated by Solidago canadensis (gray’s goldenrod) with lesser amounts of Shizachyrium scoparium (little bluestem). Patches of Polygonum cuspidatum (Japanese knotweed) and Impatiens capensis (spotted touch me not) were observed in mesic soil conditions located adjacent to the riparian forest community (Table 3–2). Total plant species richness is 12 and importance values range from 2.9 to 25.3.
Table 3–2. Old field community.
Scientific Name Common Name DR FR IVave Solidago canadensis grays goldenrod 28.4698 22.2222 25.34599 Schizachyrium scoparium little bluestem 33.8078 5.55556 19.68169 Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed 21.3523 11.1111 16.23171 Impatiens capensis spotted touch me not 7.11744 5.55556 6.336497 Polytrichum commune polytrichum moss 0.71174 11.1111 5.911427 Rubus sp. blackberry 0.71174 11.1111 5.911427 Coreopsis lanceolata lance-leaved coreopsis 1.77936 5.55556 3.667457 Sambucus canadensis american elder 1.77936 5.55556 3.667457 Solidago graminifolia lance leaved goldenrod 1.77936 5.55556 3.667457 Spiraea latifolia meadowsweet 1.77936 5.55556 3.667457 Comptonia peregrina sweet fern 0.35587 5.55556 2.955714 Ipomoea purpurea morning glory 0.35587 5.55556 2.955714
- 14 - 700 Proposed 115 kV 700 690 Electrical Interconnect 690 680 680 670 670 660 650 660 640 E 630 c 650 h o 620 610 640 L a k e
630 R
o 620 e a 600 n 610 d i L 590
600 n
o i
s
s i 580 590 m 600 610 s n
a 630 r Project Site T 620 640 650 P 660 & 580 670 L 690 C 590 g
n i 590 t s 600 i 610 x E 620
630
Watertown Legend Betula populifolia - Quercus rubra Sapling Stand TransmissionLines
Mesic Rich Hardwood Stand Watercourse
Old Field Project Boundary Scale: AS SHOWN Tamarack Energy, Inc Project No: Essex, CT Quercus rubra Sapling Stand 10' Contour 1523-001 Watertown Biomass Facility 1 of 1 Riparian Forested Stand Filename: Biological Characterization PlantCover.mxd Viburnum acerifolium - Quercus alba Stand Drawn By: Plant Cover Map
Feet KPN 3 5 P r a t t S t . S u i t e 2 0 1 Date Drawn: E s s e x , C T 0 6 4 2 6 T e l e p h o n e : ( 8 6 0 ) 7 6 7 - 5 0 6 9 F a x : ( 8 6 0 ) 7 6 7 - 5 0 9 7 3-1 0 100 200 400 600 800 09-13-2007 w w w . K l e i n s c h m i d t U S A . c o m
3.1.2 Hardwood Sapling Stand Communities
This community type comprised a bulk of the vegetated cover on the site and consists of secondary hardwood growth generated from stump sprouts and saplings recruited from seed rain originating from adjacent forested stands. Stem densities are extremely high with diameter at breast height (dbh) size classes in the 1–2 inch range. Passage through portions of the stand was, at times, hindered by closely spaced stems and heavy vine growth. The transition between this dense, cut–over stand and more open, adjacent undisturbed stands is pronounced.
A total of three, somewhat distinct stand types were observed including a Betula populifolia-Quercus rubra stand along the eastern portion of the site; a Quercus alba–Viburnum acerifolium stand along the steep western hillside; and a Quercus rubra stand with scattered patches of Carex pennsylvanica in the understory within the northeastern portion of the site. It is likely that the differences in species composition across the three stands reflect edaphic (soil) heterogeneity and potentially, percent slope.
3.1.3 Betula populifolia–Quercus rubra sapling stand
This stand was observed in the eastern portion of the site where Charlton soils with 3–15% slopes were observed (Soil Resource Consultants, 2007). Grey birch and northern red oak sapling stem densities were extremely high and the understory was poorly developed (Table 3–3). Those few herbaceous species observed in the stand likely established shortly after the clearcutting, although some of the species are reasonably tolerant of the understory light environment, which was estimated to be <5% of ambient sunlight. Species observed in the understory included gray’s goldenrod, dewberry, and Canada mayflower. Although herbaceous and woody species are present in the understory, leaf litter is the most important component of the forest floor. Total plant species richness is 19 and the range in importance values range from 1.7 to 14.2.
- 16 -
Table 3–3. Betula populifolia-Quercus rubra sapling stand.
Scientific Name Common Name DR FR IVave Betula populifolia grey birch 18.75 9.677419 14.21371 leaf litter leaf litter 17.1875 6.451613 11.81956 Carex pennsylvanica pennsylvania sedge 11.40625 9.677419 10.54183 Quercus rubra northern red oak 9.375 9.677419 9.52621 Lindera benzoin spicebush 8.59375 6.451613 7.522681 Quercus alba white oak 9.375 3.225806 6.300403 Betula lenta sweet birch 7.8125 3.225806 5.519153 Rubus flagellaris dewberry 3.125 6.451613 4.788306 Maianthemum canadense canada mayflower 6.25 3.225806 4.737903 Amelanchier canadensis serviceberry 1.5625 6.451613 4.007056 Spiraea latifolia meadowsweet 0.3125 6.451613 3.382056 Viburnum recognitum northern arrowwood 3.125 3.225806 3.175403 Acer rubrum red maple 0.78125 3.225806 2.003528 Smilacina racemosa false solomons seal 0.78125 3.225806 2.003528 Vitus labrusca fox grape 0.78125 3.225806 2.003528 Aralia nudicaulis sarsaparilla 0.15625 3.225806 1.691028 Gaultheria procumbens teaberry 0.15625 3.225806 1.691028 Sassafras albidum sassafras 0.15625 3.225806 1.691028 Solidago canadensis grays goldenrod 0.15625 3.225806 1.691028 Vitus aestivalus summer grape 0.15625 3.225806 1.691028
3.1.4 Quercus alba–Viburnum acerifolium sapling stand
This stand was observed along the steep hillside that comprises the western portion of the site. Soils observed on the hillside include a Charlton- Hollis soil complex with 8–35% slopes (Soil Resource Consultants, 2007). Although stem dbh in this stand is similarly narrow, stem densities were not as high as those observed in the eastern portion of the site (Table 3–4). The most dominant and frequently occurring species is mapleleaf viburnum. Other important tree species observed include white oak, sweet birch, black cherry, shagback hickory, red maple, (rarely) eastern red cedar, and sugar maple. Comparatively larger numbers of invasive species and naturalized exotics were observed in this stand type including Japanese berberry and eastern burning bush. Understory light levels were estimated to be slightly higher in this stand (5–7% of ambient sunlight). Total plant species richness is 23 and importance values range from 1.16 to 14.5.
- 17 -
Table 3–4. Quercus alba-Viburnum acerifolium sapling stand.
Scientific Name Common Name DR FR IVave Leaf litter leaf litter 22.47807 6.666667 14.57237 Viburnum acerifolium mapleleaf viburnum 13.26754 8.888889 11.07822 Quercus alba white oak 13.15789 4.444444 8.80117 Berberis thunbergii japanese berberry 9.429825 6.666667 8.048246 Acer rubrum red maple 7.127193 8.888889 8.008041 Betula lenta sweet birch 9.320175 6.666667 7.993421 Carya ovata Shagbark hickory 11.51316 4.444444 7.978801 Amelanchier canadensis serviceberry 2.192982 6.666667 4.429825 Maianthemum canadense canada mayflower 1.315789 6.666667 3.991228 Acer saccharum sugar maple 3.399123 4.444444 3.921784 Parthenocissus quinquefolia virginia creeper 1.20614 4.444444 2.825292 Carex pennsylvania pennsylvania sedge 0.657895 4.444444 2.55117 Polystichum achrostichoides christmas fern 1.096491 2.222222 1.659357 Arisaema triphyllum jack in the pulpit 0.548246 2.222222 1.385234 Euonymous atropurpurea eastern burning bush 0.548246 2.222222 1.385234 Juniperus virginiana eastern red cedar 0.548246 2.222222 1.385234 Prunus serotina black cherry 0.548246 2.222222 1.385234 Rubus odoratus large purple flower raspberry 0.548246 2.222222 1.385234 Rubus sp. blackberry 0.548246 2.222222 1.385234 Fraxinus pennsylvanica white ash 0.109649 2.222222 1.165936 Lindera benzoin spicebush 0.109649 2.222222 1.165936 Ribes americanum wild black currant 0.109649 2.222222 1.165936 Solanum dulcamara enchanters nightshade 0.109649 2.222222 1.165936 Solidago canadensis grays goldenrod 0.109649 2.222222 1.165936
3.1.5 Quercus rubra sapling stand
This stand type was observed along gradual slopes in the northeastern portion of the site. Soils observed on the hillside include a Charlton-Hollis soil complex with 3-15% slopes (Soil Resource Consultants, 2007). Northern red oak is a dominant species in this community and stem densities were extremely high with estimated dbh size classes in the 1–2 inch range. Other tree species observed included (rarely) white pine, white oak, white ash, (rarely) paper birch, black cherry, and grey birch (Table 3–5). Within the understory, Carex pennsylvanica is a dominant species along with an admixture of Canada mayflower, Virginia creeper, blackberry, and serviceberry seedlings. Leaf litter is also an important component of the understory given the low light levels. Total plant species richness is 21 and importance values range from 1.4 to 17.2.
- 18 -
Table 3–5. Quercus rubra sapling stand.
Scientific Name Common Name DR FR IVave Quercus rubra northern red oak 23.21429 11.11111 17.1627 Carex pennslyvanica pennsylvania sedge 13.21429 8.333333 10.77381 leaf litter leaf litter 11.90476 8.333333 10.11905 Pinus strobus white pine 11.90476 2.777778 7.34127 Lindera benzoin spicebush 8.928571 5.555556 7.242063 Quercus alba white oak 8.333333 5.555556 6.944444 Maianthemum canadense canada mayflower 3.095238 8.333333 5.714286 Parthenocissus quinquefolia virginia creeper 2.380952 5.555556 3.968254 Aralia nudicaulis sarsaparilla 4.761905 2.777778 3.769841 Prunus serotina black cherry 1.190476 5.555556 3.373016 Ilex verticillata winterberry 0.714286 5.555556 3.134921 Betula populifolia grey birch 2.380952 2.777778 2.579365 Acer rubrum red maple 1.785714 2.777778 2.281746 Amelanchier canadensis serviceberry 1.190476 2.777778 1.984127 Sassafras albidum sassafras 1.190476 2.777778 1.984127 Fraxinus americana white ash 0.714286 2.777778 1.746032 Acer saccharum sugar maple 0.595238 2.777778 1.686508 Betula papyrifera paper birch 0.595238 2.777778 1.686508 Carya ovata shagbark hickory 0.595238 2.777778 1.686508 Rubus sp. blackberry 0.595238 2.777778 1.686508 Viburnum acerifolium mapleleaf viburnum 0.595238 2.777778 1.686508 Juniperus virginiana eastern red cedar 0.119048 2.777778 1.448413
3.2 Interconnect Plant Communities
The plant community observed within the 115kV electrical interconnect is that of a mature, mesic, rich hardwood stand. In that the electrical interconnect route follows a four-foot wide ATV trail, a mixture of disturbance tolerant and less disturbance tolerant plant species were observed. Within the tree layer, species including northern red oak, white ash, American beech (Fagus grandifolia), shellbark hickory, green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), sweet birch, red maple, white pine (rarely), eastern red cedar (standing dead), hemlock (rarely), and European white birch were observed. Estimated mean stem dbh range is 6–14 inches and mean estimated stand height ranges from 60–70 feet. The stand is open, with widely spaced stems, and canopy cover ranges from 90–100%.
Within the understory, shrub species observed included spicebush, Rosa multiflora (multiflora rose), Japanese berberry, eastern burning bush, and winterberry. Observed vine species included blackberry. Within wetter sections of the stand adjacent to the site boundary, herbaceous species included sensitive fern and cinnamon fern.
- 19 -
Elsewhere, species observed in the ground layer included grays goldenrod, Virginia creeper, dewberry, and sarsaparilla.
3.3 Wetlands (Facility Site)
Wetlands identified on the site include a large (6.96 acre) forested riparian wetland associated with Turkey Brook. This wetland occupies the center of the site and is driven largely by groundwater discharge, which emanates from a large wetland complex located to the north of the property. Wetland soils identified by Soil Resource Consultants include the following series: Leicester extremely stony soils (0–5% slopes); and Pootatuck fine sandy loam (0–3% slopes). Although the wetland is primarily associated with Turkey Brook, there is a narrow and shallow swale that extends well into the upland. The primary hydrologic input for the swale appears to be groundwater seepage.
3.3.1 Riparian Forest Community
Dominant species in the riparian forest community associated with Turkey Brook include a suite of tree species that can be found primarily in mesic and hydric soil conditions: Acer saccharum (sugar maple); Betula allegheniensis (yellow birch); Ostrya viginiana (American hophornbeam); red maple and Acer platanoides (Norway maple) (Table 3–7). Many of the mesic tree species were observed in drier portions along the edge of the riparian forest. Other species observed in this community include cinnamon fern, Symplocarpus foetidus (skunk cabbage), and the hydric shrub species Lindera benzoin (spicebush). Total plant species richness is 38 and the importance values range from 0.8 to 8.2. In general, this was an open stand type and leaf litter was the dominant forest floor substrate type. The width of the riparian forest becomes greater within the southern portions of the site along Echo Lake road.
Table 3–7. Riparian forest community.
Scientific Name Common Name DR FR IVave Acer saccharum sugar maple 13.2714 3.0769 8.1742 Ostrya virginiana american hophornbeam 11.2807 4.6154 7.9480 Acer platanoides norway maple 13.2714 1.5385 7.4049
- 20 -
Scientific Name Common Name DR FR IVave leaf litter leaf litter 6.3703 4.6154 5.4928 Lindera benzoin spicebush 1.3271 9.2308 5.2790 Carex stricta tussock sedge 3.9814 6.1538 5.0676 Betula allegheniensis yellow birch 6.6357 3.0769 4.8563 Arisaema triphyllum jack in the pulpit 5.3086 3.0769 4.1927 Quercus alba white oak 6.6357 1.5385 4.0871 Tsuga canadensis eastern hemlock 5.9721 1.5385 3.7553 Osmunda cinnamomea cinnamon fern 3.9814 3.0769 3.5292 Quercus rubra northern red oak 5.3086 1.5385 3.4235 Betula lenta sweet birch 0.6636 4.6154 2.6395 Berberis thunbergii Japanese berberry 0.1327 4.6154 2.3740 Polytrichum commune polytrichum moss 0.1327 4.6154 2.3740 Acer rubrum red maple 1.3271 3.0769 2.2020 Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 1.3271 3.0769 2.2020 Dennsatedtia punctilobula hay scented fern 0.6636 3.0769 1.8702 Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern 0.6636 3.0769 1.8702 Cornus amomum silky dogwood 1.9907 1.5385 1.7646 Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower 1.3271 1.5385 1.4328 Smilacina racemosa false solomons seal 0.9954 1.5385 1.2669 Fraxinus americana white ash 0.6636 1.5385 1.1010 Ilex verticillata winterberry 0.6636 1.5385 1.1010 Osmunda regalis royal fern 0.6636 1.5385 1.1010 Polystichum achrostichoides christmas fern 0.6636 1.5385 1.1010 Populus tremuloides quaking aspen 0.6636 1.5385 1.1010 UID Shrub UID shrub 0.6636 1.5385 1.1010 UID vine UID vine 0.6636 1.5385 1.1010 Vaccinium corymbosum highbush blueberry 0.6636 1.5385 1.1010 Viburnum acerifolium mapleleaf viburnum 0.6636 1.5385 1.1010 Rosa multiflora multiflora rose 0.3318 1.5385 0.9351 Symplocarpus foetidus skunk cabbage 0.3318 1.5385 0.9351 Celastrus orbiculatus bittersweet 0.1327 1.5385 0.8356 Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed 0.1327 1.5385 0.8356 Rhus toxicodendron poison ivy 0.1327 1.5385 0.8356 Rubus flagellaris dewberry 0.1327 1.5385 0.8356 Sassafras albidum sassafras 0.1327 1.5385 0.8356 Thalictrum polygamum tall meadow rue 0.1327 1.5385 0.8356
Turkey Brook itself consists of a highly sinuous and rectangular channel that ranges in width from eight to ten feet. Banks were well defined, approximately one to two feet in height, and did not exhibit any signs of erosion; even along the outer (convex) banks. Channel substrate consists of a heterogeneous mixture of sand and cobbles although scattered boulders were observed further upstream. The embeddedness of the stream (cobbles and gravels buried in sand) was observed within those reaches of the stream close to the southern boundary of the site. Flow within the channel was somewhat sluggish at
- 21 -
the time of the field investigation, with water depths that averaged 1–3 inches in depth. Water temperatures were cold during the August survey, which is indicative of a groundwater influence.
3.3.2 Wetland Functions and Values
Wetland functions and values associated with this forested riparian wetland system include groundwater recharge/discharge; floodflow alteration (storage and desynchronization); production export; sediment/shoreline stabilization; and wildlife habitat.
The ACOE considerations/qualifiers for the function of groundwater recharge/discharge that apply to this wetland: (4) gravel or sandy soils present in or adjacent to the wetland; (5) fragipan does not occur in the wetland; (6) fragipan, impervious soils, or bedrock does not occur in the wetland; and (13) signs of groundwater discharge are present.
Applicable considerations/qualifiers for floodflow alteration include (9) wetland receives and retains overland sheet flow runoff from adjacent uplands.
Considerations/qualifiers for production export include: (1) wildlife food sources grow within this wetland.
Considerations/qualifiers for sediment/shoreline stabilization include: (7) wide wetland (>10’) borders watercourse (Turkey Brook), lake, or pond; (12) dense vegetation borders watercourse, lake, or pond; and (13) high percentage of energy absorbing emergent plants and/or shrubs border a watercourse, lake, or pond.
With respect to the 24 ACOE considerations/qualifiers for the function of wildlife habitat, the following apply to this wetland: (6) wetland is contiguous with other wetland systems connected by a watercourse or lake; (7) wildlife overland access to other wetlands is present; (8) wildlife food sources are within
- 22 -
this wetland or nearby; (13) density of the wetland vegetation is high; (16) plant/animal indicator species are present; (17) animal signs observed; and (21) wetland has a high avian utilization or potential.
3.4 Wildlife (Facility Site)
3.4.1 Old Field
The small patch of old field habitat present along the southeastern provides habitat for species that utilize early successional plant communities, and also those generalists that pass between patch types. This herb and shrub dominated habitat would provide excellent cover for a range of bird species and a suite of small mammals (Table 3–8). Observed bird species included the American goldfinch, gray catbird; common yellowthroat; song sparrow; and field sparrows.
Mammals observed within this habitat type include eastern cottontail and the white–tailed deer (tracks and scat). Other mammals that are expected in this habitat type include woodchuck; Virginia opossum; eastern chipmunk; gray squirrel; and the raccoon. The small mammal community however, is expected to be dominated by white footed mice and deer mice.
No reptiles were observed on the site during this current survey. However, a number of snake species are expected to utilize this patch type, in addition to the mounds of soil and rocks scattered throughout the site. With regard to amphibians, some of the more common species including the American toad and the eastern garter snake are expected.
Table 3–8. Observed and expected wildlife species within the old field. GENUS AND SPECIES COMMON NAME OBSERVED EXPECTED Amphibians and Reptiles Coluber c. constrictor Northern black racer X Thamnophis s. sirtalis Eastern garter snake X Bufo americanus American toad X
- 23 -
GENUS AND SPECIES COMMON NAME OBSERVED EXPECTED Plethodon cinereus Redback salamander X Birds Colinus virginianus Northern bobwhite X Scolopax minor American woodcock X Zenaida macroura Mourning dove X Empidonax virescens Acadian flycatcher X Tyrannus tyrannus Eastern kingbird X Dumetella carolinensus Gray catbird X Toxostoma rufum Brown Thrasher X Bombycilla cedrorum Cedar waxwing X Vireo griseus White-eyed vireo X Vermivora pinus Blue-winged warbler X V. peregrina Tennessee warbler X Dendroica petechia Yellow warbler X Geothlypis trichas Common yellowthroat X Passerina cyanea Indigo bunting X Carduelis tristis American goldfinch X Melospiza melodia Song sparrow X Spizella pusilla Field sparrow X M. lincolnii Lincoln’s sparrow X Zonotrichia albicollis White-throated sparrow X Mammals Scolophus aquaticus Eastern mole X Didelphus virginiana Virginia opossum X Sylvilagus floridanus Eastern cottontail X S. transitionalis New England cottontail X Sciurus carolinensis Gray squirrel Marmota monax woodchuck X Peromyscus luecopus White footed mouse X Microtus pennsylvanicus Meadow vole X Napaeozapus insignis Woodland jumping mouse X Mephitis mephitis Striped skunk X Odocoileus virginianus White-tailed deer X
- 24 -
3.4.2 Hardwood Sapling Stands
The large patches of dense hardwood sapling stands present on the site provide habitat for species that utilize thickets and dense, cut-over hardwood stands, which cover a significant proportion of the site. Many of the vines and brambles observed along the margins of the stand are berry-bearing and provide an excellent food source for a range of avian species (Table 3–9). Observed bird species included the gray catbird (vocalizations only) and the black–capped chickadee, which was present at the interface of the hardwood sapling stand and the considerably more mature Mattatuck State Forest. Expected species include the ring–necked pheasant and the chestnut–sided warbler.
Mammals observed within this habitat type include the woodchuck (winter burrow). Other mammals that are expected in this habitat type include the least shrew and the New England cottontail.
With respect to the presence of amphibians and reptiles (herptiles) the redback salamander will likely be encountered in this habitat type.
Table 3–9. Observed and expected wildlife species within the hardwood sapling stand. GENUS AND SPECIES COMMON NAME OBSERVED EXPECTED Amphibians and Reptiles Plethodon cinereus Redback salamander X Birds Phasianus colchicus Ring-necked pheasant X Empidonax traillii Willow flycatcher X Dumetella carolinensis Gray catbird X Dendroica pennsylvanica Chestnut–sided Warbler X Icteria virens Yellow chat X Pheucticus ludovicianus Rose-breasted grosbeak X Pipilo erythrophthalmus Rufous-sided towhee X Melospiza lincolnii Lincoln’s sparrow X Parus atricapillus Black capped chickadee X (close to Mattatuck Forest edge)
- 25 -
GENUS AND SPECIES COMMON NAME OBSERVED EXPECTED Mammals Cryptotis parva Least shrew X Sylvilagus transitionalis New England cottontail X Marmota monax woodchuck X (winter burrow)
3.4.3 Riparian Forested Wetland
This community consisted of one of the most open forested stands on the site and provides excellent habitat for a range of bird species and a suite of small mammals that utilize riparian forested wetlands (Table 3–10). Observed bird species included the gray catbird (vocalizations only). Expected bird species include the belted kingfisher and the cerulean warbler amongst others.
Evidence of habitat usage by beaver includes gnawed saplings. Other mammals expected to occur in this habitat type include Virginia opossum and the eastern mole. Amphibians expected to occur in this habitat type include red spotted newt, whereas observed species included the green frog.
Table 3–10. Observed and expected wildlife species within the Riparian forested wetland. GENUS AND SPECIES COMMON NAME OBSERVED EXPECTED Amphibians and Reptiles Rana clamitans melanota Green frog X Birds Scolopax minor American woodcock X Cerycle alcyon Belted kingfisher X Dumetella carolinensis Gray catbird X Catharus fuscescens Veery X Hylocichla mustelina Wood thrush X Dendroica cerulea Cerulean warbler X Protonotary warbler Protothonary warbler X Seiurus motacilla Louisiana waterthrush X Geothylpis trichas Common yellowthroat X Icteria virens Yellow breasted chat X Melospiza melodia Song Sparrow X Carduelis tristis American goldfinch X
- 26 -
GENUS AND SPECIES COMMON NAME OBSERVED EXPECTED Mammals Didelphus virginiana Virginia opossum X Scalopus aquaticus Eastern mole X Castor canadensis Beaver X (gnawed saplings)
3.5 Interconnect Route Wildlife
This community is comprised of a short segment of the Mattatuck state forest that has been impacted by an ATV trail that leads out to the CL&P electrical transmission ROW. However, given the presence of extensive forested stands on either side of the proposed easement, it seems likely that forest interior bird species may occur within the vicinity of the proposed route including the ovenbird (Table 3–11). Observed bird species included the black-capped chickadee, while expected bird species include the downy woodpecker and the red-eyed vireo amongst others. Mammals expected to occur in this habitat type include the eastern cottontail, while observed species include the white tailed deer (droppings only).
Table 3–11. Observed and expected wildlife species within the interconnect route. GENUS AND SPECIES COMMON NAME OBSERVED EXPECTED Amphibians and Reptiles Storeria o. occipitomaculata Northern redbelly snake X Plethodon cinereus Redback salamander X Birds Accipiter striatus Sharp shinned hawk X A. gentilis Northern goshawk X Buteo platypterus Broad-winged hawk X Picoides pubescens Downy woodpecker X P. villosus Hairy woodpecker X Contopus virens Eastern wood peewee X Empidonax virescens Acadian flycatcher X E. minimus Least flycatcher X Cyanocitta cristata Blue jay X Parus atricapillus Black-capped chickadee X X Sitta carolinensus White-breasted nuthatch X Hycichla mustelina Wood thrush X
- 27 -
GENUS AND SPECIES COMMON NAME OBSERVED EXPECTED Vireo flavifrons Yellow-throated vireo X V. olivaceus Red-eyed vireo X Seiurus aurocapillus ovenbird X Dendroica caerulescens Black-throated blue warbler X Mniotilta varia Black-and-white warbler X Geothlypis trichas Common yellowthroat X Piranga olivacea Scarlet tanager X Mammals Sylvilagus floridanus Eastern cottontail X Peromyscus leucopus White footed mouse X Odocoileus virginianus White tailed deer X
3.6 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species
Suitable habitat for the American kestrel was not observed on this site, which has a great deal to do with the fact that the site is nearly exclusively dominated by a dense tangle of vines and closely–spaced hardwood saplings. In fact, this negative association between the density of vegetation and American kestrel numbers has been demonstrated in other studies, whereby the dense understory created by pine regeneration in cut or unburned forests exerted an adverse effect on southeastern American kestrel populations (Hoffman, 1988). Based upon published species accounts, Kestrels need open areas with low stature vegetation in which to hunt their prey, and also require natural tree cavities for nesting. Although a small patch of old field is present adjacent to Echo Lake road, much of the vegetation was estimated to measure at least 3–4 feet in height and patches of tall shrubs were present. Furthermore, dead trees (snags) suitable for nesting with tight–fitting entrances for nests were not observed adjacent to the old field patch type.
- 28 -
4.0 IMPACTS
The project has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts to (1) Turkey Brook wetlands; (2) upland plant communities; and (3) commonly occurring wildlife to the greatest extent possible. Notwithstanding, direct and indirect impacts to resources will occur during construction and operation of the facility itself. The nature of probable impacts related to the construction, operation and maintenance of the facility are discussed in the following sections.
4.1 Upland Plant Communities
Impacts to upland plant communities will include the Betula populifolia–Quercus rubra; Quercus rubra hardwood sapling stands; and the old field community type. Habitat related impacts associated with the clearing for construction laydown areas are anticipated to be temporary and cleared areas will be allowed to re–vegetate naturally following construction. Of the area affected by the site, a total of 13.5 acres of the upland plant communities observed on the site will be impacted by development. This total accounts for approximately 40% of the vegetated areas on the entire 33 acre site.
Impacts to plant communities present within the proposed 115kV electrical interconnect ROW will involve limited clearing of the mesic, rich hardwood stand and maintaining the cleared area to accommodate service vehicles and maintenance activities. This forested community would be converted to, and permanently arrested at, an early successional stage and the ROW plant community would be comprised of grasses, herbs, and scattered shrubs. The microclimate within the new ROW would be altered such that
irradiance levels would be higher, and there would be a shift in CO2 levels and an increase in evaporative losses. The shift in microclimate will have a number of implications with respect to determining the types of plant species that recruit from seed sources.
- 29 -
Air Emission Impacts
The proposed project will be a Major Stationary Source, subject to Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Non-attainment New Source Review (NNSR) requirements. Criteria pollutants analyzed as part of this permit application include
particulate matter less than 10 um (PM10); particulate matter less than 2.5 um (PM2.5)
NO2; SO2; carbon monoxide (CO); volatile organic compounds (VOCs); carbon dioxide
(CO2); and lead (Pb).
Impacts to sensitive plants associated with certain of these criteria pollutants were assessed with the direct impact ambient screening concentrations provided in the USEPA document “A Screening Procedure for the Impacts of Air Pollution Sources on Plants, Soils, and Animals” (USEPA, 1980). Plant species present on the site that are considered sensitive species include Betula populifolia (grey birch) and Pinus strobus (white pine).
Impacts to these species associated with NO2, SO2, CO, and Pb were assessed by comparing modeled results with the Air Quality Related Value (AQRV) screening concentrations presented in the guidance document. Direct impact screening criteria have
not been developed for either CO2 or VOCs, and as such are not presented in the USEPA guidance document.
Refined air quality dispersion modeling was performed with USEPA’s AERMOD model (ISC-AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software) to evaluate air quality
impacts of SO2, NO2, CO, and Pb. Estimated potential emission rates and other stack parameters from the proposed fluidized bed gasifier (FBG) power plant operating at a maximum rated capacity were input to the model. Modeling was performed using rural dispersion coefficients and five (5) consecutive years of meteorological data from the nearby Waterbury-Oxford Airport meteorological monitoring site. The Waterbury- Oxford meteorological data is considered representative of the project site in Watertown with respect to EPA criteria, including proximity to the project site, similarity in terrain features, similarity in wind direction and speed frequency distribution, and location with respect to the Naugatuck River valley influences on meteorology.
- 30 -
All modeling analyses were performed in accordance with procedures specified in the CTDEP Ambient Impact Analysis Guideline or otherwise recommended by CTDEP. Since this analysis is concerned with onsite impacts, receptor rings were spaced at 10 degree intervals on 36 radials originating at the FBG stack and placed at 25–meter intervals out to 100 meters and 50–meter intervals out to 500 meters from the stack. All receptors were assumed to be in flat terrain, at the same terrain height as the stack base elevation.
The results of the modeling analysis indicate that all criteria compounds are well below the corresponding AQRV screening concentration, with modeled results comprising less than 2% of the corresponding AQRV screening concentration and in many instances, < 0.5% (Table 4–1). Based upon these results, none of the modeled emissions will impact sensitive plant species.
Table 4–1. Comparison of ambient screening criteria (ug/m3), averaging time, and modeled FBG ambient impacts. Screening Averaging AQRV Screening Modeled On-site FBG % of AQRV Screening Criterion Time Concentration Impacts Concentration (ug/m3) (ug/m3) SO2 1 hr 917 5 0.55 3 hr 786 4 0.51 24 hr -- 2 NA Annual 18 0.3 1.67 NO2 4 hr 3,760 8 0.21 8 hr 3,760 7 0.19 Monthly 564 1 0.18 Annual 100 0.5 0.50 CO 1 hr -- 13 NA 8 hr -- 11 NA Weekly 1,800,000 7 0.0004 Pb 3 Month 1.5 0.001 0.07
4.2 Wetlands
Filling-related impacts to wetlands will occur within a narrow, finger-like swale that extends into the uplands. Total wetland impacts will equal 4,000 square feet (0.091 acres). The wetland swale itself occurs within a depression located in the hardwood sapling stand and plant species observed included dense growth of saplings including quaking aspen, northern red oak, and white ash. Shrub species included spicebush, while
- 31 -
species in the understory included Canada mayflower, sensitive fern, sassafras seedlings, and Polytrichum moss.
Although likely an expression of groundwater discharge, given the small size of the swale and its disturbed nature, wetland functions and values were not ascribed. For this reason, wetland functions and values will not be compromised as part of the filling. That is, groundwater discharge will still occur within the wetland system associated with Turkey Brook, regardless of the filling activity. Furthermore, groundwater discharge will still occur within the swale, albeit at a point further downgradient of the fill material.
4.3 Wildlife
Temporary displacement and avoidance of active construction areas would have a localized effect on commonly occurring wildlife present on the site by causing them to abandon feeding, breeding (where applicable), and resting activities. Small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians that utilize upland areas adjacent to wetland areas on the site will be displaced during construction activities. Foraging and breeding opportunities for those wildlife species that utilized portions of the site that were cleared during construction and allowed to re–vegetate would be disrupted until vegetation re- establishes. These activities would resume however, shortly after the completion of construction activities. Finally, the proposed activities will have no effects on the movement of wildlife species along the Turkey Brook riparian corridor.
Given the small amount of habitat that will be affected by the interconnect route, it seems highly unlikely that the change will result in any population level effects. With respect to the composition of the terrestrial wildlife community, the numbers of predators including Molothrus ater (brown headed cowbird) could possibly increase locally within the narrow cleared area maintained above the electrical interconnect route, in response to the increase in edge habitat. Edge habitat is widely recognized to be a population “sink” due to the effects of increased predation and the associated reduction in prey population size.
- 32 -
Although the impacts to plant communities on the facility site may appear serious, it is important to note that they are early successional plant communities that have developed in response to severe disturbance. As such, they are not unique plant communities with a correspondingly unique suite of wildlife with acute habitat specificity. Rather, many of the observed wildlife species and those species expected to utilize this type of site are going to be habitat generalists and will make use of undisturbed habitat types remaining on the site and potentially the large tracts of undeveloped land associated with the Mattatuck State Forest that surround the site. The assumption that adjacent properties (particularly) will remain undeveloped is based upon the fact that they are presently state owned lands.
4.4 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species
As previously discussed, suitable habitat for the American kestrel is not present on the site given the absence of large expanses of short stature grassland habitat in addition to suitable nesting trees adjacent to low–stature grassland habitat. For this reason, impacts to the American kestrel and associated habitat will not occur.
- 33 -
5.0 MITIGATION
This project has been designed to minimize impacts to upland plant communities; wetlands; Turkey Brook; and wildlife to the greatest extent practicable. Specifically, the footprint associated with the facility and attendant structures has been configured to preferentially utilize previously disturbed habitats and the site development has been condensed to avoid impacts to sensitive resources including Turkey Brook and the associated floodplain wetlands. Moreover, the utility interconnects have been situated so as to maximize the use of previously disturbed sections of the Mattatuck State Forest. Notwithstanding, direct and indirect impacts to biota and associated habitats will occur during construction and once the plant is in operation. Mitigation measures to offset impacts resulting from the construction, operation, and maintenance of the facility are discussed in the following sections.
5.1 Upland Plant Communities
Mitigating measures used to minimize the effects of development are primarily focused on reducing the alteration of plant communities to the greatest extent possible and also include a provision for adequate buffers so that the attributes of the habitat are not degraded. As an added measure, efforts to improve existing habitat functions through planting native plant species or other appropriate means have been specified.
Once construction begins near sensitive resource areas, e.g. wetlands, exposed soils should be stabilized within 14 days including all disturbed areas that may not be at final grade but will remain undisturbed for periods longer than an additional 30 calendar days. In this regard, it is suggested that the “New England Roadside Matrix Upland Seed Mix” be used to re–vegetate all upland areas with exposed soils. This seed mix is particularly appropriate for roadsides, industrial sites, or cut and fill slopes and blends native grasses, wildflowers and shrubs together in a native matrix seed mix. Plant species contained in the mix include several grasses: creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra), switch grass (Panicum virgatum), little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), Virginia wild rye (Elymus virginicus); a number of wildflowers: partridge pea (Chamaecrista fasciculata), wild blue
- 34 -
lupine (Lupinus perennis), showy tick trefoil (Desmodium canadense), New England aster (Aster novae-angliae), wild senna (Cassia hebecarpa), butterfly milkweed (Asclepias tuberosa), round-headed bush clover (Lespedeza capitata), white vervain (Verbena urticifolia); in addition to several shrub species: gray dogwood (Cornus racemosa) and staghorn sumac (Rhus typhina).
In areas that may be frequently disturbed, the warm season grasses will dominate. In those areas that are not as frequently disturbed, the wildflower component will become dominant. Along cuts and side slopes that may never be mowed, the shrub component will add structural diversity and excellent wildlife habitat.
Apart from the seed mix, it is recommended that plantings within the upland area should consist only of native species and include trees such as Pinus strobus (white pine), shrubs including Myrica pennsylvanica (bayberry) and Rhus typhina (staghorn sumac), while warm season grasses can include species such as Schizachyrium scoparium and Panicum virgatum (switchgrass). Both of these grasses have significant wildlife value.
Standard Best Management practices (BMPs) and soil and erosion control measures will be implemented in order to minimize indirect impacts to wetlands and terrestrial communities adjacent to the electrical interconnect ROW. Specifically, to minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation during construction, mitigation measures, including hay bales and silt fence, will be placed in appropriate locations along the interconnect routes. These mitigation measures will prove to be especially effective along the interconnect route in those instances where wetlands are situated at the base of steep grades.
5.2 Wetlands
Although direct filling–related impacts to wetlands are minor and will not compromise identified wetland functions and values, indirect impacts to wetlands associated with Turkey Brook will require mitigation. Indirect impacts include increased overland flow resulting from an increase in impervious area, in addition to the deposition of suspended solids into onsite wetlands. The mitigation of indirect impacts to wetlands
- 35 - will include (1) BMPs; (2) the enhancement of wetland buffer zone with transitional plantings; and (3) the creation of wetlands designed to handle stormwater. Wetlands designed to handle stormwater are discussed more fully in the restoration plan developed for the site entitled Stormwater Wetland: Water Quality Basin and Planting Details (Soil Resource Consultants, 2007) (Appendix C).
To minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation during construction, mitigation measures, including hay bales and silt fence, will be placed in appropriate locations on the site to both protect wetlands and to minimize the erosion of soil from stockpiles on the site. Prior to construction, erosion control devices would be placed between the work area and wetlands that are situated downgradient of construction activities. In addition to these standard BMPs there are other approaches to minimizing soil erosion that can be undertaken including grass waterways, rip–rap splash pads etc. In those instances where clearing and construction activities are required at the very edge of the wetland, a smaller piece of equipment will be utilized to minimize impacts. The construction corridor will be clearly marked with orange snow fence to ensure that construction equipment does not stray further into adjacent and undisturbed areas. Each of these measures and others are discussed more fully in the Soil and Erosion Control Plan developed for the site.
The addition of woody vegetation to the wetland buffer zone would serve to dissipate the energy of overland sheet flow entering the Turkey Brook wetlands through increased surface area. The vegetation would also exert a filtering effect, thereby removing water borne suspended solids and maintaining Turkey Brook water quality. Enhancement wetland buffer zone plantings could include transitional wetland shrub species such as Cornus racemosa (gray dogwood), and Amelanchier canadensis (common serviceberry), while tree species could include a number of fast growing, early successional tree species such as Juniperus virginiana (eastern red cedar), a species that tolerates full sun to partial sun conditions.
As proposed, stormwater detention basins will be constructed adjacent to the northeastern edge of the Turkey Brook wetland. Given their close proximity to the
- 36 -
wetland, the hydrologic regime would be such that a “soft–engineered” approach to basin design would work fairly well and would also serve to offset the wetland filling impacts. In this regard, it is recommended that a palustrine emergent wetland be the target plant community within the detention basin, with an admixture of scattered berry–bearing shrubs as a structural element for wildlife, e.g. Vaccinium corymbosum (highbush blueberry). In order to develop the emergent wetland plant community, plant species including lurid sedge (Carex lurida), green bulrush (Scirpus atrovirens) can be planted. Shrub species could be scattered along the margins of the basin and include Viburnum lentago (nannyberry).
- 37 -
6.0 LITERATURE CITED
DeGraaf, R.M. and D.D. Rudis. 1986. New England Wildlife: Habitat, Natural History, and Distribution. Northeast Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report NE-108.
Hoffman, M. L.; Collopy, M. W. 1988. Historical status of the American kestrel (Falco sparverius paulus) in Florida. Wilson Bulletin. 100(1): 91-107.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1980. A Screening Procedure for the Impacts of Air Pollution Sources on Plants, Soils, and Animals.
Z:\Projects\1523 Tamarack\001\FINAL Terrestrial Ecology Report.doc
- 38 -
APPENDIX A
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE LETTERS
APPENDIX B
SOIL REPORT BY A CT CERTIFIED SOIL SCIENTIST
APPENDIX C
STORMWATER WETLAND: WATER QUALITY BASIN AND PLANTING DETAILS (SOIL RESOURCE CONSULTANTS, 2007)