Natural area source book A guide for Land Managers, Scientists, Educators and Conservation Planners within the Virginia Coastal Resources Management area

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Tgsk 10 FINAL PRODUCT DCR-Heritege
FY 1"3 Natural Area Mgmt. Team & Model Plans
Natural Area Source Book:

A guide for land managers, scientists,
educators and conservation planners within
the Virginia Coastal Resources
Management Area

'@7

Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritage
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219
Telephone (804) 786-7951

Technical Report #95-7

"il This project was funded, in part, by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Re-
sources Management Program through Grant #NA370ZO360-01 of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, under the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended.

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation programs, activities, and employment opportunities are
available to all people regardless of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, national origin, or political affili-
ation. An equal opportunity/affirmative action employer.

NATURAL AREA SOURCE BOOK:

A Guide for Land Managers, Scientists, Educators, and
Conservation Planners within the

Virginia Coastal Resources Management Area

PREPARED BY:
Sandra Y. Erdle and Kennedy H. Clark
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritage
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, Virginia 23219
Technical Report #95-07

This project was funded by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal

Resources Management Program throu Grand #na370z0360-01 of the National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act

of 1972 as amended, and the Department of Conservation and Conservation and Recreation.

Cover illustration by Jeffrey Gaither, depicts biological monitoring.

NATURAL AREA SOURCE BOOK

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i. Acknowledgments ............................................ i

1. Introduction ............................................ 1
1. Project goals and objectives ................ I................ 2
2. Overview of coastal plain ................................... 3

H. Managed Natural Areas Within the Coastal Zone ....................... 5
1. Description of natural areas ................................ 6
2. List and map of managed natural areas .......................... 8

III. Guide to Agencies, Organizations, Academic Institutions and
Individuals Knowledgeable About Specific Resources, or Natural Area
Conservation and Management ............................... 11

IV. Guide to Resource Management Planning for NaturaI Areas ............. 48

V. Bibliography and Pertinent References ........................... 59

Appendices ............................................. ... 83
A. List of natural heritage resources in Coastal Zone
B. Natural heritage fact sheets
C. Model resource management plan - North Landing River Natural Area Preserve
D. Natural Resource Profiles - Chesapeake Bay, Back Bay, North Landing River,
Northwest River

Natural Area Source Book: acknowledgements

ACKNOWLEDGNW,NTS

Funding for this project was provided by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality,
through the Coastal Resources Management Program, Grant Number NA37OZO360-01, of
the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Department of
Conservation and Recreation. This work was implemented under the Coastal Zone
Management Act of 1972, as amended. Matching funds were provided by the Virginia
Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. We would like to
thank Laura McKay of the Department of Environmental Quality for coordinating this
funding.

We wish to thank everyone who responded to questionaires, submitted suggestions, supplied
information about specific federal and state agencies, universities, private organizations and
.ndividuals, and importantly, granted permission for their respective names or affiliations to
be listed in this book. Certainly, without the time, assistance, and input from these people,
development of a Natural Area Source Book would not have been possible.

Special thanks are offered to all staff members of the Division of Natural Heritage, and
especially to Caren A. CalJouw, Faye McKinney, and Megan Rollins who offered invaluable
assistance with this project.

1. Introduction

1. Project goals and objectives

2. Overview of Coastal Plain

0
1

Natural Area Source Book: project goals

Project Goals and Objectives

Virginia's Coastal Zone is rich in biodiversity. Recent inventories conducted by Virginia
Department of Conservation and Recreation scientists have identified over 250 natural areas
which support natural heritage resources in the Coastal Zone. Natural Heritage Resources
are habitats of rare plant and animal species, rare and exemplary natural communities, and
significant geologic features. Within the Coastal Zone, or Coastal Resource Management
Area, at least 63 natural areas are found on public or private conservation lands. These
conservation lands are managed partly, if not entirely, for their biodiversity and aesthetic
values. To assist land managers and resource experts in the complex task of appropriately
managing natural areas, the Department of Conservation and Recreation has produced a
Natural Area Source Book. Goals of the project, as related to the Source Book are as
follows:

1. To establish an interdisciplinary team of resource managers, scientists and experts
knowledgeable about specific resources and land management techniques. This team
provides a) guidance in collection and analysis of ecological data for natural areas, b) input
and guidance on inclusion of specific information for a natural area source book.

2. To produce a Natural Area Source Book for land managers, scientists, educators and
conservation planners within Virginia's Coastal Resources Management Area.

The Natural Area Source Book provides land managers, scientists, educators and
conservation planners with a current source for information about existing natural areas and
natural area management issues within the Coastal Resource Management Area. The
Natural Area Source Book contains 1) descriptions of natural areas, ownership, management
and location, 2) a comprehensive guide to agencies, organizations, academic institutions and
individuals that may be knowledgeable about specific resources, or natural area protection
and management, 3) an extensive bibliography of related topics, and 4) a guide to resource
management planning, and a completed Resource Management Plan for the North Landing
River Natural Area Preserve.

Overview of the Coastal Plain

For purposes of the Natural Area Source Book, the Coastal Zone is essentially synonymous
with the Coastal Resource Management Area, or the Coastal Plain physiographic province.
The Coastal Plain is the youngest of Virginia's physiographic provinces. It is bordered to
the north by Maryland, south by North Carolina, west by Virginia's Piedmont Plateau, and
to the east by the Atlantic Ocean. This area includes 17 cities and 29 counties, and boasts
extensive coastline along the Atlantic Ocean and the Chesapeake Bay. The Coastal Plain
grades gently from approximately 60 meters above sea level at the Fall Line (at the eastern
edge of the Piedmont Plateau) to below sea level in the Atlantic Ocean. It also posseses the
warmest climate in Virginia (Woodward and Hoffman, 1991), and therefore, a large number
of southern plant and animal species are able to survive here at or near their northern range
limit.

Four major rivers, the Potomac, Rappahannock, York, and James Rivers and numerous
tributary rivers and creeks dissect the northern Coastal Plain and flow into the Chesapeake
Bay. The area now known as the Chesapeake Bay was historically the drainage basin for the
Susquehanna River, and the four rivers listed above were originally tributaries to the old
Susquehanna River. When sea level rose after glacial melting, part of the old Susquehanna
River basin flooded, creating the Chesapeake Bay. Tributary river basins also flooded,
dissecting the remaining land into four peninsulas, the Northern Neck, the Middle Peninsula,
The Lower Peninsula and the Eastern Shore (Woodward and Hoffman, 1991). On the
northern Coastal Plain, there is a pronounced change of surface character from north to
south. The relatively narrow Northern Neck is deeply dissected by short, high-gradient
streams which flow through a terrain described as hilly and well-drained. Southward the
surface gradually becomes flatter toward the James River (Woodward and Hoffman, 1991).
Rivers are bordered by extensive freshwater tidal marshes, and marl ravines and woodlands
support numerous rare plant and animal species.

The eastern shore and barrier islands form a long peninsula along the outer Coastal Plain.
Active wave and wind processes continue to shape the coastline here, composed primarily of
unconsolidated sands and gravels. The terrain is relatively low, supporting extensive barrier
beaches, salt marshes, and pine flatwoods. Technically the Coastal Plain extends eastward
(below sea level) to the edge of the North American continent. The submerged section may
extend down as much as 180 meters below sea level at the Continental Shelf (Woodward and
Hoffman, 199 1).

The southern Coastal Plain includes the Dismal Swamp drainage basin and parts of the
Chowan River drainage. Both systems drain toward the Albemarle Sound in North Carolina.
The Great Dismal Swamp, Northwest River, North Landing River and Back Bay form
significant watersheds within the Dismal Swamp drainage basin. These watersheds are noted
nationally for their extensive estuarine and freshwater wetlands. The Chowan drainage basin
0 stretches from the Piedmont to the Coastal Plain. Within the Coastal Plain, the drainage
3

Natural Area Source Book: overview of Coastal Plain

The Great Dismal Swamp, Northwest River, North Landing River and Back Bay form
significant watersheds within the Dismal Swamp drainage basin. These watersheds are noted
nationally for their extensive estuarine and freshwater wetlands. The Chowan drainage basin
stretches from the Piedmont to the Coastal Plain. Within the Coastal Plain, the drainage
basin is represented by two major rivers, the Nottoway and Blackwater Rivers. Throughout
much of their courses, these rivers are slow, entrenched streams with deep channels. Unique
sandy upland habitats tend to form on the sandy east sides of these rivers as they meander
through the Coastal Plain. Long-leaf pine barrens and turkey oak sandhills, two rare
vegetative communities, are restricted to this region of the Coastal Plain.

Information collected on rare plants, animals and vegetative communities is managed by the
Department of Conservation and Recreation's Biological and Conservation Data System
(BCD), a powerful, state-of-the-art information management tool designed to track
information on elements of biological diversity, occurrences of those elements, conservation
sites, ecological monitoring programs, and additional pertinent data. The BCD System
provides current and comprehensive information for the benefit of science and research, safe
economic growth and conservation driven by sound science.

In addition to rich pelagic and estuarine communities, Virginia's Coastal Plain supports an
extremely diverse array of freshwater wetland and terrestrial communities. Natural
communities are distinct assemblages of plants and animals which interact with one another
and their physical environment. Some of the most notable natural communities within
Virginia's Coastal Plain are pocosins, seasonally wet pine flatwoods, seasonal ponds, pine
and turkey oak sandhills, freshwater tidal marshes, dune and swale wetlands, salt marshes,
and maritime loblolly pine forests. In the ongoing inventory of the natural resources of
Virginia, the Department of Conservation and Recreation locates, maps and monitors
communities as elements of natural diversity, just as it does plant and animal species. The
Department has documented 45 rare and exemplary community occurrences in Virginia's
Coastal Plain.

Virginia's Coastal Plain flora and fauna -are rich and varied. The diversity of species is the
result of the region's warm climate, vast array of wetland habitats, and unique upland
habitats. Four hundred twelve rare plants and animals are documented from the Coastal
Plain by the Department of Conservation and Recreation. Appendix A of the source book
contains a list of all natural heritage resources for the Coastal Plain region. This list is
grouped by plants, animals, and communities and includes the Heritage Network global rank,
state rank, federal status, and state status for each species and community.

II. Managed Natural Areas Within the Coastal Zone

1. Description of natural areas

2. List and map of managed natural areas

I*
5

Natural Area Source Book: managed natural areas

Managed Natural Areas Within Virginia's Coastal Zone

Presently, there are 63 managed natural areas within public and private conservation
ownership in Virginia's Coastal Resource Management Area, also called the Coastal Zone.
Many other significant natural areas occur in private ownership within this region. This
report however, features those natural areas which have been identified by Department of
Conservation and Recreation scientists as lands supporting rare flora, fauna, and native
vegetative communities, and which are managed to conserve natural heritage resources.
Numerous federal, state, local, and private interests are involved in the conservation of
natural areas. For purposes of this Natural Area Source Book, managed natural areas have
been broadly categorized into one of five classifications: state lands, federal lands, local
lands, university lands, and private conservation lands. A complete list and map of Managed
Natural Areas within the Coastal Zone immediately follow this narrative.

A natural area, defined by the Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act of 1989,(Article 3, Code
of Virgini , section 10. 1-209), "means any area of land, water, or both land and water,
whether publicly or privately owned, that retains or has reestablished its natural character,
though it need not be completely natural and undisturbed: or which is important in preserving
rare or vanishing flora, fauna, native ecological systems, geological, natural historical, scenic
or similar features of scientific or educational value benefitting the citizens of the
Commonwealth." Natural areas serve as important reserves for rare organisms, they help
maintain ecosystem stability, and provide important baseline information for long-term
ecological monitoring. They are ideal sites for research, and provide tremendous
opportunities for public education and passive recreation.

Natural areas provide four key benefits to the citizens of Virginia. They provide public
access to the outdoors; they provide unique educational and passive recreation opportunities;
they enhance tourism to Virginia (Virginia's Eastern Shore Migratory Bird Festival generates
over $52,000 per year in revenue, and Cape May and the Delaware Shore realize some four
billion dollars per year in nature related tourism); and they conserve Virginia's rich natural
heritage.

Lack of scientific data and the absence of planning for safe econimic growth has placed some
of southeast Virginia's species and communities at risk. Certain communities such as
pocosins, Atlantic white cedar swamps, and long-leaf pine and turkey oak woodlands were
once common in this region. Originally, pocosins and cedar swamps extended over 600
square miles in this area. Now roughly 20 square miles of this rare habitat remain intact and
are restricted to the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge and the North Landing
River Natural Area Preserve. In a similar manner, long-leaf pine and turkey oak woodlands
once covered vast regions of southeast Virginia. Less than 3000 acres remain, and of that,

Natural Area Source Book: managed natural areas

only Old Dominion University's 350 acre Blackwater Ecologic Preserve is protected and
managed as a natural area.

Citizens throughout the Commonwealth support the conservation of natural areas for
scientific, educational, aesthetic and economic values. Indeed, results of The Commonwealth
Poll, a 1994 poll conducted by Survey Research Laboratory, of Virginia Commonwealth
University, indicate that citizens of Virginia support natural area conservation. Fifty eight
percent of respondents strongly agreed that "Virginia should try to identify and locate rare
plants and animals." In the same poll, a large majority of Virginia citizens (85%) "strongly
agreed" that "Virginia should protect previously untouched habitats." Through passage of a
95 million dollar Parks and Natural Areas Bond (of which 11.5 million dollars is dedicated
toward natural area acquisition and public access improvements), Virginia citizens recently
made a commitment to conserve natural areas for the benefit of future generations.

To reach a still larger segment of Virginia's population and to garner support for conserving
Virginia's rich biological diversity, we must continue to increase awareness in the
Commonwealth's citizens about natural areas and their inherent benefits. Providing
opportunities for passive recreation and environmental education will enhance and nourish a
better understanding of the necessity to conserve these areas, add to the quality of life in the
region, and enhance economic development. Increasingly, the public has acknowledged the
importance that natural areas play in educational and interpretive programs, as demonstrated
at such areas as Seashore State Park and Natural Area, and Bethel Beach Natural Area
Preserve.

Accommodating both public and scientific use of natural areas -while preserving valuable
natural resources is a challenge for land managers, particularly in Virginia's Coastal Zone.
Land managers are faced with complex environmental issues which require a thorough
knowledge of the resource base, careful planning, and integrated management programs.
Additional information is necessary to determine the best techniques for managing certain
natural environments and rare species habitats. Baseline data on ecological processes are
central to sound management planning, but this information is often lacking or difficult to
obtain. By understanding the processes (for example, fire, herbivory, and hydrology)
operating on natural landscapes, land managers are able to better judge effects of their
activities on the land and those special resources they attempt to manage and preserve. The
Natural Area Source Book should serve as a useful guide for land managers, conservation
planners and educators in the Coastal Zone. It provides information on natural area
conservation, rare species, natural communities, restoration and management techniques,
knowledgeable contacts, and pertinent references. The Virginia Department of Conservation
and Recreation's resource management plan for the North Landing River is appended to the
source book and serves as a model for developing management programs for existing private
and public conservation lands.

MANAGED NATURAL AREAS WITHIN VIRGINIA'S COASTAL ZONE

Managed Area Name Ownership Managing Agency/institute

State Lands (Department of Conservation and Recreation, Department of Game and Inland Fisheries)
1. Bethel Beach Natural Area Preserve Dept. of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) DCR
2. Bushmill Stream Natural Area Preserve DCR DCR
3. Caledon Natural Area DCR DCR
4.* Charles C. Stierly Natural Area DCR DCR
5. Chippokes Plantation State Park (portions of) DCR DCR
6. False Cape State Park (portions of) DCR DCR
7. Hughlett Point Natural Area Preserve DCR DCR
8. Kiptopeke State Park (portions of) DCR DCR
9. Kittewan Wildlife Management Area Dept. of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) DGIF
10. Leesylvania State Park (portions oo DCR DCR
11. Mason Neck State Park (portions of) DCR DCR
12. North Landing River Natural Area Preserve DCR DCR
13. Northwest River Natural Area Preserve DCR DCR
14.* Parkers Marsh Natural Area DCR DCR
15. Princess Anne Wildlife Man. Area (portions of) DGIF DGIF
16. Seashore State Park and Natural Area (portions oo DCR DCR
17.* White Oak Swamp Natural Area Commonwealth of VA Dept. of General Services/Dept. of Forestry
18.* William B. Trower Bayshore Natural Area Preserve -DCR DCR
19.* Wreck and Bone Island Natural Area Preserve DCR DCR, TNC, VA Coast Reserve
20. York River State Park (portions of, part of NERR) DCR DCR

Federal Lands (Military, National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service)
1.* A. P. Hill Military Reservation (portions ot) U.S. Dept. of Defense (USDoD) USDol)
2. Assateague Island National Seashore (portions of) U.S. Dept. of the Interior (USDOI) U.S. National Park Service (USNPS)
3. Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
4. Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
5. Colonial National Historical Park (portions of) USDOI USNPS
6. Eastern Shore of VA National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
7. Featherstone National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
S. Fisherman's Island National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
9.* Fort Belvoir Military Reservation (portions oo USDoD USDoD
10.* Fort Lee Military Reservation (portions of) USDoD USDoD
ll.* Fort Story Military Reservation (portions of) USDoD USDoD
12. George Washington Memorial Parkway (portions of) USDOI USNPS

(Access to Natural Areas marked with an asterisk (*) is by PERMISSION ONLY from the managing agency listed.)

(page 2 of 21 continued: Managed Natural Areas Within Virginia's Coastal Zone)
Managed Area Name Ownership Managing Agency/Institute
Federal Lands (continued)
13. Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
14. Great Falls National Park (portions of) USDOI USNPS
15. James River National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
16. Manassas Nat'l Battlefield Park (portions of) USDOI USNPS
17. Marumsco National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
18. Mason Neck National Wildlife Refuge (portions oo USDOI USFWS
19. Nansemond National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
20. North Landing River Islands (portions of) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ACOE, TNC-VAFO
21. Petersburg Nat'l Battlefield Park (portions oo USDOI USNPS
22. Plum Tree Island National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
23. Presquile National Wildlife Refuge (portions of) USDOI USFWS
24. Prince William Forest Park USDOT USNPS
25.* Goddard Space Flight Ctr/Wallops Flight Facility (portions oo Nat'l Aeronautics and Space Administration Nat'l Aeronautics and Space Administration

Local Lands
1. Grafton Ponds Natural Area Preserve City of Newport News City of Newport News/DCR
2. Grandview Beach Nature Preserve City of Hampton City of Hampton, Dept. of Recreation
3. Northwest River Park (portions of) City of Chesapeake Chesapeake Dept. of Recreation

University Lands
L* Blackwater Ecological Preserve Brd of Visitors, Old Dominion Univ. (ODU) ODU
2.* Goodwin Islands (National Estuarine Research Reserve) Brd of Visitors, College of William and Mary VIMS
3.* William and Mary College Woods (portions of) Brd of Visitors, College of William and Mary College of William and Mary

Private Conservation Lands
L* Alexander Berger Memorial Sanctuary The Nature Conservancy (TNC) TNC-VA Field Office (VAFO)
2.* Catlett Islands (National Estuarine Research Reserve) privately owned Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS)
3.* Cumberland Marsh Preserve TNC TNC-VAFO
4.* Fraser Preserve TNC TNC-VAFO
5.* Magothy Bay Natural Area TNC TNC-VA Coast Reserve
6.* New Point Comfort Preserve TNC TNC-VAFO
7.* North Landing River Preserve TNC TNC-VAFO
8.* Northwest River Preserve TNC TNC-VAFO
9.* Orange Grove Preserve (TNC Managed Area) privately owned TNC-VAFO
10.* Owens Marsh Preserve privately owned TNC-VAFO
11.* Sweet Hall Marsh (National Estuarine Research Reserve) privately owned VIMS
12.* Virginia Coast Reserve TNC TNC-VA Coast Reserve

(Access to Natural Areas marked with an asterisk (*) is by PERMISSION ONLY from the managing agency listed.)

MANAGED NATURAL AREAS WITHIN VIRGINIA'S COASTAL ZONE
4
14

Fairfax
F.1 limit
16 Co. 0
P.t

Prince Williana

7 18
17 0
B24 10

Stafford

3
F r tsburg KlngGeorge Virginia's Coastal Resource Management Area

SPOLSYlMle a

NJ Westmoreland

Caro,11.0

Richmond
Essex 4
NorEhumber &act

2 25

0
Hanover King Willima King & Queen Ln@ost- 14 C@
10 9 cHESA PEA YE Ac@omac

Middlesex BA r
Richmond 3

A, Now Kent
Gloucester Matthews 00
2 LhMPLM 12
Chesterfield
23 Charles City York
00 1 HeIgh @ It is 9 James City 3 bU16 2 6 19
0 010 5 C:02 18
21 4DI 5
A,s Newport 22 8
Sorry News P0 used 6
Rf", 2
4 Hampton

so$$" Isle of Wight Norfolk

pb M

1 19 Virginia Beach

Suffolk Chesapeake
KEY 13
3db 12 20
State Lands (DCR, DGIF) 8" 36

Federal Lands (DoD. NPS. ACOE, FWS)

Local Lands

University Lands
Private Conservation Lands Map by: VA Dept. of Conservation & Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage 2/95

0 Natural Area Source Book:

III. Guide to Agencies, Organizations, Academic Institutions and

Individuals Knowledgeable about Specific Resources, or

Natural Area Protection and Management.
is

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

CONTACT / RESOURCE DIRECTORY

Listed below are some agencies, organizations, academic institutions and individuals that may be knowledgeable
about natural area protection, management and/or specific resources. These are broadly grouped under the
following headings: Chesapeake Bay/Coastal Resources Protection; Forestry; Land and Resource
Conservation and Environmental Advocacy; Local and Regional Planning; Natural Resource Identification
and Conservation; Recreation; Regulation; Research and Education; Soil and Water Conservation;
Wetlands Planning, Regulation and Conservation; followed by a list of Resource Experts. Certainly, this
directory cannot possibly include all pertinent contacts and resources available within the coastal zone area, and
is intended only as a guide.

CHESAPEAKE BAY / COASTAL RESOURCES PROTECTION

Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, Inc.
mission/assistance: The Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, Inc. is a coalition of environmentalists, business
representatives, government officials, sports enthusiasts and others who are working together to protect a
priceless resource, the Chesapeake Bay.
contact: staff (804) 775-0951

Chesapeake Bay Foundation
mission/assistance: Chesapeake Bay Foundation's mission is to "Save the Bay". The foundation offers
programs on land management, land conservation, water quality protection, wetlands protection, and
environmental education.
contact: staff, Chesapeake Bay Foundation (804) 780-1392

Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department (CBLAD)
mission/assistance: The mission of the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department is to protect the
Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries from pollution caused by the use and development of land. To achieve this,
the Department will serve the citizens of the Commonwealth by working in partnership with local governments
to implement programs that protect and improve water quality, while supporting a healthy economy and other
public policy objectives. CBLAD provides technical assistance in the areas of regulatory interpretation,
nonpoint source pollution control, site design issues, and comprehensive planning for water quality protection.
contact: Scott Kudlas, Chief of Planning Assistance (804) 243-7229
C. Scott Crafton, Chief of Regulatory Assistance (804) 371-7503
(Or use the 800 number: (800) 243-7229)

Chesapeake Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve in Virginia (Virginia Institute of Marine Science)
mission/assistance: Chesapeake Bay NERR's mission in Virginia is to protect the Bay's natural resources, to
conduct estuarine research that will aid coastal decision making, and to make a significant contribution to
estuarine education in Virginia.
contact: manager (804) 642-7135

United States Army Corps of Engineers
mission: The USACOE provides safe navigation along the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway and protection of
Natural Resources under the Corps ownership.
contact: Andrew Reid (804) 441-7641

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

United States Department of Coast Guard, Fifth Coast Guard District
contact: Gary L. Ott (804) 898-2320

Virginia Cooperative Extension - Chesapeake Bay Programs
mission/assistance: Virginia Cooperative Extension, Chesapeake Bay Program's mission is to coordinate and to
provide educational programs with local extension agents, Soil and Water Conservation Districts, and others on
ways to reduce non-point source pollution from reaching the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries.
contact: Randall F. Shank, Chesapeake Bay Education Coordinator (804) 371-8884

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), Division of Soil and Water Conservation,
Chesapeake Bay Programs, Bureau of Non-point Source Programs
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources.
contact: James W. Cox (804) 786-3957

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), Division of Soil and Water Conservation,
Chesapeake Bay Programs, Bureau of Rivers and Shores
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources.
contact: L.S. Button (804) 371-7536

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), Division of Soil and Water Conservation,
Chesapeake Bay Programs, Bureau of Urban Programs
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources.
contact: J. Michael Flagg (804) 786-39S9

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Shoreline
Programs Section, Shoreline Erosion Advisory Service
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources. Assistance can
be provided as education and technical assistance to private properties, government agencies or the general
public on shoreline erosion, shoreline erosion control and coastal zone management.
contact: Lee Hill (804) 642-7121

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
mission/assistance: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's mission is to protect the environment of
Virginia in order to promote the health and well-being of the Commonwealth's citizens.
contact: Larry Minock (Coordinator of Interstate Chesapeake Bay Programs) (804) 762-4320

Virginia Institute of Marine Science
The College of William and Mary - School of Marine Science
mission/assistance: The School of Marine Science is one of four professional graduate schools of the College of
William and Mary. The objective of the educational program is to provide a fertile and stimulating learning
environment for students preparing for careers in marine science.
contact: Berch Smithson (804) 642-7382

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VM1RC)
mission/assistance: Virginia Marine Resources Commission holds regulatory jurisdiction over all commercial
and sports fishing, marine fish, marine shellfish, and marine organisms in the tidal waters of Virginia. VMRC
holds permit jurisdiction on all projects involving use of state owned submerged lands and authority over use or
development in vegetated and non-vegetated tidal wetlands and coastal primary sand dunes.
contact: Robert Grabb, Tony Watkinson (804) 247-2250

FORESTRY

Virginia Department of Forestry
mission/assistance: The Virginia Department of Forestry's mission is to maintain a forest resource to meet the
needs of the Commonwealth. The VADOF can provide technical assistance to private landowners to assist with
management of natural resources, and leadership to help protect water quality associated with forest activity.
The VADOF enforces the Forest Water Quality Law, and provides assistance with community forest projects.
The VADOF also provides rural fire protection and control, assistance with marketing forest products,
reforestation, pest management and other environmental concerns. Biological identification, protection,
silvicultural prescription, and forest management can be handled with in-house experts or referral.
contact: James Starr, Headquarters (804) 977-6555 Charlottesville
John Carroll, Region 1 (804) 834-2300 Waverly
William Saunders, Region 2 (804) 443-2211 Tappahannock

Virginia Forestry Association (VFA)
mission/assistance: The mission of the Virginia Forestry Association is the promotion of stewardship and wise
use of our forest resource by landowners and the forest industry, for the economic and environmental benefits
of all Virginians.
contact: Paul R. Howe, Exec. Dir. (804) 741-0836

LAND AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCACY

American Farmland Trust
contact: Dennis Bidwell, Director of Land Protection (202) 659-5170

American Fisheries Society, Virginia Chapter
mission/assistance: The American Fisheries Society's mission is to promote the conservation, development, and
wise utilization of fisheries, both recreational and commercial. The Virginia Chapter is affiliated with American
Fisheries Society Headquarters.
contact: Michael C. Odom (703) 332-9210

Back Bay Restoration Foundation
P.O. Box 868, VA Beach, VA 23451
contact: Joy Eliassen, Pres. (804) 427-0685

Cape Henry Audubon Society
contact: president, or exec. board member (804) 622-0372

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Center for Plant Conservation
mission/assistance: The Center for Plant Conservation's mission is conserving rare and endangered plants of
the United States through cultivation and research. The Center for Plant Conservation is a national organization
headquartered at the Missouri Botanical Garden in St. Louis and governed by an independent national Board of
Trustees.
contact: staff (314) 577-9450

Citizens for a Better Eastern Shore
Northampton County Chapter, P.O. Box 882, Eastville, VA 23347
contact: Suzanne Westcoat, President

Conservation Council of Virginia (CCVA)
mission/assistance: CCVA provides a dynamic forum in which to coordinate development and promotion of
effective policies for the sustainable use and preservation of our natural resources. The council is a broad
coalition of organizations and individuals concerned with conservation opportunities in the Commonwealth.
contact: staff CCVA, PO Box 106, Richmond, VA 23201

The Conservation Fund
mission/assistance: The Conservation Fund collaborates with private and public partners to save land. A
nonprofit organization, the Fund is dedicated to advancing land conservation in America with creative ideas and
new resources. The Fund provides specialized skills and services ranging from land planning and acquisition to
ecological assessment and communications support.
contact: Patrick F. Noonan, President (703) 525-6300

Elizabeth River Project
contact: Maxjorie Mayfield, President (804) 625-3648

Friends of Back Bay Refuge
contact: Molly Brown, President (c/o Back Bay Nat'l Wildlife Refuge) (804) 721-2412

Friends of the Rappahannock
contact: president, exec. board member (703) 373-3448

Historic Rivers Land Conservancy
contact: Carolyn Lowe (804) 565-3167

James River Association
mission/assistance: The James River Association works for the preservation of the scenic, environmental,
historical and recreational characteristics of the James River watershed in our area, consistent with orderly
economic development.
contact: Patti Jackson (804) 730-1921

IGptopeke Environmental Station, Research & Education Laboratory (IKESTREL)
missionlassistance: KESTREL is a non-profit foundation focusing attention on the migration of birds and
insects on Virginia's Eastern Shore. The goals of KESTREL are to contribute to the understanding of bird and
insect migration by, 1) promoting, organizing, directing and financially supporting studies, 2) producing
educational materials and 3) serving as a resource for information.
contact: Bill Williams, President 15 (804) 253-6779 or (804) 229-6095

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

The Mattaponi and Pamunkey Rivers Association
mission/assistance: The Mattaponi and Pamunkey Rivers Association is dedicated to preservation of the history,
ecology, scenic values, recreation and economy of the Mattaponi and Pamunkey Rivers.
contact: Billy Mills (804) 775-0951

National Wilderness Institute (NWI)
contact: staff (703) 836-7404

Natural Areas Association
mission/assistance: The Natural Areas Association's mission is to advance the preservation of natural diversity.
The association works to inform, unite, and support persons engaged in identi@@ing, protecting, managing, and
studying natural areas and biological diversity.
contact: staff (314) 878-7850 (815) 964-6666

The Nature Conservancy (Virginia Field Office)
mission/assistance: The Nature Conservancy's mission is to preserve plants, animals and natural communities
that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive. Land
protection strategies, land management.
contact: Michael Lipford, Director - Judy Dunscomb Dir. of Science and Stewardship (804) 295-6106

The Nature Conservancy (Virginia Coast Reserve)
mission/assistance: The Nature Conservancy's mission is to preserve plants, animals and natural communities
that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive. The
Virginia Coast Reserve is a barrier island wilderness area containing some 45,000 acres of sandy beaches, salt
marsh, and adjacent upland along the Eastern Shore of Virginia. The Reserve is recognized as one of the most
important privately held natural areas in America, and has been designated by the United Nations as a World
Biosphere Reserve in recognition of its great ecological value.
contact: John M. Hall, Director - Barry Truitt, Dir. of Science and Stewardship (804) 442-3049

Northern Neck Chapter of the Audubon Society
contact: Porter Kier (804) 529-6071

Northumberland Association for Progressive Stewardship (NAPS)
mission/assistance: NAPS is a non-profit, non-partisan Virginia public service organization dedicated to the
orderly growth and environmental welfare of Northumberland County.
contact: Michael S. Harwood (804) 580-4801

Piedmont Environmental Council
mission/assistance: Piedmont Environmental Council is a nonprofit organization formed to conserve natural
resources and the pastoral landscape of a nine-county region of the Northern Virginia Piedmont. Public
education and services to public officials and citizens, covering: land use; farmland retention; open space
conservation; historic preservation; and rural planning legislation. Active statewide and federally on rural
conservation issues.
contact: Charles S. Whitehouse (703) 347-2334

Richmond Audubon Society
contact: president or exec. board member (804) 257-0813

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Southeastern Association for Virginia's Environment (SAVE)
mission/assistance: SAVE is a coalition of concerned individuals, organizations and businesses dedicated to the
preservation and protection of the total environment of the southeastern region of Virginia. Through unified and
concerted efforts, this coalition believes that they can make a difference in the policies and attitudes that will
shape the environment and quality of life for generations to come.
contact: Sue Carlyle, President (804) 481-2538

The Trust for Public Land
mission/assistance: The Trust for Public Land is a national nonprofit land conservation organization that
protects land as a living resource for present and future generations. A problem-solving organization, TPL
helps communities, public agencies and nonprofit organizations acquire and protect open space. TPL shares
knowledge of nonprofit land acquisition processes and pioneers methods of land conservation and evironmentally
sound land use.
contact: Debi Lee Osborne, Director, Chesapeake Lands Project (202) 543-7552

Virginia Chapter of the Wildlife Society
contact: staff (804) 2964731

Virginia Environmental Endowment
mission/assistance: Virginia Environmental Endowment (VEE) is a nonprofit grantmaking corporation whose
purpose is to improve the quality of the environment. VEE funds programs aimed at creating economically-
viable, ecologically-sustainable communities, preventing pollution, conserving natural resources, and providing
environmental education.
contact: Gerald P. McCarthy, Executive Director (804) 644-5000

Virginia Environmental Network
contact: staff (804) 644-0283

Virginia Herpetological Society
408 Franklin Drive, Blacksburg, VA 24060
contact: Ron Southwick

Virginia Native Plant Society
mission/assistance: The VNTPS and chapters throughout Virginia seek to further appreciation and conservation
of Virginia's wild plants and habitats. Programs emphasize public education, protection of endangered species,
habitat preservation, and encouragement of appropriate landscape use of native plants. Includes both amateurs
and professionals.
contact: Nicky Staunton (703) 368-9803

Virginia Nurserymen's Association, Inc.
mission/assistance: The mission of the Virginia Nurserymen's Association is to enhance the development of
professional nurserymen, to assist in improving efficiency and profitability of the profession, and to represent
and promote the nursery industry to the Commonwealth and the Nation.
contact: Jeffrey B. Miller, Exec. Dir. (703) 382-0943

io
17

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Virginia Outdoors Foundation
mission/assistance: The Virginia Outdoors Foundation's mission is to preserve Virginia's natural scenic,
historic, scientific, open space and recreational areas by means of private philanthropy. The Foundation accepts
gifts of cash, stock, real property or open spaces easements to achieve its purpose.
contact: Virginia E. McConnell, Director (804) 786-5539

Virginia Society of Ornithology
mission/assistance: The VSO concentrates on all aspects of the birds of VA. Recent major activities include
collaboration with state agencies on large field research projects, a long-term banding operation on the Eastern
Shore, and field trips to bird hot spots. The VSO also publishes a semiannual journal, a quarterly newsletter,
and books on Virginia's birds. Additionally, the VSO provides an annual conservation award and a biannual
research grant to people involved with the birds of the Commonwealth. This is a statewide organization with 24
local chapters.
contact: Bill Akers, President (804) 330-3289
Thelma Dalmas (804) 239-2730

Virginia Zoological Society
contact: staff (804) 624-9937

Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Council
mission/assistance: The Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Council is a non-profit, non-lobbying organization of
representatives from conservation and environmental groups as well as corporate America. The Council's
unique and innovative purpose is to promote and nuture the enhancement of corporate property - representing
about one-quarter of private U.S. land - for the benefit of wildlife. In addition to helping wildlife, Council-
supported activities focus on "the human dimension. " Citizens, employees, managers, conservationists, state
and federal agency personnel and community groups work together to protect wildlife while enhancing
relationships with one another. 1010 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1240, Silver Spring, MD 20910
contact: staff

LOCAL AND REGIONAL PLANNING

Accomack - Northampton Planning District Commission
mission/assistance: The Accomack-Northampton Planning District Commission's mission is to promote the
orderly and efficient development of the physical, social and economic elements of the District [Accomack and
Northampton Counties and 19 incorporated towns], through regional planning and encouraging and assisting
governmental subdivision to plan for the future. The PDC maintains or has access to a variety of data and
information resources.
contact: James M. McGowan (804) 787-2936

Caroline County Department of Planning and Community Development
mission/assistance: The Caroline County Department of Planning and Community Development's mission is to
implement and enforce all environmental regulations. Staff are available to answer environmental/planning
questions with regard to Caroline County.
contact: Andrea K. Hornung (804) 633-4303

Charles City County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department 19 (804) 829-9217

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department
contact: Donna E. Cesan (804) 371-7504

Chesterfield County Planning Department
mission/assistance: The Chesterfield County Planning Department undertakes long and short range planning for
land use and development.
contact: Thomas E. Jacobson, Director (804) 748-1050

City of Alexandria Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (703) 838-4666

City of Chesapeake, Department of PI
mission/assistance: As per the Chesapeake City Charter, the Planning Dept. has the following responsibilities:
to prepare a comprehensive plan and its continued review and revision; to advise the City Manager on
implementation of the comprehensive plan and other matters affecting physical development of the City; to
prepare other reports, studies, and evaluations as required by the City Manager; and to advise the Planning
Commission in the exercise of its responsibilities and in connection therewith to provide necessary staff
assistance. This office deals with various natural resource matters since they often are relevant issues to land
use and development. This office is a source for various types of information, such as maps, aerial
photographs, studies, and information on local resource management programs, as well as information dealing
with land use and development.
contact: L. Lee Dydin, Planner (804) 547-6176
City of Colonial Heights Planning Department 0
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 520-9275

City of Falls Church Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (703) 241-5040

City of Hampton Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 727-6132

City of Hopewell, Department of Development
contact: Milton Martin (804) 541-2220

City of Newport News, Department of Planning
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 247-8428

City of Norfolk Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 441-2375

City of Petersburg Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 733-2308

City of Poquoson Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 968-3535

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

City of Portsmouth Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 393-8836

City of Richmond, Dept. of Community Development, Div. of Comprehensive Planning
mission/assistance: The Department of Community Development's mission is to plan, promote, coordinate and
implement a coherent structure for the maintenance and development of the social and physical environment to
enhance the life of the current and future citizens of the City of Richmond.
contact: staff, Dept. of Community Development (804) 780-6335

City of Virginia Beach Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 427-4621

City of Williamsburg, Department of Planning
contact: Reed Nester (804) 220-6130

Crater Planning District Commission
mission/assistance: The Crater Planning District Commission's mission is to promote the orderly and efficient
development of the physical, social and economic elements of the Planning District.
contact: Dennis K. Morris, Executive Director (804) 861-1666

Essex County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 443-2434

Fairfax County, Office of Comprehensive Planning
mission/assistance: The Fairfax County, Office of Comprehensive Planning's mission is to prepare and
interpret policies and ordinances to ensure that environmental protection and ecological resource conservation
objectives are met as a function of the development process.
contact: staff, Environment and Development Review Branch (703) 324-1380

Gloucester County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 693-4040

Hampton Roads Planning District Commission
mission/assistance: The HRPDC is responsible for regional planning and problem solving in the functional
areas of Physical and Environmental Planning, Transportation, Economics, Legislative and Information Services
and Human Resources. It provides a forum for the elected and appointed officials of the region's local
governments to address common problems and opportunities. The HRPDC compiles information and completes
technical studies in each of its functional responsibilities. Through an extensive Committee structure, the
HRPDC facilitates information exchange among the localities, state and federal agencies and the private sector.
Consensus approaches are developed for consideration by the Commission. The Commission includes the Cities
of Chesapeake, Franklin, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach
and Williamsburg, and the Counties of Gloucester, Isle of Wight, James City, Southampton and York.
contact: Arthur L. Collins, Executive Director/Secretary (804) 420-8300
John M. Carlock, Director of Physical and Environmental Planning (804) 420-8300

Hanover County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 537-6171

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Henrico County Planning Office
mission/assistance: The Henrico County Planning Office's mission is to prepare the general plans for charting
the future development of the County. Development of such plans requires analysis of the physical
environment, existing land use conditions, economic market realities, and the availability of public services.
The Planning Office also reviews specific development proposals to assure conformity with the appropriate
County ordinances.
contact: Audrey Anderson, County Planner (804) 672-4602

Isle of Wight County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 357-3191

James City County Planning Department
mission/assistance: The James City County Planning Department's mission is to provide analysis of planning
activities related to public facilities, utilities, transportation and land use. This department assists in the creation
and achievement of community goals and visions and manage development activities in a way that focuses on
achievement of those goals and visions.
contact: Wayland Bass, County Engineer (804) 253-6671

King and Queen County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 785-6272

King George County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (703) 775-7111

IGng William County, Department of Community Development
contact: Dennis W. Carrey (804) 769-4933

Lancaster County, Virginia, Department of Planning and Land Use
contact: G. Cabell Lawton, IV (804) 462-5220

Mathews County, Department of Planning and Zoning
mission/assistance: This department can provide information regarding local land use.
contact: Ted Costin, AICP (804) 725-4034

Middlesex County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 758-3382

Middle Peninsula Planning District Commission
mission/assistance: Middle Peninsula Planning District Commission is a regional planning agency serving
middle peninsula localities in land use, environmental, transportation, housing, and economic development
issues.
contact: Jim Uzel, Environmental Programs Coordinator (804) 750-2311

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

New Kent County Planning Department
mission/assistance: New Kent County Planning Department's mission is to encourage well planned, orderly
growth as a means to meet the physical, economic, and social needs of county residents. To preserve and
protect the natural environment while permiting development to occur in a manner consistent with the capacity
of land to handle development.
contact: staff, New Kent County Planning Department (804) 966-9690

Northampton County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 678-0443

Northern Neck Planning District Commission
contact: Randy Wingfield, Planning District Commission (804) 529-7400

Northumberland County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 580-4342

Prince George County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 733-2608

Prince William County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (703) 792-6830

Rappahannock Area Development Comission (RADCO Planning District)
mission/assistance: The RADCO Planning District's mission is to promote long-range planning of
environmental, physical, social, economic and transportation elements in the District. RADCO staff could assist
a natural area resource manager by coordinating between that manager and local governments to enhance their
relationship through regional support. Staff could bring issues affecting the natural area to the attention of
decision-makers and allow for discussion of those issues. RADCO staff could also provide assistance on
various projects and increase awareness among the public of the natural area as an asset to the region.
contact: Stephen Manster, Executive Director - Sandra Rives-Swope, Env. Planner (703) 373-2890

Richmond County Planning Department
mission/assistance: This department serves as planning and land use program administrator for Richmond
County. Duties include inventory and analysis of natural resources.
contact: William E. Duncanson (804) 333-3415

Richmond Regional Planning District Commission
mission/assistance: The Richmond Regional Planning District Commission's mission is to plan physical, social
and economic development of the district.
contact: Mr. Larry McCarty (804) 3S8-3684

Southampton County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 653-3008

Spotsylvania County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (703) 582-7146

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Stafford County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (703) 371-4614

Surry County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 294-5210

Westmoreland County Planning Department
contact: staff, Planning Department (804) 493-0120

York County Department of Community Development
mission/assistance: York County Dept. of Community Development's mission is implementation of York
County's Comp. Plan by ensuring that development which does occur is in accordance with the County's rural
character and is consistent with the carrying capacity of the land.
contact: Cynthia S. Taylor (804) 890-3525

NATURAL RESOURCE IDENTMCATION AND CONSERVATION

Department of Nnes, Nnerals and Energy
contact: staff (800) 552-3831

Goddard Space Flight Center/Wallops Flight Facility (GSFC/WFF)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Goddard Space Flight Center/Wallops Flight Facility,
GSFC/WFF Environmental Branch, Wallops Island, VA 23337-5099
contact: Pamela Whitman, Resource Manager (804) 824-2137

United States Department of Defense, Fort A.P. Hill Military Reservation
Fort A. P. Hill Military Reservation, Bowling Green, VA 22427
contact: John Phillips, Resource Manager (804) 633-8255

United States Department of Defense, Fort Belvoir Military Reservation
Fort Belvoir Military Reservation, Fort BeIvoir, VA 22060-5113
contact: Dorothy Keough, Resource Manager (703) 355-7968

United States Department of Defense, Fort Lee Tffilitary Reservation
Directorate of Public Works, Bldg. 6205 (ATZM-EMO), Fort Lee, VA 23801-5200
contact: Carol Anderson, Resource Manager (804) 765-4803

United States Department of Defense, Fort Story Nfilitary Reservation
Fort Story Military Reservation, c/o Resource Manager, Fort Eustis, Fort Eustis, VA 23604-5000
contact: Tony Rizzio, Resource Manager (804) 878-4123

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
mission/assistance: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's mission is to conserve, protect, and enhance the
nation's fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The service can
provide Natural Areas managers with information on all Federal environmental laws and programs; natural
resource management and restoration techniques; endangered and rare species; environmental contaminants; and
sources of environmental education.
contact: Virginia Field Office - Karen L. Mayne (804) 693-6694
Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge - Joseph F. McCauley (804) 721-2412
Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge - John D. Schroer (804) 336-6122
Eastern Shore of VA National Wildlife Refuge - Sherman W. Stairs (804) 331-2760
Featherstone National Wildlife Refuge - J. Frederick Milton, Jr. (703) 690-1297
Fisherman's Island National Wildlife Refuge - Sherman W. Stairs (804) 331-2760
Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge - Lloyd A. Culp, Jr. (804) 986-3706
James River National Wildlife Refuge - Barry G. Brady (804) 733-8042
Marumsco National Wildlife Refuge - J. Frederick Milton, Jr. (703) 690-1297
Mason Neck National Wildlife Refuge - J. Frederick Milton, Jr. (703) 690-1297
Nansemond National Wildlife Refuge - Lloyd A. Culp, Jr. (804) 986-3706
Plum Tree Island National Wildlife Refuge - Lloyd A. Culp, Jr. (804) 986-3706
Presquile National Wildlife Refuge - Barry G. Brady (804) 733-8042

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Southeast Regional Office
mission/assistance: The National Park Service's mission is to preserve and protect the natural resources for the
enjoyment of all visitors and for future generations.
contact:
Mid-Atlantic Regional Office - Dave Reynolds, Chief, Branch of Natural Resource Management (215) 597-5372
Mid-Atlantic Regional Office - Denise Cooke, Coord. for Air, Water and Endangered Species (215) 597-9978
Assateague Island National Seashore - Carl Zimmerman, Natural Resources Manager (410) 641-1441
Colonial National Historic Park - Chuck Rafkind, Natural Resources Manager (804) 898-8677
Fredericksburg National Battlefield Park - Susan Alberts (703) 373-0834
George Washington Birthplace - Natural Resources Manager (804) 224-2142
George Washington Memorial Parkway - Natural Resources Manager --- --- ----
Great Falls National Park - Dwight Madison, Park Manager (703) 285-2965
Manassas National Battlefield Park - Natural Resources Manager (703) 754-7107
Petersburg National Battlefield Park - Ray Ahlbrandt, Natural Resources Manager (804) 732-3531
Prince William Forest Park - Natural Resources Manager (703) 221-7181
Richmond National Battlefield Park - Mike Bristow, Natural Resources Manager (804) 226-1981

Virginia Academy of Science (VAS), Archaeology Section
mission/assistance: The VAS, Archaeology Section disseminates information concerning archaeology in
Virginia. (Attn: Dennis Blanton, c/o Dept. of Anthropology, College of William and Mary.)
contact: Dennis B. Blanton (804) 221-2584

0 24

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Virginia Department of Game and hdand Fisheries
missionlassistance: Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries' mission is to manage Virginia's wildlife
and inland fish to maintain optimum populations of all species to serve the needs of the Commonwealth.
contact: Wildlife - Bob Duncan, Chief (804) 367-6878
Glen Askins, Regional Manager (804) 253-4180
Rick Busch, Regional Manager (804) 899-4169
Fisheries - Gary Martel, Chief (804) 367-1004
Mitchell Norman, Regional Manager (804) 424-6719
John Kauffman, Regional Manager (804) 296-4731
Nongame Program - Karen Terwilliger, Nongame Biologist (804) 367-1000
Mike Pinder, Aquatic Nongame Biologist (703) 951-6992
Fish and Wildlife Info. System - Rebecca K. WaJda (804) 367-8351
Environmental Services - Raymond T. Fernald (804) 367-8364

Virginia Department of Historic Resources
mission/assistance: Virginia Department of Historic Resources's mission is to encourage the identification,
evaluation, and preservation of Virginia's significant historical and cultural resources. Offers technical advice
on preservation of historic structures and archaeological sites, and on compliance with state and federal
preservation regulations. Arranges artifact loans and provides design assistance for educational exhibits as well
as assistance to teachers seeking to include historic preservation in their curricula.
contact: David Dutton, Project Review Division (804) 786-3143
Catherine Slusser, Director, Technical Assistance Division (804) 786-4143

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage
mission/assistance: Department of Conservation and Recreation's (DCR) mission is to conserve Virginia's
natural and recreational resources. DCR's Division of Natural Heritage works to inventory and conserve
Virginia's biological diversity. The Division produces an inventory of Virginia's natural diversity, provides
information on rare, threatened and endangered species and natural environments to citizens of the
Commonwealth. DCR conserves natural areas through a variety of protection tools, and implements model
programs for the stewardship of Virginia's natural heritage resources.
contact: Thomas L. Smith, Division Director (804) 786-7951
Leslie D. Trew, Inventory Program Manager (804) 371-6206
Larry R. Smith, Natural Areas Program Manager (804) 371-6205
Caren A. Caljouw, Stewardship Coordinator (804) 371-6204
Steve Carter-Lovejoy, Information Manager (804) 786-8377
Lesa S. Berlinghoff, Project Review Coordinator (804) 371-2708

Virginia Farm Bureau Federation
contact: staff (804) 784-1374

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

RECREATION

Accomack County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: William Allen (804) 787-3900

Alexandria Department of Recreation, Parks & Cultural Activities
contact: Richard Kauffman (703) 838-4842

Arlington Co. Department of Parks, Recreation and Community Resources
contact: Alice Foster (703) 358-3323

Caroline County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Donnell Howard (804) 633-7277

Charles City County Department of Parks and Recreation
contact: Darrell Crittendon (804) 829-9227

City of Chesapeake, Parks, Recreation and Building Maintenance Department
mission/assistance: The Chesapeake Parks, Recreation and Building Maintenance Department's mission is to
provide opportunities and facilities to serve the leisure needs of citizens year round to include: leisure program
classes, athletic programs, special events, senior programs, handicap programs, and to maintain the buildings,
parks and recreational fields for those programs.
contact: Park Planner (804) 547-6411

City of Chesapeake, Parks, and Recreation Department: Northwest River Park
mission/assistance: Northwest River Park's mission is to provide passive recreational offerings to the citizens
of Chesapeake and their guests; to provide protection and conservation of the park; and to provide protection of
the habitat and sanctuary for its natural resources as well as educational programs about its environment.
contact: W. N. Petree Manager, Northwest River Park (804) 421-7151

Chesterfield County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Mike Golden (804) 748-1623

Colonial Heights Recreation and Park Department
contact: Sean E. Gleason (804) 520-9390

Essex County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Sylvia Allen (804) 443-2470

City of Fairfax Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Michael B. Cadwallader (703) 385-7858

Fairfax County Department of Recreation and Community Services
contact: W. Michael Kendrick (703) 324-5501

Fairfax County Park Authority
contact: James Heberlein (703) 246-5700

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Falls Church Recreation and Parks Department
contact: Howard E. Herman (703) 241-5077

Federal Lands-to-Parks Program (National Park Service)
mission/assistance: Through the Federal Lands-to-Parks Program, State and local agencies may acquire land
and facilities at no cost to meet park and recreation needs.
contact: staff (404) 331-2610

Fredericksburg Recreation Department
contact: Robert Antozzi (703) 372-1088

Fredericksburg-Stafford County Park Authority
contact: Ray Grizzle (703) 373-7909

Gloucester County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Carol Steele (804) 693-2355

Hampton Department of Parks and Recreation
contact: Elizabeth Walker (804) 727-6347

Hanover County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Brad Ashley (804) 798-8062

Henrico County Recreation and Parks Department
contact: Tom Blekicki (804) 672-5104

City of Hopewell Department of Recreation and Parks
contact: William Mitchell (804) 541-2304

Isle of Wight County Public Facilities Authority
contact: Alan Nogiec (804) 357-2291

James City County Parks and Recreation
contact: Needham Cheely, 111 (804) 229-5676

Ying George Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Jo Turek (703) 775-4386

King William County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Tim Smith (804) 769-4928

Mathews County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: John Christopher (804) 725-7171

Nfiddlesex County Parks and Recreation
contact: Beth Stilwagen (804) 758-4330
16
27

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Newport News Department of Parks and Recreation
contact: Ronald Burroughs (804) 247-8451

Norfolk Department of Parks and Recreation
contact: Stanley A. Stein (804) 441-2400

Northampton County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Barry Randall (804) 678-5179

Northern VA Regional Park Authority
contact: Darrell Winslow (703) 352-5900

Northumberland County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Angeline Sisson (804) 580-8901

Petersburg Recreation Department
contact: Alan Archer (804) 733-2394

Poquoson Parks and Recreation
contact: Art Thatcher (804) 868-3580

Portsmouth Parks and Recreation
contact: L. Pettis Patton (804) 393-8481

Prince George County Department of Recreation and Parks
contact: Barney Lee (804) 733-2646

Prince William County Park Authority
contact: Peggy Delinocci (703) 792-7060

Richmond City Department of Recreation and Parks
contact: Allison Baker (804) 780-5715

Stafford County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Michael Scott (703) 7204871

Suffolk Parks and Recreation
contact: Dinesh Tiwari (804) 925-6325

Surry County Parks and Recreation Department
contact: Earvin Jones (804) 294-3044

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Southeast Regional Office
mission/assistance: The National Park Service's mission is to preserve and protect the natural resources for the
enjoyment of all visitors and for future generations.
contact:
Mid-Atlantic Regional Office - Dave Reynolds, Chief, Branch of Natural Resource Management (215) 597-5372
Mid-Atlantic Regional Office - Denise Cooke, Coord. for Air, Water and Endangered Species (215) 597-9978
Assateague Island National Seashore - Carl Zimmerman, Natural Resources Manager (410) 641-1441
Colonial National Historic Park - Chuck Rafkind, Natural Resources Manager (804) 898-8677
Fredericksburg National Battlefield Park - Susan Alberts (703) 373-0834
George Washington Birthplace - Natural Resources Manager (804) 224-2142
George Washington Memorial Parkway - Natural Resources Manager (804) 224-2142
Great Falls National Park - Dwight Madison, Park Manager (703) 285-2965
Manassas National Battlefield Park - Natural Resources Manager (703) 754-7107
Petersburg National Battlefield Park - Ray Ahlbrandt, Natural Resources Manager (804) 732-3531
Prince William Forest Park - Natural Resources Manager (703) 221-7181
Richmond National Battlefield Park - Mike Bristow, Natural Resources Manager (804) 226-1981

City of Virginia Beach, Department of Parks and Recreation
mission/assistance: The Virginia Beach Department of Parks and Recreation's mission, or QUEST (Quality,
Unified vision, Effective leadership, Service, Team work) is to enhance the quality of life in Virginia Beach by
responding to recreational needs of the community through parkland, facilities, and program services.
contact: Ray A. Emerson, Parks Administrator - J. Barry Frankenfield, Parks and Rec. Planner (804) 563-1100

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Planning and Recreation Resources
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources. The Division
of Planning and Recreation Resources provides planning, recreation and public access technical assistance. The
Scenic Byways and Virginia Scenic Rivers Programs are within this division, which maintains a public access
database for coastal Virginia. Visual resource assessments and evaluations are provided.
contact: John Davy - Derral Jones - Janit Potter (804) 786-2556

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of State Parks
mission: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources. The Division of State
Parks works to protect, conserve and manage significant state natural, recreational, historical and cultural
resources and to provide recreational and educational services, opportunities and facilities consistent with needs
of Virginians and their guests.
contact: Resource Manager - Theresa Duffey (804) 786-9025
Belle Isle State Park - Timothy G. Shrader, 111 (804) 462-5030
Caledon State Park and Natural Area - John R. Zawatsky (703) 663-3861
Chippokes Plantation State Park - Danette C. McAdoo (804) 294-3625
False Cape State Park - Bryan K. Anderson (804) 426-7128
George Washington Grist Mill Historical State Park - David F. Stapleton (703) 780-3383
Kiptopeke State Park - Scott A. Flickinger (804) 331-2267
Lake Anna State Park - Douglas H. Graham (703) 854-5503
Leesylvania State Park - James A. Klakowicz (703) 670-0372
Mason Neck State Park - W. Jeff Foster (703) 550-0960
Pocohontas State Park - Edward Swope (804) 7964255
Seashore State Park and Natural Area - Fred Hazelwood, IV or Philip A. Koury (804) 481-2131

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Westmoreland State Park - Willie E. Bowen (804) 493-8821
York River State Park - Stephanie Turner (804) 556-3036

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Volunteerism and Constituent Services
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources.
contact: Karen F. Marcus, Director (804) 786-2294

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
mission/assistance: Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries' mission is to provide opportunity for all
to enjoy wildlife, inland fish, boating and related outdoor recreation.
contact: Wildlife - Bob Duncan, Chief (804) 367-6878
Glen Askins, Regional Manager (804) 253-4180
Rick Busch, Regional Manager (804) 899-4169
Fisheries - Gary Martel, Chief (804) 367-1004
Mitchell Norman, Regional Manager (804) 424-6719
John Kauffman, Regional Manager (804) 296-4731
Lands and engineering - Jack Raybourne, Chief (804) 367-8864

Virginia Recreation and Park Society (VRPS)
mission/assistance: The Virginia Recreation and Park Society is a private, non-profit professional organization,
founded in 1953 and incorporated in 1956. It's purpose is to unite all professionals, students and interested lay
persons engaged in the field of recreation, parks and other leisure services in the Commonwealth of Virginia,
into one body and to work together to promote and improve the profession in all its diversity. VRPS is
affiliated with the National Recreation Park Association.
contact: staff (804) 730-9447

Westanoreland County Parks and Recreation
contact: Alice Hutnyan (804) 493-8163

Williamsburg Department of Parks and Recreation
contact: Paul Hudson (804) 220-6170

York County Division of Recreational Services
contact: Cheryl Sonderman (804) 890-3500

REGULATION

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

North Carolina Department of Agriculture / Plant Conservation Program
mission/assistance: North Carolina Department of Agriculture, Plant Conservation Program's mission is
protection of endangered and threatened native plants. This is the legal listing agency for endangered and
threatened plant species for North Carolina. It contributes to research, protection and habitat restoration for E
& T species. Projects may cross state lines and range anywhere in the southeast, as long as the species is native
to North Carolina. Contact person's research interests include presettlement vegetation of southeastern Virginia,
presettlement fire ecology of Virginia.
contact: Cecil Frost (919) 733-3610

United States Army Corps of Engineers
mission: The USACOE administers the Clean Water Act, provides wetlands permitting, and provides safe
navigation along the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway and protection of Natural Resources under the Corps
ownership.
contact : Col. Andrew M. Perkins, Jr. Andrew Reid (804) 441-7641

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) - Virginia Field Office
mission/assistance: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's mission is to conserve, protect, and enhance the nation's
fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. USFWS can provide
Natural Areas managers with information on all Federal environmental laws and programs; natural resource
management and restoration techniques; endangered and rare species; environmental contaminants; and sources
of environmental education.
contact: Karen L. Mayne (804) 693-6694

Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
mission: Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services mission is protection, conservation and
recovery of listed threatened and endangered plant and insect species, as well as the listing of these species as
threatened or endangered.
contact: John R. Tate (804) 786-3515

United States Department of Coast Guard
contact: Gary L. Ott (804) 898-2320

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
mission/assistance: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's mission is to protect the environment of
Virginia in order to promote the health and well-being of the Commonwealth's citizens.
contact: Elizabeth Moran, Permit Manager (804) 762-4430
Jack Schubert, Air Toxics, Enforcement & Compliance (804) 762-4303
Bob McEachem, Water Div. Enforcement and Compliance (804) 762-4278

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
mission/assistance: Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries mission is to manage Virginia's wildlife
and inland fish to maintain optimum populations of all species to serve the needs of the Commonwealth.
contact: Wildlife - Bob Duncan, Chief (804) 367-6878
Glen Askins, Regional Manager (804) 253-4180
Rick Busch, Regional Manager (804) 899-4169
Fisheries - Gary Martel, Chief (804) 367-1004
Mitchell Norman, Regional Manager (804) 424-6719

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

John Kauffman, Regional Manager (804) 296-4731
Nongame Program - Karen Terwilliger, Nongame Biologist (804) 367-1000
Mike Pinder, Aquatic Nongame Biologist (703) 951-6992
Fish and Wildlife Info. System - Rebecca K. Wajda (804) 367-8351
Environmental Services - Raymond T. Fernald (804) 367-8364

Virginia Marine Resources Commission
mission/assistance: This state agency holds regulatory jurisdiction over all commercial and sports fishing,
marine fish, marine shellfish, and marine organisms in the tidal waters of Virginia. Holds permit jurisdiction
on all projects involving use of state owned submerged lands and authority over use or development in vegetated
and non-vegetated tidal wetlands and coastal primary sand dunes.
contact: Robert Grabb (804) 247-2250

RESEARCH AND EDUCATION

Christopher Newport University, Biology Department
contact: chair, Biology Department (804) 594-7126

Center for Archaeological Research
The College of William and Mary
mission/assistance: This center provides consultation and research services in the areas of archaeology and
architectural history, and more generally, historic preservation and cultural resource management.
contact: Dennis B. Blanton, Donald W. Linebaugh (804) 221-2580

The Center for Conservation Biology
The College of William and Mary
mission/assistance: The Center for Conservation Biology is a non-profit organization dedicated to finding
practical solutions to current environmental problems. To this end, its focus has been to integrate three
complimentary disciplines: Research- staff conducts basic and applied research focused on the functioning of
mid-Atlantic ecosystems. Staff at the center strives to select projects that not only fill information needs but
also serve as catalysts to increase public awareness and stimulate related work within the region. Education-
staff educates students and the public about the conservation and significance of our natural resources. The
center also distributes significant research findings and information to assist resource planners and promote
informed, responsible decision making. Management- staff initiates and develops comprehensive strategies for
the conservation and preservation of mid-Atlantic resources and ecosystems. In addition, center staff assists
local, state, and federal agencies in identifying the condition and distribution of sensitive coastal resources.
contact: Dr. Bryan Watts, Director (804) 221-2247

Herbarium, Department of Biology
The College of William and Mary
mission/assistance: The mission of the herbarium at the College of William and Mary is to build and maintain a
collection of accurately identified plant specimens representing the vascular flora of the coastal plain of Virginia,
in particular, and to a more limited extent, the flora of the southeastern United States. These specimens serve
as a historical record of the flora as an aid in identifying "unknowns", and as data for research in plant
systematics.
contact: Donna M. E. Ware, Curator (804) 221-2213
0 32

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

School of Marine Science - Virginia Institute of Marine Science
The College of William and Mary
mission/assistance: The School of Marine Science is one of four professional graduate schools of the College of
William and Mary. The objective of the educational program is to provide a fertile and stimulating learning
environment for students preparing for careers in marine science.
contact: Berch Smithson (804) 642-7382

Eastern Shore Community College
contact: chair, Department of Biology (804) 787-5900

histitute for Chesapeake Bay Studies
contact: staff (804) 633-7249

J. Sergeant Reynolds Community College
contact: chair, Department of Biology (804) 371-3000

John Tyler Community College
contact: chair, Department of Biology (804) 796-4031

Mariner's Museum
contact: staff (804) 595-0369

Maymont Foundation
contact: staff (804) 358-7166

Norfolk Botanical Garden
contact: staff (804) 441-5803

Old Dominion University - Department of Biological Sciences
mission/assistance: Undergraduate and graduate education. Ecological research in a range of ecosystems and
specialties (cave biota, marine benthic, wetland plants, mammals, reptiles, fishes, marine microbes, etc.)
contact: Department of Biological Sciences (804) 683-3595

State Arboretum of Virginia
contact: staff (703) 837-1758

Tidewater Community College
Geophysical Sciences and Biology Departments
mission/assistance: Coastal Studies Program-primary course offerings in basic Oceanography, Geology, and
Biology. Additional courses in Coastal Ecology, Wetlands Management, Water Quality, Principles of
Underwater Research, Laboratory Techniques in Environmental Sciences. The program emphasizes a strong
field and laboratory component. The acquisition of a research vessel in spring 1995 will allow greater
flexibility and a host of new programs. Community - The department is also interested in any cooperative
educational and research programs with agencies throughout the region.
contact: Michael Lyle (804) 427-7189
Fred Stemple, Jr. (804) 427-7191

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Thomas Nelson Community College
contact: chair, Department of Biology (804) 825-2898

University of Richmond
contact: Valerie Kish, Department of Biology (804) 289-8229

Virginia Commonwealth University - Department of Biology
contact: Leonard A. Smock, Chai (804) 828-1562

Virginia Living Museum
mission/assistance: Education. The museum has exhibits and programs featuring native Virginia animals and
plants.
contact: Pete Money (804) 595-1900

Virginia Marine Science Museum
mission/assistance: Education. The museum houses a large aquarium dedicated to Chesapeake Bay species, as
well as numerous other exhibits.
contact: staff (804) 425-3474

Virginia Museum of Natural History
mission/assistance: l)VMNH provides a permanent repository where specimens of Virginia's natural heritage
can be housed, cared for, cataloged, and studied; 2) VMNH can provide assistance in locating voucher
specimens and associated information pertinent to natural diversity of the area; 3) curatorial staff may provide
identification of vertebrates and invertebrates, conduct inventory programs or instruct others in how to conduct
inventory programs, provide relevant literature sources for reference, designate known natural elements in terms
of rarity or biological significance; 4) VMNH maintains a listing of collections held in institutions around the
state.
contact: Paisley S. Cato, Curator of Collections (703) 666-8600

Virginia State University
contact: chair, Department of Biology (804) 524-5961

Virginia Union University
contact: chair, Department of Biology (804) 257-5611

Virginia Wesleyan College
mission/assistance: Virginia Wesleyan College is a four year liberal arts college.
contact: Verne M. Keefer, Dept. of Biology (804) 455-3247

SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

nonpoint source pollution control, site design issues, and comprehensive planning for water quality protection.
contact: Scott Kudlas, Chief of Planning Assistance (804) 243-7229
C. Scott Crafton, Chief of Regulatory Assistance (804) 371-7503
(Or use the 800 number: (800) 243-7229)

Colonial Soil and Water Conservation District (Area III)
mission/assistance: The Colonial Soil and Water Conservation District strives to coordinate and respond to the
natural resource interests among agricultural, residential, business and civic groups and local governments in the
Counties of Charles City, James City, New Kent and York, and the City of Williamsburg. The conservation
district cooperates and communicates with local governments, landholders, schools, civic groups and businesses
so that 0 practical protection is provided for water quality and supply, soil productivity and forest management.
Our activities are governed by the Federal, State and Local laws and regulations that are required to be used by
our participating jurisdictions.
contact: David W. Meador (804) 564-1870 or S64-0537

Eastern Shore Soil and Water Conservation District (Area VI)
mission/assistance: The Eastern Shore Soil and Water Conservation District's mission is to provide and develop
leadership in natural resources conservation on the Eastern Shore of Virginia through education, the promotion
of cooperative programs, and meeting the needs of a diverse clientele. We would be of assistance to a resource
manager of a natural area by providing technical and educational assistance.
contact: P. W. Davis, Chairman - Peggy Hutchinson, Administrative Secretary (804) 787-1251

Hanover-Caroline Soil and Water Conservation District (Area U
contact: Stephanie Lassiter Martin (804) 798-8107 or (804) 633-5044

Henricopolis Soil and Water Conservation District (Area HI)
mission/assistance: The Henricopolis Soil and Water Conservation District's mission is to provide leadership
in the conservation of natural resources in Henrico County, through the promotion of good stewardship and
education programs.
contact: Terry S. Ruhlen, District Program Manager (804) 672-5176

James River Soil and Water Conservation District (Area M
mission/assistance: The James River Soil and Water Conservation District's mission is to encourage and
promote proper management of the soil and water resources within Chesterfield and Prince George Counties.
contact: Tom Sordelett (804) 748-2235

Northern Virginia Soil and Water Conservation District (Area H)
mission/assistance: NVSWCD promotes the wise use and conservation of soil and water resources and sound
environmental policies for Fairfax County. NVSWCD offers technical expertise, educational programs, and
community outreach in the soil and water conservation arena.
contact: Paige Shiller (703) 324-1460

Peanut Soil and Water Conservation District (Area VI)
contact: Troy Griffin (804) 357-3191 or (804) 539-9270

Prince William Soil and Water Conservation District (Area H)
contact: James Bonar (703) 361-1710

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Three Rivers Soil and Water Conservation District (Area
mission/assistance: The Three Rivers Soil and Water Conservation District achieves soil and water conservation
through positive, informed leadership, education and technical assistance for all people.
contact: L. Gorland McBride, District Manager (804) 443-2327

Tidewater Soil and Water Conservation District (Area IM
mission/assistance: The Tidewater Soil and Water Conservation District is an entity of state government. It is
a local grassroots organization that seeks to provide practical solutions to soil, water, and other natural resource
related problems. To do this, the Tidewater Soil and Water Cons. District provides technical assistance,
coordination with other agencies, and promotes environmental awareness throughout the district.
contact: Burton Bland (804) 693-3562

Tri-County/City Soil and Water Conservation District (Area IM
contact: L. Gordon Linkous (703) 373-8592

Virginia Dare Soil and Water Conservation District (Area VI)
mission/assistance: The Virginia Dare Soil and Water Conservation District's mission is to provide and
promote leadership in the conservation of natural resources through stewardship and education programs with
particular emphasis on water quality. The district offers experience in conservation planning with local farmers,
Best Management Practices (agricultural, urban and shoreline) and educational programs.
contact: Julie Bright (804) 427-4775

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Suffolk, Regional Office, Division of Soil and
Water Conservation Area VI
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources. The Division
of Soil and Water Conservation, Area VI provides education and assistance to landowners and farmers on
nutrient management, soil loss, and pesticide management. The regional office also works with farmers on
plans for Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act agricultural requirements.
contact: Billie Jean Elmer (804) 925-2468

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Tappahannock, Regional Office - Division of Soil
and Water Conservation Area M
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources. The Division
of Soil and Water Conservation, Area III provides education and assistance to landowners and farmers on
nutrient management, soil loss, and pesticide mana ement. The regional office also works with farmers on
plans for Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act agricultural requirements.
contact: Wayne Davis (804) 443-6752

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Warrenton, Regional Office - Division of Soil and
Water Conservation Area H
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources. The Division
of Soil and Water Conservation, Area H provides education and assistance to landowners and farmers on
nutrient management, soil loss, and pesticide management. The regional office also works with farmers on
plans for Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act agricultural requirements.
contact: Debbie Cross (703) 347-6420

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Virginia Departinent of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Shoreline
Programs Section, Shoreline Erosion Advisory Service
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources. Assistance can
be provided as education and technical assistance to private properties, government agencies or the general
public on shoreline erosion, shoreline erosion control and coastal zone management.
contact: Lee Hill (804) 642-7121

WETLANDS PLANNING, REGULATION, AND CONSERVATION

Accomack County Wetlands Board
contact: David A. Fluhart (804) 787-5721

American Water Works Association
contact: staff (804) 867-9171

Cape Charles Wetlands Board
contact: Richard Barton (804) 331-3259

Charles City County Wetlands Board
contact: John T. Bragg, Jr. (804) 829-9217

Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department
mission/assistance: The mission of the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department is to protect the
Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries from pollution caused by the use and development of land. To achieve this,
the Department will serve the citizens of the Commonwealth by working in partnership with local goverriments
to implement programs that protect and improve water quality, while supporting a healthy economy and other
public policy objectives. We provide technical assistance in the areas of regulatory interpretation, nonpoint
source pollution control, site design issues, and comprehensive planning for water quality protection.
contact: Scott Kudlas, Chief of Planning Assistance (804) 243-7229
C. Scott Crafton, Chief of Regulatory Assistance (804) 371-7503
(Or use the 800 number: (800) 243-7229)

Chesapeake Wetlands Board
contact: John T. King, HI (804) 547-6248

City of Colonial Heights
contact: Vicky Minetree (804) 520-9275 0,
37

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Essex County Wetlands Board
contact: James F. Moore (804) 443-4951

Fairfax County Wetlands Board
contact: Connie C. Crawford (703) 324-1210

Fredericksburg Wetlands Board
contact: Jervis Hairston (703) 372-1179

Gloucester County Wetlands Board
contact: David L. Lathrop (804) 693-4040

Hampton Wetlands Board
contact: Patricia Tbomas (804) 727-6142

Hopewell Wetlands Board
contact: Milton Marvin (804) 541-2267

Isle of Wight County Wetlands Board
contact: Sandy Whitley (804) 357-3091

James City County Wetlands Board
contact: Jackie White (804) 253-6622

Fing George Wetlands Board
contact: Kathy Musick (703) 775-7111

Ving William County Wetlands Board
contact: Dale R. Burton (804) 769-4927

Lancaster County Wetlands Board
contact: William H. Pennell, Jr. (804) 462-5220

Mathews County Wetlands Board
contact: Sherry Ashe (804) 725-5025

Middlesex County Wetlands Board
contact: Michele Mixner DeWitt (804) 758-0500

New Kent County Wetlands Board
contact: R. J. Emerson, Jr. (804) 966-9861

Newport News Wetlands Board
contact: Robert G. Bates (804) 247-8437

Norfolk Wetlands Board
contact: Edwin L. Rosenberg (804) 441-2152

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Northampton County Wetlands Board
contact: Milissa S. Burgard (804) 678-5872

Northumberland County Wetlands Board
contact: Kenneth D. Eades (804) 580-8910

Poquoson Wetlands Board
contact: Deborah Vest (804) 868-7151, ext. 25

Portsmouth Wetlands Board
contact: Mike Kelly (804) 393-8836

Prince William County Wetlands Board
contact: Mark Colwell (703) 792-6984

Richmond County Wetlands Board
contact: Bill Duncanson (804) 333-3415

Stafford County Wetlands Board
mission/assistance: The Stafford County Wetlands Board's mission is to preserve and protect wetlands from
despoliation and destruction, and to accomodate necessary economic development in a manner consistent with
wetlands preservation.
contact: Philip Thompson (703) 659-8668

Suffolk Wetlands Board
contact: Scott Mills (804) 934-3111, ext. 258

Surry County Wetlands Board
contact: Angela Hopkins (804) 294-5210

United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Water Resources Division
mission/assistance: The USGS Water Resources Division's overall mission is to provide hydrologic information
and understanding needed for the optimum use and management of the Nation's water resources, for the overall
benefit of the people of the United States. The agency is unique among Federal government organizations
because it has neither regulatory or developmental authority - it's sole product is information. Assistance in all
aspects of hydrology is possible. The USGS can provide matching funds to state agencies and other non-
Federal organizations as part of cooperative programs.
contact: Michael Focazio (804) 771-2427

Virginia Beach Wetlands Board
contact: Planning Dept. (804) 427-4131

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation' (DCR), Division of Soil and Water Conservation,
Chesapeake Bay Programs, Bureau of Rivers and Shores
mission/assistance: DCR's mission is to conserve Virginia's natural and recreational resources.
contact: L.S. Button (804) 371-7536

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
mission: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's mission is to protect the environment of Virginia in
order to promote the health and well-being of the Commonwealth's citizens. The Department of Environmental
Quality can provide assistance to natural resource managers in the areas of environmental permits, pollution
response and remediation, and ambient monitoring data.
contact: Roger K. Everton, Tidewater Regional Office (804) 552-1840
Chet Bigelow, Richmond (804) 527-5061

Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC)
mission/assistance: Virginia Marine Resources Commission holds regulatory jurisdiction over all commercial
and sports fishing, marine fish, marine shellfish, and marine organisms in the tidal waters of Virginia. VMRC
holds permit jurisdiction on all projects involving use of state owned submerged lands and authority over use or
development in vegetated and non-vegetated tidal wetlands and coastal primary sand dunes.
contact: Robert W. Grabb, Chief, Habitat Management Division (804) 247-2250

West Point Wetlands Board
contact: Watson M. Allen (804) 843-3330

Westmoreland County Wetlands Board
contact: Paul Jones (804) 493-0121

Williamsburg Wetlands Board
contact: Jack Hobbs (804) 220-6130

York County Wetlands Board
contact: Cindy Taylor (804) 890-3538

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

RESOURCE EXPERTS

It would be impossible to list ALL resource experts in Virginia, consequently, it should be noted that
this list represents only a small portion of local resource experts. Additional resource experts may be
found within local governments, state and federal agencies, universities, museums, private organizations
and within the general public, as private citizens.)

Ecology:
Gregory M. Capelli, College of William and Mary (804) 221-2224
*aquatic ecology

William H. Moorhead, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*field ecologist, community ecology,

James E. Perry, III, Virginia Institute of Marine Science (804) 642-7388
*wetland ecology

Thomas J. Rawinski, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*community ecology and classification

Gene M. Silberhorn, Virginia Institute of Marine Science (804) 642-7382
*wetland ecology

Leonard A. Smock, Virginia Commonwealth University (804) 828-1562
*stream ecology, wetlands, water quality

Stuart A. Ware, College of William and Mary (804) 221-2233
fforest ecology

Fauna:
John B. Bazuin, Jr. (703) 308-2285
*birds of Virginia's coastal resource management area

Ruth A. Beck, College of William and Mary (804) 221-2217
*colonial nesting birds, endangered bird species

Charles R. Blem, Virginia Commonwealth University (804) 928-1562
*environmental physiology of vertebrates, acid rain

Dana S. Bradshaw, The Center for Conservation Biology (804) 221-1649
*field biologist, spec. in bird cons. through management
and public education, with an emphasis on passerines

Bonnie L. Brown, Virginia Commonwealth University (804) 828-1562
*fish genetics, aquaculture

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Mitchell C. Byrd, The Center for Conservation Biology (804) 221-2236
*conservationist, specializing in bird cons. through management
and policy, with an emphasis on birds of prey

Edward E. Clark, Jr., Virginia Wildlife Center (703) 234-WILD
*injured, debilitated wildlife

Gary Costanzo, Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VADGIF) (804) 253-4180
*waterfowl biologist

John B. Gallegos, Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge (804) 721-2412
*specializing in migratory bird conservation through management

Greg C. Garman, Virginia Commonwealth University (804) 828-1562
*fish ecology and fisheries management, anadromous fish

Christopher S. Hobson, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*field zoologist, small mammals, reptiles, amphibian,
specializing in bat ecology and distribution

Richard Hoffman, Virginia Museum of Natural History (703) 666-8600
*invertebrate taxonomy, research, education

John R. Holsinger, Old Dominion University (804) 683-3595
*cave biologist, taxon specific expertise
(freshwater isopods and amphipods)

David N. Karowe, Virginia Commonwealth University (804) 828-1562
*plant-animal interactions, insect ecology

C. Barry Knisley, Randolph Macon College (804) 752-7254
*tiger beetle, insect conservation and ecology

Roger L. Mann, Virginia Institute of Marine Science (804) 642-7360
*intertidal oyster reefs, oyster ecology

Karen L. Mayne, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Virginia Field Office (804) 693-6694
*endangered species

Joseph F. McCauley, Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge (804) 721-2412
*specializing in migratory bird conservation through
refuge management and policy

Joseph C. Mitchell, University of Richmond (804) 289-8234
*amphibians, reptiles, population and community ecology

Nancy D. Moncrief, Virginia Museum of Natural History (703) 666-8600
*mammalian genetics, taxonomy, ecology

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Richard J. Neves, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (703) 231-5573
*freshwater mollusks and stream ecology

John F. Pagels, Virginia Commonwealth University (804) 828-1562
*ecology of small mammals, endangered species

Mike Pinder, Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (703) 951-6992
*aquatic non-game biologist

Steven M. Roble, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*field zoologist, specializing in rare vertebrates and
invertebrates of Virginia

Robert K. Rose, Old Dominion University (804) 683-3595
*mammals, mammalian ecology, endangered mammals

Alan H. Savitzky, Old Dominion University (804) 683-3595
*taxon specific expertise (amphibians, reptiles), research,
education, canebrake rattlesnake research

Barbara A. Savitzky, Christopher Newport University (804) 594-7782
*amphibians, reptiles - research, education

Donald J. Schwab, Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (804) 934-1577
*wildlife biologist

Dirk J. Stevenson, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*field zoologist, specializing in ecology of reptiles
and amphibians

C. Richard Terman, College of William and Mary (804) 221-2250
*mammalian population ecology, population ecology

Karen A. Terwilliger, Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (804) 367-1000
*nongame biologist

Bryan D. Watts, Center for Conservation Biology (804) 221-2247
*community ecologist, specializing in bird/habitat
relationships and landscape ecology, with an emphasis
on avian systems relative to dynamic landscapes

Flora:
Allen Belden, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*field botanist, rare species identification

Gary P. Fleming, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*field botanist, field ecologist, rare species identification

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Cecil Frost, North Carolina Department of Agriculture (804) 733-3610
*field botanist, presettlement vegetation of southeastern
Virginia, presettlement fire ecology of Virginia

J. Christopher Ludwig, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*field botanist, rare species identification

Lytton J. Musselman, Old Dominion University (804) 683-3595
*botanist, Curator of Herbarium - ODU

John R. Tate, Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (804) 786-3515
*endangered plant and insect regulations, listing

Donna M. E. Ware, College of William and Mary (804) 221-2213
*plant systematics, herbarium curator

Thomas F. Wieboldt, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University (703) 231-5746
*herbarium curator

Donald R. Young, Virginia Commonwealth University (804) 828-1562
*physiological ecology of barrier island plants

Nancy Van Alstine, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*field botanist, rare species identification

Stewardship / Land Management / other
Bryan K. Anderson, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 426-7128
*recreation and land management

Lesa S. Berlinghoff, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*environmental/project review, rare species tracking

Dennis B. Blanton, Archaeology Section, Virginia Academy of Science (804) 221-2584
*archaeology in Virginia

Willie E. Bowen, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 493-8821
*recreation and land management

David Brownlie, USFWS, Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge (804) 986-3706
*prescribed fire, bum management

Caren A. Caljouw, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*natural areas stewardship, planning/implementation of
ecological management, monitoring, and research on sites
supporting rare species and communities

Steve W. Capel, VADGIF, Habitat Coordinator (804) 598-3706
*farm wildlife and wetland. habitat management

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Chief, Len Gunther, U.S. Coast Guard (804) 898-2320
*navigation, prescribed fire smoke management

John Carroll, Virginia Dept. of Forestry, Waverly (804) 834-2300
*forest stewardship management plans, stewardship incentive
program (SIP), planning/implementation of forest management

Allen R. Carter, USFWS, Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge (804) 986-3706
*fire management coordinator, bum management

Kennedy H. Clark, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*natural areas stewardship, planning/implementation of
ecological management, monitoring, and research on sites
supporting rare species and communities

Melissa Donoff, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*natural area protection, resource protection

Theresa A. Duffey, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-5053
*resource management

Judy Dunscomb, The Nature Conservancy, Virginia Field Office (804) 295-6106
*natural areas stewardship, planning/implementation of
ecological management, monitoring, and research on sites
supporting rare species and communities

Sandra Erdle, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*conservation planning, natural areas stewardship

Harold Evans, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*environmental review, rare species tracking

Scott A. Flickinger, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 331-2267
*recreation and land management

W. Jeff Foster, Department of Conservation and Recreation (703) 550-0960
*recreation and land management

Douglas H. Graham, Department of Conservation and Recreation (703) 854-5503
*recreation and land management

John R. Heerwald, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-4388
*program manager, environmental education

Scott Hardaway, Virginia Institute of Marine Science (804) 642-7277
*shoreline management

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Fred Hazelwood, IV, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 481-2131
*recreation and land management

Lee Hill, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 642-7121
*shoreline erosion, management

James A. Klakowicz, Department of Conservation and Recreation (703) 670-0372
*recreation and land management

Scott W. Kudlas, Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Dept. (804) 225-3441
*Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act

Linda Lundquist, The Nature Conservancy, Virginia Field Office (804) 295-6106
*natural area protection, resource protection

Karen L. Mayne, USFWS, Virginia Field Office (804) 693-6694
*endangered species regulations

Danette C. McAdoo, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 294-3625
*recreation and land management

Laura B. McKay, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (804) 7624323
*Coastal Projects Coordinator

Patricia Moore, Virginia Dept. of Game and Inland Fisheries (804) 598-3706
*farm wildlife habitat management

Gary L. Ott, U.S. Dept. of Coast Guard (804) 898-2320
*petroleum, toxic spills

William Petree, Northwest River Park, City of Chesapeake (804) 421-7151
*recreation, recreational/resource management

Ann Regn, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (804) 762-4442
*environmental education

William Saunders, Virginia Dept. of Forestry, Tappahannock (804) 443-2211
*forest stewardship management plans, stewardship incentive
program (SIP), planning/implementation of forest management

David Sausville, VADGIF, Forest Stewardship Program (804) 737-4791
*wildlife habitat and population management on private lands

Timothy G. Shrader, III, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 462-5030
*recreation and land management

Larry Smith, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*natural area protection, resource protection 46

Natural Area Source Book: contacts, resources

Thomas L. Smith, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-7951
*natural heritage resource and natural area conservation

David F. Stapleton, Department of Conservation and Recreation (703) 780-3383
*recreation and land management

Jim Staff, Virginia Dept. of Forestry, Charlottesville (804) 977-6555
fforest stewardship management plans, stewardship incentive
program (SIP), planning/implementation of forest management

Edward Swope, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 796-4255
*recreation and land management

Barry Truitt, The Nature Conservancy, Virginia Coast Reserve (804) 442-3049
*natural areas stewardship, planning/implementation of
ecological management, monitoring, and research on sites
supporting rare species and communities

Stephanie Turner, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 556-3036
*recreation and land management

Holly C. Walker, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-8765
*naturalist, environmental education

R. Gary Waugh, Jr., Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 786-5045
*public communications, environmental education

Gary William on, Department of Conservation and Recreation (804) 331-2267
*chief ranger, naturalist

John R. Zawatsky, Department of Conservation and Recreation (703) 663-3861
*recreation and land management

0 Natural Area Source Book:

IV. Guide to Resource Management Planning for Natural Areas

0 1

0
48

4/1/94
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION
STATE LANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN GUIDE OUTLINE

I. Introduction
A. Purpose of the site
B. Policy
IL Site description
A. Location
B. Demographic features and surrounding land-use
C. Boundaries
D. Facilities
i. Roads
ii. Parldng
iii. Trails
iv. Buildings
v. Utilities
vi. Control Limitations
vii. Recreational facilities
viii. Fencing and barriers
III. Resources
A. Physical and Abiotic Features
i- Topography
ii. Geology
iii. Soils
iv. Climate
v. Hydrologic features
B. Terrestrial and Aquatic Communities
C. Natural Heritage Resources
i. Physical description, ecological requirements, and population dynamics
ii. Range of habitats occupied within site
iii. Size and condition of the occurrence
iv. Past and current threats to ecological condition
D. Cultural resources
i. Archaeological
ii. Historic landscapes and structures
E. Recreation resources
i. Range of recreation opportunities
a. Access
b. Non-recreational uses
c. On-site management
d. Social interaction
e. Acceptability of visitor impacts
f. Acceptable regimentation
ii. Aesthetic values of the site 49

IV. Management plan development
A. Land Classification
i. Primary classification
a. State Park
b. State Natural Area Preserve
c. State Cultural Resource Area
d. State Reserve
e. State Trail/Greenway
f. Special Interest Site
ii. Zone classification
a. Non-sensitive
b. Sensitive
c. Preservation
1. Natural
2. Cultural
3. Special
B. Management direction, standards, and guidelines
C. Management unit development and prescriptions
i. Management unit development
a. Visitor services/concentrated use
b. Support/administrative
c. Historical/cultural use
d. Dispersed recreation
e. Viewshed
f. Natural area preserve
g. Zoological/botanical
h. Geological
i. Wildlife
j. Timber
k. Agricultural
1. Scenic River
m. Control limitations and special use
ii. Management prescriptions
D. Action plans

Natural Area Source Book: State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation

State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide

1. INTRODUCTION

In order to facilitate wise resource management planning, the Department of Conservation and Recreation has
established a Land Classification Task Force. The Task Force has developed a land classification system and
applied the classifications and use zones to all departmental lands, as stated in DCR Policy #122-1. The DCR
Director approved the Task Force classification recommendations in early 1991. The following resource
management plan guide, developed by the Land Classification Task Force, is submitted for adoption by the
Director according to the terms of DCR Policy #122-2.

The Resource Management Plan Guide is arranged in steps that begin with an extensive inventory and data
collection process designed to provide the information on which management scenarios are compared and tested
for applicability and impact. Following classification, the site's limitations and opportunities are fully
investigated and characterized into zones of suitability and finally into management units where prescriptions
will govern appropriate mana ement implementation through action plans. Figure I illustrates the steps, process
and considerations of the classification system and the development of Resource Management Plans. The guide
is broad in context and applicable to the varied purposes for which the state owns and manages land. However,
for certain sites or parcels within sites which were acquired for specific purposes or have special use limitations,
resource-specific mana ement zone and unit planning may need to be applied as in the management of
endangered species or other significant resources.

For the guide to work best, an inter-disciplinary Departmental planning team should be formed to collect data,
develop alternatives and analyze the range of potential scenarios under which the property can be managed
within compliance of law or regulation. This practice invites a varied perspective and results in the formulation
of the most appropriate plan for each property. It is imperative that the Division with lead management
responsibility be represented on the planning team, especially when decisions are being made about near term
management. This will assure that resource management decisions are within the capabilities and
responsibilities of the mana ing Division. Management implementation should utilize appropriate Departmental
expertise and capabilities as well.

The Resource Management Plan Guide that follows is a general, annotated format to aid land managers in
developing management plans. It is designed to comprehensively tailor the agency's needs to the land's inherent
capability to meet that need, while protecting the natural, cultural, or historic resources and values of the site.

A. Purpose of the Site
Describe the purpose for which the site is being (was) acquired. Usually sites are established for significant
biological, physical, cultural, or recreational features. The use of a designation system to identify primary
/secondary purposes will help simplify the description process. General categories for consideration are:

1. Natural Resource - primary purpose is conservation and interpretation of unique natural features,
including the protection and management of significant biological resources, fisheries, and wildlife.

2. Historic/Cultural Resource - primary purpose is conservation and interpretation of significant cultural
resources including historic and prehistoric sites.

Natural Area Source Book: State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide

3. Recreation Values - primary purpose is to provide a full range of recreational opportunities.

4. Agricultural/Forest Resource - primary purpose is for the production of food and fiber.

5. Special Use - primary purpose is a specific use such as a golf course, environmental education, zoo,
museum, prison, etc.

The Department of Conservation and Recreation has developed a specific land classification system for all
Departmental lands that refines the five general categories above into units that coincide with the legal mandate
of the Department of Conservation and Recreation and that in general can be applied to all Commonwealth
lands. This system consists of six primary land classifications with use zones and subzones (see Land
Classification report). Each DCR property has been classified according to its primary purpose for
establishment and historic management. Further, each classified property is zoned according to compatible uses
and the significant resources therein. The classifications approved by the DCR Director are as follows:

I. State Park
11. State Natural Area Preserve
III. State Cultural Resource Area
IV. State Reserve
V. State Trail/Greenway
VI. Special Interest Site

The primary emphasis of management should be consistent with the land classification system. Section Five of
this planning outline provides the classification hierarchy, including zones and subzones, as well as a wide range
of management prescriptions. Each DCR property will be evaluated using the management guidelines,
standards, and prescriptions defined in Sections IV.B and IV.C of this planning outline in order to develop a
comprehensive resource management plan for the property.

B. Policy
Appropriate policies, guidelines and authorities affecting the property should be identified and summarized. The
Department of Conservation and Recreation will develop and continually revise the standard management
policies and guidelines which will provide detailed guidance regarding activities such as prescribed burning, use
of herbicides, gypsy moth control, wildlife harvest, etc. When pertinent, these policies and procedures should
be addressed in the plan.

H. SITE DESCREMON

A. Location
Maps and supporting text should include the following information for each site so as to: 1) identify the site in
relation to nearby population centers, 2) identify access routes to the site, and 3) identify governmental
boundaries and relationships with relevant agencies or organizations.

B. Dernographic Features and Surrounding Land-Use
1. Demographics - Assess the social and economic trends in the region paying particular attention to
population growth and recreational trends in the area. Projections of future user needs and interests
should be determined.

Natural Area Source Book: State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide

2. Surrounding Land-use - Describe surrounding land-use and recent trends, mapping different land-use
types. Projections of future trends can be obtained from the locality. Comprehensive land-use plans
have been developed for many cities and counties throughout the Commonwealth and are valuable
sources of information.

The demographic information can be abbreviated for non-recreation sites, however, land-use trends should be
discussed in detail for all sites.

C. Boundaries
The exact location of the site's boundaries needs to be determined. An inventory should be done containing:
information on the bearings and distances, comer descriptions, line maintenance (whether blazed, painted or
cleared), source (deed vs. surveyed) and a line/road category. A boundary map should show the corners
numbered along the perimeter of the boundary and correspond to the comers in the inventory. Potential or
existing encroachments should be noted.

D. Facilities
An inventory of all man-made features within the site boundaries should be made and each facility accurately
mapped. Include any man-made features outside the site which might significantly affect the area. The
inventory should include at least the following:

1. Roads - width and length
2. Parking - type and capacity
3. Trails - type and length
4. Buildings - size and function
5. Utilities - water, sewer, solid waste disposal, power, communication
6. Control limitations - rights of way of various kinds, less than fee simple ownership
7. Recreation and facilities - identify all recreational facilities within the site, such as number of
campsites, etc.
8. Fencing and barriers - describe and map existing fencing and additional fencing needed. Evaluate
existing and potential motorized use and the need to provide barriers to vehicular use of certain areas.

I][[. RESOURCES

A. Physical and Abiotic Features
This subsection should address the following topics:

1. Topography - describe the relief and aspect of the property. Identify major topographic features
such as sinkholes, valley walls, etc. Give the range of elevational changes at the site.
2. Geology - describe the underlying bedrock of the site, formations that lie immediately under the soil
material, and any outcrops. Give the geologic age of these deposits. Include geologic maps in an
appendix.
3. Soils - describe the different soil types on the property giving depth, slope, permeability, drainage,
acidity or alkalinity, fertility and erodibility. Include soil maps in an appendix.
4. Climatic conditions - describe the climate of the area. Mention averages and extremes of
temperature and precipitation, seasonal periods of precipitation, fire danger season, prevailing winds,
and first and last frost.

Natural Area Source Book: State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide

5. Hydrologic features - name the major rivers, streams and tributaries that drain the area. Name,
locate on a map, and describe the water features and drainage patterns within the site. Describe active
processes that may change the character of the area such as sedimentation, eroding gullies, stream bank
erosion, etc.

B. Terrestrial and Aquatic Conununities
Name, locate and describe terrestrial and aquatic communities within the site. Describe the diversity of floral
and faunal species within the area. Include species inventories in the appendices and recommend specific
inventories if not available. Those communities which are natural heritage resources should be briefly identified
here and described in more detail in the following section of the plan.

C. Natural Heritage Resources
List and locate all natural heritage resources on a U.S.G.S. topographic map or other suitable base map.
Include general information about the rare species and/or communities and about the specific occurrences. For
each natural heritage resource, develop the following:

1. Physical description, ecological requirements, and population dynamics.
2. Describe the range of habitats occupied within the state.
3. Size and condition of the occurrence.
4. Past and on-going threats that bear on the ecological condition.

D. Cultural Resources
1. Archaeological - identify and survey sites (may not want to show location on public maps).
2. Historical landscapes and structures - identify and describe in detail all existing items located within
the site.

E. Recreational Resources
1) The range of recreational opportunities should be evaluated using the recreational opportunity spectrum
process which includes defu-ting the six opportunity factors.
a. Access - all access routes and types are evaluated: roads, trails, cross countrylby cars, orvs, horse,
foot.
b. Non-recreational uses - grazing, mining, timbering, heritage sites.
c. On-site management - extent of modification (are there isolated instances of man's modification of
the environment or is it well distributed).
- apparentness of modification (blended with native materials or clearly of off-site origin).
- complexity of modification (log bridge or complicated engineered structure).
- facilities (none, some limited basic facilities, or are full service campgrounds, pools, and boating
facilities offered).
d. Social interaction (none-low-moderate-full) Vary by setting as well as types of acceptable use (i.e. canoe
vs. motor boat).
e. Acceptability of visitor impacts. (Trampling of vegetation, noise, behavior, etc.) It must be determined in
advance what level of impact is appropriate for the type of opportunity being supplied.
f. Acceptable regimentation (nature, level and extent of control over recreational use, regs, rules, site
design, laws, etc.).

Limitations of size may make provision of many recreation opportunities impractical, but for larger sites, this
process will clarify how best to zone areas so that different recreational experiences can be offered. This will
also help prevent incompatible uses from degrading recreational resources.

Natural Area Source Book: State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide

2) Aesthetic values of the site should be evaluated. Viewsheds should be classified using a visual quality rating
system. Scenic values of the site should be carefully mapped to ensure that proposed management activities
will not degrade them. Several tools for mapping visual resources are available and the best approach to use
for each site can be determined based on the intended use of the site.

IV. MANAGEMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT

A. Land Classification
1. Primary Classification
The site should be classified according to the format described in the Departmental Land Classification
System. The Definitions used in the classification are as follows:

1. STATE PARK - Property with sufficient acreage which provides developed recreation opportunities
and captures the quality of an area's landscape and maintains it. Sites as a whole are to be of statewide
or regional significance and provide protection to a natural resource base.

II. STATE NATURAL AREA PRESERVE - Land or water of variable acreage that may offer low
intensity public use. The primary purpose of the, property is to support rare plant and/or animal species
and/or unique natural communities, and it is, therefore, dedicated to ensure their preservation.

111. STATE CULTURAL RESOURCE AREA - Site of variable size managed to demonstrate period of
agriculture, historic or formal gardens, and visually or culturally significant buildings, landscape,
museums, and significant archaeological sites.

IV. STATE RESERVE - Areas which offer limited opportunity for developed recreation and are
managed for multiple use (e.g. timber, open space, and/or agriculture) compatible with the natural
environment.

V. STATE TRAIL/GREENWAY - Linear area consisting of Department owned or managed
components of the state trails system, scenic river system, By-way System, or other linear corridors.

VI. SPECIAL INTEREST SITE - Area offering limited or specialized public use due to space or
configuration. May be used to meet special recreation needs such as water access, trail heads, or
scenic views. Special interest sites allow public use with some facility development.

2. Zone Classification
Under each of the six primary classifications there are three major zones, which may be applied to the
property. The zones, based on resource analysis, will direct the type of use which may occur on land areas
under a major classification.

i. Non-sensitive (1) - Areas not known to be particularly unique but representative of the local environment.
Areas which could be used for preservation or development. Available for public access.

ii. Sensitive (2) - Areas with sensitive environment, but not necessarily unique statewide. There may be
development restrictions which could include: areas highly-susceptible to erosion, steep slopes, wetlands,
floodplains and floodways, water bodies, etc.

Natural Area Source Book: State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide

iii. Preservation Zone (3) - Areas reserved for protection of state significant resources including threatened or
endangered plant and animal species or significant cultural resources.

a. Natural - Actual or proposed Natural Area Preserves dedicated to protecting Natural Heritage
Resources managed for the habitat of threatened or endangered species or natural communities present
on property-

b. Cultural - Areas to protect or preserve State significant Cultural resources.

c. Special - Areas managed for the protection and management of state significant natural resources or
cultural areas - can allow for restricted public access.

B. Management Direction/Standards and Guidelines
Long-term goals and specific objectives for the site are described here, including ecologic and programmatic
goals. Specific objectives may be listed under each goal.

The general direction for the three zones described in Section IV-A.2 sets minimum levels of protection that
must be maintained while achieving the goals and objectives established for the area. These management
requirements apply to specific management practices wherever they occur within that zone. The general
direction provides guidance on how actions, measures or management practices are to be established for each
zone as well as at the site level.

Standards and Guidelines further define acceptable limits within which the general direction is to be
implemented. Standards and Guidelines for each zone should address the following topics for consideration.

Recreation/other public uses
Hunting, fishing, trapping
Agriculture
Timber
Water
Minerals and geology
Soils
Roads, utilities, access
Facilities
Natural Heritage Resources
Wildfire
Insects and disease
Active management of vegetation and wildlife

These considerations may include but are not limited to the above topics. Discuss the existing and needed
information regarding each topic and its relation to the site and zone classification.

C. Management Unit Development and Prescriptions
1. Management Unit Development
Management Units are parcels of land receiving a particular prescription and management treatment.
Management units may consist of portions of the site where an individual management prescription or a group
of compatible management prescriptions are applied. Most management units are compatible with zone
sensitivities but some may be incompatible, and would thus be managed as exceptions. Each unit should be
described and mapped. The description should include a statement on the management intent for the unit,

Natural Area Source Book: State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide
0
existing resource character, man-made facilities, and any identified concerns. Management units can and
should be designed to meet the individual needs of the area for which resource management plans are being
developed. Careful consideration must be given to the establishment of these areas and the resource
capabilities associated with them.

General categories of management units, based on use, follow:

a. Visitor Services/Concentrated Use Management Unit
All areas which serve concentrations of people would be included, such as day use and overnight use areas,
areas used for active land and water activities (not including areas used as hiking trails, for dispersed fishing
or hunting, etc.). This unit replaces subscript "d" of the earlier classification scheme.

b. Support/Administrative Management Unit
This area would consist of facilities specific to the operation and maintenance of the parcel, including
facilities such as a maintenance shop, water treatment plant, residences, etc. This unit replaces subscript
"d" of the earlier classification scheme.

c. Historical and Cultural Use Management Unit
All buildings and grounds which are historic or have historic qualities would be included. Also included
would be: areas managed to demonstrate period agriculture, historic or old formal gardens, and visually or
culturally significant buildings and landscapes.

d. Dispersed Recreation Management Unit
Contains portions of a site where there is dispersed recreation use. Areas may be managed to provide a
variety of dispersed recreation opportunities and experiences, to enhance and interpret the unique natural
resources of the area, to develop and administer trail systems.

e. Viewshed Management Unit
Areas which provide scenic quality, natural viewsheds and remoteness. Management activities are limited
to those uses that do not affect the existing scenic attributes.

f. Natural Area Preserve Management Unit
Consists of areas which have been dedicated as state natural area preserves. Formal classification of these
units can only occur with the approval of the Department Director upon recommendation by the Land
Classification Committee and an ecological assessment by the Division of Natural Heritage.

g. Zoological/Botanical Management Unit
Consists of lands requiring special management because of special biological values. Species or
communities considered exemplary, sensitive, or rare but which do not meet the criteria for natural area
preserve status are included.

h. Geologic Management Unit
Consists of lands protecting fragile fossil or mineral localities and prominent features of the landscape which
have high educational and scientific value.

i. Wildlife Management Unit
Contains portions of the site that are managed to maintain or enhance wildlife habitat. A variety of non-
motorized dispersed recreation activities may occur in this unit.

Natural Area Source Book: State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide

j. Timber Management Unit
Consists of portions of the site that are managed for timber through a variety of timber cutting methods.
Lands within this management unit provide a range of timber products in as efficient and economic a
manner as is consistent with the land classification and overriding objectives for management of the site.

k. Agricultural Management Unit
Consists of portions of the site that are managed for food and fiber. A variety of agricultural practices may
be used as long as they are consistent with the land classification and the over-riding objectives for
management of the site.

1. Scenic River Management Unit
Areas include state or federally designated scenic rivers and protect the largely primitive/pristine
surroundings on the river and within an adequate buffer.

m. Control Limitations and Special Use Management Unit
Any situation or area that occurs within a site where special use permits, management agreements, or
easements have been granted or where control is lacking or limited in some respect would be included; such
as radio communication towers and stations, public water supply easements, non-site utilities, rights-of-way,
inholdings, mining permits, etc. A brief description should be prepared on the special use and extent of any
limitations. This unit replaces subscript "m" of the earier classification scheme.

2. Management Prescriptions
Management prescriptions, following a format of the Standards and Guidelines, should be developed for each
management unit. These prescriptions will reflect the direction set in the Management Direction and
Standards and Guidelines for the zone and will further refine and direct management on a site-specific basis.

In some instances, site-wide prescriptions (e.g. detailed plant survey needs to be conducted) will cross the
boundaries of the management units. The prescriptions should address the identified issues and ensure the unit
is contributing to the overall management direction of the site.

D. Action Plans
Actions are considered a set of related tasks leading toward the achievement of an objective. Action plans
should enumerate tasks identified through the management prescription planning process and should identify
personnel, costs, and schedules for each task.

March 1995

Natural Area Source Book: I

V. Bibliography and Pertinent References

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Bibliography, pertinent references

Listed below are selected references that may assist land managers, scientists, educators and
conservation planners in Virginia's coastal zone. References are grouped under the following
broad headings: ecological management and research; economics/planning/public use; exotic
/non-native species; fauna; fire; flora; hydrology and water quality; inventory and conservation
planning; restoration; soils/substrate.

ECOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH:

Ash, A. N., C. B. McDonald, E. S. Kane and C. A. Pories. 1983. Natural and modified pocosins:
literature synthesis and management options. Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-83/04.

Beule, J. D. 1979. Control and management of cattails in southeastern Wisconsin wetlands.
Wisconsin Dept. Natural Resources Technical Bulletin 112, 80 pp.

Brown, M. T., J. M. Schaefer, and K. Brandt. 1990. Buffer Zones for Water, Wetlands, and
Wildlife in East Central Florida. CFW Publication #89-07, Florida Agricultural Experiment
Stations Journal Series No. T-00061.

Caljouw, C. A. and S. Hobbs. 1991. Management Agreement for the North Landing River Preserve
System. Unpublished Report on file with the Virginia Department of Conservation and
Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA, 13 pp.

Clairain, E. J., Jr., and B. A . Kleiss. 1989. Functions and Values of Bottomland Hardwood Forests
Along the Cache River, Arkansas: Implications for Management. From the Proceedings:
Forested Wetlands of the Southern United States, July 12-14, 1988. Orlando, FL, pp. 27-33.

Clifton, C. 1989. Effects of vegetation and land use on channel morphology. in R. E. Gresswell, et
al., editors. Practical approaches to Riparian Resource Management: An Educational
Workshop. BLM Publication BLM-MT-PT-89-001.4351. pp. 121-129.

Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. Laroe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and
deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Program FWS/OBS-
79/31, 103 pp.

Crosby, M. P. and A. D. Beck. 1995. Management-oriented research in National Estuarine Research
Reserves, with examples of fisheries-focused studies. Natural Areas Journal, 15(l): 12-20.

Diehl, J., and T. S. Barrett. 1988. The Conservation Easement Handbook. The Land Trust Alliance,
Alexandria, VA, 269 pp.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Dillaha, T. A., J. H. Sherrard, D. Lee. 1986. Long term effectiveness and maintenance of vegetative
filter strips. Bulletin 153, Virginia Water Resources Research Center.

Dillaha, T. A., J. H. Sherrard, D. Lee, S. Mostaghim, and V. 0. Shanholtz. 1988. Evaluation of
vegetative filter strips as a best management practice for feedlots. Journal of Water Pollution
Control Federation, 60: 1231-1238.

Elmore, W. and R. L. Beschta. 1987. Riparian areas: perceptions in management. Rangelands, 9(6):
260-265.

Gebhart, K., S. Leonard, G. Staidl, and Don Prichard. 1990. Riparian area management: riparian and
wetland classification. Bureau of Land Management. Service Center. Denver, CO Tech Ref
1737-5, 56 pp.

Godfrey, P. J. 1976. Barrier beaches of the East Coast. Oceanus, 19(5): 27-40.

Gosselink, J. G. 1990. Landscape conservation in a forested wetland watershed: can we manage
cumulative impacts? BioScience, 40(8): 588-600.

James, D. E. and M. J. Hewitt, 111. 1992. To save a river: Building a resource decision support
system for the Blackfoot River Drainage. Geo Info Systems, pp. 37-49. 0
Karr, J. R. 1991. Biological integrity: a long-neglected aspect of water resource management.
Ecological Applications, 1(1): 66-84.

Pearce, J. B. 1995. New York bight: a case study of marine habitat quality, cumulative effects, and
management in the 21st century. Natural Areas Journal, 15(l): 37-42.

Practical Approaches to Riparian Resource Management: an Educational Workshop. BLM Publication
BLM-MT-PT-001-4351, pp. 45-52.

Rawinski, T. J. 1994. Community sampling and habitat description: general instructions. Virginia
Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA,
3 pp.

Schlosser, 1. J. 1990. Environmental variation, life history attributes, and community structure in
stream fishes: implications for environmental management and assessment. Environmental
Management, 14(5): 621-628.

Sedell, J. R., G. H. Reeves, F. R. Hauer, J. A. Stanford and C. P. Hawkins. 1990. Role of refugia
in recovery from disturbances: modern fragmented and disconnected river systems.
Environmental Management, 14(5): 711-724.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Smith, R. H. 1942. Management of salt marshes on the Atlantic Coast of the United States. Trans.
North American Wildlife Conference, 7: 272-277.

Steuter, A. A., et al. 1990. A synthesis approach to research and management planning: the
conceptual development and implementation. Natural Areas Journal, 10(2): 61-68.

The Sustainable Development Action Strategy for Northampton County, Virginia. 1994. Adopted by
the Northampton County Brd of Supervisors June 1994. A document of the VA Department
of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program, pursuant to National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Back Bay, Virginia: A literature synthesis of natural resource
status and trends. Report to the Virginia Field Office, USFWS. 54 pp.

ECONOMICS / PLANNING / PUBLIC USE:

Adams, L. W., and L. E. Dove. 1989. Wildlife Reserves and Corridors in the Urban Environment.
National Institute for Urban Wildlife, Columbia, MD, 91 pp.

Brenneriman, R. L., and S. M. Bates, eds. 1984. Land-Saving Action. Island Press, Covelo, CA, 249
PP.

Department of Conservation and Recreation. (in progress). Virginia Outdoors Plan. Richmond,
Virginia. Projected publication: 1995.

Department of Planning and Budget and the Governor's Science and Advisory Committee. 1982.
Science Engineering and Technology - Resources in Virginia. January 1982.

Dixon, J. A. and P. B. Sherman. 1990. Economics of Protected Areas: A New Look at Benefits and
Costs. Island Press, Washington, D. C., Covelo, CA, 234 pp.

Edwards, V. M. 1994. Developing America's natural areas market. Natural Areas Journal, 14(l):
17-21.

Freemuth, J. C. 1991. Islands Under Seige: National Parks and the Politics of External Threats.
University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, 186 pp.

Harris, L. D. 1984. The Fragmented Forest. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 211 pp.

Hodges, J. and A. Regn (eds). 1994. Environmental Education Resources Directory: A Guide to
Environmental Information and Educational Resources in Virginia. Produced by VA
Department of Environmental Quality and Virginia Institute of Marine Science. VIMS
Publication #42. 88 pp.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Hoose, P. M. 1981. Building an Ark, Tools for the Preservation of Natural Diversity through Land
Protection. Island Press, Covelo, CA, 221 pp.

Hunter, M. L. 1990. Wildlife, Forests, and Forestry. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 370 pp.

Little, C. 1990. Greenways for America. John Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MD.

Milewski, 1. A. 1995. Marine biodiversity: shaping a policy framework. Natural Areas Journal,
15(l): 61-67.

Moler, P. E. and R. Franz. Wildlife Values of Small, Isolated Wetlands in the Southeastern Coastal
Plain. S. E. Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Symposium, GA Dept. of Natural Resources,
Atlanta, GA, pp 234-241.

Naiman, R. J., H. Decamps, and M. Pollock. 1993. The role of riparian corridors in maintaining
regional biodiversity. Ecological Applications, 3(2): 209-212.

Norton, B. G. 1987. Why Preserve Natural Variety? Princeton University Press, 281 pp.

Noss, R. F. 1987. Protecting natural areas in fragmented landscapes. Natural Areas Journal, 7(l): 2-
13.

Noss, R. F. and A. Y. Cooperrider. 1994. Saving Nature's Legacy: Protecting and Restoring
Biodiversity. Island Press. Washington, D.C., 416 pp.

Pickering, H. J. 1995. Conserving the threatened coastal resource against all odds. Natural Areas
Journal, 15(l): 50-60.

Potter, J., C. Caljouw, and M. Heinricht. 1994. North Landing River Watershed Public Access and
Visual Assessment. Dept. of Conservation and Recreation, Richmond, VA, 69 pp.

Shafer, C. L. 1990. Nature Reserves. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., 189 pp.

Soule, M. E. 1987. Viable Populations for Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
UK, 189 pp.

Soule, M. E. and D. Simberloff. 1986. What do genetics and ecology tell us about the design of
nature reserves? Biological Conservation, 35: 19-40.

The Commonwealth Poll. 1994. Public Opinion Regarding Protection of Natural Areas and Habitats.
Conducted by Survey Research Laboratory, Center for Public Service, Virginia
Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. Prepared for the Department of Conservation
and Recreation, Richmond, VA, May 1994, 15 pp.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Thomas, J. P. 1995. Remote sensing and relating coastal development to living marine resources and
their habitats. Natural Areas Journal, 15(l): 21-36.

USDOI/National Park Service. 1990. Economic Impacts of Protection Rivers, Trails and Greenway
Corridors: A Resource Book. NPS, Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance, Western
Region, 600 Harrison #600, San Francisco, CA, 94107 (415) 744-3968

Vora, R. S. 1994. Integrating old-growth forests into managed landscapes: a northern Great Lakes
perspective. Natural Areas Journal, 14(2): 113-123.

Whelan, T. (ed) 1991. Nature Tourism: Managing for the Environment. Island Press, Washington, D.
C., Covelo, CA, 223 pp.

Wright, L. D., and S. P. Hubbell. 1983. Stochastic extinction and reserve size: a focal species
approach. Oikos, 41: 466-476.

EXOTIONON-NATIVE SPECIES:

Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay. 1993. Environmentally Sound Landscape Management for the
Chesapeake Bay.

Boone, J., E. Furbish, and K. Turner. 1987. Control of Phragmites communis: results of burning,
cutting, and covering with plastic in a North Carolina marsh. Cooperative Park Service Unit
Technical Report 41, U.S.D.O.I., NPS, Athens, Georgia, 15 pp.

Cross, D. H. and K. L. Fleming. 1989. Control of Phragmites or common reed. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Leaflet 13.4.12. U.S.D.O.I., Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, 5 pp.

Eckardt, N. 1987. Elaeagnus umbellata - Autumn olive. Element Stewardship Abstract. The Nature
Conservancy, Minneapolis, MN.

Evans, J. E. 1982. Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonic ): A literature review of management
practices. Natural Areas Journal, 4: 4-10.

Field, R. J. and W. A. Mitchell. 1988. Bush honeysuckles (Lonicer spp.). Section 7.5.5. U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers Wildlife Resources Management Manual. Technical Report EL-88-4.

Frazier, B. E., and B. C. Moore. 1993. Some tests of film types for remote sensing of purple
loosestrife, (LZhru Ealicaria) at low densities. Wetlands, 13(3): 145-152.

Hellings, S. E. and J. L. Gallagher. 1992. The effects of salinity and flooding on Phragmites
australis. Journal of Applied Ecology, 29: 41-49.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Hoshovsky, M. 1986. TNC Element Stewardship Abstract: Ailanthus altissima and Ailanthus
glandulos . The Nature Conservancy, San Francisco, CA.

Hu, S. 1979. Ailanthus. Arnoldia, 39(2): 29-50.

Kennay, J., G. Fell and V. Nuzzo. 1990. Garlic Mustard. Vegetation Management Guideline 1(10).
Illinois Nature Preserves Commission.

Luken, J. 0. 1994. Valuing plants in natural areas. Natural Areas Journal 14(4): 295-299.

Marks, M., B. Lapin, J. Randall. 1994. Phragmites australis a. communis): Threats, Management
and Monitoring. Natural Areas Journal, 14(4): 285-294.

McKnight, B. N. 1993. Biological Pollution: the control and impaact of invasive exotic species. 261
pp.

Monsanto Company. 1985. Rodeo aquatic herbicide; complete directions for use in aquatic sites.
Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO.

Nuzzo, V. 1991. Experimental control of garlic mustard in Northern Illinois using fire, herbicide and
cutting. Natural Areas Journal, 11(3): 158-167.

Sather, N. 1988. Lonicera jal2onic : Element stewardship abstract. The Nature Conservancy.
Minneapolis, MN. '

Spongberg, S. 1990. The first Japanese plants for New England. Arnoldia, 50(3): 2-11.

Szafoni, B. 1994. Autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata
). Vegetation Management Guideline, Vol 1 (3).
Illinois Department of Conservation.

FAUNA:

Beck, R. A., J. W. Akers, J. W. Via, and B. Williams. 1990a. Status and distribution of the least
tern in Virginia 1975-1988. Virginia Journal of Science, 41: 404-418.

Beck, R. A., J. W. Akers, J. Via, J. W. Williams, K. Payne, K. Terwilliger, D. Bradshaw, and B.
Watts. 1990b. Colonial waterbird investigations. Virginia Dept. of Game and Inland
Fisheries, VA Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Invest. Annual Rpt: 38-52.

Behrend, D. F., G. F. Mattfeld, W. N. Tierson and F. E. Wiley,111. 1976. Deer density control for
comprehensive forest management. Journal of Forestry, 68: 695-700.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Bradshaw, D. S. 1990. Red-cockaded woodpecker investigations, Virginia Dept. of Game and Inland
Fisheries, VA Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Invest. Annual Rpt: 91-93.

Bradshaw, D. S. (in press) Habitat use by a relict population of red-cockaded woodpeckers in
southeastern Virginia. Proceedings - Red-cockaded woodpecker symposium III.

Brown, W. S. 1993. Biology, status and management of the timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus): a
guide for conservation. SSAR Herpetol. Circ. 22: 1-78.

Buckley, P. A. and F. G. Buckley. 1976. Guidelines for the Protection and Management of
Colonially Nesting Waterbirds. North Atlantic Regional Office, National Park Service,
Boston, MA.

Butler, R. W. 1992. Great Blue Heron, in The Birds of North America, No. 25. (A. Poole, P.
Stettenheim, and F. Gill, Eds.) Philadelphia: The Academy of Natural Sciences;
Washington, D.C.: The American Ornithologists' Union.

Churchfield, S. 1990. The Natural History of Shrews. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 178 pp.

Clark, K. H. 1992. Shoreline habitat selection by bald eagles in a non-breeding eagle concentration
area on the James River, Virginia. M.A. Thesis, College of William and Mary,
Williamsburg, VA, 111 pp.

Cline, K. W. and M. A. Byrd. 1994. Bald Eagle management in Virginia: a comprehensive plan.
Final report to Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Nongame and Endangered
Species Program, 136 pp.

Cross, R. R. 1989. Monitoring, management, and research of the piping plover at Chincoteague
National Wildlife Refuge. Unpublished report on file with U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Chincoteague, VA.

Dueser, R. D., and K. Terwilliger. 1987. Status of the Delmarva fox squirrel (Sciurus RiM cinereus)
in Virginia. Virginia Journal of Science, 38: 380-388.

Dunkle, S. W. 1989. Dragonflies of the Florida Peninsula, Bermuda, and the Bahamas. Scientific
Publishers. Gainesville/Washington, 154 pp.

Dunkle, S. W. 1990. Damselflies of Florida, Bermuda and the Bahamas. Scientific Publishers.
Gainesville/Washington, 148 pp.

Ellingwood, M. R. and J. B. McAninch. 1984. Update on the Institute of Ecosystem Studies deer
damage control project. Trans. Northeast Deer Technical Committee, 20: 6-7.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Grubb, T. G. and R. M. King. 1991. Assessing human disturbance of breeding bald eagles with
classification tree models. J. Wildl. Manage, 55: 500-511.

Halls, L. K. (ed). 1984. White-tailed deer ecology and management. A Wildlife Management Institute
Book. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, PA.

Hammerson, G. A. 1994. Beaver (Castor canadensis): ecosystem alterations, management, and
monitoring. Natural Areas Journal, 14(l): 44-57.

Hammerson, G. A. 1991. Element Stewardship Abstract for Castor canadensis, Beaver. Unpublished
Report. The Nature Conservancy, Eastern Heritage Task Force, Boston, Mass.

Hammerstrom, F. 1986. Harrier, hawk of the marshes. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution
Press.

Hooven, E. F. and H. C. Black. 1976. Effects of some clearcutting practices on small-mammal
populations in western Oregon. Northwest Science, SO: 189-208.

Huntly, N. 1991. Herbivores and the Dynamics of Communities and Ecosystems. Annu. Rev. E col.
Syst., 22: 477-503.

Irwin, R. R. 1972. Further notes on Emphyes dukesi (Hesperiidae). Journal of Research on the
Lepidoptera, 10: 185-188.

Ishmael, W. E. and 0. J. Rongstad. 1984. Economics of an urban deer removal program. Wildl.
Soc. Bull., 12(4): 394-398.

Jaffee, N. B. 1980. Nest site selection and foraging behavior of the bald eagle in Virginia. M.S.
Thesis, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA, 113 pp.

Johnson, R. 1. 1970. The systematics and zoogeography of the Unionidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia) of the
Southern Atlantic Slope Region. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, 140(6):
263-449.

Jones, C. A., S. R. Humphrey, T. M. Padgett, R. K. Rose, and J. F. Pagels. 1991. Geographic
variation and taxonomy of the southeastern shrew (SoM jqn&jrqgrW. Journal of
Mammalogy, 72: 263-272.

Karr, J. R., L. A. Toth, and D. R. Dudley. 1985. Fish communities of midwestern rivers: a history
of degradation. BioScience, 35(2): 90-95.

Knisley, C. B. and J. H. Hill. 1989. Impact of human activity on Cicindela dorsalis and Cicindela
12uritana.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Knisley, C. B. and J. H. Hill. 1990. Studies of two endangered tiger beetles, Cicindela dorsalis
dorsalis and Cicindela puritan , in Maryland, 1989. Final Report to Maryland Natural
Heritage Program, Annapolis, MD.

Knisley, C. B. and J. H. Hill. 1992. Effects of habitat change from ecological succession and human
impact on tiger beetles. Virginia Journal of Science, 43: 133-142.

Kushlan, J. A. 1989. Avian use of fluctuating wetlands. in R. R. Sharitz and J. W. Gibbons, eds.
Freshwater Wetlands and Wildlife. USDOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information,
Oak Ridge, TN. DOE Symposium Series No. 61., pp. 593-604.

McCracken, G. F. 1988. Who's endangered and what can we do? Bats, 6(3): 5-9.

McDonald, J. N. and T. Skwara (editors). 1991. Virginia's Endangered Species: Proceedings of a
Symposium/Coordinated by Karen Terwilliger. The McDonald and Woodward Publishing
Co., Blacksburg, VA, 671 pp.

Meanley, B. 1992. King Rail in The Birds of North America, No. 3 (A. Poole, P. Stettenheim and F.
Gill, eds.). Philadelphia: The Academy of Natural Sciences; Washington, D.C.: The
American Ornithologists Union, 12 pp.

Merritt, R. W., and D. L. Lawson. 1992. The role of leaf litter macro-invertebrates in stream-
floodplain dynamics. Hydrobiologia, 248: 65-77.

Mitchell, J. C. 1994. The Reptiles of Virginia. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, xv +352
PP.

Naiman, R. J., C. A. Johnston, J. C. Kelley. 1988. Alteration of North American streams by
beaver. BioScience, 38(11): 753-762.

Neves, R. J., G. B. Pardue, E. F. Benfield, S. D. Dennis. 1980. An Evaluation of Endangered
Mollusks in Virginia. Report for Virginia Commission of Game and Inland Fisheries, Fish
Division, Project #E-F-1, Richmond, VA.

Neves, R. J. and J. C. Widlak. 1987. Habitat ecology of juvenile freshwater mussels (Bivalvia:
Unionidae). Am. Malacol. Bull., 6: 179-188.

Opler, P. A. and G. 0. Krizek. 1984. Butterflies East of the Great Plains. The Johns Hopkins
University Press. Baltimore and London, 294 pp.

Pague, C. A. and J. C. Mitchell. 1987. The status of amphibians in Virginia. Virginia Journal of
Science, 38(4): 304-318.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Panek, F. M. 1995. Preservation and management of marine and coastal fisheries in the National
Park system: a review of research programs. Natural Areas Journal, 15(l): 7-11.

Parker, M., F. J. Wood, Jr., B. H. Smith and R. G. Elder. 1985. Erosional Downeutting in Lower
Order Riparian Ecosystems: Have Historical Changes Been Caused by Removal of Beaver?
Paper presented at the First North American Riparian Conference, Univ. of Arizona, Tucson,
AZ, April 1985.

Porter, W. F. 1991. White-tailed Deer in Eastern Ecosystems: Implications for Management and
Research in National Parks. U.S.D.O.I. Natural Resources Report NPS/NRSUNY/NRR-
91/05.

Power, M. E. 1990. Effects of fish in river food webs. Science, 250: 811-814.

Savitzky, A. H. 1995. (in preparation) Canebrake Rattlesnake Fact Sheet.

Scott, J. A. 1986. The Butterflies of North America. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, 583
pp-

Shaw, J., G. Heidt, L. McClenaghan, Jr. and S. Sheffield. 1987. Guidelines for the protection of bat
roosts. American Society of Mammalogists.

Strole, T. A. and R. C. Anderson. 1992. White-tailed deer browsing: species preferences and
implications for central Illinois forests. Natural Areas Journal, 12(3): 139-144.

Therres, G. D., M. A. Byrd, and D. S. Bradshaw. 1993. Effects of development on nesting bald
eagles: case studies from Chesapeake Bay. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Nat. Res. Conf., 58:62-69.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990. Chesapeake Bay Region Bald Eagle Recovery Plan: Draft
Recovery Plan, First Revision. Newton Corner, MA.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Dismal Swamp Southeastern Shrew (Sorex longirostris fisheri
Merriam) Recovery Plan, Draft. Hadley, Massachusetts.

Watts, B. D. 1994. Distribution of colonial waterbirds on the Eastern Shore of Virginia:
Implications for beneficial uses of dredge material. Final report to Virginia Department of
Game and Inland Fisheries, Nongame and Endangered Species Program, 92 pp.

Watts, B. D., K. W. Cline and M. A. Byrd. 1994. THE BALD EAGLE in VIRGINIA: a
management guide for landowners. Final product for National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, 9 pp.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Watts, B. D., K. W. Cline, and M. A. Byrd. 1994. THE BALD EAGLE in VIRGINIA: an
information booklet for land planners. Final report to National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, 85 pp.

Watts, B. D. and S. E. Mabey. 1994. Migratory landbirds of the lower Delmarva: habitat selection
and geographic distribution. Final report to National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, 101 pp.

Webster, W. D., J. F. Parnell, and W. C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia, and
Maryland. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Williams, B., R. A. Beck, W. Akers, and J. W. Via. 1990. Longitudinal surveys of the beach nesting
and colonial waterbirds of the lower Chesapeake Bay. VA Journal of Science, 41: 381-388.

FIRIE:

Buccholz, K. and R. A. Zampella. 1987. A 30-year fire history of the New Jersey USA pine
plains. Bulletin of the NJ Academy of Science, 32(2): 61-70.

Busch, D. E. and S. D. Smith. 1993. Effects of fire on water and salinity relations of riparian woody
taxa. Oecologia, 94: 186-194.

Christensen, N. L. 1981. Fire regimes in southeastern ecosystems. in: Mooney, H. A., T. M.
Bonnicksen, N. L. Christensen, J. E. Lotan and W. A. Reiners, (technical coords.)
Proceedings of the conference: fire regimes and ecosystem properties. Dec 1978, Hawaii. US
Forest Service GTR WO-26.

Ewel, K. C. 1993. Fire in cypress swamps in the southeastern United States. Symposium: Fire in
Wetlands: A Management Perspective. Tall Timbers Research Station, FL.

Faulkner, S. P. and A. A. Del La Cruz. 1982. Nutrient mobilization following winter fires in an
irregularly flooded marsh. J. Env. Q., 11: 129-133.

Fischer, W. C. (compiler) 1993. The Fire Effects Information System (data base). Missoula, MT: US
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Intermountain
Fire Sciences Laboratory.

Forthman, C. A. 1973. The effects of prescribed burning on sawgrass, Cladium jamaicens Crantz, in
south Florida. MS Thesis. Univ. Miami, Coral Gables, FL, 83 pp.

Hackney, C. T. and A. A. Del La Cruz. 1981. Effects of fire on brackish marsh communities:
management implications. Wetlands, 1: 75-86.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Hungerford, R. D., K. C. Ryan, and W. H. Frandsen. 1994. Heat transfer modeling in organic soils
and linking soil heating to visual fire severity indicators. (Draft study plan). Intermountain
Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, Montana.

Jones, C. A. 1992. Review of the effects of fire on Peromyscus and Podomys. Biological Sciences,
55(2): 75-84.

Kirby, R. 1988. Fire in North American wetland ecosystems and fire-wildlife relationships: An
annotated bibliography. USFWS Bio. Rep, 88(l).

Klukas, R. W. 1973. Control burn activities in Everglades National Park. Proceedings of Annual Tall
Timbers Fire Ecology Conference, 12: 379-425.

Krefting, L. W. and C. E. Ahlgren. 1974. Small mammals and vegetation changes after fire in a
mixed conifer-hardwood forest. Ecology, 55: 1391-1398.

Motzkin, G. and W. A. Patterson 111. 1991. Cape Cod's Atlantic White Cedar: Managing a Unique,
Natural (?) Community. Park Science, 11 (3): 10-11.

Motzkin, G., W . A. Patterson, III, and N. Drake. 1993. Fire history and vegetation dynamics of a
Chamaecyparis thyoides wetland on Cape Cod, Massachusetts.

Price, M. V. and N. M. Waser. 1984. On the relative abundance of species: postfire changes in a
coastal sage scrub rodent community. Ecology, 65: 1161-1169.

Schmalzer, P. A. and C. R. Hinkle. 1992. Soil dynamics following fire in Juncus and Spartin
marshes. Wetlands, 12: 8-21.

Smith, L. M., and J. A. Kadlec. 1985. Fire and herbivory in a Great Salt Lake marsh. Ecology, 66:
259-265.

Taylor, J. G. 1986. Recreation and fire management: public concerns, attitudes and perceptions.
Leisure-Sciences, 8(2): 167-187.

Tirmenstein, D. A. 1991. !Qhamaecyparis thyoides. IN: Fischer, W. C. (compiler) 1993. The Fire
Effects Information System [data base]. Missoula, Montana: U. S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Intermountain Fire Sciences
Laboratory.

Van Wilgen, B. W. and A. J. Wills. 1988. Fire behavior prediction in savanna vegetation. South
African Journal of Wildlife Resources, 18(2): 41-46.

Wade, D., J. Ewel, and R. Hoffsetter. 1980. Fire in south Florida ecosystems. U. S. Forest Service
GTR SE-17 125 pp.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Wilbur, R. B. and N. L. Christensen. 1983. Effects of fire on nutrient availability in a North
Carolina Coastal Plain pocosin. American Midland Naturalist, 110: 54-61.

FLORA:

Bazely, D. R., R. L. Jeffries. 1986. Changes in composition and standing crop of salt marsh
communities in response to removal of a grazer. J. Ecol., 74: 693-706.

Bruderle, L. P., and S. E. Davison. 1985. Element stewardship abstract-Aeschynomen virginic
Arlington, Virginia: The Nature Conservancy.

Brumbach, W. E., and C. W. FyIer. 1988. Monitoring of Isotria medeoloides in New Hampshire.
Wild Flower Notes [New England Wild Flower Society, Framingham, Massachusetts], 3: 32-
40.

Crum, H. A. and L. E. Anderson. 1981. Mosses of Eastern North America. New York: Columbia
University Press. Two volumes.

Dennis, J. V. 1988. The Great Cypress Swamps. Louisiana State Univ. Press, Baton Rouge and
London, 142 pp.

Ewel, K. C. and H. T. Odum. 1984. Cypress Swamps. University Presses of Florida, Univ. of
Florida Press, Gainesville, FL, 472 pp.

Fernald, M. L. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. Eighth edition. New York: American Book
Company.

Fernald, M. L. 1936. Plants from the outer coastal plain of Virginia. Rhodora, 38: 376-404,
414-452.

Frost, C. C. 1989. History and status of remnant pocosin, canebrake and white cedar wetlands in
Virginia. Unpublished Report on file with the Virginia Department of Conservation and
Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Richmond, VA, 130 pp.

Godfrey, R. K. and J. W. Wooten. 1979. Aquatic and Wetland Plants of Southeastern United States.
Univ. of GA Press, Athens, GA, 712 pp.

Harvill, A. M., Jr., T. R. Bradley, C. E. Stevens, T. F. Wieboldt, D. M. E. Ware, D. W. Ogle, G.
W. Ramsey, and G. P. Fleming. 1992. Atlas of the Virginia Flora, Third Edition. Virginia
Botanical Associates, Burkeville, VA, 144 pp.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Keddy, P. A., 1. C. Wisheu, B. Shipley and C. Gaudet. 1989. Seed banks and vegetation
management for conservation: Toward predictive community ecology. in: M. A. Leek, et al.
eds. Ecology of Soil Seed Banks. Academic Press, pp. 347-363.

Keenan, P. E. 1989. Progress report on the small whorled pogonia. American Orchid Society
Bulletin, 57: 624-626.

Laderman, A. D. 1987. Atlantic White Cedar Wetlands. Westview Special Studies in Natural
Resources and Energy Management. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 400 pp.

Ludwig, J. C. 1995. Natural Heritage Resources of Virginia: Rare Vascular Plant Taxa and Virginia
Plant Watch List. (compiled by J.C. Ludwig) Department of Conservation and Recreation,
Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA, 27 pp.

Ludwig, J. C. 1989. The biological and legal status of Virginia's rare and uncommon vascular plants.
Jeffersonia, 20:1-18.

McKee, K. L., I. A. Mendelssohn, and D. M. Burdick. 1989. Effect of long-term flooding on root
metabolic response in five freshwater marsh plant species. Canadian Journal of Botany, 67:
3446-3452.

Niering, W. A. and R. S. Warren. 1977. Our dynamic tidal marshes: vegetation changes as revealed
by peat analysis. Connecticut Arboretum Bulletin, 12. 22 pp.

Ostlie, W. R. 1990. Element Stewardship Abstract for Carex decomposit , cypress-knee sedge. The
Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 10 pp.

Rawinski, T. J. 1992. A classification of Virginia's indigenous biotic communities: Vegetated
Terrestrial, Palustrine and Estuarine Community Classes. Natural Heritage Technical Rpt.
#92-21. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage,
Richmond, VA, 25 pp.

Roman, C. T., W. A. Niering, and R. S. Warren. 1984. Salt marsh vegetation change in response to
tidal restriction. Environmental Management, 8: 141-150.

Schneider, R. L. and R. R. Sharitz. 1986. Seed bank dynamics in a southeastern riverine swamp
forest. American Journal of Botany, 73: 1022-1030.

Shankman, D., and L. G. Drake. 1990. Channel migration and regeneration of bald cypress in
western Tennessee. Physical Geography, 11(4): 343-352.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Shankman, D. 1993. Channel migration and vegetation patterns in the southeastern coastal plain.
Conservation Biology, 7(l): 176-183.

Sharitz, R. R. and J. W. Gibbons. 1982. The ecology of southeastern shrub bogs (pocosins) and
Carolina bays: a community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/04.

Smith, L. M. and J. A. Kadlec. 1983. Seed banks and their role during drawdown of a North
American marsh. Journal of Applied Ecology, 20(2): 673-684.

Strong, M. T., and P. M. Sheridan. 1991. Juncus caesariensis Coville (Juncaceae) in Virginia peat
bogs. Castanea, 56: 65-69.

Sutter, R. D. 1982. The distribution and reproductive biology of Helonias bullata L. in North
Carolina. North Carolina Dept. of Agriculture, Plant Industry Division, Raleigh, NC.

Sutter, R. D. 1984. The status of Helonias bullata L. (Liliaceae) in the Southern Appalachians.
Castanea, 49(l): 9-16.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1991. Swamp Pink (Helonias jLullata). Recovery Plan. Newton
Corner, Massachusetts.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Small Whorled Pogonia (Isotria medeoloides). Recovery Plan,
First Revision. Newton Corner, Massachusetts.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Sensitive Joint-vetch (Aeschynomene virginica
). Draft
Recovery Plan, First Revision. Newton Corner, Massachusetts.

Virginia Natural Heritage Program, Department of Conservation and Historic Resources. 1988.
Status survey report for Helonias bullata (Swamp Pink) in Virginia. Submitted to the Bureau
of Plant Protection and Pesticide Regulation, Virginia Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer
Services.

E"ROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY:

Allan, J. D. and A. S. Flecker. 1993. Biodiversity conservation in running waters. BioScience,
43(l): 32-43.

Bales, J. D. and S. C. Skrobialowski. 1993. Salt transport in a tidal canal, West Neck Creek,
Virginia. Hydraulic Engineering, Proceedings of the 1993 Conference, (2): 1422-1427.

Beschta, R. L. and W. S. Platts. 1986. Morphological significance of small streams: significance
and function. Water Resources Bulletin, 22(3): 369-379.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Benjamin, S. and R. Sutter. 1993. Experiment 2: Monitoring the water table of three North
Carolina depression bogs. in: Sarracenia ionesii: Monitoring, management and research
1991-1992. The Nature Conservancy, North Carolina Field Office, Chapel Hill, NC, Internal
publication, pp. 92-109.

Carlock, J. 1994. Environmental Program Publications - Environmental Reviews, Hampton Roads
Planning District Commission. April, May, June 1994, Number 12.

Conner, W. H., et al. 1981. Comparison of the vegetation of three Louisiana swamp sites with
different flooding regimes. American Journal of Botany, 68: 320-331.

Conner, W. H. and J. W. Day, Jr. 1981. Water level variability and litterfall productivity of forested
freshwater wetlands in Louisiana. American Midland Naturalist, 128: 237-245.

Copeland, B. J., R. G. Hodson, S. R. Riggs, and J. E. Easley, Jr., 1983. The Ecology of the
Albemarle Sound, North Carolina: an estuarine profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Division of Biological Services, Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-83/01. 68 pp.

Correll, D. L., T. E. Jordan, and D. E. Weller. 1992. Cross media inputs to eastern U.S.
watersheds and their significance to estuarine water quality. Water Science Technology,
26(12): 2675-2683.

Doss, P. K. 1993. The nature of a dynamic water table in a system of non-tidal, freshwater coastal
wetlands. Journal of Hydrology, 141: 107-126,

Gerla, P. J. 1992. The relationships of water-table changes to the capillary fringe, evapotranspiration,
and precipitation in intermittent wetlands. Wetlands, 12(2): 91-98.

Godfrey, P. J. 1976. Comparative ecology of East Coast barrier islands: hydrology, soil,
vegetation. in: Technical Proceedings of the Barrier Island Workshop. Washington, D.C.
The Conservation Foundation.

Golet, F. C. and D. J. Lowry. 1987. Water regimes and tree growth in Rhode Island Atlantic
white cedar swamps. in: Aimlee D. Laderman, ed. Atlantic White Cedar Wetlands.
Westview Press. Boulder, CO, pp. 91-110.

Gosselink, J. G., L. C. Lee and T. A. Muir. 1990. Ecological Processes and Cumulative Impacts,
Illustrated by Bottondand Hardwood Wetland Ecosystems. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI,
708 pp.

Johnson, W. C. 1992. Dams and riparian forests: case study from the upper Missouri River. Rivers,
3(4): 229-242.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Jordan, T. E., D. L. Correll and D. E. Weller. 1993. Nutrient interception by a riparian forest
receiving inputs from adjacent cropland. Journal of Environmental Quality, 22(3): 467-
473.

Kleiss, B. A. 1988. Assessing Water Quality and Hydrology Functions of a Bottomland Hardwood
Forest in Arkansas. Information Exchange Booklet, Vol. D-88-3. Environmental Effects
of Dredging. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Lichtler, W. F., and P. N. Walker. 1979. Hydrology of the Dismal Swamp, Virginia-North Carolina.
pp. 140-168 In P. W. Kirk, Jr. (ed) The Great Dismal Swamp, University Press of
Virginia, Charlottesville, 427 pp.

Liptack, D., J. Turenne, W. Wilcox and K. Healy. 1990. Ground-penetrating radar study of salt-
water intrusion at Tisbury Great Pond, Massachusetts. Unpublished report, 17 pp.

Marshall, H. G. and M. D. Norman (eds). 1990. Proceedings of the Back Bay Ecological
Symposium. Publ. by Dept. of Biological Sciences, Old Dominion Univ., Norfolk, VA.

Nilsson, C., A. Eckblad, M. Gardfiell, and B. Carlberg. 1991. Long-term effects of river
regulation on river margin vegetation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 28(3): 963-987.

O'Dell, J. M. 1988. The North Landing River Basin of Virginia Beach: A Brief Historical Overview.
Department of Conservation and Historic Resources. Richmond, VA, 58 pp.

Odum, W. E., T. J. Smith III, J. K. Hoover, and C. C. McIvor. 1984. The ecology of tidal
freshwater marshes of the United States east coast: a community profile. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-83/17. 177 pp.

Park, R. A., M. S. Trehan, P. W. Mausel, and R. C. Howe. 1989. Coastal Wetlands in the Twenty-
first Century: Profound Alterations due to Rising Sea Level. in: Wetlands; Concerns
and Successes. American Water Resources Association, pp. 71-80.

Phillips, P. J. and R. J. Shedlock. 1993. Hydrology and chemistry of groundwater and seasonal
ponds in the Atlantic Coastal Plain in Delaware, USA. Journal of Hydrology, 141: 157-178.

Rheinhardt, R. D. and C. Hershner. 1992. The relationship of below-ground hydrology to canopy
composition in five tidal freshwater swamps. Wetlands, 12(3): 208-216.

Richardson, Curtis J. 1991. Pocosins: an ecological perspective. Wetlands, Special Issue 11: 335-354.

Richter, B. 1992. Hydrologic Monitoring Manual. Internal publication of The Nature Conservancy.
53 pp.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Schneider, R. 1992. Examination of the Role of Hydrology and Geochemistry in Maintaining Rare
Plant Communities of Coastal Plain Ponds: A Final Report to The Nature Conservancy.
Unpublished manuscript. 51 pp.

Siegel, D. 1. 1988. Evaluating cumulative effects of disturbance on the hydrologic ftinction of bogs,
fens and mires. Environmental Management, 12(5): 621-626.

Sigafoos, R. S. 1961. Vegetation in Relation to Flood Frequency near Washington, D.C. in USGS
Professional Paper 424-C. pp. 248-250.

Sparks, R. E. 1992. Risks of altering the hydrologic regime of large rivers. in J. Cairns, Jr., B. R.
Niederlehner, and D. R. Orvos (eds). Predicting Ecosystem Risk. Advances in Modern
Environmental Toxicology. Princeton Scientific Publishing Company, Inc. Princeton, NJ,
pp. 119-152.

Ursic, S. J. 1991. Hydrologic effects of two methods of harvesting mature southern pine. Water
Resources Bulletin, 27(2): 303-315.

Virginia Institute of Marine Science. 1993. Wetland Guidelines. Prepared by Virginia Institute of
Marine Science and Virginia Marine Resources Commission, 74 pp.

Virginia Water Quality Assessment. 1990. 305(b) Report to EPA and Congress. VWCB Information
Bulletin #579. April.

Virginia Water Quality Assessment. 1992. 305(b) Report to EPA and Congress. VWCB Information
Bulletin #588. April.

Wilson, S. 1993. Virginia Nonpoint Source Pollution Watershed Assessment Report. Virginia
Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation,
Richmond, VA, 157 pp.

Winter, T. C. 1990. A conceptual framework for assessing cumulative impacts on the hydrology
of nontidal wetlands. Environmental Management, 12(5): 605-620.

INVENTORY AND CONSERVATION PLANNING:

Baumgartner, J., ed. 1994. Site Conservation Planning: Issues and Recommendations. Final Report of
the Site Design Working Group, August 1994. The Nature Conservancy. 17 pp.

Biological and Conservation Data System. 1994. (BCD) Department of Conservation and Recreation,
Division of Natural Heritage.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Clampitt, C. A. 1991. Natural Areas Inventory of the Lower Peninsula of Virginia. Natural Heritage
Technical Report #92-1. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of
Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA, 85 pp.

Clampitt, C. A., C. A. Pague, J. C. Ludwig, M. L. Lipford, C. A. Caljouw, and K. A. Buhlmann.
1990. An Inventory of the Natural Communities, and Rare, Threatened and Endangered
Species of Seashore State Park and Natural Area, Virginia Beach, VA. Natural Heritage
Technical Rpt. #90-2. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of
Natural Heritage. Richmond, VA, 97 pp.

Clark, K. H. 1993. Conservation Planning for the Natural Areas of the Lower Peninsula of Virginia.
Natural Heritage Technical Rpt. #93-4. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation,
Division of Natural Heritage. Richmond, VA, 193 pp.

Diamond, J. M. 1975. The island dilemma: lessons of modern biogeographic studies for the design of
natural preserves. Biological Conservation, 7: 129-146.

Erdle, S. Y., M. A. Donoff, L. R. Smith, C. A. Caljouw, and H. C. Bernick, 111. 1994.
Conservation Planning for the Management and Protection of Natural Areas in the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Rpt. #94-12. Virginia Department of
Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Richmond, VA, 125 pp.

Ludwig, J. C., K. A. Buhlmann, and C. A. Pague. 1993. A Natural Heritage Inventory of Mid-
Atlantic Region National Parks in Virginia: Colonial National HIstorical Park. Natural
Heritage Technical Report #93-6. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation,
Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA, 62 pp.

Mabey, S. E., J. M. McCann, L. J. Niles, C. Bartlett, and P. Kerlinger. 1993. The Neotropical
Songbird Coastal Corridor Study - Special Virginia Edition. Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, Richmond, VA, 72 pp.

Rawinski, T. J. and G. P. Fleming. 1993. An inventory and protection plan for southeast Virginia's
critical natural areas, exemplary wetlands, and endangered species habitats. Albemarle-
Pamlico Study. Rpt No. 93-13, Raleigh, NC, 200 pp.

Rawinski, T. J. and J. C. Ludwig. 1992. Critical natural areas, exemplary wetlands, and endangered
species habitats in southeastern Virginia: Results of the 1991 inventory encompassing Prince
George County, Surry County, Isle of Wight County, Chesapeake City, Suffolk City, and
Virginia Beach City. Natural Heritage Technical Report 92-14, Virginia Department of
Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA, 87 pp.

Rawinski, T. G., and S. D. Price. 1994. An action plan for coastal plain wetland conservation toward
a continental conservation strategy. Biological Conservation, 68: 281-284.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. 1991. State Lands Resource Management Plan
Guide. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Richmond, VA, 102 pp.

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritag e. Conservation
Planning for the Management and Protection of Natural Areas in the Albemarle-Pamlico
Estuarine Study Area of Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Rpt. #94-9. Richmond, VA.

Watts, B. D., M. A. Byrd, and G. E. Kratimenos. 1993. Active land planning for long-term bald
eagle management within the lower Chesapeake Bay (Phase 1: Model Construction). Final
Report to the Virginia Environmental Endowment. 36 pp.

RESTORATION:

Apple, L. L. 1985. Riparian Habitat Restoration and Beavers. Paper presented at the Riparian
Ecosystem Management Conference, Univ. of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, April 1985.

Athearn, F. J. 1988. Habitat in the Past: Historical Perspectives of Riparian Zones on the White
River. BLM Cultural Resource Series, No. 23, 44 pp.

Barendregt, A., S.M.E. Stam and M. J. Wassen. 1992. Restoration of fen ecosystems in the Vecht
River plain: cost-benefit analysis of hydrological alternatives. Hydrobiologia, 233: 247-258.

Barrett, N. E. and W. A. Niering. 1993. Tidal marsh restoration: trends in vegetation change using a
geographical information system (GIS). Restoration Ecology, 3-93: 18-28.

Connin, S. 1991. Characteristics of successful riparian restoration projects in the Pacific Northwest.
USEPA 910/9-91-033.

Environmental Concern. 1993. Excerpts on wetland creation and restoration. Various titles and
authors. Wetland Journal, I I pp -

Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. Watershed protection approach: A project focus.
Unpublished draft. In press. 86 pp.

Gammill, S. P. and P. E. Hosier. 1992. Coastal salt marsh development at Southern Topsail Sound,
North Carolina. Estuaries, 15(2): 122-129.

Gecy, J. L. and M. V. Wilson. 1990. Initial establishment of riparian vegetation after disturbance
by debris flows in Oregon. American Midland Naturalist, 123: 282-291.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Hardaway, C. S., G. R. Thomas, B. K. Fowler, C. L. Hill, J. E. Frye, N. A. Ibison. 1985.
Results of the vegetative erosion control project in the Virginia Chesapeake Bay system.
Proceedings, 12th Annual Conference on Wetlands Restoration and Creation, Tampa, FL, 19
PP.

Haynes, R. J., J. A. Allen and E. C. Pendleton. 1988. Re-establishment of Bottomland Hardwood
Forests on Disturbed Sites: An Annotated Bibliography. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Biological Report 88(42). 104 pp.

Hupp, C. R. and A. Simon. 1991. Bank accretion and the development of vegetated depositional
surfaces along modified alluvial channels. Geomorphology, 4: 111-124.

National Research Council. 1992. Chapter 5: Rivers and Streams. Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems.
Chapter 6: Wetlands. Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems. National Academy Press.
Washington, D. C., pp. 165-261 and pp. 262-340.

Swenson, E. A. and C. L. Mullins. 1986. Revegetating Riparian Trees in Southwestern Floodplains.
in: Riparian Ecosystems and their Management: Reconciling Conflicting Uses. April 16-18,
1985. Tucson, AZ.

van der Valk, A. G. and R. L. Pederson. 1989. Seed banks and the management and restoration of
natural vegetation. in: Ecology of Soil Seed Banks. Academic Press, Inc. pp. 329-346.

Williams, C. D. and J. E. Williams. 1992. Bring back the natives: a new strategy for restoring
aquatic biodiversity on public lands. Transactions of the 57th North American Wildlife and
Natural Resources Conference, pp. 416-423.

Zentner, J. 1992. Zentner on Katz (and Zedler and Hiss): The issue of restorability. Restoration and
Management Notes, 10(2): 113-116.

SOILS/SUBSTRATE (SEDIMENTATION, EROSION, ACCRETION):

Anderson, G. L., C. S. Hardaway and J. R. Gunn. 1983. Beach response to spurs and groins.
Proceedings, Coastal Structures 83, ASCE, Arlington, VA.

Brinson, M. A. 1981. Nitrogen cycling and assimilative capacity of nitrogen and phosphorus by
riverine wetland forests. Water Resources Research Institute of the University of North
Carolina #81-167, Chapel Hill, NC.

Carter, V. 1988. The relation of hydrogeology, soils and vegetation on the wetland-to-upland
transition zone of the Great Dismal Swamp of Virginia and North Carolina. Ph.D.
dissertation, George Washington University, Washington, D.C.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Faulkner, S. P. and W. H. Patrick, Jr. 1992. Redox processes and diagnostic wetland soil indicators
in bottomland hardwood forests. Soil Science Society of America, 56: 856-865.

Finkelstein, K. and C. S. Hardaway. 1988. Late Holocene sedimentation and erosion of estuarine
fringing marshes, York River, Virginia. Journal of Coastal Research.

Gammill, S. P. and P. E. Hosier. 1992. Coastal salt marsh development at Southern Topsail Sound,
North Carolina. Estuaries, 15(2): 122-129.

Godfrey, P. J. 1976. Comparative Ecology of East Coast Barrier Islands: Hydrology, Soil,
Vegetation. in: Technical Proceedings of the Barrier Island Workshop. Washington, D.C.,
The Conservation Foundation.

Groeneveld, D. P. and T. E. Griepenhog. 1985. Interdependence of Groundwater, Riparian
Vegetation, and Streambank Stability: A Case Study. Paper presented at the Symposium on
Riparian Ecosystems and Their Management. University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, April
1985.

Hardaway, C. S. 1985. Estuarine shore erosion control: Gapped breakwaters. Proceedings, Coastal
Zone 85, ASCE, Baltimore, MD.

Hardaway, C. S. and G. L. Anderson. 1980. Shoreline Erosion in Virginia. Virginia Sea Grant
Program, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point, VA, 25 pp.

Hardaway, C. S., J. R. Gunn and R. N. Reynolds. 1993. Breakwater design in Chesapeake Bay:
Dealing with the end effects. Proceedings, Coastal Zone 93, ASCE, New Orleans, LA.

Heede, B. H. 1992. Stream Dynamics: An Overview for Land Managers (revised edition: original
1980). Forest Service General Technical Report RM-72. 26 pp.

Huenneke, L. F. and R. R. Sharitz. 1990. Substrate heterogeneity and regeneration of a swamp tree,
Nyssa aguatica. American Journal of Botany, 77(3): 413-419.

Hupp, C. R. and D. E. Bazemore. 1993. Temporal and spatial patterns of wetland sedimentation,
West Tennessee. Journal of Hydrology, 141: 179-196.

Hupp, C. R. and A. Simon. 1991. Bank accretion and the development of vegetated depositional
surfaces along modified alluvial channels. Geomorphology, 4: 111-124.

Kauffinan, J. B. and W. C. Krueger. 1984. Livestock impacts on riparian ecosystems and
streamside management implications: a review. Journal of Range Management, 37(5): 430-
438.

Natural Area Source Book: bibliography, pertinent references

Likens, G. E. and F. H. Bormann. 1974. Linkages between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.
BioScience, 24(8): 447-456.

National Research Council. 1992. Chapter 5: Rivers and Streams. Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems.
National Academy Press. Washington, D. C., pp. 165-261.

Pinay, G., A. Fabre, Ph. Vervier, and F. Gazelle. 1992. Control of C, N, P distribution in soils of
riparian forests. Landscape Ecology, 6(3): 121-132.

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. 1994. Soil Survey of the Cities of Hampton,
Newport News,'Poquoson and Portsmouth. Interim Report to HRPDC.

Warren, R. S. and W. A. Niering. 1993. Vegetation change on a northeast tidal marsh: interaction
of sea-level rise and marsh accretion. Ecology, 74(l): 96-103.

Wright, L. D., C. S. Kim, C. S. Hardaway, S. M. Kimball and M. 0. Green. 1987. Shoreface and
Beach Dynamics of the Coastal Region from Cape Henry to False Cape, Virginia. Technical
Report Prepared for Virginia Department of Conservation and Historic Resources, Richmond,
VA, 116 pp.

1. Appendices

A. List of Natural Heritage Resources found within
Virginia's Coastal Resource Management Area

B. Natural Heritage Fact Sheets
Natural Area Protection
-Natural Area Dedication
-NA Management Agreements
-NA Registry
Natural Area Stewardship
-Ecological management
Natural Areas Management Techniques
-FIre and Natural Areas
Natural Environments
-Conserving Virginia's Natural Environments: Why?
-Bald Cypress-Water Tupelo Swamp
-Pocosins
-Sea-level Fens
-Seasonal ponds
-Turkey Oak Sandhills
Invasive Allen Plant Species of Virginia
-Warning! Invasive Alien Plants
-Asiatic sand sedge
-Autumn olive/Russian olive
-Bush honeysuckles
-Common reed
-Garlic mustard
-Japanese honeysuckle
-Kudzu
-Mile-a-minute
-Porcelain-berry
-Tree-of-heaven

C. Model Resource Management Plan

D. Natural Resource Profiles
Chesapeake Bay
Back Bay
North Landing River
Northwest River

Appendices:

A. List of Natural Heritage Resources found within
Virginia's Coastal Zone

Definition of Abbreviations Used an Natural Heritage Resource Lists
of the
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation

Natural Heritage Ranks

The following ranks are used by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation to set protection priorities for
0
aturat heritage resources. Natural Heritage Resources, or IINHR's," are rare plant and animat species, rare and exemplary
turaL communities, and significant geologic features. The primary criterion for ranking NHR's is the number of
0putations or occurrences, i.e. the number of known distinct localities. Also of great importance is the number of
individuals in existence at each Locality or, if a highly mobile organism (e.g., sea turtles, many birds, and butterflies),
the total number of individuals. other considerations may include the quality of the occurrences, the number of protected
occurrences, and threats. However, the emphasis remains on the number of populations or occurrences such that ranks will
be an index of known biological rarity.

S1 Extremely rare; usually 5 or fewer populations or occurrences in the state; or may be a few remaining individuals;
often especially vulnerable to extirpation.

S2 Very rare; usually between 5 and 20 populations or occurrences; or with many individuals in fewer occurrences; often
susceptible to becoming extirpated.

S3 Rare to uncommon; usually between 20 and 100 populations or occurrences; may have fewer occurrences, but with a Large
number of individuals in some populations; may be susceptible to Large-scale disturbances.

S4 Common; usually >100 populations or occurrences, but may be fewer with many Large populations; may be restricted
to only a portion of the state; usually not susceptible to immediate threats.

S5 Very common; demonstrably secure under present conditions.

SA Accidental in the state.

S#B Breeding status of an organism within the state.

SH Historically known from the state, but not verified for an extended period, usually > 15 years; this rank is used
primarily when inventory has been attempted recently.

S#N Non-breeding status within the state. Usually applied to winter resident species.

SU Status uncertain, often because of Low search effort or cryptic nature of the element.

Sx Apparently extirpated from the state.

z Long distance migrant whose occurrences during migration are too irregular, transitory and/or dispersed to be
reliably identified, mapped and protected.

Global ranks are similar, but refer to a species' rarity throughout its total range. Global ranks are denoted with a IIGII
followed by a character. Note that GA and GN are not used and GX means apparently extinct. A "Oil in a rank indicates that
a taxonomic question concerning that species exists. Ranks for subspecies are denoted with a 'IT". The global and state
ranks combined (e.g. G2/Sl) give an instant grasp of a species, known rarity.

These ranks should not be interpreted as legal designations.

Federal Legal Status

The Division of Natural Heritage uses the standard abbreviations for Federal endangerment developed by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Endangered Species and Habitat Conservation.

LE -Listed Endangered 3A - Former candidate - presumed extinct
LT -Listed Threatened 3B - Former candidate - not a valid species under
PE -Proposed Endangered current taxonomic understanding
PT -Proposed Threatened 3C - Former candidate - common or welt protected
C1 -Candidate, category I XF - no federal legal status
C2 -Candidate, category 2

State Legal Status

The Division of Natural Heritage uses similar abbreviations for State endangerment.

LE - Listed Endangered PE - Proposed Endangered SC - Special Concern
LT - Listed Threatened PT - Proposed Threatened
C - Candidate NS - no state legal status

For information on the Laws pertaining to threatened or endangered species, contact:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for all FEDERALLY listed species
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Plant Protection Bureau for STATE listed plants and insects
Department of Game and Inland Fisheries for aLL other STATE Listed animals

3/95

PAGE 1
23 FEB 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

**AMPHIBIANS
AMBYSTOMA MABEEI MABEE'S SALAMANDER G4 S1 LT
AMBYSTOMA TIGRINUM TIGER SALAMANDER G5 S1 LE
BUFO QUERCICUS OAK TOAD G5 S1 SC
HYLA GRATIOSA BARKING TREEFROG G5 S1 LT
NECTURUS PUNCTATUS DWARF WATERDOG G4 SU
SIREN INTERMEDIA LESSER SIREN G5 S2
SIREN LACERTINA GREATER SIREN G5 S2
**BIRDS
AIMOPHILA AESTIVALIS BACHMAN'S SPARROW G3 S1 C2 LT
AMMODRAMUS CAUDACUTUS SHARP-TAILED SPARROW G5 S2 SC
ANAS STREPERA GADWALL G5 S2
ASIO FLAMMEUS SHORT-EARED OWL G5 S1
CASMERODIUS ALBUS GREAT EGRET G5 S2B,S4 SC
CERTHIA AMERICANA BROWN CREEPER G5 S2S3 SC
CHARADRIUS MELODUS PIPING PLOVER G3 S2 LE LT
CHARADRIUS WILSONIA WILSON'S PLOVER G5 S1 LE
CIRCUS CYANEUS NORTHERN HARRIER G5 SlS2 SC
EGRETTA CAERULEA LITTLE BLUE HERON G5 S2B,S4 SC
EGRETTA THULA SNOWY EGRET G5 S2
EGRETTA TRICOLOR TRICOLORED HERON G5 S2B,S4 SC
EUDOCIMUS ALBUS WHITE ISIS G5 S1
FALCO PEREGRINUS PEREGRINE FALCON G4 S1 E/SA LE
GALLINULA CHLOROPUS COMMON MOORHEN G5 S1 SC
HALIAEETUS LEUCOCEPHALUS BALD EAGLE G4 S2S3 LE LE
IXOBRYCHUS EXILIS LEAST BITTERN G5 S2
LATERALLUS JAMAICENSIS BLACK RAIL G47 SU C2
LIMNOTHLYPIS SWAINSONII SWAINSON'S WARBLER G4 S2 SC
NYCTANASSA VIOLACEA YELLOW-CROWNED NIGHT-HERON G5 S2 SC
NYCTICORAX NYCTICORAX BLACK-CROWNED NIGHT-HERON G5 S2S3
PELECANUS OCCIDENTALIS BROWN PELICAN G4 S1B,S4 LE SC
PHALACROCORAX AURITUS DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANT G5 S1
PLEGADIS FALCINELLUS GLOSSY ISIS G5 S2 SC
PODILYMBUS PODICEPS PIED-BILLED GREBE G5 S2
PORZANA CAROLINA SORA G5 S2
RALLUS ELEGANS KING RAIL G4Q S2
RALLUS LIMICOLA VIRGINIA RAIL G5 S2
RYNCH0OPS NIGER BLACK SKIMMER G5 S2
STERNA ANTILLARUM LEAST TERN G4 S2 SC
STERNA CASPIA CASPIAN TERN G5 S2 SC
STERNA MAXIMA ROYAL TERN G5 S2
STERNA NILOTICA GULL-BILLED TERN G5 S2 LT
STERNA SANDVICENSIS SANDWICH TERN G4 S1 SC

PAGE 2
23 FES 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS
COMMUNITIES

DWARF SCRUB
ESTUARINE BEACH/SHORE
ESTUARINE HERBACEOUS VEGETATION
ESTUARINE SCRUB
EUTROPHIC FOREST
EUTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED SCRUB
EUTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED
FOREST

LOW HERBACEOUS UPLAND VEGETATION
LOW HERBACEOUS WETLAND
MESOTROPHIC FOREST
MESOTROPHIC SATURATED WOODLAND
MESOTROPHIC SCRUB
MESOTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED
FOREST

MESOTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED
FOREST
MID-HEIGHT HERBACEOUS UPLAND
VEGETATION
MID-HEIGHT HERBACEOUS WETLAND
OLIGOTROPHIC FOREST
OLIGOTROPHIC SATURATED FOREST
OLIGOTROPHIC SATURATED HERBACEOUS
VEGETATION
OLIGOTROPHIC SATURATED SCRUB
OLIGOTROPHIC SATURATED WOODLAND
OLIGOTROPHIC SCRUB
OLIGOTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED
FOREST
OLIGOTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED
HERBACEOUS VEGETATION
OLIGOTROPHIC SEASONALLY FLOODED
WOODLAND
OLIGOTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY
FLOODED FOREST
OLIGOTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY
FLOODED HERBACEOUS VEGETATION
OLIGOTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY
FLOODED SCRUB
OLIGOTROPHIC SEMIPERMANENTLY
FLOODED WOODLAND
OLIGOTROPHIC WOODLAND
PERMESOTROPHIC FOREST
PERMESOTROPHIC WOODLAND

PAGE 3

23 FEB 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION 8, RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

SUBMESOTROPHIC FOREST

TALL HERBACEOUS WETLAND

FISH
ENNEACANTHUS CHAETODON BLACKBANDED SUNFISH G5 Sl LE
ERIMYZON SUCETTA LAKE CHUBSUCKER G5 S2
FUNDULUS LINEOLATUS LINED TOPMINNOW G5 si
NOTROPIS BUCCATUS SILVERJAW MINNOW G5 S3
NOTROPIS CHALYBAEUS IRONCOLOR SHINER G5 S3
INVERTEBRATES
AGELENOPSIS KASTONI A FUNNEL-WES SPIDER G4? S2
ALASMIDONTA HETERODON DWARF WEDGEMUSSEL Gl si LE LE
ALASMIDONTA VARICOSA BROOK FLOATER G3 si C2 LE
ANAX LONGIPES COMET DARNER G5 S2
ARGIA BIPUNCTULATA SEEPAGE DANCER G4 S2S3
ARICOMPHUS VILLOSIPES UNICORN CLUBTAIL G5 S3
ATLIDES HALESUS GREAT PURPLE HAIRSTREAK G5 S2S3
BARRONOPSIS JEFFERSI A FUNNEL-WES SPIDER G3 si
BOTHINOTUS JOHNSTONI A MIRID BUG G3 si
BRACHYMESIA GRAVIDA FOUR-SPOTTED PENNANT G5 S3
CALEPHELIS VIRGINIENSIS LITTLE METALMARK G4 S2
CALOPTERYX DIMIDIATA SPARKLING JEWELWING G5 S3
CASTIANEIRA TRILINEATA A TWO-CLAWED HUNTING SPIDER G4? si
CELITHEMIS ORNATA FADED PENNANT G5 si
CHLOROCHROA DISMALIA DISMAL SWAMP GREEN STINK BUG GH SH C2 C
CICINDELA DORSALIS DORSALIS NORTHEASTERN BEACH TIGER BEETLE G4TlT2 S2 LT C
CICINDELA TRIFASCIATA A TIGER BEETLE G5 si
CORDULEGASTER ERRONEA ERRONEOUS BIDDIE G4 S3
CORDULEGASTER FASCIATA SOUTHERN ARROWHEAD SPIKETAIL G30 si
CORDULEGASTER OBLIQUA ARROWHEAD SPIKETAIL G4 S3
CTENOTRACHELUS SHERMANI COMBNECK ASSASSIN BUG G3 si
DRASSYLUS LOUISIANUS A GNAPHOSID SPIDER G4? si
ELLIPTIO LANCEOLATA YELLOW LANCE G3 S2S3 C2 SC
ENALLAGMA DAECKII ATTENUATED BLUET G4 S2
ENALLAGMA DUSIUM BURGUNDY BLUET G5 S2S3
ENALLAGMA DURUM BIG BLUET G5 S3
ENALLAGMA PALLIDUM PALE BLUET G4 si
EPITHECA COSTALIS STRIPE-WINGED BASKETTAIL G4 S2
EPITHECA SPINOSA ROBUST BASKETTAIL G3G4 S2 C
EUPHYES DUKESI SCARCE SWAMP SKIPPER G3 S2 C
GAMMARUS PSEUDOLIMNAEUS NORTHERN SPRING AMPHIPOD G5 S3
GOMPHAESCHNA ANTILOPE TAPER-TAILED DARNER G4 S3
GOMPHAESCHNA FURCILLATA HARLEQUIN DARNER G5 S3
GOMPHUS FRATERNUS MIDLAND CLUBTAIL G5 si
GOMPHUS ROGERSI SABLE CLUBTAIL G4 Sl

PAGE 4
23 FEB 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

GOMPHUS VENTRICOSUS SKILLET CLUBTAIL G3 S1
HELLUOMORPHOIDES NIGRIPENNIS A FLAT-HORNED GROUND BEETLE G4? S1
INCISALIA IRUS FROSTED ELFIN G4 S2
ISCHNURA KELLICOTTI LILYPAD FORKTAIL G5 S2S3
ISCHNURA PROGNATA FURTIVE FORKTAIL G4 S2
LAMPSILIS CARIOSA YELLOW LAMPMUSSEL G4 S2 C2
LAMPSILIS RADIATA EASTERN LAMPMUSSEL G5 S2 SC
LASMIGONA SUBVIRIDIS ATLANTIC HEELSPLITTER G3 S2 C2 SC
LESTES CONGENER SPOTTED SPREADWING G5 S2
LIBELLULA EXUSTA WHITE CORPORAL SKIMMER G4 Sl
LIBELLULA QUADRIMACULATA FOUR-SPOTTED SKIMMER G5 SA
MACROMIA GEORGINA GEORGIA RIVER CRUISER G5 SlS2
NANNOTHEMIS BELLA ELFIN SKIMMER G4 Sl
NASIAESCHNA PENTACANTHA CYRANO DARNER G5 S2
NEHALENNIA INTEGRICOLLIS SOUTHERN SPRITE G5 S2
NEONYMPHA AREOLATA AREOLATA GEORGIA SATYR G5T4 S2S3
PISAURINA DUBIA A NURSERY-WES SPIDER G4 SlS3
PLOIARIA CAROLINA CAROLINA THREAD-LEGGED BUG G47 S1
PLOIARIA HIRTICORNIS AN ASSASSIN BUG G3? S1
PROBLEMA BULENTA RARE SKIPPER G2G3 S1 C2 C
PSEUDAPTINUS TENUICORNIS A GROUND BEETLE G? S1?
PSEUDOPOLYDESMUS PALUDICOLOUS A MILLIPEDE G1 S1 SC
PYCNODERIELLA VIRGINIANA SEASHORE MIRID BUG Gl? S1?
RHYBAXIS SP 1 A PSELAPHID BEETLE Gl? S2S3
SATYRIUM KINGI KING'S HAIRSTREAK G3G4 S2S3
SOMATOCHLORA FILOSA FINE-LINED EMERALD G5 S2
SOMATOCHLORA PROVOCANS STRIPED EMERALD G3G4 S2
SPEYERIA IDALIA REGAL FRITILLARY G3 S1 C2 C
SPHALLOPLANA HOLSINGERI HOLSINGER'S GROUNDWATER PLANARIAN GH SX 3A
SPHALLOPLANA SUBTILIS BIGGER'S GROUNDWATER PLANARIAN GH SX 3A
SPHODROS COYLEI COYLE'S PURSE-WEB SPIDER G3 S2
STYGOBROMUS ARAEUS TIDEWATER INTERSTITIAL AMPHIPOD G2 S2 C2 SC
STYGOBROMUS INDENTATUS TIDEWATER AMPHIPOD G2G3 S2 C2 SC
STYGOBROMUS KENKI ROCK CREEK GROUNDWATER AMPHIPOD Gl S1 SC
STYG0BROMUS PHREATICUS NORTHERN VIRGINIA WELL AMPHIPOD G2 S1S2 SC
STYGOBROMUS PIZZINII PIZZINI AMPHIPOD G2 S1S2 C2 SC
STYLURUS LAURAE LAURA'S CLUBTAIL G3G4 S2
STYLURUS PLAGIATUS RUSSET-TIPPED CLUBTAIL G5 S3
TACHOPTERYX THOREYI GRAY PETALTAIL G4 S2
TOMINOTUS COMMUNIS A BURROWER BUG G5 S1
TRAMEA ONUSTA RED-MANTLED GLIDER G5 S1
UTTERBACKIA IMBECILLIS PAPER PONDSHELL G5 S2
ZANCLOGNATHA GYPSALIS A NOCTUID MOTH GU SU
ZANCL0GNATHA SP 2 A NOCTUID MOTH G4 SU

PAGE 5
23 FEB 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS
MAMMALS

CORYNORHINUS RAFINESQUII EASTERN BIG-EARED SAT G3G4 si cz LE
PEROMYSCUS LEUCOPUS EASTI PUNGO MOUSE G5Tl si C2
SCIURUS NIGER CINEREUS DELMARVA PENINSULA FOX SQUIRREL GST3 sl LE LE
SOREX LONGIROSTRIS FISHERI DISMAL SWAMP SOUTHEASTERN SHREW G51`2 S2 LT LT
SYLVILAGUS FLORIDANUS HITCHENSI SMITHS ISLAND COTTONTAIL G5THO SH C2
SYLVILAGUS PALUSTRIS MARSH RABBIT G5 S2S3 SC
NON-VASCULAR PLANTS
ORTHOTRICHUM KEEVERAE KEEVER'S BRISTLE-MOSS Gi si cz
SPHAGNUM CAROLINIANUM CAROLINA PEATMOSS G3 S2
SPHAGNUM CYCLOPHYLLUM CIRCULAR-LEAVED PEATMOSS G3 SlS2
SPHAGNUM FLEXUOSUM FLEXUOSE PEATMOSS G50 SIS2
SPHAGNUM INUNDATUM INUNDATED PEATMOSS G37 SlS2
SPHAGNUM MACROPHYLLUM VAR LARGE-LEAF PEATMOSS G3G4T3 S2
MACROPHYLLUM
SPHAGNUM MOLLE SOFT PEATMOSS G4 S2
SPHAGNUM PORTORICENSE PUERTO RICO PEATMOSS G5 SlS2
SPHAGNUM STRICTUM STRAIGHT PEATMOSS G5 S2
SPHAGIUM SUITILE DELICATE PEATMOSS G5?Q SlS2
SPHAGNUM TORREYANUM TORREY'S PEATMOSS G3G4 S2
SPHAGNUM TRINITENSE TRINIDAD PEATMOSS G4 S2S3
OTHER
BALD EAGLE ROOST
BIRD NESTING COLONY
CHAMPION TREE
SIGNIFICANT GREAT BLUE HERON COLONY G3G5 S2

REPTILES
CARETTA CARETTA LOGGERHEAD SEA TURTLE G3 SIB,SZ LT LT
CLEMMYS INSCULPTA WOOD TURTLE G4 S2 LT
CROTALUS HORRIDUS ATRICAUDATUS CANEBRAKE RATTLESNAKE G5TUQ si LE
DEIROCHELYS RETICULARIA CHICKEN TURTLE G5 SI LE
OPHISAURUS VENTRALIS EASTERN GLASS LIZARD GS si LT
REGINA RIGIDA GLOSSY CRAYFISH SNAKE G5 si
TANTILLA CORONATA SOUTHEASTERN CROWNED SNAKE G5 S2
VASCULAR PLANTS
AESCHYNOMENE VIRGINICA SENSITIVE JOINT-VETCH G2 S2 LT C
AGALINIS AURICULATA EARLEAF FOXGLOVE G2 SI C2 c
ALETRIS AUREA GOLDEN COLICROOT G5 si
AMARANTHUS PUMILUS SEABEACH PIGWEED G2 SH LT
ANDROPOGON MOHRII MOHR BLUESTEM G47 SH
ARABIS SHORTII SHORT'S ROCKCRESS G5 S2
ARENARIA LANUGINOSA A SANDWORT G5 SH
ARNOGLOSSUM MUEILENBERGII GREAT INDIAN-PLANTAIN G4 S2
ASCLEPIAS LONGIFOLIA LONG-LEAF MILKWEED G4GS si
ASCLEPIAS RUBRA RED MILKWEED G4G5 S2S3

PAGE 6
23 FEB 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

ASIMINA PARVIFLORA DWARF PAW-PAW G5 S2S3
ASTER ERICOIDES WHITE HEATH ASTER G5 S2
ASTER PUNICEUS VAR ELLIOTT II ELLIOTT'S ASTER G5T3T4 Sl
BACOPA CAROLINIANA CAROLINA WATER-HYSSOP G4G5 SH
BACOPA IONNOMINATA TROPICAL WATER-HYSSOP G5 S2 LE
BACOPA ROTUNDIFOLIA ROUND-LEAVED WATER-HYSSOP G5 sl
BOLTONIA CAROLINIANA CAROLINA BOLTONIA G47 S2
BROMUS CILIATUS FRINGED BROME G5 s1
BUCHNERA AMERICANA BLUE-HEARTS G57 s1
CABOMBA CAROLINIANA CAROLINA FANWORT G5 s1
CACALIA SUAVEOLENS SWEET-SCENTED INDIAN-PLANTAIN G3 S2
CALOPOGON PALLIDUS PALE GRASS-PINK G4G5 SH
CALYCANTHUS FLORIDUS VAR FLORIDUS SWEET-SHRUB G5T4 S27
CAREX CAREYANA CAREY'S SEDGE G5 S2
CAREX DECOMPOSITA EPIPHYTIC SEDGE G3G4 S1 3C C
CAREX LACUSTRIS LAKE-BANK SEDGE G5 S1
CAREX LUPULIFORMIS FALSE HOP SEDGE G37 Sl
CAREX RENIFORMIS RENIFORM SEDGE G4? S1
CAREX SILICEA SEA-BEACH SEDGE G5 S1
CAREX STRAMINEA STRAW SEDGE G5 Sl
CAREX STRIATA A SEDGE G4 S2
CAREX VESTITA A SEDGE G5 S2
CARPHEPHORUIS BELLIDIFOLIUS SANDY-WOODS CHAFFHEAD G4 S1
CARPHEPHORUS TOMENTOSUS WOOLY CHAFFHEAD G4 S1
CASSIA FASCICULATA VAR MACROSPERMA KARSH SENNA G5T2 S2 C2
CENCHRUS CAROLINIANUS COAST SANDBUR G5 S2
CHAMAECYPARIS THYOIDES ATLANTIC WHITE CEDAR G4 S2
CHAMAESYCE BOMBENSS SOUTHERN BEACH SPURGE G4G5 S2
CHELONE CUTHBERTII CUTHBERT TURTLEHEAD G3 S2
CHELONE OBLIQUA RED TURTLEHEAD G4 S1
CHRYSOPSIS GOSSYPINA COTTONY GOLDEN-ASTER G5 S1
CICUTA BULBIFERA BULB-SEARING WATER-HEMLOCK G5 SH
CIRSIUM REPANDUM COASTAL-PLAIN THISTLE G5 SH
CIRSIUM VIRGINIANUM VIRGINIA THISTLE G3G4 S2
CLADIUM MARISCUS SSP JAMAICENSE SAWGRASS G5T5 S1
CLEISTES DIVARICATA SPREADING POGONIA G4 S1
CORNUS AMOMUM SSP OBLIQUA SILKY DOGWOOD G5T? S2?
CORMUS SERICEA SSP SERICEA RED-OSIER DOGWOOD G5T5 S1
CRATAEGUS AESTIVALIS KAY HAWTHORN G5 S1
CRATAEGUS CALPODENDRON PEAR HAWTHORN G5 S1
CROTALARIA ROTUNDIFOLIA PROSTRATE RATTLE-BOX G5 SH
CTENIUM AROMATICUM TOOTHACHE GRASS G5 S1
CUSCUTA CEPHALANTHI BUTTON-BUSH DODDER G5 S1?
CUSCUTA CORYLI HAZEL DODDER G5 S2?

PAGE 7
23 FEB 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

CUSCUTA INDECORA PRETTY DODDER G5 S2?
CUSCUTA POLYGONCRUM SMARTWEED DODDER G5 S2?
CYPERUS DENTATUS TOOTHED SEDGE G4 S1 C
CYPERUS DIANDRUS UMBRELLA FLATSEDGE G5 SH
CYPERUS ENGELMANNII ENGELMANN'S UMBRELLA-SEDGE G4Q SH
DESMODIUM OCHROLEUCUM CREAMFLOWER TICK-TREFOIL G2G3 S1
DESMODIUM SESSILIFOLIUM SESSILE-LEAF TICK-TREFOIL G5 S2
DESMODIUM STRICTUM PINELAND TICK-TREFOIL G4 S2
DESMODIUM TENUIFOLIUM SLIM-LEAF TICK-TREFOIL G3G4 S1
DIARRHENA OBOVATA A BEAKGRAIN G? S1
DICLIPTERA BRACHIATA WILD MUDWORT G5 S1
DIDIPLAS DIANDRA WATER-PURSLANE G5 S1
DIGITARIA COGNATA MOUNTAIN HAIRGRASS G5 SlS2
ELATINE MINIMA SMALL WATER-WORT G5 S1
ELEOCHARIS BALDWINII BALDWIN SPIKERUSH G4G5 S1
ELEOCHARIS ELLIPTICA SLENDER SPIKERUSH G5 SlS2
ELEOCHARIS EQUISETOIDES HORSE-TAIL SPIKERUSH G4 S1
ELEOCHAIIS HALOPHILA SALT-MARSH SPIKERUSH G4 S1
ELEOCHARIS MELANOCARPA BLACK-FRUITED SPIKERUSH G4 S2 C
ELEOCHARIS RADICANS ROOTED SPIKERUSH G5 SH
ELEOCHARIS ROBBINSII ROBBINS SPIKERUSH G4G5 S1 C
ELEOCHARIS TENUIS VAR VERRUCOSA SLENDER SPIKERUSH G5T3T5 Sl
ELEOCHARIS TRICOSTATA THREE-ANGLE SPIKERUSH G4 S1
ELEOCHARIS VIVIPARA VIVIPAROUS SPIKERUSH G5 S1
ERIGERON VERNUS WHITE-TOP FLEABANE G5 S2
ERIOCAULON AQUATICUM WHITE BUTTONS G5 S1 C
ERIOCAULON DECANGULARE TEN-ANGLE PIPEWORT G5 S2
ERIOCAULON PARKERI PARKER'S PIPEWORT G3 S2S3 3C
ERYTHRONIUM ALSIDUM WHITE TROUT-LILY G5 S2
EUPATORIUM GLAUCESCENS WEDGE-LEAF THOROUGHWORT G5 SH
EUPATORIUM INCARNATUM PINK THOROUGHWORT G5 S2
FILIPENDULA RUBRA QUEEN-OF-THE-PRAIRIE G4G5 S2
FIMBRISTYLIS CAROLINIANA CAROLINA FIMERISTYLIS G4 S2
FIMBRISTYLIS PERPUSILLA HARPER'S FIMBRISTYLIS G2G3 S1 C2 LE
GALIUM HISPIDULUM COAST BEDSTRAW G5 S2
GENTIANA AUTUMNALIS PINE-BARREN GENTIAN G3 S1 3C
GEUM LACINIATUM ROUGH AVENS G5 S2
GLYCERIA GRANDIS AMERICAN MANNAGRASS G5 S1
GYMNOPOGON BREVIFOLIUS BROAD-LEAVED BEARDGRASS G5 S1
HELENIUM BREVIFOLIUM SHORTLEAF SNEEZEWEED G47 S2
HELIANTHEMUM SICKNELLII PLAINS FROSTWEED G5 S1
HELIANTHEMUM PROPINQUUM LOW FROSTWEED G4 S1
HELIANTHUS OCCIDENTALIS MCDOWELL SUNFLOWER G5 S1
HELIOTROPIUM CURASSAVICUM SEASIDE HELIOTROPE G5 S1

PAGE 8
23 FEB 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

HELONIAS BULLATA SWAMP-PINK G3 S2S3 LT LE
HONCKENYA PEPLOIDES SEA-BEACH SANDWORT G5 S1
HOTTONIA INFLATA FEATHERFOIL G4 S2
HYDROCOTYLE BONARIENSIS COASTAL-PLAIN PENNY-WORT G5 S17
HYPERICUM SETOSUM A ST. JOHN'S-WORT G4G5 S1
HYPOXIS SESSILIS LONG'S YELLOW STAR-GRASS G4 SH
ILEX CORIACEA BAY-GAIL HOLLY G5 Sl
IRESINE RHIZOMATOSA EASTERN BLOODLEAF G5 S1S2
IRIS VERSICOLOR BLUEFLAG G5 S2
ISOPYRUM BITERNATUM FALSE RUE-ANEMONE G5 S1
ISOTRIA MEDEOLOIDES SMALL WHORLED POGONIA G2G3 S2 LT LE
IVA IMBRICATA SEA-COAST MARSH-ELDER G57 SlS2
JUNCUS ABORTIVUS PINE-BARREN RUSH G4G5 S1 C
JUNCUS ARTICULATUS JOINTED RUSH G5 S2
JUNCUS CAESARIENSIS NEW JERSEY RUSH G2 S2 C2 C
JUNCUS ELLIOTTII BOG RUSH G4G5 SlS2
JUNCUS GRISCOMII GRISCOM'S RUSH GHQ SH
JUNCUS MEGACEPHALUS BIG-HEAD RUSH G4G5 S2
JUNCUS PELOCARPUS BROWN-FRUITED RUSH G5 S1
JUNIPERUS COMMUNIS GROUND JUNIPER G5 S1
JUSTICIA OVATA OVATE WATER-WILLOW G5 S2S3
LACHNANTHES CAROLIANA CAROLINA REDROOT G4 SH
LACHNOCAULON ANCEPS BOG-BUTTONS G5 S2
LATHYRUS PALUSTRIS VETCHLING G5 S1
LEERSIA HEXANDRA CLUB-HEAD CUTGRASS G5 SH
LEPTOCHLOA FASCICULARIS VAR LONG-AWNED SPRANGLETOP G5T3 S2S3

MARITIMA
LILAEOPSIS CAROLINENSIS CAROLINA LILAEOPSIS G3 S1S2 3C C
LILIUM CATESBAEI SOUTHERN RED LILY G4 S1
LIPARIS LOESELII LOESEL'S TWAYBLADE G5 S2
LIPOCARPHA ACULATA A LIPOCARPHA G5 S1
LIPOCARPHA MICRANTHA DWARF BULRUSH G4 S1
LITHOSPERMUM CAROLINIENSE GOLDEN PUCCOON G4G5 S1
LOBELIA ELONGATA ELONGATED LOBELIA G4G5 S1
LUDWIGIA ALATA WINGED SEEDBOX G3G4 S1
LUDWIGIA BREVIPES LONG BEACH SEEDBOX G4G5 S2S3
LUDWIGIA PILOSA HAIRY SEEDBOX G5 SH
LUDWIGIA RAVENII RAVEN'S SEEDBOX G27 S1
LUDWIGIA REPENS CREEPING SEEDBOX G5 S1
LUDWIGIA SPHAEROCARPA GLOBE-FRUITED SEEDBOX G5 S2
LUDWIGIA VIRGATA SAVANNA SEEDBOX G5 SH
LYCOPODIELLA CAROLINIANA VAR SLENDER CLUBMOSS G5T4 S1

CAROLINIANA
LYCOPODIELLA INUNDATA NORTHERN BOG CLUBMOSS G5 Sl

PAGE 9
23 FEB 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

LYSIMACHIA RADICANS TRAILING LDOSESTRIFE G4G5 S1
LYTHRUM ALATUM VAR ALATUM WINGED LOOSESTRIFE GST5 S2
LYTHRUM ALATUM VAR LANCEOLATUM LANCE-LEAVED LOOSESTRIFE G5T7 SH
KATELEA DECIPIENS OLD-FIELD MILKVINE G5 S1
MATTEUCCIA STRUTHIOPTERIS OSTRICH FERN G5 Sl
MICRANTHEMUM MICRANTHEMOIDES NUTTALLIS MICRANTHEMUM GH SH C2* C
MICRANTHEMUM UMBROSUM SHADE MUDFLOWER G5 S1
MIMOSA QUADRIVALVIS VAR ANGUSTATA LITTLE-LEAF SENSITIVE-BRIARS G5T5 S2
MITREOLA PETIOLATA LAX HORNPOD G5 S1
MONOTROPSIS ODORATA SWEET PINE SAP G3 S2S3 C2
MYRIOPHYLLUM HUMILE LOW WATER-MILFOIL G5 S1
NUPHAR LUTEA SSP SAGITTIFOLIA YELLOW COWLILY G5T2 S1
NYMPHOIDES AQUATICA BIG FLOATING-HEART G5 S1
OLDENLANDIA BOSCII BOSC'S BLUET G5 S1
ONOSMODIUM VIRGINIANUM VIRGINIA FALSE-GROMWELL G4 S2
OPHIOGLOSSUM PETIOLATUM LONGSTEM ADDER'S-TONGUE G5 SH
ORTHILIA SECUNDA ONE-SIDED WINTERGREEN G5 SH
OSMANTHUS AMERICANUS WILD OLIVE G5 S1
PANICUM HEMITOMON MAIDENCANE G57 S1
PARONYCHIA VIRGINICA VAR VIRGINICA YELLOW NAILWORT G4TlQ S2 C2 C
PASPALUM DISSECTUM WALTER PASPALUM G47 S1
PASPALUM DISTICHUM JOINT PASPALUM G5 Sl
PASPALUM PRAECOX EARLY PASPALUM G4 SH
PENSTEMON HIRSUTUS HAIRY BEARDTONGUE G4 S2
PHACELIA RANUNCULACEA BLUE SCORPION-WEED G4 S1
PHLOX PILOSA DOWNY PHLOX G5 S2
PHYLA NODIFLORA COMMON FROG-FRUIT G5 S1
PHYSALIS WALTERI STICKY GROUND-CHERRY G4 S2
PHYSOSTEGIA LEPTOPHYLLA SLENDER-LEAVED DRAGON-HEAD G4G5 S2 3C
PINUS PALUSTRIS LONG-LEAF PINE G4G5 S1
PLANTAGO CORDATA HEART-LEAVED PLANTAIN G4 SH 3C
PLANTAGO MARITIMA SEASIDE PLANTAIN G5 S1
PLATANTHERA BLEPHARIGLOTTIS WHITE-FRINGE ORCHIS G4G5 S2 C
POLYGONELLA POLYGAMA OCTOBER-FLOWER G4 S1
POLYGONUM GLAUCUM SEA-BEACH KNOTWEED G3 S1
POTAMOGETON OAKESIANUS OAKES PONDWEED G4 S2 C
POTAMOGETON SPIRILLUS SPIRAL PONDWEED G5 S1
PUCCINELLIA FASCICULATA SALT MARSH GOOSEGRASS GU S1
PYCHANTHEMUM MONOTRICHUM A MOUNTAIN-MINT GHQ S17 3A
PYCNANTHEMUM TORREI TORREY MOUNTAIN-MINT G2 S27
PYROLA ELLIPTICA SHINLEAF G5 S2
PYXIDANTIERA BARBULATA FLOWERING PIXIE-MOSS G4 S1 C
QUERCUS HEMISPHAERICA DARLINGTON'S OAK G5 Sl
QUERCUS INCANA BLUE JACK OAK G5 S2

PAGE 10
23 FES 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

QUERCUS LAEVIS TURKEY OAK G5 S2
QUERCUS PRINOIDES DWARF CHINQUAPIN OAK G5 S2
QUERCUS SHUMARDII SHUMARD'S OAK G5 S2
RANUNCULUS AQUATILIS WHITE WATER BUTTERCUP G5 S1
RANUNCULUS HEDERACEUS LONG-STALKED CROWFOOT G5 SH
RANUNCULUS LAXICAULIS MISSISSIPPI BUTTERCUP G57 S1
RANURCULUS LONGIROSTRIS WHITE WATER CROW-FOOT G5 Sl
RHEXIA PETIOLATA CILIATE MEADOWBEAUTY G3G5 Sl
RHODODENDRON ARBORESCENS SMOOTH AZALEA G4G5 S2
RHYNCHOSPORA ALBA WHITE BEAKRUSH G5 S2
RHYNCHOSPORA COLORATA WHITE-TOPPED SEDGE G5 S1
RHYNCHOSPORA DEBILIS SAVANNAH BEAKRUSH G47 S1
RHYNCHOSPORA FASCICULARIS FASCICULATE BEAKRUSH G5 S2
RHYNCHOSPORA NITENS SHORT-BEAKED BALDRUSH G4 S1
RHYNCHOSPORA OLIGANTHA FEW-FLOWERED BEAKRUSH G4 S1
RHYNCHOSPORA PALLIDA PALE BEAKRUSH G3 SH
RHYNCHOSPORA PERPLEXA A BEAKRUSH G5 Sl
RHYNCHOSPORA SCIRPOIDES LONG-BEAKED BALDRUSH G4 S1
RORIPPA SESSILIFLORA STALKLESS YELLOWCRESS G5 S1
ROSA SETIGERA PRAIRIE ROSE G5 S1
RUSUS IDAEUS COMMON RED RASPBERRY G5 S2
RUDBECKIA HELIOPSIDIS SUN-FACING CONEFLOWER G2 S1 C2 C
SABATIA CALYCINA COAST ROSE-GENTIAN G3G5 SlS2
SABATIA CAMPANULATA SLENDER MARSH PINK G5 S2
SABATIA DIFFORMIS TWO-FORMED PINK G4G5 Sl
SABATIA KENNEDYANA PLYMOUTH GENTIAN G3 S1
SACCHARUM BREVIGARBE SHORT-BEARD PLUMEGRASS G3G5 S1
SAGITTARIA ENGELMANNIANA ENGELMANN ARROWHEAD G57 SH
SALIX EXIGUIA SANDBAR WILLOW G5 Sl
SANICULA TRIFOLIATA LARGE-FRUITED SANICLE G4 S2
SARRACENIA FLAVA YELLOW PITCHER-PLANT G4G5 S1 C
SARRACENIA PURPUREA NORTHERN PITCHER-PLANT G5 S2S3
SCIRPUS ACUTUS HARD-STEMMED BULRUSH G5 S1
SCIRPUS ETUBERCULATUS CANBY'S BULRUSH G3G4 SH
SCIRPUS FLUVIATILIS RIVER BULRUSH G5 S1
SCIRPUS SUBTERMINALIS WATER BULRUSH G4G5 SlS2
SCLERIA MINOR SLENDER NUTRUSH G4 S2
SCLEROLEPIS UNIFLORA ONE-FLOWER SCLEROLEPIS G4 S1
SCUTELLARIA INCANA HOARY SKULLCAP G5 Sl
SEYMERIA CASSIOIDES SEYMERIA G5 SlS2
SIDA HERMAPHRODITA VIRGINIA MALLOW G2 S1 3C
SILENE NIVEA SNOWY CAMPION G4? S1
SISYRINCHIUM ALSIDUM WHITE BLUE-EYED-GRASS G5? S2
SOLIDAGO LATISSIMIFOLIA ELLIOTT GOLDENROD G5 S1

PAGE 11
23 FES 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

SOLIDAGO RACEMOSA STICKY GOLDENROD G4? S1
SOLIDAGO RIGIDA STIFF GOLDENROD G5 S2
SOLIDAGO RUPESTRIS ROCK GOLDENROD G47 S1
SOLIDAGO STRICTA WANDLIKE GOLDENROD G5 S2
SOLIDAGO TORTIFOLIA A GOLDENROD G4G5 S1
SOLIDAGO ULIGINOSA BOG GOLDENROD G4G5 S2
SPARGANIUM ANDROCLADUM BRANCHING BURREED G4G5 S1
SPARTINA PECTINATA FRESHWATER CORDGRASS G5 S2
SPHENOPHOLIS FILIFORMIS LONG-LEAF WEDGESCALE G4? S1
SPIRANTHES OCHROLEUCA YELLOW NODDING LADIES'-TRESSES G4 S2
STACHYS PALUSTRIS MARSH HEDGE-NETTLE G5 S1
STEINCHISMA HIANS GAPING PANIC GRASS G5 S1
STEWARTIA MALACHODENDRON SILKY CAMELLIA G4 S2
STEWARTIA OVATA MOUNTAIN CAMELLIA G4 S2
STIPULICIDA SETACEA PINELAND SCALY-PINK G4G5 S1
TALINUM MENGESII MENGE'S FLAME-FLOWER G3 S1 3C
TETRAGONOTHECA HELIANTHOIDES PINELAND SQUAREHEAD G5 S1
THALICTIUM MACROSTYLUM PIEDMONT MEADOW-RUE G47 S1
THELYPTERIS SIMULATA BOG FERN G5 SlS2
TILLANDSIA USNEOIDES SPANISH MOSS G5 S2
TOFIELDIA RACEMOSA COASTAL FALSE-ASPHODEL G5 S1
TRIADENUM FRASERI FRASER'S MARSH ST. JOHN'S-WORT G4G5 S1
TRIDENS STRICTUS LONG-SPIKE FLUFF-GRASS G5 S1
TRIFOLIUM REFLEXUM BUFFALO CLOVER G5 S1
TRILLIUM PUSILLUM VAR VIRGINIANUM VIRGINIA LEAST TRILLIUM G3T2 S2 C2
TRIPHORA TRIANTHOPHORA NODDING POGONIA G4 S1
UTRICULARIA FIBROSA FIBROUS BLADDERWORT G4G5 S1
UTRICULARIA JUNCEA SOUTHERN BLADDERWORT G5 S2
UTRICULARIA MACRORHIZA GREATER BLADDERWORT G5 S2S3
UTRICULARIA OLIVACEA MINUTE BLADDERWORT G4 Sl
UTRICULARIA PURPUREA PURPLE BLADDERWORT G5 S2
VACCINIUM CRASSIFOLIUM CREEPING BLUEBERRY G4G5 S1
VACCINIUM KACROCARPON LARGE CRANBERRY G4 S2
VALERIANA PAUCIFLORA VALERIAN G4G5 S2
VERBENA SCABRA SANDPAPER VERVAIN G5 S2
VIOLA ESCULENTA SALAD VIOLET G4G5 S1
VITIS RUPESTRIS SAND GRAPE G3? S2
WISTERIA FRUTESCENS AMERICAN WISTERIA G5 S2
WOLFFIA COLUMBIANA COLUMBIA WATER-MEAL G5 S1
XYRIS CAROLINIANA CAROLINA YELLOW-EYED-GRASS G4G5 S1
XYRIS FIMBRIATA FRINGED YELLOW-EYED-GRASS G5 SH
XYRIS LAXIFOLIA VAR IRIDIFOLIA A YELLOW-EYED-GRASS G3G5T? Sl
ZENOBIA PULVERULENTA DUSTY ZENOBIA G47 Sl
ZIGADENUS GLABERRIMUS LARGE-FLOWERED CAMASS G5 S1

PAGE 12
23 FES 1995

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & RECREATION
DIVISION OF NATURAL HERITAGE

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF CZM AREA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME GLOBAL STATE FEDERAL STATE
RANK RANK STATUS STATUS

ZORNIA BRACTEATA VIPERINA G57 Si

461 Records Processed

Appendices:

B. Natural Heritage Fact Sheets

Natural Area Protection
4ptural Axea Dedication

What is Natural Area Dedication?

Natural Area Dedication is a conservation option available to landowners of highly significant natural areas.
This is the strongest form of protection available for the preservation of our natural heritage resources.
Dedication is the placement of natural areas, both privately and publicly owned, into Virginia's Natural Area
Preserve System. The landowner retains ownership and transfer rights of the land, while voluntarily restrict-
ing those land uses which are incompatible with the conservation needs of the natural. area.

How are Lands Dedicated? Natural Area Dedica-
tion. To be eligible, a
A landowner who is interested in property must include
dedicating his/her land should one or more of these
contact the Virginia Department of natural values:
Conservation and Recreation
(DCR). If the property qualifies habitat for rare,
N
for Natural Area Dedication, the threatened or en-
landowner and DCR will write a dangered plant or
legal document known as the In- animal species;
9
ument of Dedication. The In-
rument of Dedication will ad- rare or state signifi-
dress factors such as a legal de- cant natural com-
scription of the area to be dedi- munities;
cated, the conservation objectives 1K
for the site, the extent of public rare or state signifi-
use desired, and the land use(s) cant geologic sites.
that will be restricted. The direc-
tor of DCR has the sole authority How are Dedicated
to approve an Instrument of Dedi- Lands Managed? clude repairing trails, posting
cation. Upon approval, the direc- boundaries, studying hydrology,
tor and the landowner will sign the Once natural areas are placed into controlling invasive species, con-
document, which places the land Virginia's Natural Area Preserve ducting prescribed burns and re-
into Virginia's Natural Area Pre- System, DCR stewardship staff storing damaged natural commu-
serve System. The document will assists landowners in developing nities.
be recorded with the deed of the management plans and conducting
property thereby ensuring perma- management activities. Natural What are the Advantages
nent protection of the natural area Area Preserves are managed to re- to Natural Area Dedication?
against conversion to inappropri- tain their natural character and to
ate uses. ensure the long-term survival of Through Natural Area Dedication,
natural heritage resources. A va- a landowner is rewarded with the
at Lands Qualify riety of management techniques is pride of contributing to a statewide
&Natural Area Dedication? used to preserve native ecological conservation effort. Dedication
systems, rare or vanishing flora provides the landowner with the
Only the most significant natural and fauna, and significant geologi-
areas in Virginia are considered for cal features. Management may in- more

Natural Axea Protection

Natural Area Dedication

satisfaction of preserving an area incentives for dedicating their tate and Virginia inheritance taxes,
of beauty for the enjoyment of land. Examples include possible and a charitable deduction for state
future generations. In addition, reduced assessment for real estate and federal income tax purposes.
landowners may receive financial purposes, reduction of federal es-

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
Departinent of Conservation & Recreation uwu
CONSERVMVIKiMS AURALANDRECUATIDWESOURM
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219
This fact sheet was funded in part by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act of 1972 as amended.

Natural Area Protection
&Iatural Area Management Agreements

What is a Natural Area Management Agreement?
A Natural Area Management Agreement is a written contract between a landowner and the Department of
Conservation and Recreation (DCR) designed to achieve specific conservation objectives. The agreement
will clearly state the management plan for the land and the duration of the agreement. The management
objectives will be determined according to the conservation goals of the landowner and DCR, and will be
based on the specific management needs of natural heritage resources. The contract will be valid after it is
signed by the landowner and the director of DCR. This is a legal agreement which may be cancelled by either
party following a 30 day notice.

How are Natural cal management
Areas Managed? techniques include
prescribed burn-
Natural areas are managed to re- ing, invasive spe-
tain their natural character and to cies control, bio- A
A.,
ensure the long-term survival of logical monitoring
J
natural heritage resources. Various and hydrologic res-
management techniques are used toration.
to preserve rare or vanishing flora
d fauna, natural environments What Lands
and ecosystems.
Qualify for a
Natural Area
Each natural area requires a man- Management
agement plan written to address Agreement? N
the characteristics and conditions
of the area. An important aspect Natural Area Man-
91
- agement Agree-
of natural area management plan
ning is determining what land-uses ments are designed
are compatible within a given area. to preserve the L
This planning requires a thorough commonwealth's
analysis of the ecological values most significant natural areas. Why Should a Landowner
of a particular site along with the Consider a Natural Area
economic and social influences. To be eligible, a property must in- Management Agreement?
The landowner and DCR agree on clude one or more of these natural
compatible land-use practices and values: In selecting this protection option,
incorporate those in a plan. the landowner is rewarded with
* habitat of rare, threatened or the pride of contributing to the
Many natural areas require active endangered plant and animal conservation of Virginia's natural
management to ensure rare natu- species, heritage. If the landowner wishes,
ral communities and species flour- the professional staff of DCR can
. h. DCR natural area stewards * rare or state significant natural offer management advice or assis-
Wrovide technical expertise in de- communities, tance. The DCR stewardship staff
veloping management plans and is available to develop and imple-
implementing ecological manage- * rare or state significant geologic ment plans for various manage-
ment projects. Common ecologi- sites. ment procedures such as pre-

Natural Area Protection
Natural Area Management Agreements

scribed burning, control of Who Should Consider landowner who wishes to retain
invasive'species, establishment of a Natural Area ownership of land and takes pride
vegetative buffers, a nd hydologic Management Agreement? in the natural features of his/her
restoration. In addition, our stew- property. It is best suited for land-
ardship staff will monitor the con- A Natural Area Management owners who are committed to con-
dition of the resources for the Agreement is an option available serving natural heritage resources.
landowner as well as provide, the to conserve natural areas on either
owner with information about the publicly or privately owned land.
resources on his/her land. This option is well suited for the

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
'Dry?
Department of Conservation & Recreation
COMERVING VHGNIKS NATURALAND RECUMNAL RESOURUS
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219 01

This fact sheet was funded in part by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Managerpent Program through Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act of 1972 as amended.

Least tern
What commitment does the by Megan Rollins
landowner make?

Landowners who participate in Virginia's Re' istry
9
of Natural Areas commit to the following:-,
1)' to voluntarily preserve and protect natural M
heritage resources on their land to the best of
their ability;
2) to notify DCR of any potential threats to
these resources, such as pollution,
clearing of land, etc.;
3) to notify DCR of any intent to sell
'transfer o
or
wnership of the
property-

Does the owner receive any
What recognition does the financial incentives?
landowner receive for this
No. However, there are other protection
commitment? methods'available, such as conservation
j easements and natural area dedication
In honor of the voluntary corm-nitment to protect which could offer tax incentives.
the natural, area, the landowner will receive a
plaque recognizing the land for its significant Is management assistance
features and the owner for their stewardship
cominitment. available to the owner of a

r
i tered area?
egis

Yes. DCR will provide management
sistance at the
as
R E GJ S'T R Y
landowner's request.

For additional information,
Tl
contact:
0 F
WDCR-
L
NATURA
Department of Conservation,& Recreation
CONSERVING VIRGINIA'S NATURAL AND 9CREATIONAL RESOU@CES
Division of Natural Heritage AR E'A S
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219 Gray's lilly
Parking tre?frog
(@04) 786-7951 by Afegan Rollins
by Chris Pague

Virginia's Natural Heritage...

Virginia is a state of extraordinary natural today. As the human population increases, so does must support significant natural heritage resources
diversity-from the sandy beaches of the Atlantic the conversion of natural lands to other uses. As a for Virginia, such as:
Ocean and the Cheasapeake Bay, across the gentle result, the land certain plants and animals depend
hills of the Piedmont and the Shenandoah Valley, to upon for survival may be permanetly damaged or
the mountains of the western highalnds. Residents destroyed. Fortunately, we are learning to take 1) habitat for rare, threatened, or endagered
of the Commonwealth take great pride in the precautions and property owners are acting plants or animals.
beauty of our natural heritage. More voluntarily to safeguard the best that remains or our
than 2,400 native species fo plants, natural world. 2) rare or state significant natural communities.
848 vertebrate animals interact with
Virginia's rocks, soils, and water 3) significant geologic landmarks.
to form unique natural What is the Registry of Natural
communities and ecosystems. Areas?
However, some species and What say does the
ecosystems which flourished in Virginia's Registry of Natural Areas is a program landowner have in
Virginia's past are very threatened developed to encourgage voluntary conservation of the registration
significant lands in private and public ownership. process?
Our staff has identified more than 900 natural areas
throughout the commonweatlh which serve as The decision to register belongs
habitiat for our natural heritage resources. entirely to the landowner. This is a
Landowners of these sites play a crucial role in the voluntary and nonbinding
conservation of such lands and in turn the future agreement that may be terminated
survival of the natural communities and rare by either party at any time.
species they support. Species are often lost simply
because the landowner is unaware of its existence
and needs. By informing and recognizing the Does registration of a
landowners of these significant natural areas, the natural area permit
Registry of Natural Areas Program reduces the public access to private
chance that these resources may be property?
unknowingly destroyed. The
program is operated by the No. Registration of a natural area
Virginia Department of provides no right of public access
Conservation and Recreation to private property unless
(DCR), an agency devoted to the requested by the owner. As with
identification and protection of any private land, vistitors must
the Commonwealth's most receive permission from the
significant nautural areas. landowner before entering the
property. Locations of
What areas registered natural areas
qualify for the are not publicized
registry? unless the owner so
To be eligible for desires.
placement on the
registry, a property

Natural Area Stewardship
logical Management

Natural areas encompass a wide
range of environments and support a
rich diversity of flora and fauna. From
its tidal salt marshes of the coast to its
T
boreal forests of the mountains, Virginia N,
has been described as an ecological
crossroads of national significance.
Virginia's Department of Conserva-
tion and Recreation (DCR) acquires,
dedicates and manages natural areas of
statewide significance. The Natural
Area Preserve System focuses on pre-
serving lands so that rare natural com-
munities and species may flourish. In L
addition, DCR advises other levels of Restoration
government and private owners about ral values of land to conserve biologi- tion, prescribed management, research
managing natural areas. Following ac- cal diversity. Land protection alone, and monitoring.
quisition, DCR faces the even greater however, does little to preserve the char- Conservation Planning is the analy-
challenge of natural area stewardship. acter of a natural area if impacts such sis of the ecological, economic and so-
Stewardship is the long-term manage- as the introduction of invasive alien cial features of land which provides the
ment of land to maintain its natural re- plants, or hydrologic disturbances are scientific foundation for conservation of
*
urces and inherent natural beauty. not also addressed. With continuing al- natural areas. Conservation planning
CR stewardship is a combination of teration of the land by human activity, starts well before a natural area is ac-
property and ecological management. many ecosystems have become frag- quired. Planning boundaries are set
On any natural area preserve, one may mented or reduced to isolated islands which delineate ecologically sensitive
find staff and volunteers searching for surrounded by agricultural fields or de- areas where land-use activities should
rare plants, posting boundary signs, re- veloped areas. Ecological management be carefully managed to ensure that they
pairing trails or studying hydrology. is the key to successful stewardship and are compatible with conservation goals
Ecological management is focused can be sub-divided into five general cat- for natural resources. Well designed
on maintaining and enhancing the natu- egories: conservation planning, restora- natural area preserves encompass those
ecological features necessary for the
survival of native flora and fauna, and
are planned to permit the best possible
4 @j management by DCR stewards.
Restoration activities are imple-
01, mented in an attempt to return disturbed
land or vegetation to its original condi-
4
tion. Fundamental environmental pro-
cesses critical to ecosystem functioning
u,
ri
include water and nut ent cycling, ero
hd! ;$1,
W sion, herbivory, and natural distur-
W
4,44 bances such as floods and fire. Resto-
ration techniques reinstate or replicate
-@-WgN20t A@
Re
,@""20
environmental processes to aid the re-
40 t
turn of an ecosystem to its original state.
Habitat restoration involves the re
of specific habitat features to the
turn
environment, and the introduction of
Prescribed burning specific plants and animals to ensure

Natural Axea Stewardship
Ecological Management

habitation of the area by native species. needed resources
Habitat restoration may also involve the such as space,
removal of invasive or non-native spe- sunlight and A,
cies from the natural area. food.
Hydrologic restoration allows for Once estab-
hed in dis-
land or along a waterway. Maintaining
the natural flow of water through a wet- lis
turbed areas,
or restoring the movement and chemis- they advance @n
U,
try of water encourages certain plants steadily int
0
@77
and animals to inhabit an area. Hydro natural areas and
logic restoration may involve the re- can be difficult t.o Monitoring
moval of obstructions to water flow, remove. A van-
plugging of ditches, or remedial work ety of control methods, such as mechani- of plant and animal species; air, water,
to improve water quality. cal removal and the use of environinen- land and pollution are other components
Prescribed'Managernent maintains tally safe herbicides, are used by natu- of the environment that must be moni-
or enhances environmental conditions of ral area stewards to control invasive spe- to red for effective resource manage-
an area. Through management activi- cies. ment. Monitoring activities also inform
ties such as prescribed burning and Research is important to the long- natural area stewards if management
invasive species control, natural area term preservation of a natural area for activities have been successful in ful-
stewards Protect and rejuvenate natural identifying the environmental conditions filling their goals. Information obtained
vegetation. This enhances habitat con- necessary to support a particular com- through monitoring can. be used to fur-
ther refine and enhance current manage-
ditions for many rare species and pre- munity or species of interest. Informa-
serves the integrity of rare communities. tion to guide management of rare spe- ment practices.
Prescribed burning is the carefully cies or communities is often lacking. .. Effective stewardship of Virginia's
natural areas is dependant on the dedi-
planned and controlled use,of fire to Research aimed at understanding the cation of a variety of people. Land man-
accomplish a management goal. Many natural history, biology and population agers, resource experts, conservation
natural areas in Virginia such as longleaf dynamics of a rare species or how an planners and private landowners all con-
pine-turkey oak sandhills and grassy ecosystem functions is essential for tribute to sound ecological management
savannahs contain plants that are de- planning effective management. pIractices. Volunteers also contribute sig-
pendent on or benefit from regular fires Monitoring is a multi-faceted tool nificantly to preserving natural areas
to enhance seed germination and make used by natural area stewards to assess through assistancewith monitoring, pre-
space and nutrients available for new the ecological condition of an area. It is scribed management and restoration
growth. used to document the trends of natural projects. If you are interested in learn-
* lnvasive species represent a serious communities and rare species. It can ing more about Virginia's natural area
threat to natural areas. Often these spe- also help determine if the natural pro- preserves and ecological management
cies have no natural enemies or controls cesses essential to their continued ex- programs, contact the Department of
to curb their growth and dispersal; they istence are occurring. Monitoring is not Conservation and Recreation at (804)
can easily outcompete native species for limited to assessing only the condition 7@6-7951.

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
40hDrv
Department of Conservation & Recreation
CONSERVING VIRUNIASNAMALANDREGMAnONALMS @URCES
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219

This fact sheet was funded in part by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act-of 1972 as amended.

Natural Areas Management Techniques
,fire and Natural Areas: An Overview

Whether caused by lightning or the hand of man, fire has been a part of the natural world for centuries. In Virginia, prior to
European settlement, American Indians intentionally set fires for hunting, protection, warfare, agriculture, vegetation manage-
ment and food gathering. On flat terrain, fires would burn over large areas until some natural barrier or rainfall event was
encountered. Today unrestrained fires represent a hazard to public safety and property, but the benefits of carefully prescribed
and controlled fire can still be realized. Fire is recognized as a cost-effective land management tool by silviculturalists, wildlife
managers, and natural area managers. Prescribed burning is practiced today using skillful methods and rigid safety specifica-
tions.

Prescribed burning is the intentional
use of fire in a particular time and place,
under established conditions and speci-
fications, to accomplish a biological or
resource management goal. The Virginia
Department of Conservation and Rec-
reation (DCR) uses prescribed burning
when this practice benefits particular
tb
fire-dependant natural communities and
6
species. Secondary benefits derived from Z
4
regular burning include opening aes-
A,
j
thetically pleasing landscapes, impres-
sive displays of wildflowers, greater
numbers and enhanced visibility of wild-
life, and a profusion of blueberries,
uckleberries and raspberries.

Vegetation succession is the natural
process by which one type of vegeta- Prescribed Burning
tion is replaced by another leading to-
ward increased biomass and vegetation Fire contributes to maintaining on or benefit from fire. Fire liberates
structure. The end point of succession Virginia's natural heritage in so many the rare plants from competing woody
is referred to as the climax, or steady- ways. Entire forest types such as vegetation and sometimes enhances seed
state condition in which the community longleaf pine forest, pitch pine forest and germination.
is more or less self-sustaining. Through- table mountain pine forest are created
out much of Virginia, succession left and perpetuated by fire. The grassy The case of the Virginia-endemic
unchecked would result in dense, closed savannahs created by fire provide the Peter's Mountain Mallow is dramati-
canopy forest. Maintaining open, early- necessary breeding habitat for rare cally illustrative. Just four naturally es-
successional types of vegetation such as Bachman's sparrows and other forms tablished individual plants remained
prairie, savannah, woodland and glade, of wildlife. Prairie vegetation still ex- until an experimental burn was con-
and the species dependant on these com- ists in Virginia largely because of fre- ducted at the site. Four hundred new
munities, necessitates fire management quent accidental fires along railroad plants appeared after the fire. Prescribed
as a means of setting back the process tracks. Lastly, there are more than 100 burn management will likely rescue this
of succession. rare plant species which either depend species from the brink of extinction.

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

Department of Conservation & Recreation
CONSERNnNG 1ARUNIAS NATUILALAND RECUATIONAL RES011RCES
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219

Natural Heritage Resources Fact Sheet
Virginia's Rare Natural Environments
*Conserving Virginia's Natural Environments: Why?

The natural environments of Virginia contain a wondrous array of indigenous plants and animals, and each
environment has its distinctive community of species. The term community refers to species that occur together. It
has the same meaning in the natural world as in our own lives. Just like humans, each organism plays an important
role in the functioning of the whole system, and all parts are interdependent.
Over thousands of years, the spe-
cies in each community have evolved A.
life history strategies which enable
them to survive within a specific
niche. This process does not take
place in a vacuum-the strategies
adopted by one species influence the
direction taken by others. Nor has it 1@
stopped. Like a river that flows
through time and across space, a
natural community undergoes con-
stant change yet retains its essential
characteristics. For instance, all
plants growing in the area compete
With one another for the available
light, moisture and nutrients. Plants
which die are soon replaced by oth- The freshwater marsh community pictured above is but one of Virginia's rare
ers. Also, just like humans do, plants natural environments.
change their environment as they live in nutrient-rich droppings at a new dominate the silty river bottoms on
in it. They can affect fertility by con- location. Other plants have seeds the coastal plain, while alder and
tributing organic matter to the soil, which hitchhike across the landscape sycamore prevail alongside moun-
thereby influencing the robustness by clinging to animal fur or even tain streams. Often the vegetation
and density of the vegetation. When human clothing. reflects the underlying geology.
a community is disturbed by dam- Animals, in turn, are absolutely Mountain slopes dominated by pine
aging wind, fire, floods or human ac- dependent on plants. Among the and oak usually indicate acidic soils
tivity, opportunistic plants are the 30,000 insect species in Virginia, derived from shale and sandstone,
first to recolonize the area, but these many feed on a single plant species while sugar maple, tulip-tree, bass-
are soon replaced by larger or more or genus. Animals either consume wood, and buckeye often indicate
long-lived species. This is a process plants directly, or prey on the herbi- limestone. Elevation has a dramatic
known as vegetation succession. vores (plant eaters), or prey upon the effect on vegetation, as any visitor
Many plants depend on insects for predators of the herbivores, thus to Mount Rogers can attest.
pollination, while other plants have forming complex food chains. Specific communities are classi-
evolved strategies which utilize birds As you travel across Virginia, you fied based on the dominant or char-
and mammals as effective agents of can recognize the major types of acteristic species present. Examples
seed dispersal. Some plants produce natural communities by the plants are chestnut oak-mountain laurel
Oceds within sweet, fragrant, or and animals that live there. 'Me shift- forest and longlea.fpine-turkey oak
brightly colored fruit. When con- ing sands of coastal dunes support woodland. By naming community
sumed by birds and mammals, these windswept meadows of beach-grass types, we communicate information
seeds remain viable and are expelled and sea oats. Towering cypress trees more effectively and can inventory

Virginia"s Rare Natural Environments

Conserving Virginia's Natural Environments: Why?

the best examples of each. Some helps maintain fertility, and can pro- ciated and valued in real dollar terms.
community types are widespread vide renewable forest products and Consequently, too many important
because conditions which created forage for livestock. To a great ex- areas are being destroyed before
them are present over large areas. tent, the economy of coastal Virginia their overall biological and societal
Other communities are restricted to is directly dependent on a produc, values have been determined. It may
just a few areas simply because the tive and uncontaminated Chesa- come as a surprise to learn that spe-
natural environments upon which peake Bay ecosystem. cies entirely new to science are con-
they depend are so rare on the land- Often overlooked but vitally im- tinually being discovered in Virginia.
scape. However, in too many cases portant is the role played by benefi- Examples include many insect spe-
the rarity of a community is the re- cial insects which pollinate fruit trees cies and a plant called running glade
sult of human activity. Through and many crops, and keep pest or- clover discovered in Lee County. By
thoughtless deeds and actions, we ganisms in check at virtually no cost protecting the best remaining natu-
have altered and even destroyed bio- to society. Natural lands also help ral environments, we most assuredly
logically diverse communities. maintain the balance of nature, pri- will be protecting a host of poorly
Scientists recognize that the de- marily through the maintenance of known species whose role in the eco-
struction of natural communities predator-prey relationships: Hawks system and whose value to human
endangers us as well as the natural and owls which nest in forests con- society have yet to be determined.
world. We, too, depend on the eco- trol harmful rodents in adjacent farm We have to be encouraged, however,
system services which natural com- that Virginians care deeply about
munities provide: Vegetation f .ilters land; bats residing in a cave consume preserving our beautiful land,
vast numbers of mosquitoes on 0
and holds water to ensure a clean warm summer nights. that our citizens will strive to ensure
and reliable water source, removes that the natural heritage we inher-
carbon dioxide from the atmosphere Unfortunately, many of these eco- ited is passed on to future genera-
and restores oxygen, holds soil and system services are not fully appre- tions.

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
SUED r i?
Department of Conservation & Recreation 9
CONS VIRGMS NAJURALMD RECREAMNAL RESOURCES
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219 Of
This fact sheet was funded in part by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act of 1972 as amended.

Natural Heritage Resources Fact Sheet
firginia's Rare Natural Environments

Bald Cypress-Water Tupelo Swamp

Description
The cypress-tupelo swamps bordering the rivers of southeastern Virginia contain some of the largest and
most impressive trees found anywhere in the eastern United States. These swamps are the wettest and deepest
forested wetlands which form in low-lying areas, commonly in depressions, floodplains, abandoned river
channels, or sloughs following a major river channel. Although normally separated from a river, much of the
land is flooded year-round with the Water standing up to several feet deep. In Virginia, bald cypress and
water tupelo are often found together in these deepwater swamps and have developed a variety of adaptations
for surviving flooded conditions. Bald cypress trees produce the familiar knees which rise above the water
helping to stabilize the tree in the soft soil and possibly supplying oxygen to the roots. Water tupelo produces
very wide, buttressed lower trunks for stability in the standing water. Regular flooding of the swamp pro-
duces oxygen-poor soils and drives the subsequent complex processes that are used to extract and circulate
nutrients and oxygen within the community.

A@
Al.
4 a
"IC
111 ZZ, 1A
"M
A
@0 A`
J
WM@,,
7' v
%
I @wl
1-7
X. E_w

Z
4",

7
S!*k:

Bald Cypress-Water Tupelo Community

Distribution rivers supporting this type of veg- rose, Virginia willow, lizards tail
Bald cypress-water tupelo swamps etation include the Nottaway and and cardinal flower. On the
are most common in the southeast- Meherrin rivers, and Fontaine water's surface, duckweed and
ern coastal plain where extensive Creek. water fern are common members
river systems and flat topography of the swamp community.
combine to create prolonged Flora and Fauna The swamps are also an impor-
flooding. In Virginia, large, undis- Bald cypress and water tupelo tant habitat for many species of
turbed tracts of bald cypress-wa- trees grow to more than 150 feet waterfowl. Wood duck and mal-
ter tupelo swamps are rare and tall with a trunk diameter of six lards breed here, as do several
occur mainly in the southeastern feet. Older ones are estimated to heron species, warblers and other
part of the state where bald cypress be at least 600 years old. These songbirds. These swamps contain
approaches its northern range swamps are host to many other abundant crayfish and mussels,
Aiknit. The Blackwater River in Isle wetland plant and animal species. and are also home to beavers,
WWight and Southampton coun- Typical shrubs and herbs associ- muskrat and numerous other ani-
ties supports several examples of ated with the bald cypress-water mal species.
old growth bald cypress-water tu- tupelo swamps of Virginia include
pelo swamps. Other southeastern water ash, buttonbush, swamp - over

Virginia.s Rare Natural EnVironments
Bald Cypress-Water Tupelo Swamp

Values the frequency of blow-downs, and References
Besides hosting important plant encourage the spread of invasive Christensen, N. L. 1988. Vegetation of
and animal species, bald cypress- or alien species. Ditching, drain- the Southeastern Coastal Plain. in North
water tupelo swamp forests have ing, or damming a swamp can re- American Terrestrial Vegetation. M. G.
several important functions. Pri- sult in the disruption of water flow Barbour and W. D. Billings (eds.). Cam-
marily these low swamps act as a and sediment cycling of the bridge University Press, Cambridge. pp.
sink for floodwater and protect swamp. Road and bridge construc- 317-363.
higher areas during floods. They tion or improvement activities Conservation Planning for the Natural
have a role in filteri 'ng river water should be carefully planned and Areas of the Lower Peninsula of Vir-
and -removing sediments. They monitored to minimize impacts in ginia. 1993 Virginia Department of Con-
also function in erosion control swamps. Preserving the natural servation and Recreation, Division of
and groundwater recharge. Fi- flow of the river is critical to the Natural Heritage, Richmond. 168 pp.
nally, these swamp forests are a long-term maintenance of these
pleasing wetland environment for forests. Mitsch, W. J. and J. G. Gosselink. 1986.
Wetlands. Van Nostrand Reinhold Com-
recreation and enjoyment of na- pany, Inc., New York. 539 pp.
ture. Protection
Bald cypress-water tupelo forests Odum, H. T. 1984. Summary: Cypress
Threats:@ are irreplaceable natural heritage Swamps and their Regional Role. in
The primary threat to bald cy- resources in Virginia. Loggin op- C@press Swa , K. C. Ewel, H. T.
9 Odum (eds.). University of Florida
press-water tupelo swamps in Vir- erations and development activi- Press, Gainesville. pp. 416-443.
ginia is disruption of the habitat ties should be planned to minimize
by human activity. Logging has impacts on these wetland forests.
encroached on some of the unpro- Protection from water contamina-
tected old growth forests along the tion, pollution, and disturbance
Blackwater River. Continued thin- will also require a comprehensive
ning of. the trees could alter the planning approach.
light levels of the forest, increase

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

&gum
' 6'" D
Department of Conservation & Recreation
COIGERVING VIRGINIKS NATURALAND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312 01
Richmond, VA 23219
xr@;'@_'%

This fact sheet was.funded in part by the Department of Environmental Quality's.Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act of 1972 as amended.

Natural Heritage Resources Fact Shee t
Wirginia's Rare Natural Environments

Pocosins

Description
Pocosins are a rare natural environment characterized by peaty soils and heath-like vegetation. Often tucked be-
tween coastal freshwater marshes and deepwater swamp forests of the Atlantic coastal plain, pocosins are one of
Virginia's rarest wetlands. A high water table, an abundance of sphagnum moss, and the slow decay of dead vegeta-
tion contributeto the deep peat and acidic soils of these areas. These conditions, along with nutrient poor soils and
frequent fires, are common features of pocosin communities. The landscape of these wetlands grades from shrubby,
low pocosins dominated by a dense layer of low heath vegetation and occasional open herbaceous areas to higher
forested pocosins with sparse to dense small trees and shrubs. This low vegetation is maintained by fire, the high
water table, and the naturally low nutrient levels in the soil. Some species, such as Atlantic white cedar, depend on
fire to curb the growth of competing vegetation and stimulate seed germination. Presently, habitat loss and a less
frequent incidence of fire has altered the structure of pocosins and may threaten their continued existence in Vir-
ginia.

-v
J

R,-T, V-4
_@,i, 10 1 @ L, ,
r
F1
MUM
A

N@,
IX@
fE
411V
4
'K.
JI:

Pocosin Community

Distribution cedar and pond pine are the domi- clude spreading pogonia and
Pocosins are found throughout the nant tree species in high pocosins. Walter's sedge.
Atlantic coastal plain from south- Atlantic white cedar is a rare and Few surveys have been conducted
eastern Virginia to northern Florida, valuable lumber tree which has been on the animal species found in po-
and west to Mississippi. In Virginia, steadily declining across much of its cosins, however, rare butterflies such
pocosins have never been common, range because of harvesting, fire as Hessel's hairstreak are known to
but have historically been found in suppression, and habitat loss. A inhabit these wetlands.
the Great Dismal Swamp and along dense understory of fetterbush,
the lower Blackwater, Northwest, sheep laurel, inkberry, sweet bay and Threats
North Landing, and Nottaway riv- red bay grows beneath the trees. It has been estimated that less than
ers. Currently, they are limited in Throughout the pocosin is a thick 30 percent of pocosin communities
Virginia to remnant communities in tangle of greenbriar vine, and Vir- throughout the Atlantic coastal plain
0
e Great Dismal Swamp and along ginia chain fern is the dominant her- remain intheir natural condition. Vir-
e North Landing River. baceous plant. Several rare plants ginia has fared even worse with only
can be found in these wetlands, es- 17 percent of its pocosins remain-
Flora and Fauna pecially as islands or openings in the ing today. Ditching, draining and
In Virginia, red maple, Atlantic white lowest pocosins. These rarities in- peat mining have taken their toll on

Virginia's Rare Natural Environments

Pocosins

water and nutrient cycling in these. pocosin communities. Despite great fluence of adjacent land use on wa-
environments, and the suppression success in land acquisition realized ter quality. A plan to restore and
of fire has allowed the growth of by natural resource agencies and maintain clean water flow through
woody species to go. unchecked. land conservation organizations, the wetland, and the reintroduction
Atlantic white cedar is in need of long-term survival of pocosin com- of fire will greatly increase the
protection and thrives in pocosin munities, and the rare plants and chances for survival of this endan-
habitats'. The return of this rare and animals living within them, will de- gered ecosystem.
valuable tree will depend on protect- pend onmanagement efforts focused
ingand managing its wetland home. on maintaining the community in its References
natural state. The two driving eCo- Frost, C. C. 1989. History and status of rem-
Protection logical forces within these wetlands nant pocosih, canebrake and white cedar
wetlands in Virginia. unpub. report to the
The pocosins along the North Land- are fire and the cycling of water. VA Natural Heritage Program, Richmond.
ing River are protected by The Na- Today, unrestrained fire represents 130 pp.
ture Conservancy and the Depart- a hazard to public safety and prop- Caliouw,'C. A. and S. Hobbs. 1991. Man-
ment of Conservation and Recre- erty, but the benefits of carefully pre- agement plan for the North Landing River
ation as part of the Virginia Natural scribed and controlled fire can be Preserve System. Unpub. report on file with
the Virginia Natural Heritage Program, Rich-
Area Preserve System.The Great realized. Studies are underway to mond. 130 pp.
Dismal Swamp National Wildlife learn more about the flow of water
Refuge also protects some important through these wetlands and the in-

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

Department of Conservation & Recreation
CONSERVING MRUNIAS NATLUMAND RECILAMNAL RESOURCES
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219

Natural Heritage Resources Fact Sheet
firginia's Rare Natural Environments

Sea-levelFens

Description
Virginia's sea-level fens are an extremely rare type of coastal wetland distinguished from a marsh and a bog by a
distinct hydrologic regime and unique vegetation associations. In general, sea-level fens are open, freshwater wet-
lands located at the upland edges of wide, oceanside tidal marshes. Unlike bogs, whose primary water source is
rainwater, a sea-level fen's primary water source is an underground spring that supplies nutrient-poor groundwater
to the system. For a sea-level fen to form, a combination of environmental factors must occur. First, a natural spring,
usually seeping from a nearby slope, must be present to allow the movement of groundwater into the area. Second,
the fen must be sufficiently protected from flooding, such as by a wide,"fronting tidal marsh, to prevent the influx of
nutrient-rich tidal flow. If these two conditions are met, unique plant associations that include both northern bog
species and southern freshwater tidal species can form, and diagnostic plant species such as ten-angled pipewort
and beaked spike-rush can thrive. It is uncommon to find this combination of environmental factors, which accounts
for the rarity of this community type.

k@ ....... . ..
X ,
7
14,

4
Ve@ "'J',
i 4 ::@i

@p
flih F
t
, 4 k"Fl-
7@,
p, P
k
;N 41

J!!

Sea-level Fen Community
Distribution the soil strongly affect the plants Since their discovery in 1991, few
Sea-level fens were first discovered and animals that exist in sea-level investigations into the resident ani-
in 1991. Superior examples of this fens. Vegetation consists of an in- mal populations of sea-level fens
community type have been found in teresting combination of acid-tol- have been conducted. However, one
only five locations on the East Coast, erant bog plants and tidal freshwa- species of interest found in these ar-
and cover a total of no more than 10 ter wetland plants capable of surviv- eas is a dragonfly, Nanothemis bella,
acres. Although there are likely many ing in low-nutrient areas. For some which, at 3/4 inch long, is the
more examples of this community of these species, the Virginia'sea- smallestnortheastern dragonfly. Also
type, thus far they have only been level fens represent the southern- characteristic of these environments
documented in Sussex County, Del., most extent of their range, and the is the eastern mud turtle which, not
and in Accomack County on only habitat that supports these spe- surprisingly, thrives in the mucky,
Virginia's Eastern Shore. cies in the state. Most interesting springy habitat.
among the vegetation are the many
carnivorous plants such as sundew Values
0
Flora and Fauna and bladderwort which capture and The natural heritage values associ-
The low nutrient content of the digest small insects and inverte- ated with these small wetlands are
water and the acidic conditions of brates. focused primarily on the plant and

Virginia's Rare Natural Environments

Sea-levelFens
0

animal species that they harbor; of- ments or agricultural fields can cause prevent the flow of high nutrient
ten these communities are the only an influx of nutrients into the fen. water and sediments into these ar-
location for. a species in the state. This upsets the balance of water and ea's. Although fens may be protected
The number of rare species docu- nutrients in the area and leads to the to some extent by wetland regula-
mented in fens is significant. These disruption of soil characteristics and tions ofthe Federal Clean Water Act,
areas are also ecologically interest- plant species that exist in fen condi- negative influences from surround-
ing in that they incorporate both tions. Increased nutrient and sedi- ing environments can be devastai-
freshw 'ater marsh plants and acid- ment flow could result in suitable ing -to these areas and protection is
tolerant bog plants which are more environmental conditions for the essential to ensure their continued
common in northern bogs.. growth of invasive species such as existence.
common reed.
Threats References
By far ,the biggrest threat to this rare Protection: Ludwig, J. C. and T. J. Rawinski. 1993. The
community type is groundwater pol- Protection of these rare wetland vegetation and flora of the "sea-level fens"
of the Delmarva peninsula. Virginia Jour-
lution. The possible movement of communities will take a concen- nal of Science 44:120.
fertilizers and wastes, into'the trated effort on the part of landown-
groundwater from nearby develop- ers and environmental agencies to

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

W
r Y2-
D%Jlki,
Department of Conservation & Recreation
COMERVING VIRUNIAS NATUFLALAND RECREAMNAL RESOURCES
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219 0@r

This fact sheet was funded in part by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program thrbugh Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act of 1972 as amended.

Natural Heritage Resources Fact Sheet
4(irginia's Rare Natural Environments

Seasonal Ponds

Description
The use of the wordpond may be somewhat misleading in the case of seasonal pond communities. More accurately,
they are shallow depressions in the ground that contain standing water for all or, usually, part of the year. Some
larger ponds are actually forested. The amount and duration of standing water varies among ponds and strongly
influences the plant and animal associations that are present. Most ponds are sinkhole depressions which were
created by the dissolution of underlying substrate and the subsequent collection of water and sediments in the
depression. In the coastal plain, this underlying material is calcareous and consists of ancient shell deposits. In the
Shenandoah Valley, the underlying material is limestone. Finally, some ponds are simply lowlands Within dune
landscapes. Sinkhole ponds in Virginia are referred to as seasonal because the depressions do not hold water for
extended periods of time. The hydrology of seasonal ponds varies, but they generally have standing water during
early spring, the wettest time of the year, and gradually dry through the summer and fall. The length of time standing
water remains in the ponds can change from year to year; ponds will have more water for longer periods during wet
years than during drought years. Seasonal ponds range anywhere in size from 50 feet to several hundred feet or
more in diameter.

0.
4W"

Ov
R
f
'T' A,
M

ITI
N

Seasonal Pond Community

Distribution within Seashore State Parkand Natu- can add up to be more valuable than
Seasonal ponds are scattered ral Area in Virginia Beach. Seasonal any individual pond considered on
throughout the coastal plain from the ponds are also found in the its own. Several rare Virginia plant
Maritime Provinces to the Gulf Shenandoah Valley in Augusta and species such as harper's fimbristylis
Coast of Texas. They are especially Rockingham counties where the and black-fruited spikerush are
prevalent in the Carolinas where the geologic features are different. found along the edges of coastal
ponds form a regular feature along plain seasonal ponds. The endemic
the fall line. In Virginia, seasonal Flora and Fauna Virginia sneezeweed is found at the
ponds are not as common. They are Fluctuations of water levels vary margins of Shenandoah Valley sea-
found in scattered sites in the south- considerably among ponds depend- , sonal ponds as are several other rare
d
astern part of the state, and on the ing on their age and location. Water plant species.
astern Shore. Two sites of particu- levels also vary from year to year Animal species also commonly
lar note are the Grafton Ponds com- within a single pond. The result is a inhabit seasonal ponds. Because the
plex in York County and Newport diverse plant and animal richness ponds contain standing water for
News, and the small ponds located within the entire pond complex that only part of the year, they are un-

Virginia's Rare Natural Environments

Seasonal Ponds

able to support fish and therefore versity of life contained within an Although seasonal ponds may have
provide an ideal, predator-free entire pond complex, protection of some protection under wetland regu-
breeding habitat for many amphib- the, surrounding habitat, with par- lations of the Federal Clean Water
ian species. Mabee's salamander is ticular attention to maintaining wa- Act, interpretations of these laws
a rare amphibian that breeds at some ter regimes, is required to preserve often change and should not be
seasonal ponds in Virginia. Another the character of these natural com- solely depended upon for protection.
rare amphibian, the barking tree frog, munities. Draining, ditching, and Additionally, regulations often don't
is a northern species with its south- 'dredging can disrupt the natural provide for the protection of sur-
ern range limit in Virginia. It is only water cycles upon which the com- rounding upland habitats and may
found in the southeastern part of the niunity is based. In addition, nutri- allow damaging activities in some
state and-requires a fish4ree, fresh- ent levels need to be maintained, in cases. Protecting the hydrologic
water habitat to reproduce. Several the ponds; runoff from fertilized ag- conditions of the ponds and adjacent
rare and unusual dragonflies also ricultural fields can increase sedi- upland environments is critical to
inhabit these specialized environ- ment and nutrient levels in ponds and their long-term preservation.
ments. alter the plant communities that can
survive.there. Finally, it is important References
Values to remember that few species will Conservation Planning for the Natural Ar-
Seasonal ponds are especially impor- use seasonal ponds as their only habi- eas of the Lower Peninsula of Virginia. 1993
Virginia Department of Conservation and
tant for the unique diversity of plants tat. Amphibians in particular may be Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage,
and animals that inhabit them. A net- present at p6 nds only to mate and Richmond. 168 pp.
0
work of s *everal ponds is a complex, lay eggs. Surrounding upland. natu- Rawinski, T. J. 1991. Virginia's Shenandoah
interwoven system of wetland com- ral areas should be protected with Valley sinkhole ponds: in-land outposts of
munities. Often plant species in these the pond .s themselves to provide liv- Coastal Plain flora (draft). VA Dept. of Con-
ponds are at their southern limit, or ing habitats for species. As well, the servation and Recreation, Division of Natu-
ral Heritage, Richmond. 4 pp.
are endemic to Virginia. In addition, ponds will provide an avenue for
the importance of these habitats as dispersal of seeds or young to new Schafale, M. P. and A. S. Weakley. 1990.
Classification of the Natural Communities
predator-free breeding ground's for ponds. of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural
amphibians cannot be overempha- Heritage''Program, Raleigh. 325 pp.
sized. -Protection
Long-term protection of this rare
Threats community type will depend on en
Considering the varied hydrologic vironmentally sound planning and
nature of seasonal ponds and the di- development around these areas.

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.

1104 D

Department of Conservation & Recreation
CONSERVING AROMAS NATURAL AND RECREAMNAL KL50UKCE5
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
W01
Richmond, VA 23219

This fact sheet was funded in part by the Department of Environmental Qualityls Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act of 1972 as amended.

Natural Heritage Resources Fact Sheet
Qfirginia's Rare Natural Environments

Turkey Oak Sandhills

Description
Sandhills are distinctive natural communities which occur on well drained, sandy soils primarily in the southeastern
coastal plain from Virginia southward. Where they are found, they are characterized by abundant sand and scattered
trees. Well-drained soils set up dry, nutrient-poor growing conditions on a sandhill. The dominant trees are species
of pine and oak while understory plants generally consist of shrubby plants with an occasional patch of herbaceous
vegetation and lichens. Longleaf pine and turkey oak are the dominant trees which characterize sandhills in Virginia.
These sandhills resemble their counterparts in the Carolinas with some slight differences. Frequent, low-intensity
fires were common in Virginia sandhills as a means of maintaining the vegetation, although in recent years fires have
been suppressed or controlled for safety considerations. Human disturbance, in conjunction with the suppression of
natural fires, has altered these communities to a great extent.

'N"
KA
2 -1,

-A,
4,
@'A
@4,
K5,

Turkey Oak Sandhill Community
Distribution sand trap water and allow rare blue Threats
There is evidence that longleaf pine jack oak and longleaf pine to sur- Turkey oak sandhills are one of the
and turkey oak were more common vive. In addition, these areas con- most endangered ecosystems in Vir-
in Virginia before human settlement. tain rare shrubby and herbaceous ginia. Without regular fires to re-
However, lumbering and agricultural vegetation such as sandy-woods move the buildup of shrubby, under-
development over the past 250 years chaffhead, creeping blueberry, Oc- story vegetation, common tree spe-
have taken their toll on sandhill com- tober-flower, and flowering pixie- cies would be able to thrive and re-
munities. In Virginia, the best re- MOSS. place the longleaf pine and turkey
maining examples of turkey oak oak. The most effective means of
sandhills are found in Isle of Wight Noteworthy animal species which maintaining the community is by
County. Sandhill communities are inhabit Virginia sandhill communities regular prescribed burns to curb the
also found in Southampton County include southeastern crowned growth of encroaching vegetation.
and Suffolk. snakes, rare tiger beetles, and numer- Many of the plants in this commu-
ous butterfly and moth species, in- nity type, such as the longleaf pine,
Flora and Fauna cluding a moth that feeds specifically require fire for successful reproduc-
e turkey oak sandhills of Virginia on pixie-moss. With some clearing tion. In addition, disturbance of sur-
,&port a number of rare plant and of the undergrowth, this area would rounding lands can have an impact
animal species, some of which are be excellent potential habitat for the on sandhills. In particular, construc-
at the northern limit of their range. federally endangered red-cockaded tion of houses near the community
Locally, layers of clay beneath the woodpecker. could limit the frequency and extent

Virginia's Rare Natural Environments

Turkey Oak Sandhills

of burning allowed in the area. Sand Protection of these communities will References
mining and ditching can affect the depend on a regular schedule of pre- Christensen, N. L. 1988. Vegetation of the
natural flow of water to the site dis- scribed burning to maintain the nec- southeastern Coastal Plain, pp. 317-363 in
North American Terrestrial Vegetation (M.
rupting the natural cycling of water essary sandhill conditions. The re- G. Barbour and W. D. Billings eds.). Cam-
and nutrients, and influencing the cent introduction of prescribed bum- bridge University Press, Cambridge.
species of plants that are present. ing to the Blackwater Ecologic Pre- Ravvinski, T. J. and G. P. Fleming. 1993. An
Finally, clearcutting a sandhill com- serve has resulted in the re-emer- Inventory and Protection Plan for Southeast
munity permits the growth of com- gence of some species not found Virginia's Critical Natural Areas, Exemplary
mon loblolly pines and is an ongo- here since natural fires were sup- Wetlands and Endangered Species Habitats.
Virginia Department of Conservation and
ing, serious threat. pressed. flistoric records indicate the Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage,
Protection presence of numerous rare species Richmond. 208 pp.
The only currently protected tract of in these sandhills; some may reap- Frost, C. C., and L. J. Musselman. 1987.
turkey oak sandhill in Virginia is pear with continued management, History and vegetation of the Blackwater
found in the Blackwater Ecologic prescribed burns, and protection Ecologic Preserve. Castanea 52(l):16-46.
Preserve in Isle of Wight County. -from disturbance.

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
Dri?
Department of Conservation & Recreation
CONSERVING VIRUNIAS NATULALAND REOuMNAL RESOURCES
1500 East main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219 01
This fact sheet was funded in part by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act of 1972 as amended.

WARNING! INVASIVE ALEEN PLANTS

OXHY ARE ALIEN PLANTS A SERIOUS THREAT?

Plants that are not a part of the indigenous (native) vegetation, but that have been introduced into a region are called
aliens. For the most part, introduced, or alien, plant species form an important part of our environment, contributing
immensely to agriculture, horticulture, landscaping, and soil stabilization, But among the thousands of plant species
introduced to our area, some have displayed unexpected aggressive growth tendencies. The purpose of this fact sheet
is to identify some of the more problematic species which, in many circumstances, degrade native plant communities.

While most alien plant species do not persist in the wild, introductions since European settlement have substantially.
changed the composition of native plant communities: throughout North America. Of the roughly 2500 vascular plant
species that grow in the wild in Virginia, some 350 are not native to the state. While many of these are restricted to
roadsides and other heavily-disturbed sites, others readily invade natural and semi-:natural landscapes.

invastvu-dien-ptznKtypica4.-exhibft-dw-foHowing-charaeteristies---------

9 rapid growth and maturity,
* prolific seed production,
9 highly successful seed dispersal, germination, and colonization, -
* rampant spread,
* ability to out-compete native species,
e high cost to remove or control.

Invasive aliens thrive on disturbed sites. Native plant communities fragmented by human disturbances are most
OYInerable to invasion, but even intact ecosystems can be invaded by the most aggressive alien species. Invasive alien
plants leave behind the natural controls (e.g. insects) that keep them in check in their native habitats. Biodiversity
is further threatened when alien plants harbor invasive pathogens, fungi, or other organisms that decimate native
species, such as American Chestnut.

AWARENESS IS CRITICAL

Awareness of the problems caused by invasive alien plants is the first step in preventing their conti nued use. Pu blic
awareness will help-increase responsible landscaping and conservation practices. Awareness by resource managers
will help prevent the introduction of these species on public lands and preserve our natural heritage.

YOU C IIELP

Learn what species are native in your area. Use'native species, grown from local stock if available, for conservation
and landscaping purposes whenever possible. When using alien plants, avoid highly invasive species. Support public
policies that restrict the introduction of invasive alien plants and get involved in organizations and agencies that work
to protect biological diversity. Ask your nursery to sell native plants propagated from local stock. Plan and
implement sound practices for the control of invasive alien plants in natural areas. A list of alien plants that have
invasive tendencies in Virginia is provided on the overleaf.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT-
or
Virginia Native Plant Society Department of Conservation and Recreation
P.O. Box 844 Ah@ Division of Natural Heritage
Annandale, Virginia 22003 00 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, Virginia 23219

INVASIVE ALIEN PLANTS OF VIRGINIA

Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name
Alligator-weed Alternanthera philoxeroides Kudzu-vine Pueraria lobata
Amur cork-tree Phellodendron amurense Leafy spurge Euphorbia esula
Amur honeysuckle Lonicera maackii Lesser celandine Rahunculus ficaria
Aneilima Murdannia keisak Linden viburnum Vibunum dilitatum
Mile-a-minute Polygoum perfoliatum
Asiatic sand sedge Carex kobomugi Mimosa Albizia julibrissin
Autumn olive Elaeagnus umbellata Moneywort Lysimachia nummularia
Balloon-vineo Cardiospennum halicababum Morrow's honeysuckle Lonicera morrowi
Beafsteak plant Perilla frutescens Mugwort Artemisia vulgaris
Bell's honeysuckle Lonicera x bella Multiflora rose Rosa multiflora
Bermuda-grass Cynodon dactylon Musk thistle Carduus nutans
Birdsfoot trefoil Lotus corniculatus Nipplewort Lapsana communis
Black pine Pinus thunbergii Norway maple Acer platanoides
Blunt-leaved privet Ligustrum obtusfolium Oatgrass Arrhenatherum elatius
Brazilian water-weed Egeria densa Orchard-grass
Bristled knotweed Polygonum cespitosum Dactylis glomerata
Oriental bittersweet Celastrus orbiculatus
Brown knapweed Centaurea jacea Parrot's feather Myriophyllum aquaticum
Bugleweed Ajuga reptans Periwinkle Vinca minor
Bull-thistle Cirsium vulgare Poison hemlock Conium maculatum
Canada bluegrass Poa compressa Porcelain-berry Ampelopsis brevipedunculata
Canada-thistle Cirsium arvense Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria
Chinese lespedeza Lespedeza cuneata Purple loosestrifeo Lythrum virgatum
Chinese privet Ligustrum sinense Quack-grass Agropyron repens
Chinese tallow treeo Sapium sebiferum Red morning-glory Ipomoea coccinea
Chinese wisteria Wisteria sinensis Red sorrel Rumex acetosella
Chinese yam Dioscorea batatas Redtop Agrostis gigantea
Common buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica Rhode Island bent-grass Agrostis tenuis
Common chickweed Stellaria media Rough bluegrass Poa trivialis
Common cocklebur Xanthium strumarium Russian olive Elaeagnus angustifolia
Common day-flower Commelina commums Sawtooth oak Quercus acutissima
Common morning-glory Ipomoea purpurea Short-fringed knapweed Centaurea dubia
Common reed Phragmites australis Siberian elm Ulmus pumila
Common teasel Dipsacus sylvestris Sickle-pod Cassia obtusifolia
Crown-vetch Coronilla varia
Curled dock Rumex crispus Spotted knapweed Centaurea maculosa
Curled thistle Carduus acanthoides Sweet breath of spring Lonicera firagrantissima
Tall fescue Festuca elatior
Cut-leaf teasel Dipsacus laciniatus Tartarian honeysuckle Lonicera tatarica
Empress-tree Paulownia tomentosa Thorny elaeagnus Elaeagnus pungens
English Ivy Hedera helix Timothy Phleum pratense
Eulalia Microstegium vimineum Tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima
European water-milfoil Myriophyllum spicatum Velvet-grass Holcus lanatus
Fennel Foeniculum vulgare Water chestnut Trapa natans
Field-bindweed Convolvulus arvensis Water-flag Iris pseudacorus
Fiveleaf akebia Akebia quinata Weeping lovegrass Eragrostis curvula
Garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata White mulberry Morus alba
Giant foxtail Setaria faberi White poplar Populus alba
Giant reed Arundo donax White sweet clover Melilotus alba
Gill-over-the-ground Glechoma hederdeea Wild onion Allium vineale
Glossy buckthorn Rhamnus frangula Wild parsnip Pastinaca sodtiva
Hydrilla Hydrilla verticillata Wineberry Rubus phoenicolasius
Ivy-leaved morning-glory Ipomoea hederacea Winged burning busho Euonymus alatus
Japanese barberry Berberis thunbergii Wintercreeper Euonymus fortunei
Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonicea Yellow sweet clover Melilotus officinalis
Japanese hops Humulus japonicus
Japanese knotweed Polygonum cuspidatum Especially troublesome
Japanese spiraea Spiraea japonica
Japanese wisteria Wisteria floribunda o Persistence in Virginia uncertain
0 Including all cultivars
Johnson-grass Sorghum halepense
Jointed charlock Raphanus raphanistrum Scientific names follow Atlas of the Virginia Flora III by
Jointed-grass Arthraxon hispidus Harvill, et al., 1992.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
or
Virginia Native Plant Society Department of Conservation and Recreation
P.O. Box 844 Division of Natural Heritage
Annandale, Virginia 22003 1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, Virginia 23219

Invasive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
4ksiatic Sand Sedge (Carex kobomugi) Ohwi

Description
Asiatic sand sedge is a perennial sedge which grows to about a foot in
height. The stem is triangular, and the base of the stem is covered with
@U
brown scales. Young leaves are yellow-green in color and stiff with a
. -
A
rough texture along their edges. Older, basal leaves are somewhat wider, 4@
-u
darker green in color and leathery to the touch. The leaves are often
taller than the flowering heads of the plant. Flowering heads are either
male or female, and are crowded into dense clusters at the tops of the A
stems. Female flower clusters are longer and more slender than the more
W.,
cylindrical male flower clusters. The.fruits are triangular nutlets known
as achenes and are enclosed in a papery sac surrounded below by scales
and bracts. Asiatic sand sedge spreads rapidly by underground stems.

L
Distribution as American beach grass, coastal
Asiatic sand sedge is an east Asian spurge, sea oats, and sea-coast marsh Asiatic Sand Sedge (Carex kobomugi)
native which was introduced into elder. Once established, Asiatic sand
coastal sands from New Jersey to sedge dramatically changes the pro- plants. Herbicide application is best
rginia in the 1930's for erosion file of a dune. Tall, native plants such accomplished at the end of the grow-
Ontrol and as a sand stabilizer. The as sea oats buffer the dune from the ing season when plants are actively
plant is typically found on coastal strong forces of wind and salt spray. transporting nutrients from stems and
dunes and berms, although it is also When native plants are crowded out leaves to root systems. Glyphosphate
occasionally found in dry, sandy in- by the low-growing Asiatic sand herbicides affect all reen vegetation
land areas. In Virginia, it was intro- sedge, the dunes are vulnerable to and should be used 9sparingly so as
duced into the Sandbridge area and shifting sands and blowouts. not to contact desirable species which
has recently been documented in may be growing with theAsiatic sand
Accomack County and the cities of Control sedge. As with hand pulling control
Virginia Beach and Chesapeake. Its Early detection of this invasive plant methods, follow-up treatments may
tolerance for salt spray and high is important for successful control, be needed in subsequent years to re-
winds allows it to survive in dune as small populations are easier to move plants that have sprouted from
habitats occupied by unique native manage than larger ones. Removal by remaining seeds.
vegetation. pulling or digging out the plants is
recommended only for very small Reference
Threats infestations. Large patches of this Fernald, M. L. 1950. Gray's Manual of
The stems of Asiatic sand sedge form invasive are best controlled by the Botany, eighth edition. American Book
low, dense mats in dunes which application of a biodegradable Company, New York. 1632 pp.
crowd out native dune species such . glyphosphate herbicide to individual

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation, or the Virginia Native Plant Society.

Virginia Native Plant Society
P.O. Box 844
nt of Conservation & Recreation Annandale, VA 22003
A10M.GMAS NATURAL AND RECREATIONAL RMU

1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219

Invasive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
mn Olive (Elaeagnus umbellata Thunberg)
f7utsusian Olive (Elaeagnus angustfiblia L.)

Description
Autumn olive is a deciduous shrub or small tree in the Oleaster family. Leaves
are alternate, oval to lanceolate, and untoothed. The underside of the dark
green leaf is covered with silver-white scales. The plant may grow to a
height of 20 feet. The small, light yellow flowers are borne along twigs after
the leaves have appeared early in the growing season. 'Me small, round,
juicy fruits are reddish to pink, dotted with scales, and produced in great
quantity. Autumn olive is easily confused with a closely related species,
Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia), which is also an invasive species.
Russian olive has elliptic to lanceolate leaves, its branches are usually thorny,
and its fruit is yellow, dry and mealy. Identification should be confirmed by
a specialist.

Habitat ute to seed dispersal. It is widely dis-
Autumn olive has nitrogen-fixing tributed in Virginia, having been re-
root nodules which allow it to thrive corded in 46 counties.
in poor soils. Typical habitats are Russian olive, native to Eurasia,
disturbed areas, roadsides, pastures was planted as an ornamental and
W
fields in 'a wide range of soils. escaped cultivation in the central and
tumn olive is drought tolerant and western United States. At this time,
may invade grasslands and sparse Russian olive is rare in Virginia,
woodlands. It does not do well on where it has been reported only from
wet sites or in densely forested ar- Accomack, Fairfax, Northumber-
eas. land and Warren counties.
Russian olive can be found in dry
to moist soils, but does particularly Threats
well in sandy floodplains. Autumn olive is a very troublesome
invasive species in Virginia. In addi-
Distribution tion to its prolific fruiting, seed dis-
Autumn olive was introduced to the persal by birds, rapid growth and
United States from east Asia in the ability to thrive in poor soil, Autumn
1830s. It is found from Maine south olive resprouts vigorously after cut-
to Virginia, and west to Wisconsin. ting or burning. It creates heavy
Autumn olive was planted in the shade which suppresses plants that Autumn Olive (Elaeagnus umbellata)
eastern and central United States for require direct sunlight.
revegetation of disturbed areas. Although rare in Virginia, Russian western United States it has become
Birds forage on its fruit and contrib- . olive poses similar threats. In the a major problem in riparian wood-

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virginia Native Plant Society.
; @For
"C' CR
Virginia Native Plant Society
Department of Conservation & Recreation
COMERVING MRIGINKS NAMAL AND uowmAm-s@ P.O. Box 844, Annandale, VA 22030
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312, Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

Invasiv e' Alien Plant Species. of Virginia
Autumn Olive
Russian Olive

lands, threatening even large, hardy mended because theyare biodegrad- fruits are quickly eaten by birds.
native plants such as cottonwood. able, breaking down into harmless Other alternatives are evergreens
components on contact with the soil. such as American holly (flex opaca),
Control To be safe and effective, herbicide bayberry (Myrica pennsylvanica)
Seedlings and sprouts can be hand- use requires careful knowledge of and wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera).
pulled when the soil is moist to in- the chemicals, appropriate concen- All are available at local nurseries.
sure removal of the root system. On trations, and the effective method
larger pl'ants, cutting alone results in and timing -of their application. Con- References
.thicker, denser growth. Burning dur- sult an agricultural extension agent
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay. 1993.
ing the dormant season also results or a natural resource specialist for Environmentally Sound Landscape
in viRorous resprouting. more details on herbicide control Management for the Chesapeake Bay.
A glyphosate herbicide can be measures.
used to control larger plants. Foliar Eckardt, N. 1987. Elaeagnus umbellata-
application has* proven effective in Suggested Alternative Plantings Autumn olive. Element Stewardship
Abstract. The Nature Conservancy,
controlling these species. Since There are many native species which Minneapolis.
glyphosate is nonselective and will- are attractive as ornamentals, stabi-
affect all green vegetation, care lize soils, and provide food and cover Harvill, A., et. al. 1992. Altas of the
should be taken to avoid impacting for wildlife. Winterberry (Hex Virginia Flora. Virginia Botanical
native plant species. At sites where verticillata), black haw (Viburnum Associates. Burkesville.
this is a concern, application of the prunifolium), gray dogwood
herbicide to the freshly cut stumps (Cornus racemosa) and shining Szafoni, B. 1994. Autumn olive
of the invasive shrub should achieve sumac (Rhus copallina) all provide (Elaeagnus umbellata). Vegetation
Management Guideline, Vol. 1, No. 3,
the desired results. This method a winter source of food for birds. Illinois Department of Conservation,
minimizes damage to other plants., Serviceberry (Amelanchier spp.) Charleston.
Glyphosate herbicides are recom- blooms early in the'spring and its

For More information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virginia Native Plant Society.
IwDrv
Virginia Native Plant Society
y
Department of Conservation & Recreation '@et
COMERVING VIRGMS NAULALAND REaMMAL iO@ P.O. Box 844, Annandale, VA 22030
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312, Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

Invasive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
Osh Honeysuckles: Belle's honeysuckle (Lonicera x bella Zabel), Fragrant honeysuckle (L. fragrantissima
Lindley & Pax), Amur honeysuckle (L. mackii (Rupr.) Maxim), Morrow's honeysuckle (L. morrowi A.
Gray), Tatarian honeysuckle (L. tatarica L.), European fly honeysuckle (L. xylosteum L.)

Description
Bush honeysuckles are upright, generally deciduous shrubs that range from
6 to 16 feet in height. The opposite, simple leaves are usually oval to oblong
in shape and range in length from 1 to 2.5 inches. Flowering occurs from
May to June (February to April for fragrant honeysuckle) with the fragrant,
tubular flowers borne in pairs. Flower color ranges from creamy-white in
most species to pink or crimson in varieties of Tatarian honeysuckle. Whit-
ish flowers become yellow with age. The fruit is a many-seeded, red to
orange berry. Exotic bush honeysuckles can be confused with our Virginia
native fly honeysuckle (Lonicera canadensis), but this seldom-seen species
.is restricted to high elevation mountainous terrain. Consult an appropriate
guidebook or a natural resource expert for proper identification.

Habitat wildlife food source. At present,
In Virginia bush honeysuckles occur bush honeysuckles are distributed
most often along roadsides and in locally in Virginia, particularly in
forest edges, pastures and aban- northern and central regions, al-
lened fields. Grazed and disturbed though their ranges appear to be
woodlots may also be invaded by expanding.
some bush honeysuckle species. Al-
though bush honeysuckles are most Threats
common in upland habitats, Bush honeysuckles can rapidly in-
Morrow's honeysuckle is known to vade and overtake a site, forming a
invade fens, bogs and lakeshores in dense shrub layer that interferes with
portions of the northeastern United the life cycles of many native woody
States. and herbaceous plants. Exotic bush
honeysuckles can alter habitats they
Distribution invade by decreasing light availabil-
The invasive bush honeysuckles in ity and depleting soil moisture and P
Virginia are natives of Europe, east- nutrients. Some species may also
ern Asia or Japan. Most species have release chemicals into the soil that
been cultivated as ornamentals in the inhibit the growth of other plant spe-
eastern United States since the mid- cies. The fruit of bush honeysuckles
1800s. Also, some varieties were is fed upon by many kinds of birds.
developed and planted widely for The birds then spread the seed Morrow's honeysuckle (L. morrowi)

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virginia Native Plant Society.
QOC--R- Virginia Native Plant Society
Department of Conservadon & Recreation P.O. Box 844, Annandale, VA 22030
CONS NG VIRCAMNS NATURALAND RECUATMAL RESOURCES
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312, FUchmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

Invasive Alien' Plant Species. of Virginia
Bush Honeysuckles

throughout the landscape. able. They will begin to break down inhibit growth of new shoots and
into harmless components on con- eradicate target plants. Consult a'
Control tact with the soil. A glyphosaite her- natural resource specialist or an ag-
Light infestations may be cleared by bicide may be applied to the leaves ricultural extension agent for more
hand with a shovel or'grubbing hoe or freshly cut stumps late in the information on these control meth-
provided the entire root is removed. growing season. Timing is important ods.
Severe- infestations may be con- to insure effectiveness. Application
trolled by repeated treatments of near the end of the growing season Wtitten by Dr. Charles E. Williams,
cutting, burning or applying herbi- when the plant .is transporting nutri_ Department of Biology, Clarion
cide. ents to its roots will result in the University
Brush cutting plants should be highest rate of kill. References
done. during the growing season. In some areas, prescribed burn-
Generally two cuts per year are rec- ing may be used to control bush hon- Field, R. J. and W. A. Mitchell. 1988. Bush
ommended, one in early spring fol- eysuckles. Burns conducted during honesuckles (Lonicera spp.). Section 7.5.5.
lowed, by one in the late summer or the growing season will top-kill 'U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wildlife
early autumn. Cuts made in the win- shrubs and inhibit new shoot produc- Resources Management Manual. Technical
ter while the plant'is dormant will tion. These burns will favor warm- Report EL-88-4.
only encourage vigorous resprout- season grasses and perennial forbs
Harvill, A. M., Jr., et al. 1992. Atlas of the
ing. increasing species diversity and pro-. Virginia Flora, 2nd ed. Virginia Botanical
The application of an herbicide is ductivity. Associates, FarmviJ16, Va.
also an effective -control method. Treatment of any severely infested
Glyphosate herbicides are recom- -areas usually requires management
mended because they are biodegrad- for a period of three to five years to

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virginia Native Plant Society.
6DCR
Department of Conservation & Recreation Virginia Native Plant Society
CONSERVING VIRCJNIAS NATURMAND RECREATKYM RESOURCES P.O. Box 844, Annandale, VA 22030
1500 E.'Main Street, Suite 312, Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

hivasive Plant Species ofVirginia

Common Reed (Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud.)

Description
Common reed is a tall perennial wetland grass ranging in height from three to 13 feet.
Strong, leathery horizontal shoots growing on or beneath the ground surface (rhizomes)
give rise to roots and tough vertical stalks. These stalks support broad sheath-type leaves
thatareone-half to two inches wide near thebase, tapering to a point at the ends. The foliage
is gray-green during the growing season, with purple-brown plumes appearing by late June.
The plant turns tan in the fall and most leaves drop off, leaving only the plume-topped shoot.
Big cordgrass (Sparlina cynosuroides), a non-invasive species, is sometimes confused with
common reed. It can be distinguished from common reed by its sparser flowering structure
and longer, narrower leaves.

Habitat vertical shoots remaining. The accumula-
Common reed thrives in sunny wetland tion of dead leaves and stems, as well as the
pervasive rhizome system, prohibits the
habitats. It grows along drier borders and
elevated areas of brackish and freshwater growth of desirable plant species.
marshes and along riverbanks and
lakeshores.The species isparticularly preva-- Threats
lent in disturbed or polluted soils found Common reed has become a destructive
- weed in Virginia, quickly displacing desir- @10
along roadsides, ditches and dredged areas
able plant species such as wild rice, cattails
Oistribution and native wetland orchids. Invasive stands
Found throughout the temperate regions of of common reed eliminate diverse wetland
plant communities, and provide little food
North Amencacommon reedis widespread or shelter value for wildlife.
in eastern Virginia and also can be found in
some western arm ofthe state. It is strongly
suspected that a non-native, aggressive Prevention Cornmoii Rce(i (Pliragmites australis)
strain of the species was carried to North Nnimizing land disturbances and water
America in the early 20th century. pollution helps deter this invasive species. Illustration courtesy Weiland Program,
Land management practices that guard Virginia Institute of Marine Science
Life History against erosion, sedimentation, fluctuating Artist: Rita Llanso
Common reed spreads to a new area by water levels and nutrient loading in wet- burning has generally proven to be the most
sprouting from a rhizome firagment or from lands are the best long-term protection. effective means of control, and results in
seed. New upright stems grow from the minimal disturbance to wetlands. Only a
rhizome each spring. Rhizomes spread hori- Control special, bio-degradable herbicide which is
zontally in all directions during the grow- Once established, common reed is very non-toxic to animals and licensed for use in
ing season. Flowering begins in late June, difficult to completely eradicate. How- wetlands can be used. Because a healthy
and seeds are formed by August. In early ever, careful planning and long-term man- wetland ecosystem is generally resistant to
autumn, food reserves move from leaves agement can yield varying levels of con- invasive species, long-term control of com-
and stems to the rhizome system. The leaves trol. Herbicide use in combination. with mon reed depends upon restoration of the
die and fall off, with only the dead brown health of the ecosystem.
Formore information about common reed, contact the DepartmentofConservation andRecreation at8041786-7951, the U.S. Fish & Widlife
Service at 8041721-2412 or the Virginia Native Plant Society.
C R
Ahp--tment of Consavation & ftcreatfon
a - 4* mr =@ @- A@___
'WNSERVING VIRGIMNS NATURAL AND RECREA11ONAL RESOURM t@:@ -. P.O. BOX 8"
Virginia Native Plant Society

AnnarxWe. VA 22003
Division of Natut-al Heritage
1500 East Main Street - Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219

Invasive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
Sarlic Mustard (Alliaria petiolata (Bieb.) Cavara & Grande)

Description
Garlic mustard is a biennial herb in the mustard family. Plants can range in
height from 5 to 46 inches. The first year plants form rosettes of kidney-
shaped leaves. In its second year, the plant grows a stem with leaves that are
triangular and sharply toothed. The flowers are born in a cluster at the end
of the stem, and each small flower has four white petals. Seeds are black,
oblong and found in rows within a long narrow capsule called a silique.
Crushed leaves and stems of this plant give off a distinctive garlic odor.

Habitat bance created by periodic flooding.
Garlic mustard grows in rich, moist Prolific seed production and lack of
upland forests and wooded natural predators which might feed
streambanks. It is shade tolerant and on garlic mustard allow it to quickly
readily invades disturbed areas such dominate the ground cover. Native
as roadsides and trail edges. Garlic herbs in competition with garlic
mustard cannot tolerate acidic soils, mustard may suffer population de-
including undrained peat or muck. clines.
Q
istribution Control
ative to Europe and Asia, garlic Light infestations of garlic mustard
mustard is now found in Canada, can be controlled by hand-pulling.
south to Virginia, and as far west as Plants should be pulled before seeds
Kansas and Nebraska. It is believed have ripened. Care must be taken to
to have been brought to North insure the entire root is removed and
America by European settlers for use disturbance of the soil is minimal.
in cooking and medicine. In Virginia, Severe infestations can be con-
garlic mustard is found throughout trolled with herbicides. Garlic mus-
the state, with notable exceptions of tard is biennial. Its first year growth
southeastern and northeastern coun- overwinters as a basal rosette of kid-
ties. ney-shaped leaves, therefore it is still
green when many other herbs have
Threats died or gone into dormancy. Foliar
This species can invade a forest application of a glyphosate herbicide
through a disturbance such as treefall can be made in late fall to minimize vd,
or trail construction. Along damage to other plants. Follow-up
streambanks, the plant does excep- treatments may be necessary over
tionally well because of the distur- two or three years to get target Garlic Mustard (Alliatia petiolata)

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virginia Native Plant Society.
@F
r f?
4D %..Wl %I Virginia Native Plant Society
Departmt of Conservation & Recreation
COMERVINGVIRG S NATURALAND RECUMONAL RESOURCES P.O. Box 844, Annandale, VA 22030
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312, Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

Invasive Alien Plant Species n
of Virgfi ia-
Garlic Mustard
plants that we're missed as well as tions, and the effective method and Fernal d, M. 1950. Gray's manual lop
new sprouts. Glyphosate herbicides timing of their application. For more b6tany. 8th ed. American Book Co. New
are recommended because they are information on herbicide use, con- York.
biodegradable, breaking down into tact a natural resource specialist or Harvill, A;, et. al. 1992. Atlas of the
harmless components on contact agricultural extension agent. Virg'Inia Flora. Virginia Botanical
with soil. However, glyphosatQ is a Associates. Burksville.
nonselective, s@ystemic herbicide and References
will affect all green vegetation. To Nuzzo, V. 1991. Experimental control of
Kennay, J., G.Tell, and V. Nuzzo. 1990. garlic mustard in Northern Illinois using
be-safe and effective, herbicide use
Garlic Mustard. Vegetation Management fire, herbicide and cutting. Natural Areas
requires careful knowledge of the Guideline 1(10). Illinois Nature Preserves Journal 1,1(3):158-167.
chemicals, appropriate concentra- Commission:

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virginia'Native Plant Society.
W"Dri?
%A Nk Virginia Native Plant Society
Department of Conservation & Recreation
COMERVING VIRUNKS NATURALAND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES P.O. Box 844, Annanda1c, VA 22030
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312. Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

Invasive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
Sapanese Honeysuckle (Lonicerajaponica Thunberg)

Description
Japanese Honeysuckle is a trailing or twining woody vine that can grow to
more than 30 feet in length. Young stems are often hairy; older stems are
hollow with brownish bark that may peel off in shreds. The simple, opposite
leaves are oval to oblong in shape and range from 1.5 to 3 inches in length.
In much of Virginia, leaves of Japanese honeysuckle are sernievergreen and
may persist on vines year-round. The extremely fragrant, two-lipped flow-
ers are borne in pairs in the axils of young branches and are produced through-
out the summer. Flowers range from I to 2 inches in length and are white
with a slight purple or pink tinge when young, changing to white or yellow
with age. The fruit is a many-seeded, black, pulpy berry that matures in
early autumn. Japanese honeysuckle is distinct from our two native honey-
suckles, the trumpet honeysuckle (Lonicera sempervirens), and wild hon-
eysuckle (Lonicera dioica). These natives both bear red to orange-red ber-
ries, and their uppermost pair of leaves is joined together.

Habitat cover, for erosion control, and for
Japanese honeysuckle occurs prima- wildlife food and habitat. In Virginia,
0
y in disturbed habitats such as Japanese honeysuckle is naturalized
adsides, trails, fencerows, aban- statewide, being most abundant in
doned fields and forest edges. It of- piedmont and coastal plain forests.
ten invades native plant communi-
ties after natural or human induced Threats
disturbance such as logging, Where light levels are optimal, such
roadbuilding, floods, glaze and as in forest edges, canopy gaps or
forest, newly es-
windstorms, or pest and disease out- under sparse, open es
breaks. tablished Japanese honeysuckle
vines grow and spread rapidly. Sup-
Distribution pressed vines growing in dense
Japanese honeysuckle is native to shade, however, are capable of rapid
eastern Asia. Introduced to cultiva- growth and spread when light levels
tion in 1862 on Long Island, Japa- in a habitat are increased by distur-
nese honeysuckle is now widely bance. In forests, Japanese honey-
naturalized in the eastern and cen- suckle vines spread both vertically
tral United States. Japanese honey- and horizontally by climbing up tree
suckle was, and in some areas still trunks and/or by trailing or clamber-
is, planted as an ornamental ground ing over the forest floor and associ- Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicerajaponica)

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virginia Native Plant Society.
rv
Virginia Native Plant Society
nt of Conservation & Recreation
CONSERVING MROMS NAnDALAND RECUMMAL RESOURCES P.O. Box 844, Annandale, VA 22030
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312, Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

InvasiveAlien Plant Species of Virginia
Japanese Honeysuckle,

ated vegetation. Trailing vines pro- Japanese honeysuckle within a habi- (Campsis radicans), Virginia
duce stolons which root when they tat and limit its spread for one or two creeper (Parthenocissus quin-
contact soil, aiding the vegetative growing seasons. quefolia), and trumpet honeysuckle
spread and persistence of the spe- Where prescribed burning or (Lonicera sempervirens). Wild gin-
cies. mowing is difficult or undesirable, ger (Asarum canadensis) makes an
Dense, Strangling growths of Japanese honeysuckle may be excellent ground cover in shady ar-
Japanese honeysuckle can impact treated with a glyphosate herbicide. eas. All these species are easy to
desirable vegetation by decreasing Glyphosate is recommended because cultivate, have wildlife and aesthetic
light availability within the habitat, it is biodegradable and will begin to value, and can generally be obtained
depleting soil moisture and nutrients, break down into harmless compo- from commercial sources or propa-
or by toppling upright stems through nents on contact with the soil. How- gatedby wild-collected seeds or put-
the sheer weight of accumulated ever, it is nonselective and will af- tings.
vines. Negative effects of Japanese fect all green vegetation. Therefore
honeysuckle invasion include devel- it is best applied to the semiever- Wriuen by Dr. Charles E. Williams,
opment of malformed trunks in trees, green leaves with a spray or wick Department of Biology, Clarion
Univers ity
suppression of plant growth, inhibi- applicator in late autumn when other
tion of regeneration in woody and vegetation is dormant but Japanese
References
herbaceous plants, and alteration of honeysuckle is still physiologically
habitats used by native wildlife. active. Reapplication may be neces-
Evans, J. E. 1082. Japanese honeysuckle
sary to treat plants missed during the (Lonicera japonica): A literature revie
Control initial.treatment. To be safe and ef- of management practices. Natural Area*
Small populations can be controlled fective, herbicide use requires care- Journal 4:4-10.
by careful hand-pulling, grubbing ful knowledge of the chemicals, ap-
with a hoe or a shovel-, and removal propriate concentrations, and the Hatvill, A. M., Jr., ct at. 1992. Atlas of the
Virginia Flora, 2nd ed. Virginia Botanical
of trailing vines. In old fields and effective method and timing.of their
roadsides, twice yearly mowing can application. Consult a natural re- Associates. Farmville, Va.
slow vegetative spread, however, source specialist for more informa- Sather, N. 1988. Lonicera japonica:
due to vigorous resprouting, stem tion on herbicide use and prescribed Element stewardship abstract. The Nature
.density may increase. burning techniques. Conservancy, Minneapolis.
In pine plantations or in fire-de-
pendent natural communities, Japa- Suggested, Alternatives Sp6ngberg, S. 1990. The first Japanese
nese honeysuckle can be controlled Some native alternatives to Japanese plants for New England. Arnoldia 50(3):
2-11.
by prescribed burning. Burning can honesuckle for use in home land-
greatly, decrease the abundance of scaping include trumpet creeper

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virgin ia Native Plant Society.

%..Oil Nil Virginia Native Plant Society
Department of Conservation & RLcreation 844, Annandale,-VA 22030
CONSERVING MUMS NAMALAND nauja4AL nswiU@ P.O. Box
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312, Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

Invasive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
Wudzu (Pueraria lobata (Willd.) Ohwi)

Description
Kudzu is a perennial, trailing or climbing vine of the legume family. Dark
R
green'leaves, starchy fibrous roots, and elongated purple flowers with a

V
fragrance reminiscent of grapes readily identify this aggressive vine. A dense T
,@,Z7'
stand of identically colored plants growing on and around everything in its
path is also a familiar field mark. Rarely flowering, kudzu stems and roots
spread out in all directions from root crowns, with new plants beginning
every one to two feet at stem nodes. This dense packing of kudzu can result
in tens of thousands of plants occupying a single acre of land. Kudzu leaves
are hairy beneath, often tri-lobed, and in groups of three on the vine. The . . ....
1/2 to 3/4 inch purple flowers are pea-like in shape and are produced on
plants exposed to direct sunlight. Kudzu fruits, present in October and No-
vember, are hairy, bean-like pods which produce only a few viable seeds in
each pod cluster. It is thought that some seeds can remain dormant for sev- Kudzu (Pueraria lobata)
eral years before they germinate. During the peak growing season in early
summer, this prolific vine can grow at a rate of a foot a day, easily covering found in Florida where it has begun
and choking trees and understory vegetation. to invade the Everglades. Through-
out Virginia, kudzu stands are a
40abitat use as a soil stabilizer, animal fod- common sight along roadways and
A hardy opportunist, kudzu grows der, and ornamental vine. Due to its bordering agricultural fields.
in a variety of habitats and environ- prolific nature and lack of natural
mental conditions, but does best on insect or disease controls, kudzu Threats
deep, well-drained, loamy soils. Al- quickly made a pest of itself and was Where it grows, kudzu has the
most any disturbed area is suitable considered a nuisance by the early ability to out-compete and elimi-
habitat for this vine. Roadsides, old 1950s. In 1970 it was listed as a nate native plant species and up-
fields, vacant lots and abandoned common weed by the Soil Conser- set the natural diversity of plant and
yards are all prime spots for new vation Service. Today, kudzu is animal communities. Its extremely
kudzu growth. spread along the Atlantic coast; rapid growth rate and habit of grow-
north to Illinois and Massachusetts, ing over objects threatens natural
Distribution west to Texas and Oklahoma, and areas by killing native vegetation
A native of Japan, kudzu was south to Alabama, Georgia and Mis- through crowding and shading, and
brought to the southeastern United sissippi where the heaviest infesta- can seriously stifle agricultural and
States at the turn of the century for tions occur. It has also recently been timber production. In addition, al-

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation, or the Virginia Native Plant Society.

Virginia Native Plant Society
V"Drv P.O. Box 844
Annandale, VA 22003
N.J X
ent of Conservation & Recreation
VIRGNIAS NATURALAND RECRE"NAL RESOURCES
W500 East Main Street, Suite 312 Wo
Richmond, VA 23219

Invas'ive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
Kudzu

though edible by many grazing ani- can be eliminat ed by persistent ported to the roots where they are
mals, its viney nature makes it diffi- weeding, mowing, or. grazing dur- able to kill the entire plant.
cult to cut and bale, making it unde- ing the growing season over a pe- In some areas, prescribed burn-
sirable as a hay crop. Grazing can riod of three to four years. Unfortu- ing may be used as a follow-up
eliminate kudzu fields in just a few nately, with root systems that can be treatment after herbicide application.
years making them unsuitable for use up to 12 feet deep, eradication by Although it should be carefully and
as pastures except over a short time direct root removal is not practical. professionally handled, this two step
period. Because of its hardy nature Long-term treatment of heavily process is effective in clearing out
and lack of natural enemies, kudzu infested sites usually requires the leaf litter and speeding
is able to colonize diverse habitats application of herbicides over a pe- recolonization of an area by desir-
and achieve a widespread distribu- riod of up to five years to inhibit the able native plant species.
tion. growth of new shoots. Biodegrad-
able glyphosphate herbicides are rec- References
Control, ornmended for control of kudzu in
Control of well established kudzu natural areas. These herbicides break Fernald, M. L. 1950.'Gray's Manual of
stands can take up to 10 years. Per- down rapidly into harmless compo- Botany, Eighth edition. American Book
sistent eradication of all roots is the nents when exposed to soil. Because Company, New York. 1632 pp.
key to the control of this pest, keep- glyphosphate is a systemic, non-se@ Gleason, H. A., and A. Cronquist.991.
ing in mind that a single kudzu patch lective herbicide that affects all green Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern
may extend past landowner bound- vegetation, treatments should be United States and Adjacent Canada,
second edition. The New York Botani
aries. The most effective method of carefully timed and applied by Garden, New York. 910 pp. ce
control will depend on several fac- trained applicators. The best time for
tors; size of the infested area, prox- application of these herbicides is at Harvill, A. M., Jr., et al. 1992. Atlas of the
imity to sensitive species or other the end of the growing season when Virginia Flora, fifth edition. Virginia
desirable vegetation, and accessibil- the. plants are actively transporting Botanical Associates, Farmville. 135 pp.
ity of the patch. Small patches of nutrients from leaves and stems to Kudzu in Alabama - History, Uses, and
kudzu that are not well established root systems. When applied at the Control. Alabama Cooperative Extension,
(usually ones less than ten years old) proper time, herbicides are trans- Circular ANR-65, Auburn. 8 pp.

For more i .nformation, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation, or the Virginia Native Plant Society.

irginia Native Plant Society
P.O. Box 844
60CR Annandale, VA 22003
Department of Conservation & Recreation
riONSERVNGVW"SNATUR,kLANDRECREATKX4ALRLSOURCES
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219
This fact sheet Was funded in part by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management @rogram through Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act of 1972 as amended.

Invasive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
Offile-a-minute (Polygonum pe[foliatum L.)

Description A
Also called tearthumb because of the spines on its leaves and stems, this
annual vine of the smartweed family can climb up to 15 feet in height. Al-
though similar to two native Polygonum species (arrow-vine and halberd-
leaved tearthumb), mile-a-minute differs from these primarily in its leaves
and fruits. The leaves are light green, one to three inches wide, and perfectly
triangular. The fruits are berry-like, fleshy, blue, and approximately pea-
sized. The most striking feature of this plant is the saucer-shaped sheath at
the base of each leaf. This feature is not found on any other Polygon=
species. Rapidly growing at about a half foot per day, mile-a-minute can
reach lengths of 20 feet. This prolific vine easily grows over other vegeta-
tion, stealing nutrients, choking stems, and blocking sunlight.

Habitat come a pest. So far it has been reported
Mile-a-minute thrives in areas with at a few sites in Northern Virginia.
plenty of direct sunlight and damp soil. Mile-a-minute (Polygonum perfoliatunt)
It is especially prevalent along road- Threats
sides, ditches, stream banks, wet mead- Its rapid growth and viney nature allow the plant becomes excessively viney.
ows, and clearcuts. it generally grows mile-a-minute to overtake the native Removal of brush, leaves and woodpiles
in areas with an abundance of leaf litter vegetation of an area, smothering seed- which may create thick litter is also ef-
on the soil surface. This appears to help lings and out-corripeting adult plants for fective in controlling the spread of the
0
ep the soil moist and may aid in the space, nutrients and sunlight. This com- plant. Herbicides may be used as an al-
rmination of seeds. petition is a particular concern in wet ternative in heavily infested areas. Spot
meadows which may support rare wet- applications of biodegradable
Distribution land plants. Although it does not appear glyphosphate herbicides are recom-
A native of Japan, mile-a-minute was to be a threat to farmers, it can easily mended before mile-a-minute goes to
accidentally brought to Pennsylvania in become a pest to gardeners and land- seed in early August. As glyphosphate
the 1930's with a shipment of rhodo- scapers, destroying ornamental plants is a non-selective herbicide which af-
dendrons. Its seeds were allowed to and landscaped yards. fects all green vegetation, it should be
mature and were soon spread by birds used sparingly so as not to contact de-
and rodents that ate the fruits. In eight Control sirable vegetation which may be grow-
years, from 1981 to 1989, mile-a-minute Because mile-a-minute is an annual ing with the mile-a-minute. Profession-
extended its range in Pennsylvania from (propagating only from seeds) with a als should be consulted to determine the
five to eleven counties. In recent years, shallow root system, this invasive is best best method of control in patches that
it has crept down the coast into Mary- removed from lightly infested areas by are heavily infested with this invasive
land and Washington D.C., becoming digging the plants up (with strong gloves species.
established in more than half of to protect hands from the spines) and Reference
Maryland's counties. Although not disposing of them before they go to seed. Mountain, W. L. 1989. Mile-a-minute
widely distributed in Virginia, mile-a- Seed set begins in early August and ter- UDdate - distribution, biology and control
minute has the ability to rapidly colo- minates at first frost. Removal of the suggestions. Regulatory Horticulture
nize roadsides and waste areas and be- plants is also best accomplished before 15T!):21-24.

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation, or the Virginia Native Plant Society.

Alm Virginia Native Plant Society
P.O. Box 844
4"DCR Annandale, VA 22003
WPM. ent of Conservation & Recreation 3

1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219

Invasive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
*orcelain-berry (Ampelopsis brevipedunculata (Mwidm.) Trautv.)

Description
Porcelain-berry is a deciduous, climbing vine of the grape family which can grow,
with support, to a height of 16 feet. It is related to two North AmericanAmpelopsis
species, raccoon-grape and pepper-vine. The leaves of porcelain-berry are bright
3
green, slightly hairy on the underside, and often deeply lobed with three to five
lobes per leaf. Young twigs are also hairy to the touch. The unusual fruits of porce-
lain-berry, however, distinguish it from similar species. This fruit is also the feature
that may be responsible for its introduction to North America. Ile fruit is hard,
with the appearance of porcelain, and changes in color from white to a series of
pastel shades of yellow, lilac, and reen before finally turning a sky blue. All the 5-
9
colors can often be found on a single fruit cluster. @,7

Habitat grows quickly and, once established, is
Porcelain-berry is a hardy species that tenacious and can be difficult to remove.
can adapt to a variety of environmental It is relatively insect and disease resis
conditions. It grows well in most soils tant, and can outcompete native species
but is especially successful in moist, for water and nutrients. The thick mats Porcelain-berry (Ampelopsis brevipedunculata)
slightly shady areas along stream banks, of porcelain-berry, which are so attrac- tion as well. If hand pulling is not fea-
and in thickets. tive to landscapers, spatially usurp other sible, porcelain-berry may be removed
plants. by the spot application of glyphosphate
estribution herbicides to individual plants. As
A native of northeast Asia, porcelain- Control glyphosphate is a non-selective herbi-
berry was cultivated in North America Surprisingly, this invasive plant is still cide, it should be used sparingly so as
as an ornamental bedding and screening popular in the horticultural trade. The not to contact desirable plants growing
plant. It spread into natural areas when most effective control is removal from with porcelain-berry. Herbicide treat-
birds ate the berries and spread the seeds commercial trade and the use of alter- ment is most effective when applied to-
in their droppings. Once established in native plants for landscaping and gar- ward the end of the growing season
the wild, this prolific vine spread along dening. Some alternative species include when plants are actively transporting
the East Coast from New England to trumpet honeysuckle, goldflame honey- nutrients from stems and leaves to root
North Carolina and west to Ontario and suckle and j ackman clematis. systems. As with manual removal of
Michigan. Locally, it has been Where removal of porcelain-berry is plants, follow-
documented in ten counties in northern necessitated, hand pulling the plants up treatments may be needed in
and central Virginia. should be done before the plant is in fruit subsequent years to remove plants
to avoid scattering seeds. Because the which have sprouted from seeds
Threats roots of porcelain-berry plants often remaining in the soil.
The very features that make porcelain- merge with shrubs or other desirable Reference
berry attractive as a landscape plant also vegetation, this type of manual removal Spangler, R. L. 1977. Landscape Plants for the
Central and Northeastern United States including
make it a problem in natural areas. Al- is difficult in well established patches Lower and Eastern Canada. Burgess Publishing
though relatively slow to establish, it without damaging the desirable vegeta- I Company, U.S.A. 506 pp,

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation, or the Virginia Native Plant Society.

4 Virginia Native Plant Society
P.O. Box 844
ikR@a & Recreation Annandale, VA 22003

1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219

This fact sheet was funded in part by the Department of Environmental Quality's Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA 270ZO312-01 of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Coastal Resource Management Act of 1972 as amended.

Invasive Alien Plant Species of Virginia
*ree-of-Heaven (Ailanthus altissima (Miller) Swingle)

Description
Tree-of-heaven is a small to medium-sized tree in the mostly tropical Quas-
sia family. It has smooth gray bark. Leaves are compound, alternate, odd- N.
pinnate, with 11-25 lanceolate leaflets. Most leaflets have one to three course
teeth near their base. Tree-of-heaven leaves may be confused with those of
sumac or black walnut. Flowers occur in panicles at the ends of branches;
male flowers produce a strong odor which has been described as "the smell
of burnt peanut butter." The leaves when crushed also produce this distinc-
tive, offensive odor. Seeds are centered in a papery sheath called a Samara.
The samaras are slightly twisted or curled, and twirl as they fall to the ground.
They can be borne on the wind great distances from the parent plant.

Habitat establish a taproot three months
Tree-of-heaven establishes itself from germination. Thus they quickly
readily on disturbed sites. These in- outrace many native plant species in Tree-of-Heaven (Ailanthus altissima)
clude vacant lots of the inner city, competition for sunlight and space. as possible, preferably when the soil
railroad embankments, highway Tree-of-heaven also produces a is moist to insure removal of the, en-
medians, fence rows and roadsides. toxin in its bark and leaves. As these tire taproot. Larger plants should be
naturally forested areas, distur- accumulate in the soil, the toxin in- cut; two cuttings a year may be nec-
Once created by severe storms or hibits the growth of other plants. essary, once in the early growing
insect infestations can open the way This toxin is so effective it is being season and once in the late growing
for tree-of-heaven infestation. studied as a possible source for a season. Initially, this will not kill the
Distribution natural herbicide. These factors plant; it will vigorously resprout
Tree-of-heaven is native to a region combine to make tree-of-heaven a from the roots, but seed production
extending from China south to Aus- very aggressive invasive plant able will be prevented and the plants will
to displace native tree and herb spe-
tralia. It was imported into the cies. Furthermore, the root system be lowered in stature. If continued
United States in 1784 by a Philadel- is capable of doing damage to sew- over a period of several years, cut-
phia gardener. In the western states ers and foundations. t,ing during the growing season
it was brought over by Chinese im- stresses the plants and may eventu-
migrants who use it for medicinal Control ally kill them.
purposes. Due to its rapid growth Tree-of-heaven is very difficult to A glyphosate herbicide, either
and prolific seed production, it remove once it has established a tap- sprayed onto the leaves or painted
quickly escaped from cultivation. root. It has persisted in certain ar- onto a freshly cut stump will kill the
Threats eas despite cutting, burning and plant. However, to insure the herbi-
One tree-of-heaven can produce up herbiciding. Therefore, seedlings cide gets into the root system, it is
to 350,000 seeds in a year. Seedlings , should be removed by hand as early best to apply this herbicide in the late

F
For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virginia Native Plant Society.
iOD Virginia Native Plant Society
Department of Conservation & Recreation
CONSERVING VIRCINIAS NAMIA AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES P.O. Box 844, Annandale, VA 22030
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312, Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

Invasive Alien Plant S of Virginia
pecies
Tree-of-Heaven

growing season while the plant is concentrations, and the effective and Ailanthus glandulosa. The Nature
transloca .ting nutrients to its roots. method and timing of their applica- Conservancy, San Francisco.
Glyphosate herbicides are recom- tion. Consult a natural resource spe- Hu, S. 1979. Ailanthus. Arnoldia 39(2):29-
mended because they are biodegrad- cialist or agricultural extension agent 50.
able, breaking down into harmless for more information before at-
components on contact with the soil. tempting herbicide control of tree-
However, glyphosate is a nonselec- of-heaven. Illustration reprinted by permission from
tive, systemic and will affect all green The New Britton and Brown Illustrated
vegetation. To be safe and effective, References Flora of the Northeastern United States
herbicide use requires careful knowl- and Adjacent Canada, vol. 2, pg. 469, H.
Hoshovsky, M. 1986. TNC Element Gleason, copyright 1952, The New York
edge of the chemicals, appropriate Stewardship Abstract: Ailanthus altissima Botanical Garden.

For more information, contact the Department of Conservation and Recreation or the Virginia Native Plant Society.
t Society.

Virginia Native Plant Society
Department of Conservation & Recreation 0
CONSERVINGVIRUNIASNATURAL ID RECREMONAL RESOURCES P.O. Box 844, Annandaic, VA @22@030
1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312, Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-7951

Appendices:

C. Model Resource Management Plan

COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA

North Landing River
Natural Area Preserve
Resource Management Plan,
First Edition

Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritiage
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219
Telephone (804) 786-7951

Natural Heritage Technical Document #-95-59

DCR
Department of Conservation & Recreation
CONSERVING VIRGINIAS NATURAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES

5-K

Spreading Pogonia
Cleistes divaricata

Illustration by Caren A. Caljouw

NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN,

FIRST EDITION

Natural Heritage Technical Document #95-9

15 February 1995

prepared by the
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritage
1500 East Main Street, Suite 312
Richmond, VA 23219
Telephone (804) 786-7951

This project was funded, in part, by the Virginia Coastal Resources
Management Program through Grant NA370ZO360-01 of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal
Resource Management, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972, as amended.

This document may be cited as follows:

Clark, K.H., and J.L. Potter. 1995. North Landing River Natural Area Preserve
Resource Management Plan, First Edition. Natural Heritage Technical
Document #95-9. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation,
Richmond, Virginia. February 1995. 164 pp.

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation programs, activities, and employment
opportunities are available to all people regardless of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability,
national origin, or political affiliation. An equal opportunity/affirmative action employer.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES (iii)

LIST OF FIGURES Ov)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS (v)

INTRODUCTION (1)
PURPOSE OF THE PLAN (1)
PURPOSE OF THE SITE (1)
POLICY (1)
NATURAL AREA DEDICATION (2)
PERTINENT NATURAL RESOURCE LAWS (2)
PARTNERS IN CONSERVATION PROJECT (3)
COOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT (3)

SITE AND VICINITY DESCRIPTION (7)
LOCATION (7)
BOUNDARIES (7)
FACILITIES (11)
SURROUNDING LAND USE (13)
DEMOGRAPHICS (15)
AREA HISTORY (17)

RESOURCES (20)
PHYSICAL AND ABIOTIC FEATURES (20)
OVERVIEW OF NATURAL COMMUNITIES (25)
NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES (26)
HISTORIC RESOURCES (37)
RECREATION RESOURCES AND PUBLIC ACCESS (38)
SCENIC RESOURCES (44)

CONSERVATION PLANNING (53)
THE ECOSYSTEM (53)
BIODIVERSITY SIGNIFICANCE (54)
CONCEPTUAL ECOLOGICAL MODEL (54)
STRESS ASSESSMENT (72)
CONSERVATION PLANNING BOUNDARIES (75)

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

MANAGEMENT (78)
PRIMARY LAND CLASSIFICATION (78)
ZONE CLASSIFICATION (78)
REGULATIONS, POLICIES, AND GUIDELINES (79)
MANAGEMENT DIRECTION (80)
MANAGEMENT UNITS (134)
ACTION PLANS (146)

REFERENCES (149)

APPENDICES
1. MANAGEMENT PLANNING ADVISORY TEAM (152)
2. RANKS AND STATUS ABBREVIATIONS (157)
3. SCIENTIFIC NAMES (159)
4. ACRONYMS (163)

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

LIST OF TABLES

1. PERTINENT NATURAL RESOURCE LAWS (4)

2. TRACT INFORMATION FOR
NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE (10)

3. LOCAL AND REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHICS (16)

4. NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES OF THE
NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE (27)

5. WATER-RELATED RECREATION AND
RECOMMENDED WATERBODIES (45)

6. COMPONENTS OF
THE NORTH LANDING RIVER ECOSYSTEM (58)

7. STRESS ASSESSMENT FOR
NORTH LANDING RIVER ECOSYSTEM (73)

8. ACTION PLANS FOR
NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE (147)

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

LIST OF FIGURES

1. LOCATION OF
NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE (8)

2. BOUNDARIES OF
NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE (9)

3. LOCATIONS OF FACILITIES AT
NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE (12)

4. EXTENT OF DESIGNATED STATE SCENIC RIVER STATUS
FOR THE NORTH LANDING RIVER (49)

5. EXTENT OF
NORTH LANDING RIVER ECOSYSTEM (55)

6. DIAGRAMMATIC PROFILE OF
NORTH LANDING RIVER ECOSYSTEM (59)

7. CONCEPTUAL ECOLOGICAL MODEL FOR
NORTH LANDING RIVER ECOSYSTEM (70)

8. SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL BOUNDARIES FOR
NORTH LANDING RIVER ECOSYSTEM (77)

9. MANAGEMENT UNITS OF
NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE (135)

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The development of this management plan was made possible by funding
from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
through Virginia Coastal Resources Management Program Grant
#NA370ZO360-01. Matching funds were provided by the Virginia
Department of Conservation and Recreation.

This management plan was completed with the assistance of the North
Landing River Natural Area Preserve Management Planning Advisory
Team. Advisory Team members contributed greatly to the development
of many components of this management plan and their review of the
draft helped produce a useful and polished product. Members of the
Advisory Team are listed in Appendix 1.

The principle author of this document is Kennedy H. Clark. Janit Potter
drafted the sections regarding recreation and scenic resources. Certain
members of the Advisory Team deserve special recognition for their
contributions: David Brownlie, Caren Caljouw, Sandra Erdle, Roger
Everton, Michael Focazio, Chris Ludwig, Janit Potter, Alan Savitsky, and
Robert Rose.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

INTRODUCTION

The North Landing River Natural Area Preserve is a system of protected
properties along the North Landing River and its tributaries in the cities
of Virginia Beach and Chesapeake, Virginia. The preserve consists of 22
tracts totalling over 10,300 acres. It is owned and managed by the
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (VDCR) and the
Virginia Chapter of The Nature Conservancy (TNC). This management
plan follows a format established in the State Lands Resource
Management Plan Guide (VDCR 1991) which was developed by the
VDCR Land Classification Committee and approved by the Department
Director.

PURPOSE OF THE PLAN

The primary purpose of this management plan is to guide the
management actions of the natural area preserve through the formulation
of goals and objectives and the establishment of management standards.
The plan also provides a summary of current knowledge about the site,
its resources, and its surroundings. Conservation planning and land
classification information is also furnished in the document.

PURPOSE OF THE SITE

The primary purpose for which North Landing River Natural Area Preserve
was established is the preservation of natural heritage resources for the
benefit of present and future Virginians. Management for the
preservation and enhancement of natural heritage resources shall take
precedence over all other purposes and management of the preserve.
Natural Area Dedication mandates this preservation directive for the site.
Natural area dedication is discussed in more detail below.

Secondary purposes for the establishment of the North Landing River
Natural Area Preserve include scientific research and environmental
education. A tertiary purpose is to provide opportunities for compatible
outdoor recreation.

POLICY

VDCR policies for management of natural area preserves are under
development. Policies will address such management issues as
01 1

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

prescribed burning, pesticide use, and hunting. TNC has established
policies pertaining to the management of TNC-owned property. These
policies are currently under review for updating.

NATURAL AREA DEDICATION

Natural area dedication is the strongest form of protection that can be
afforded a natural area in Virginia. It involves drafting a legally binding
Instrument of Dedication which states the preservation purpose of the
property, restricts land uses which are incompatible, and formally places
the site in the Virginia Natural Area Preserve System. The Instrument of
Dedication is recorded with the deed of the property. Dedication is
perpetual; ownership of the property can be transferred, but the
dedication will remain in effect. Natural area dedication is enabled by the
Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act of 1989 (Code of Virginia, section
10. 1 -209, et seq.).

Three of the 22 tracts that comprise the North Landing River Natural
Area Preserve are currently dedicated. The remaining tracts are
proposed for natural area dedication and the initial steps have been taken
towards dedicating these properties.

PERTINENT NATURAL RESOURCE LAWS

Several natural resource laws may affect the management of the North
Landing River Natural Area Preserve. Among the most important are the
Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act (Code of Virginia, sections 10. 1 -209
et seq.), the Federal Clean Water Act (33 USC section 1344), the
Virginia Wetlands Act (Code af Virginia, sections 28.2-1300 - 1320), the
Federal Endangered Species Act (16 USC sections 1531 -1544), the
Virginia Endangered Species Act (Code pf Virginia, sections 29.1-230 -
237), the Virginia Endangered Plant and Insect Species Act (Code of
Virginia, sections 3.1-1020 - 1030), the National Environmental Policy
Act (42 USC sections 4321 - 4307d), and the Virginia Environmental
Quality Act (Code af Virginia, sections 10. 1- 1200 - 122 1).

The Virginia Natural Area Preserves Act contains the enabling legislation
for the Virginia Natural Area Preserve System and natural area
dedication. The Federal Clean Water Act and the Virginia Wetlands Act
pertain to the protection of the wetland communities of the preserve.
The Federal Endangered Species Act, the Virginia Endangered Species
Act, and the Virginia Endangered Plant and Insect Species Act pertain to

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

species which are listed or proposed to be listed as threatened or
endangered at the state or Federal level and provide protection measures
for listed species. The National Environmental Policy Act and the Virginia
Environmental Quality Act require environmental review of certain
projects proposed, funded, or authorized by state or Federal agencies or
institutions.

A listing of all Federal and state natural resource laws which could affect
the North Landing River Natural Area Preserve or its management is given
in Table 1. -

PARTNERS IN CONSERVATION PROJECT

Several tracts of the North Landing River Natural Area Preserve
(Blackwater Farms, Riganto, Sorey) were acquired through the Partners
in Conservation Project. The Partners in Conservation Project was a
cooperative endeavor between VDCR and TNC in which TNC contributed
25% of the acquisition costs for natural area preserves purchased by
VDCR. Tracts acquired through the Partners in Conservation Project are
encumbered with deed restrictions under which they may revert to TNC
ownership if not managed appropriately as natural areas. These deed
restrictions, in addition to natural area dedication, help to reinforce the
purpose of the site.

COOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

Because of limited resources, VDCR has established a cooperative intra-
departmental strategy for the management of natural area preserves.
Staff from different divisions of VDCR participate in the management of
preserves. The Division of Natural Heritage (DNH) is responsible for
coordinating resource management planning and for implementing or
supervising ecological management, biological monitoring, and scientific
research conducted on natural area preserves. The Division of State
Parks (DSP) is responsible for all site operations at VDCR-owned natural
area preserves involving site security, visitor use, interpretation, and
maintenance of site facilities. DSP also participates in resource
management planning and assists DNH with ecological management.
The Division of Planning and Recreation Resources (DPRR) provides
technical advice to DSP and DNH regarding resource management
planning, especially on issues related to public access, recreation, and
scenic resources. DNH, DSP, and DPRR share the responsibility of
planning, designing, and constructing public access and other facilities

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 1

PERTINENT NATURAL RESOURCE LAWS

LEGISLATION CITATION RESPONSIBLE AGENCY

Presidential Order on Executive Order # 11987 Office of the President
Introduction of Exotic Species

U.S. Noxious Weed Law 7 USC 2802-2814 U.S. Dept. of Agriculture

U.S. Clean Water Act 33 USC 1344 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
U.S. Envir. Protection Agency

U.S. Rivers & Harbors Act 33 USC 404 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

U.S. Coastal Zone 16 USC 1451-1464 National Oceanic &
Management Act Atmospheric Administration

U.S. Anadromous Fish 16 USC 757a-757g National Marine Fisheries
Conservation Act Service

Navigable Waters of the U.S. 14 USC 2 U.S. Coast Guard

U.S. Clean Air Act 42 USC 7401-7671q U.S. Envir. Protection Agency

Nat. Environmental Policy Act 42 USC 4321-4307d all Federal agencies

Lacey Act (exotics) 18 USC 42 U.S. Department of Interior

U.S. Endangered Species Act 16 USC 1531-1544 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,
Nat. Marine Fisheries Service

U.S. Fish & Wildlife 16 USC 661-668s many
Coordination Act

U.S. Migratory Bird Treaty Act 16 USC 701-712 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

U.S. Aquatic Nuisance 16 USC 4701-4751 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,
Prevention & Control Act Nat. Marine Fisheries Service

Vir. Commercial Fishing Law Vi r. Code 28.2-100 - 1001 Vir. Marine Resources Comm.

Vir. Submerged Lands Law Vir. Code 28.2-1200 - 1213 Vir. Marine Resources Comm.

Vir. Wetlands Act Vir. Code 28.2-1300 - 1320 Vir. Marine Resources Comm.

Vir. Coastal Primary Sand Vir. Code 28.2-1400 - 1420 Vir. Marine Resources Comm.
Dune Act

Vir. Historic Resources Law Vir. Code 10.1-2200 - 2216 Vir. Dept of Historic Resources

Vir. Antiquities Act Vir. Code 10.1-2300 - 2306 1 Vir. Dept of Historic Resources

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)

LEGISLATION T CITATION PONSIBLE AGENCY

Vir. Endangered Species Act Vir. Code 29.1-563 - 570 Vir. Dept. of Game & Inland
Fisheries

Vir. Fish & Wildlife Law Vir. Code 29.1 -100 at seq. Vir. Dept. of Game & Inland
Fisheries

Vir. Endangered Plant & Insect Vir. Code 3.1-1020 - 1030 Vir. Dept. of Agriculture &
Species Act Consumer Services

Vir. Noxious Weed Law Vir. Code 3.1-296.11 - 296.21 Vir. Dept. of Ag. & Con. Ser.

Vir. Chesapeake Bay Vir. Code 10.1-2100 - 2115 Chesapeake Bay Local
Preservation Act Assistance Dept.

Vir. Wildfire & Burning Law Vir. Code 10.1-1141 1142 Vir. Dept. of Forestry
and 18.2-88

Vir. Emissions Law for Open Vir. Code 120.4-4001 400s Vir. Dept. of Envir. Quality
Burning

Vir. Water Control Law Vir. Code 62.1-44.2 - 44.34 Vir. Dept. of Envir. Quality

Vir. Ground-water Vir. Code 62.1-44.84 - 44.104 Vir. Dept. of Environmental
Management Act Quality

Vir. Environmental Quality Act Vir. Code 10. 1 - 1200 - 1221 Vir. Dept. of Envir. Quality

Vir. Waste Management Act Vir. Code 10.1-1400 - 1457 Vir. Dept. of Envir. Quality

Vir. Open Space Land Act Vir. Code 10.1-1700 - 1705 Vir. Outdoors Foundation

Vir. Erosion & Sediment Act Vir. Code 10.1-560 - 571 Vir. Dept. of Cons. & Rec.

Vir. Natural Area Preserves Act Vir. Code 10.1-202 - 217 Vir. Dept. of Cons. & Rec.

Vir. State Scenic Rivers Act Vi r. Code 10. 1 -400 -418 Vir. Dept. of Cons. & Rec.

Vir. Cave Protection Act Vir. Code 10. 1 - 1000 - 1008 Vir. Dept. of Cons. & Rec.

Vir. Conservation Easement Vir. Code 10.1-1009 - 1016 Vir. Dept. of Conservation and
ct Recreation

Vir. Shoreline Erosion & Public Vir. Code 10.1-700 - 711 Vir. Dept. of Conservation and
Beach Law I I Recreation

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

at a preserve. VDCR's Division of Soil and Water Conservation (DSWC)
provides technical advice and other support upon request. The Division
of Volunteerism and Constituent Services (DVCS) assists with promotion
and interpretation projects. VDCR's cooperative management process
is supervised by the Natural Areas Management Team (NAMT). The
NAMT is comprised of the Stewardship Director from DNH and the
Resource Management Coordinator from DSP. The NAMT coordinates
the cooperative management process, works on long-term natural area
preserve management issues including planning and project
implementation, and endeavors to secure non-general funds for staff
support to facilitate management of natural area preserves.

VDCR also turns to resources outside the department to help manage
natural area preserves. Other local, state, and Federal government
agencies, academic institutions, private conservation groups, and
volunteers often assist with the cooperative management efforts of
natural area preserves.

In the case of the North Landing River Natural Area Preserve, TNC and
VDCR will manage the preserve together. Rather than manage properties
independently respective of VDCR or TNC ownership, both TNC-owned
and VDCR-owned tracts will be managed through a coordinated TNC-
VDCR partnership. The TNC-VDCR partnership will direct management
to advance a set of conservation goals mutually agreed upon by both
entities.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

SITE AND VICINITY DESCRIPTION

LOCATION

The North Landing River Natural Area Preserve is located in the
southeastern corner of Virginia between the mouth of the Chesapeake
Bay, the Atlantic Ocean, and Currituck Sound. The preserve lies in the
southern areas of the cities of Virginia Beach and Chesapeake. The
preserve stretches almost 15 miles (24 km) along the North Landing
River. The approximate geographic center of the preserve (headwaters
of Alton's Creek) lies 20 miles (32 km) southeast of Norfolk and 15 miles
south-southwest of the Virginia Beach resort area.

The major north-south arterial roads in the area are Princess Anne Road
on the east side of the river and Blackwater Road on the west. Pungo
Ferry Road is the only east-west arterial road that crosses the river.
Access to or from Interstate 64, approximately 14 miles (22 km) from
the preserve's center, can be gained by following Princess Anne Road or
other routes northwest. The preserve has a small amount of upland road
frontage which lies mostly along Blackwater Road. Water frontage along
the North Landing River and its tributaries is plentiful, but nearly all of
this frontage is wetland.

Figure 1 shows the relative location of the preserve in a regional context.

BOUNDARIES

The North Landing River Natural Area Preserve is comprised of 22 tracts.
Five tracts are owned or are under negotiation by VDCR and 17 are
owned or under negotiation by TNC. Twelve contiguous tracts form an
11 mile (18 km) reach of continuous ownership (by either VDCR or TNC)
along the west side of the river. The remaining ten tracts are disjunct.
Eight lie on the west side of the river, two on the east side of the river,
and three are located along the Chesapeake and Albemarle Canal.
Boundaries of these tracts are mapped on Figure 2. Table 2 contains
information on each tract.

Some of the preserve boundaries are marked with VDCR or TNC
boundary markers, but most of the preserve's boundaries have yet to be
marked.

Figure 1. NATURAL AREA PRESERVE LOCATIONS

Oiler
it

0 Stir:
Hit

saw 0

W#
19
a
ftlhef'b
?-;j
.... "Ma
La

kin

77.

..... .....

... .. VS. ISLAND

n
...... ......

Raynor.

P
ARK-,
We of 32

Wr64
NAturAl Pret:erve
Ind le
-VIkG

5 Ckhr s-
Fentre
CK BAY

a le
Ba
. . ... .....

Saint
Mside

--rio

Location in Virginia ... ....
Scale of Miles

0 -W
Map br. VA Dept. of Conservation & Pecreatloo. Division of Natural Herlutae 2/954048 12 16 20 miles

Figure 2. BOUNDARIES OF NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE

x
'e'ad s IMM
/M
Q s Anr
" A

t
:7
DAY 2
r
t

DAY 4
COA V@@ .N.6
DAY 3 iVA It
DAY 5
-M0
X.
DAY 1
entre-as h Fd g
F I NE

CITY OF CHESAPEAKE -
jj@,@v t C h i n
WALKER
BOX CBAR

MILLER
Bac "81
WOODLY/OLD
La.
0 F
KELL AM
A-4
STEINHILBER Ong idge
A
BLACKWATER FARMS-
JAMES
1) 1 T @@Qter
RIGANTO
Brides
I.- I'. I ds
GILBERT A
r
t4c
-Alt
DOZIER
11 -T
Lj
de

AV
or,.
S T1
dio.
SOREY %
kit 0 VIR r
PEA C-
rX
iTafazu1c C

L: 7
_u_
NOT DEPICTED 7 -a
-7-
DAY 6 IT v
TU,
DAY 7
JACOBSON L

ull

2
2 4 6 10 miles
Scale of miles

The Nature Conservancy Land

VA Dept. of Conservation & Recreation Land

Army Corp of Engineers Land

MaP by: VA Dept. of ConserMlon & Recreation. Division of Natural Heritage 2/95

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 2

NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE
TRACT INFORMATION

TRACT NAME ACRES (HECTARES) OWNERSHIP

Blackwater Farms 1246(504) VDCR

Box C Bar 335036) TNC

City of Chesapeake 568(230) TNC

Day 1 839(340) TNC

Day 2 1100(445) TNC

Day 3 107(43) TNC

Day 4 104(42) TNC

Day 5 188(76) TNC

Day 6 14(6) TNC

Day 7 .7902) TNC

Dozier 780(316) TNC

ine 556(225) TNC

Gilbert 244(99) TNC

Jacobson 88(36) TNC

James 2500) TNC

Kellam 4508) VDCR

Miller 400-500 (162-202) optioned (VDCR)

Riganto 638(258) VDCR

Sorey 640(259) agreement of intent to
purchase (VDCR)

Steinhilber 110(44) TNC

Walker 821 (332) TNC

Woodly/Old 1465(592) optioned (TNQ

TOTALS 10,314-10,414 22
(4,174-4,214)

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Copies of the latest surveys and plats are kept on file at the TNC and
VDCR offices, respective of ownership.

Other public lands also occur within the vicinity. The U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) owns four islands in the North Landing River and
long narrow strip along the north bank of the Albemarle and Chesapeake
Canal. The City of Virginia Beach owns property on the east shore of
the North Landing River (Munden Point Park) and along upper West Neck
Creek (proposed to become West Neck Creek Park).

FACILITIES

Facilities currently existing on the preserve are limited. A quarter-mile
(400 m) long boardwalk into the marsh of the Dozier tract, built and
maintained by TNC, is served by a small gravel parking area off of
Blackwater Road just north of its crossing of Milldam Creek. An
observation platform, also built and maintained by TNC, is located in the
marsh of the City of Chesapeake tract at the confluence of Pocaty Creek
and the North Landing River. The platform is accessible only by water.
Some informal trails exist on the upland island area of the Blackwater
Farms tract.

The Kellam tract was purchased by VDCR specifically to provide public
access to the preserve and will be the site of public access facilities in
the near future. An access road from Blackwater Road, a parking area,
interpretive facilities, a boardwalk, and canoe access to Alton's Creek are
in the design stages and should be constructed by the summer of 1995.

Figure 3 shows the locations of these existing and proposed facilities.

Pungo Ferry Road, although not actually part of the preserve (owned by
City of Virginia Beach), bisects two of the otherwise contiguous tracts:
Blackwater Farms and Riganto.

There are no buildings or structures on the preserve beyond those
mentioned above.

A 0owerline right-of-way runs through the western part of Day tract
number two.

Bufts
FIGURE 3
Ed LOCATIONS OF FACILITIES AT
THE NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE
'5-ungj

L i

U
165 ou
e t 7-

S AVA TION
SS IF RESS FIELD)

ea
Ridge
Substa
wle

-7

168
4@ Back B

Land of
KFY -0-
Hi: -
i. PocATY CREEK OBSERVAnON PIATFOMI -2
(TNQ
ickor r 2. ALTON'S CREEK ACCESS AREA
(PROPOS M-. VDCR)
3. WLLDAM CREEK BOARDWALK (MC)

131.,kwwe@
f"1-:747- reeds
Bnid w r-
Lan
40M st, b

7-
Vine

- --AL-
,wth
N
C %
-ko
GINIA GtNIA
7-
CURRI
NMPV CAROUN
KILOMETERS 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Y. r2
F,,,,,,by
E@D t==4L (Is"a"d
MILES 1 1 2 4 5
=d

7
2

Tull Bay

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

SURROUNDING LAND USE

The area surrounding North Landing River Natural Area Preserve is
predominantly rural in character. Areas north of the preserve are heavily
urbanized and suburbanized. The preserve vicinity is subject to
increasing development pressures, mostly in the form of residential and
supporting commercial development.

The North Landing River Watershed encompasses an area of 74,635
acres (30,205 ha) with 2,841 acres (1, 150 ha) of which are located in
open waters. Agriculture is the primary land use in the watershed,
occupying 45 % of the land, or 32,633 acres (13,206 ha). Residential
uses, commercial buildings, and roadways cover another 12,997 acres
(5,260 ha) of the basin or 18% of the land area. The remaining 26,164
acres (10,588 ha) are undeveloped and stand mostly in managed and
unmanaged forests.

Agricultural lands consist mostly of row crops. Corn and soybeans are
normally rotated and a small grain cover crop is frequently planted in the
fall to help minimize soil loss over the winter and early spring. Other
agriculture includes market vegetables, pick-your-own berries, hog farms,
and horse pasture.

Area farmers are facing a number of pressures in operating their
businesses. In order to promote and enhance agriculture as an important
local industry, the ad hoc Southern Watersheds Committee has proposed
the Virginia Beach Agricultural Reserve Program (ad hoc Southern
Watersheds Committee 1994). The ad hoc committee includes
representatives from conservation groups, farming and business
interests, and local government. The objective of the program is to
arrange for the purchase of development rights on farmland in return for
working capital that can be reinvested in the farm. Purchased
development rights would be held in public trust by the City of Virginia
Beach. The program will also endeavor to find crops that will yield high
value to Virginia Beach farmers.

Many of the upland forests are managed for fiber production to varying
degrees. The Virginia Department of Forestry (VDoF) reported assisting
25 forest landowners with the development of forest management plans
for a total of 6,595 acres (2,669 ha) in the cities of Virginia Beach and
Chesapeake during the period from 1989 through 1992. Intensively
managed stands, which are generally pure loblolly pine, are often subject

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

to pre-commercial and commercial thinnings, periodic clear-cutting, site
preparation through the use of burning and fertilizers, re-seeding or re-
planting, and release spraying with herbicides. Most forest stands in the
area, however, are managed less intensively. Southern pine bark beetle
outbreaks are a concern among foresters and forest owners. Control
activities may involve cutting of infested and surrounding trees.

The cities of Virginia Beach and Chesapeake manage the growth and
development within the North Landing River Watershed. The City of
Virginia Beach includes recommendations for this region in the
Pungo/Blackwater Planning Area of the Comprehensive Plan: Planning
Commission Recommendations to City Council, December 12,1990 (City
of Virginia Beach 1992). This plan shows much of the area surrounding
the North Landing River and its tributaries as "environmentally sensitive
areas." The four issues cited in the comprehensive plan of particular
relevance for the Pungo/Blackwater Planning Area are:

(1) rural growth management,
(2) agricultural preservation,
(3) rural transportation management, and
(4) environmental protection.

The existing land use in the Pungo/Blackwater planning area is
predominantly agricultural mixed with one to three acre residential lots
intermittently located as strip development along the existing roadways.
A number of small, rural commercial centers have evolved along Princess
Anne Road and Blackwater Road. These centers represent the only
concentration of commercial land use in the watershed. A few small
subdivisions have been built or are under construction between Princess
Anne Road and the river.

The City of Chesapeake includes the area within the North Landing River
watershed in the Southern Chesapeake Planning Unit of their
comprehensive plan, entitled A Comprehensive Plan for the City Qf
Chesal2eake, Virginia (City of Chesapeake 1990). This comprehensive
plan was adopted by the Chesapeake City Council on July 25, 1990.
According to the plan, the Southern Chesapeake planning unit has three
primary functions:

(1) to sustain agriculture and protect open space,
(2) to provide for rural residential environments, and
(3) to provide compatible remote facilities sites for the U.S. Naval
14 fe

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Airfield and the Chesapeake Municipal Airport.

The existing character of the landscape in the Southern Chesapeake
Planning Unit is rural with agricultural and residential uses predominating.
Existing forested swamps and marshlands also comprise a large area.
The comprehensive plan describes the future form of the area south of
the Chesapeake and Albemarle Canal in the vicinity of Great Bridge as
being a "countryside community," while the southern and western
sections of the city are described as rural or environmentally sensitive.

The North Landing River watershed experiences heavy recreational use,
especially the waterways themselves. Boating and related activities are
the principal recreational uses of the watershed. Fishing, hunting,
camping, picnicking, walking, and wildlife observation are also common.
Recreation in the North Landing River watershed is discussed in detail in
the recreation resources section.

DEMOGRAPHICS

Table 3 summarizes some general demographic information regarding the
area.

In the last two decades, the coastal mid-Atlantic region, which includes
the North Landing River Watershed, has been growing at one of the
fastest paces in the United States. During this time period, the City of
Virginia Beach grew faster, by 25 percent, than any other city in the
nation.

The preserve lies in the City of Chesapeake and the City of Virginia
Beach. The regional context is the Hampton Roads Planning District
which includes Isle of Wight County, James City County, Southampton
County, York County, Gloucester County, and the Cities of Chesapeake,
Franklin, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth,
Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg.

The 1990 population of Virginia Beach was 393,089 and the projected
population for the year 2010 is 579,590. The 1990 population for
Chesapeake was 151,982 and the projected population for 2010 is
211,100. The 1990 population of the Hampton Roads Planning District
was 1,418,030 and the projected 2010 population is 1,753,113
(Lillywhite and Nieman 1993). The Hampton Roads Planning District has
the second greatest population of all 21 Virginia planning districts

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 3

LOCAL AND REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHICS

FEATURE I VIR. BEACH CHES. PLAN. DIST. ALL VIR. j

1990 393,069 151,976 1,416,443 6,187,200
population

1990 pop. 122,161 47,864 423,509 1,704,600
ages 0 - 19

1990 pop. 236,621 86,098 814,163 3,818,200
ages 20 - 59

1990 pop. 34,287 18,014 178,771 664,400
ages 60 +

2010 pop. 579,590 211,100 1,753,113 7,451,158
projection

1990 per 17,578 16,775 16,448 15,713
capita
income ($)

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

(Northern Virginia PDC is first).

The Pungo/Blackwater Planning Area, which contains the Virginia Beach
section of the preserve, is the largest Virginia Beach planning area in
terms of acreage, but it has the smallest population. In 1990 the
population of this planning area was approximately 4,300. A build-out
population cited in the comprehensive plan is 83,900 (City of Virginia
Beach 1992). Population growth in the Southern Chesapeake Planning
Unit, which contains the Chesapeake portion of the preserve, is
anticipated to increase from 14,129 in 1988 to 24,389 in 2002 (City of
Chesapeake 1990).

The current foundations of the local economy are tourism, the military,
and shipping. Major employers in the Hampton Roads Planning District
include the military and other government agencies and the services,
retail trade, and manufacturing industries. The economy in the North
Landing River watershed, however, continues to be based upon
agriculture and forestry (HRPDC 1993).

The per capita income for the Hampton Roads Planning District was
$16,448 in 1990; it was $15,713 for all of Virginia (HRPDC 1993).

AREA HISTORY

The North Landing River area was home to various groups of Native
Americans for at least 9,000 years before European settlers arrived in the
early 1600's. The most recent tribe, the Chesapeake, was gradually
replaced by English settlers in the first half of the 17th century.

The early colonial landscape of the 1600's was characterized by
scattered plantations of varying size with crossroad hamlets and river
landings. Tobacco was the first crop in the area and became the center
of the colonial economy. Farmers began planting other crops and turning
to timber harvest in the 1680's. Market crops, including tobacco, corn,
and wheat, were shipped overland to Norfolk, the closest deep-water
port. Lower Norfolk County, now the City of Virginia Beach, was
established during the early colonial period. The first courthouse for
Lower Norfolk County was built in 1661 on Broad Creek. A Baptist
congregation began services near Pungo Ferry in 1674 and became what
is now Oak Grove Baptist Church, the second oldest Baptist congregation
in Virginia.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

The early settlements in the'county depended on a poorly developed road
system for transportation of products to markets. The numerous
waterways and wetlands that hindered road development also
encouraged the adoption of water as the primary transportation medium
in the later 1700's. Agriculture improved in the 1700's and people
began building more substantial houses and communities. Several more
Baptist churches were established in the area, demonstrating the gradual
break from the Church of England in the colonies. Several conflicts of
the American Revolutionary War were fought in the vicinity, including the
expulsion of the last colonial governor of Virginia, Lord Dunmore, from
Norfolk. Farming operations diversified in the 1700's; local crops
included corn, oats, wheat, and flax. Trade in pitch, tar, and pork also
began.

Water-based transportation dominated the area from the later 1 700's into
the middle 1800's. Several canals were constructed to link key areas,
including the Chesapeake and Albemarle Canal (originally named the
Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal). Finished in 1859, the C&A Canal
linked the Elizabeth River and points north to the North Landing River and
points south. A drawbridge was constructed across the North Landing
River at Pungo Ferry Road in the early 1800's, but it was burned during
the Civil War. A ferry service replaced the bridge. Several minor
American Civil War conflicts were fought in the vicinity including the
burning of all the bridges in the area to prevent produce from reaching
markets. The still standing Princess Anne Courthouse was established
in 1824. By 1835, Princess Anne Courthouse was considered a main
commercial center in the area. In 1868, Princess Anne Courthouse
became the seat of Princess Anne County, which had been formed from
Lower Norfolk County. Hay, poultry, and cattle joined the list of
agricultural products. Railroads were constructed in the area in the
1880's and quickly replaced the canals and waterways as the major form
of transportation. Settlements, including Pungo and Creeds, grew
around the railroad depots.

The 20th Century has been a period of rapid change in the area. Virginia
Beach was established as a beach resort before the turn of the century
and was granted its town charter in 1906. A new turnstile bridge
replaced the ferry service across the river at Pungo Ferry Road by 1920.
Princess Anne County was still primarily agricultural in 1925. The
county was one of the most productive truck farming areas in the state.
Potatoes were the largest crop; other products included apples, peaches,
hay, corn, cotton, wheat, and peanuts. Dairy cows and hogs were also

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

raised in the early 20th century. The railroads in the area closed in the
1940's; farmers began to truck their goods to markets in Norfolk. The
City of Virginia Beach was formed from the Town of Virginia Beach and
Princess Anne County in 1963 and a city manager form of government
was adopted. The City of Chesapeake also was created in 1963 by the
merger of Norfolk County and the Town of South Norfolk. The northern
parts of Virginia Beach and Chesapeake experienced rapid growth in the
1970's and 1980's, but the southern areas remain rural in character.
The C&A Canal is now an important part of the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway (ICW) linking New England to Florida. The Pungo Ferry
drawbridge was replaced by a high profile bridge in 1991. Virginia Beach
continues to develop as a vacation destination and resort community.

TNC and VDCR conservation efforts began in the area in 1988. The first
component of the preserve, the Riganto tract, was acquired in 1989.
Acquisition efforts are continuing in the 1990's. Interest in conservation
of both the rural character of the area as well as the outstanding natural
resources have lead to several other projects by VDCR, TNC, and a host
of conservation partners.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

RESOURCES

PHYSICAL AND ABIOTIC FEATURES

TOPOGRAPHY

The topography of the North Landing River basin is low and flat. Low,
narrow, well-drained ridges and substantial wetland areas are separated
by wide, poorly drained flats. The ridges are generally oriented north-
south and average ten feet (3 m) above sea-level with some ridges
reaching 30 feet (9 m). The wetland areas generally surround shallow
rivers, creeks, and bays.

Most of the preserve is located on riverine wetland areas between the
poorly drained flats and the river. Approximately 95 percent of the
preserve is below five feet (1.5 m) above sea-level.

GEOLOGY

The North Landing River Natural Area Preserve is located on the Atlantic
Coastal Plain physiographic province. The geology of the coastal plain
is characterized by layers of unconsolidated sediments over deeply buried
bedrock. The bedrock in the North Landing River area is covered by
2000 to 5000 feet (610 - 1,524 m) of sediments. There are no bedrock
outcrops. Most of the geology underlying the preserve consists of
alluvial, organic-rich clay and silt. The geology of the uplands
surrounding the preserve consists of pebbly and cobbly sand grading
upward into muddy, fine sand, sandy silt, and silt (DMME 1993).

SOILS

Soils in the area were formed in layers of marine and fluvial sediments.
These sediments range in texture from sand to clay. Soils of the wetland
areas consist of organic matter and silt. The broad flats contain mostly
poorly drained silt loams. The sand component increases on and around
the low ridges which consist of moderately well-drained loams and fine
sandy loams (Hatch et al. 1985).

According to the Virginia Beach Soil Survey prepared by the Soil
Conservation Service (Hatch et al 1985), most of the soils on the
preserve itself are either Dorovan mucky peat or Pocaty peat.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Dorovan mucky peat, fou'nd in the swamp and pocosin areas, is a deep,
nearly level, poorly drained wetland soil. Composition is slightly to well-
decomposed organic matter and silt. The soil ranges from extremely
acidic through slightly acidic. In the swamps and pocosins, the peat
grades downward to a highly decomposed peaty clay that is underlain by
fluvial sand and gravel deposits with little organic matter. Surface-water
runoff is very slow. This soil type is continuously saturated and
frequently flooded.

The Pocaty peat soil type is found in the marshes of the preserve. Like
Dorovan, Pocaty peat is deep, nearly level, and poorly drained.
Composition is slightly to well-decomposed organic matter with some
silt. The soil is moderately permeable and surface-water runoff is very
slow. Pocaty peat ranges from strongly acidic to neutral, but may
become extremely acidic upon drying or exposure.

CLIMATE

The average winter temperature of the area is 420 F (5.5' C); the average
summer temperature is 77* F (25' C). Recorded extreme temperatures
are 5' F (-15' C) (1 /17/77) and 1030 F (39-50 C) (7/23/52). The growing
season length averages around 230 days. The date of first freeze is
generally in mid-November, the last freeze in late March.

The average total annual precipitation is 45 inches (114 cm). Twenty-
five inches (13 cm), or 56 percent, usually falls in April through
September, the growing season for most crops. Thunderstorms occur
on about 37 days each year; most occur during the summer (Hatch et al.
1985, NOAA 1993).

HYDROLOGY

The North Landing River watershed is part of the Albemarle-Pamlico
Estuarine region, the second largest estuarine system in the United
States.

As mentioned previously, the North Landing River watershed is on the
outer Atlantic Coastal Plain and is distinguished by flat topography and
low gradient rivers and creeks. The water table is at or near the surface
in much of the watershed, particularly in the riparian areas. The
hydrology on and in the vicinity of the preserve is characterized by
swamps and marshes draining slowly into sluggish rivers and creeks.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

The North Landing River empties into Currituck Sound in North Carolina
south of the preserve. Major tributaries to the river, from south to north,
include the Northwest River, Milldam Creek, Blackwater Creek, Alton's
Creek, Pocaty Creek, West Neck Creek, and the Chesapeake and
Albemarle Canal. The North Landing River watershed covers a 74,000
acre (29,947 ha) area, almost 3,000 acres (1,214 ha) of which are open
water. The headwaters of the North Landing River are in the area,of the
Kempsville community in northern Virginia Beach. The amount of net
flow is low and to the south.

Surface-water and ground-water levels are most often affected by
precipitation and evapotranspiration. Tides may cause extreme, but
temporary, fluctuations of water levels in the riparian areas as well as in
the water channels. Tides in the area are influenced mostly by wind
rather than gravitational effects. Strong winds from the southeast move
water into Currituck Inlet and northward up the North Landing River
flooding the bordering marshes and swamps. North to west winds will
cause low tides. Since wind speed, direction, and duration are irregular,
so are frequency, amplitude, and duration of the tides. Extreme high
tides will flood even the interior wetlands.

Several major projects have altered the hydrology of the area from its
natural state. The Chesapeake and Albemarle Canal was constructed in
the 1850's through Gum Swamp to connect the North Landing River to
the Elizabeth River. A set of locks at the community of Great Bridge
helps prevent the saline waters of the Elizabeth River from reaching the
North Landing River in large quantities. As part of the same canal
project, a channel was dredged down the North Landing River into
Currituck Sound. The dredging operation straightened, widened, and
deepened significant portions of the North Landing River. Several short
canals were dug cutting off several oxbows and creating marsh islands.
The C&A Canal and the North Landing River are now key components of
the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. A large ditch known as Canal
Number Two connects London Bridge Creek, a tributary of the
Lynnhaven River, to West Neck Creek, a major tributary of the North
Landing River. In 1989, a bypass canal was completed around Canal
Number Two for flood control purposes. As a result of this increased
hydrologic continuity, saltier water may be intruding into West Neck
Creek, but the ecological effects have not yet been determined. Pungo
Ferry Road was constructed on top of substantial wetland peat deposits
and required extensive dredge and fill operations through the wetland
area. Agriculture has affected the hydrology, too. Ditching of the

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

uplands to enhance drainage of agricultural fields likely has lowered the
water table in the fields and changed surface-water run-off patterns.

Ground-water withdrawals in the area are limited by water quality. The
ground water increases in salinity with increasing depth. Because of the
salinity, the largeindustrial and municipal withdrawals from deep aquifers
found in other parts of the Coastal Plain are absent in the North Landing
River watershed. Consequently, ground-water withdrawals are from
wells in shallow aquifers and are generally limited to domestic and
agricultural uses. These withdrawals are generally small and from
confined aquifers underlying, and somewhat isolated, from the water
table aquifer. The extent of local effects on water levels in the wetlands
is undetermined (M. Focazio, pers. comm.).

WATER QUALITY

The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's "General Report of
All Waterbody Data" (VDEQ 1995) provides recent water quality data for
the North Landing River and five of its major tributaries. According to
the report, all 77 river miles (124 km) of the waterbody fully support
water quality standards for fish consumption and swimming. Water
quality standards for aquatic life support also are currently fully
supported for all 77 miles (124 km), however, seven miles are
considered threatened by urban non-point pollution sources. Drinking
water supply goals are fully supported for five river miles (8 km), which
includes the entire extent of the waterway utilized for public water
supply (Stumpy Lake and tributaries). The report also notes that none
of the waterbody is impaired by failure to met Clean Water Act point and
non-point source pollution standards.

The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) also maintains
a network of ambient water quality monitoring stations in the area.
Sampling at the monitoring stations is conducted on a monthly to
quarterly schedule. Basic field parameters (pH, DO, temperature, salinity,
and conductivity) are measured and samples are taken for fecal coliform,
nutrients, TSS, BOD, water column metals, and sediment metals. VDEQ
has agreed to supply VDCR with a data from this monitoring.

There are six treated wastewater discharges into the North Landing River
and its tributaries. The sources of these six discharges are Bergey's
Dairy Farm, Mount Pleasant Mennonite Church, Norfolk Dredging
Company, Standard Transpipe Virginia, Incorporated, Oceana Naval Air

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Station, and Hope Haven - Union Mission.

As mentioned above, the direct connection from the saline Lynnhaven
River to the freshwater North Landing River via Canal Number Two has
been enhanced by the construction of a bypass canal. This project
seems to have resulted in some influx of saltwater into the North Landing
River system. The saltwater influx appears to be driven primarily by the
wind tides; the highest salinities in West Neck Creek, 24.5 ppt, were
observed during periods of sustained, strong northerly winds (Bales and
Skrobialowski 1993). The effects of these salt water pulses on the
aquatic and wetland plant and animal communities has not been
determined.

According to the records of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, 1,364 tons of freight passed through the C&A Canal
at the Great Bridge lock in 1992. Of this total, 258 tons were petroleum
products and fertilizers. A spill of kerosene-like jet fuel occurred on the
North Landing River side of the lock into the canal in June of 1994.
Although the extent of this spill turned out to be very minor, the event
indicates a potential threat from spills to water quality of the North
Landing River system.

The Virginia Nonpoint Source Pollution Watershed Assessment Report
(VDCR 1993) prepared by the VDCR's Division of Soil and Water
Conservation gives an overall priority rating of high for non-point source
pollution in the North Landing River hydrologic unit. Individual "pollution
potential" ratings were high for urban-related sources, high for
agriculture-related sources, and low for forestry- related sources. The
report states that the hydrologic unit containing the North Landing River
watershed rates in the top 10% statewide for agricultural non-point
source pollution priorities.

The United States Geologic Survey (USGS) is conducting a study of
ground water on the preserve and in the vicinity in cooperation with
VDCR and TNC. Preliminary results have been collected from a single
transect of monitoring wells running from agricultural uplands through
the swamp and pocosin into the marsh. These preliminary results
indicate that ground-water quality was influenced by agriculture in a
shallow well in an agricultural field. However, ground-water quality
measured from wells in nearby swamp, pocosin, and marsh appeared not
to be influenced by agriculture (M. Focazio, pers. comm.).

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Another water quality issue facing the North Landing River is the disposal
of dredge spoil from maintenance dredging of the ICW channel in the
river. The ICW channel in the reach of the North Landing River just north
of the state line is dredged approximately every five years. The dredged
material is disposed in the shallow, open-water sites on the west side of
the navigation channel from the state line to about two miles (3 km)
upriver of the state line. Sedimentation and Sediment Quality in the
North Landina River, Currituck Sound Estuarine System (Riggs et al.
1993) prepared by the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study states, "It is
our opinion that open disposal of mud sediments resulting from
maintenance dredging of the Intracoastal Waterway channel have
previously and will continue to have significant impacts upon turbidity
levels of associated estuarine waters for several years after dredging has
been completed." Such disposal of dredged material also may re-
suspend toxic substances into the water column which had previously
settled on the bottom.

OVERVIEW OF NATURAL COMMUNITIES

The North Landing River Natural Area Preserve is part of an interior
coastal wetland ecosystem. The preserve is over 85 percent wetland,
containing extensive swamp, pocosin, and marsh communities. The
wetlands are surrounded by forested or farmed uplands. A more detailed
discussion of the natural communities can be found in the conservation
planning section of this document.

Several different types of swamp have been identified in the area, the
number depends upon the classification scheme utilized. Swampy areas
are characterized by such tree species as swamp tupelo (Nvssa biflora),
red maple (Acer rubrum), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), green ash
(Fraxinus gennsylvanica), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Bald cypress
(Taxodium distichum), pond pine (Rings serotina), and Atlantic white
cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides) also form components of some of the
swamp communities. In some swampy areas, upland islands can be
found supporting mesophytic oaks (Quercus spp.) along with loblolly
pine.

Deep in the interior of the wetlands, pocosins are found. Pocosins are
evergreen shrub-dominated, peat-based wetlands. Dominant shrub
species include sheep laurel (Kalmia angustifolia), fetterbush (Lyonia
lucida), and inkberry (Ilex alabra). The few, scattered, and stunted trees
are mostly of pond pine, red bay (Persia borbonia), and sweet bay

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

(Magnolia virginiana). Laurel leaved greenbrier (Smilax laurifolia) grows
throughout the scrub.

The North Landing River's extensive marshes are fresh to slightly
brackish water wetlands. The largest areas of marsh are found on the
west side of the river just north of the state line. Common species of the
marshes include big cordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides), black needlerush
(Juncus roemerianus), common reed (Phragmites australis), several cattail
species (Tyl2ha spp.), and switchgrass (Panicurn virgatum). There are
many types of marshes and species richness in some of the marsh types
is quite high.

Uplands to the east and west of the preserve crest in a low ridge which
slopes gently down into the wetlands. Most of the uplands around the
preserve are in crops or forests. Common forest tree species include
loblolly pine, oaks, red maple, and sweetgum.

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES

The North Landing River wetlands are rich in biodiversity. Forty-one
natural heritage resources have been recently documented from the
wetlands and adjacent uplands of the North Landing River Natural Area
Preserve. Of the 41, 22 are rare plant species, ten are rare animal
species, eight are rare natural communities, and one is a bird nesting
colony. In addition, 16 watch-listed species have been recently
documented from the area, three of which are animals and 13 are plants.
At least 15 other natural heritage resources, mostly rare animal species,
have a moderate to high potential to occur in the North Landing River
area. Intensive biological survey for these potential natural heritage
resources has not yet been completed, but either historic records or
existing habitat conditions indicate the possibility that they may occur in
the area. Table 4 lists the natural heritage resources along with their
rarity ranks and legal status. Definitions of rarity ranks and legal status
abbreviations used in Table 4 can be found in Appendix 2.

Much of the natural heritage resource knowledge regarding the North
Landing River ecosystem came from a natural areas inventory project
conducted by VDCR for the City of Virginia Beach. The goal of the
project was to systematically identify the natural heritage resources of
the City of Virginia Beach. The project began in 1989 and lasted three
years. The multi-step inventory involved review of aerial photographs
and gathering of other information, conducting aerial reconnaissance, and

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 4

NATURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES
OF THE NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME RANKS AND STATUS*

PLANTS

A Yellow-Eyed Grass _Xyris laxifolia var. iridifolia G3G 5T?/S 1 /NF/NS

Atlantic White Cedar Chamaecyparis �y2@ides G4/S2/NF/NS

Big-Headed Rush Juncus migggephalus G4G5/S2/NF/NS

Blue Jasmine Leatherflower @@Iematis aLspa G5/S3/NF/NS

Buttonbush Dodder Cuscuta atabalanthiii G5/Sl?/NF/NS

Carolina Boltonia Boltonia caroliniana G2Q/S2/NF/NS

Carolina Lilaeopsis Lilaeopsis gtenuate G4G5/S1S213C/C

Coastal Plain Aster Aster racemosus G3?Q/Sl/NF/NS

Elliot's Aster Aster nq!@ceus var. elliotii G5T3T4/S2/NF/NS

Elongated Lobelia kobelia 1!@ata G3G5/Sl/NF/NS

Epiphytic Sedge Carex decom2asita G3G4/Sl/3C/C

Featherfoil Hottonia inflate G3G4/S2/NF/NS

Joint Paspalum Paspalurn S Listichum G5/Sl/NF/NS

Pretty Dodder Cuscuta indecora G5/S2?/NF/NS

Sawgrass Cladium mariscus var. jamgi2an2e G5T5/Sl/NF/NS

Silky Camelia Stewartia malacodendron G4/S2/NF/NS

Slender Dragon-Head Etyj2s@teia !e@h le G4G5/S2/3C/NS

Spanish Moss Tillandsia usneoides G5/S2/NF/NS

Spreading Pogonia Cleistes divaricata G4/S1 /NF/NS

Virginia Least Trillium Trillium jjURL11um var. IdLgjn@ft= G3T2/S2/C2/NS

Walter's Sedge Carex striate G4/SlS2/NF/NS

Winged Seedbox I !UsLw@lia 9-18-ta G3G4/Sl/NF/NS

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 4 (CONTINUED)

F_ COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME RANKS AND STATUS'

ANIMALS

Canebrake Rattlesnake Crotalus horridus atricaudatus G5/S1/NF/NS

Dismal Swamp Southeastern Shrew Sorex jaaq@@ fisheri G5T2/S2/LT/LT

Four-Spotted Pennant g[a@@ ag%j@da G5/S2S3/NF/NS

Great Egret Casmerodius albus G5/S2/NF/NS

Great Purple Hairstreak Atlides halesus G5/S2/NF/NS

King Rail Rallus 1!22ans G4Q/S2/NF/NS

Least Bittern 12EQh[yqt@Ls exilis G5/S2/NF/NS

Marsh Rabbit AYLV@ 22Lqs-tris G5/S2S3/NF/NS

Scarce Swamp Skipper Euphyes dukesi G3G4/S2/NF/NS

Virginia Rail Ballus limicola G5/S2/NF/NS

NATURAL COMMUNITIES

Atlantic White Cedar Swamp Oligotrophic Saturated Palustrine G3G4/S1
Forest

Big Cordgrass Brackish Marsh Tall Estuarine Herbaceous G5/S5
Vegetation

Cypress - Tupelo Swamp Eutrophic Sernipermanently Flooded G5/S4
Forest

Fetterbush - Sheep Laurel Short Oligotrophic Saturated Palustrine G3/S1
Pocosin Scrub

Pond Pine - Fetterbush Tall Pocosin Oligotrophic Saturated Palustrine G3G4/S1
Woodland

Spikerush Short Freshwater Marsh Short Herbaceous Estuarine Wetland G?/S1

Open Peat Bog Oligotrophic Saturated Palustrine G?/S?
Herbaceous Wetland

Bulrush - Cattail Freshwater Marsh Mid-height Herbaceous Estuarine G4/S3
Wetland

OTHER
7Heron Nesting Colony

Appendix 2 contains definitions of the rarity ranks and legal status abbreviations

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

thorough biodiversity survey fieldwork by botanists, zoologists, and
ecologists. The results of the project can be found in A Natural Areas
Inventory qf the City gf Virginia Beach, Virginia (Clampitt et al. 1993).

Each of the eight rare natural community types is discussed below. The
community nomenclature found in the Biological Conservation
Datasystem (BCD) is used in this discussion. The discussion of all 32
rare species, subspecies, or varieties is beyond the scope of this
document. Therefore, ten "key rare species" have been selected for
detailed discussion. The species were chosen to be representative of as
many of the habitats and taxonomic groups as possible. The key rare
speciesare Atlanticwhite cedar, canebrake rattlesnake (Crotalu@ horridus
atricaudatus), Carolina lilaeopsis (Lilaeol2sis attenuata), Dismal Swamp
southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris fisheri), elongated lobelia (Lobelia
elongata), epiphytic sedge (Carex decomoosita), least bittern (Ixobrychus
a@dk), scarce swamp skipper (Euphyes dukesi), spreading pogonia
(Cleistes divaricata), and Virginia least trillium (Trillium pusillum var.
virginianum). Key rare species are also discussed below.

SPIKERUSH SHORT FRESHWATER MARSH
(Short Herbaceous Estuarine Wetland)

The North Landing River wetlands contain outstanding examples of
several different freshwater to slightly brackish marsh types, three of
which are natural heritage resources. The spikerush short freshwater
marsh is perhaps the most significant of the three. This type is found in
the interior marshes, away from open water channels. Subject to less
tidal action than the fringing marsh types, the spikerush short freshwater
marsh is therefore also poorer in nutrients. Ground-water seepage and
peat-doming may be factors in this marsh type. Species richness is
characteristically high in the spikerush short freshwater marsh (up to 29
species per 100 square yards) and determination of dominant species
can be difficult. As the name implies, one or more species of
spikerushes (Eleocharis spp.) are almost always found in this marsh type.
Other frequently encountered species include any of several umbrella
sedges (Cyperus spp.), several bulrushes (Scirpus spp.), twigrush
(cladiurn mariscoides), and sawgrass (Cladiurn mariscus var. jamaicense).
The spikerush short freshwater marsh is also often home to rare plant
and insect species. The variety of community classification systems in
use and the paucity of inventory data make it difficult to ascertain the
actual global range and rarity of this marsh type, though it is thought to
be uncommon. In Virginia, however, the community is found only in the

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

wetlands of Back Bay, the North Landing River, and the Northwest River.
Because of its restricted distribution and limited occurrences, the
spikerush short freshwater marsh is considered very rare in the
Commonwealth. This community can be threatened by pollution,
alteration of the hydrologic regime, and direct destruction through
draining or filling. Problem species such as common reed and nutria
(Myocastor coypus) also may threaten this community.

BULRUSH - CATTAIL FRESHWATER MARSH
(mid-height herbaceous estuarine wetland)

The second rare marsh type is the bulrush - cattail freshwater marsh.
Like the spikerush short freshwater marsh, the bulrush - cattail
freshwater marsh is generally located away from the edges of channels,
but may be close to the channels in some instances. This marsh type is
generally somewhat richer in nutrients than the spikerush short
freshwater marsh. Stands of southern cattail (Typha domingensis) and
narrow-leaved cattail (Tyl2ha anaustifolia) are common along with several
bulrush species. Camphorweed (Pluchea foetida), pickerelweed
(Pontederia cordata), arrow arum (Peltandra virginica), duck potato
(Sagittaria latifolia), smartweeds (Polygonum spp.), and spikerushes are
also frequently encountered. This marsh type is uncommon throughout
its range and rare in Virginia. This community can be threatened by
pollution, alteration of the hydrologic regime, and direct destruction
through draining or filling. Problem species such as common reed and
nutria also may threaten this community.

BIG CORIDGRASS OLIGOHALINE MARSH
(tall estuarine herbaceous vegetation)

Another marsh type found on the North Landing River Natural Area
Preserve is the big cordgrass oligohaline marsh. This community is
strongly dominated by big cordgrass and may also contain components
of the bulrush - cattail freshwater marsh along with other species such
as black needlerush, switchgrass, and sawgrass. Big cordgrass marshes
are often found at the edges of the river, its creeks, and guts. The
nutrient regime is rich. Although a common natural community both
globally and within Virginia, the North Landing River marshes contain
some of the largest and most pristine stands of big cordgrass in the
state. The big cordgrass oligohaline marshes therefore qualify as
exemplary natural communities and are considered one of the
Commonwealth's natural heritage resources. This community can be

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

threatened by pollution, alteration of the hydrologic regime, and direct
destruction through draining or filling. Problem species such as common
reed and nutria also may threaten this community.

ATLANTIC WHITE CEDAR SWAMP
(oligotrophic saturated palustrine scrub)

Atlantic white cedar swamps are another rare natural community found
in wetlands of the North Landing River. Atlantic white cedar swamps
range along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United States from Maine
to Mississippi. Atlantic white cedar is distributed disjunctly through its
range; many neighboring populations are separated by vast distances.
The presence of Atlantic white cedar trees does not necessarily
constitute an occurrence of the Atlantic white cedar community. Only
a handful of Atlantic white cedar swamps have been documented in
Virginia. Atlantic white cedar swamps, restricted to freshwater coastal
wetlands, are declining over much of their range. The community is
considered rare to uncommon globally and extremely rare in Virginia.
Atlantic white cedar also is considered a rare species in Virginia and may
be found as scattered individuals throughout the wetlands of the North
Landing River. The Atlantic white cedar community, however, is
characterized by swamps strongly dominated by the species or even in
purestands. Most Atlantic white cedar swamps are dependent upon fire
for regeneration. Infrequent, intense fires burn away old trees and most
all other vegetation. This opens up habitat for seedlings which do not
compete well with adult trees or other species. Then, there must be a
long period of no fire while Atlantic white cedar seedlings become
established, mature, and produce seed. Atlantic white cedar swamps
tend to grow up in pure, even-aged stands. The fire return interval
ranges from 50 to 100 years. Atlantic white cedar swamps can be
threatened by pollution, alteration of the hydrologic regime, lack of fire,
and indiscriminate logging.

POND PINE - FETTERBUSH TALL POCOSIN
(oligotrophic saturated palustrine woodland)

Pocosins are evergreen shrub wetlands found on thick peat deposits.
Virginia is the northern edge of the range for pocosins which are
distributed on the Atlantic Coastal Plain from southeastern Virginia into
Florida and west into the Gulf coastal states. Pocosins are globally rare
natural communities and are extremely rare in Virginia. Two pocosins on
the west side of the North Landing River are the only known pocosins in

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Virginia that remain hydrologically intact. Other, more disturbed, but
quite expansive, examples of the community can be found in the Great
Dismal Swamp. Pocosins can be extremely nutrient-poor. Peat
accumulation, continuously wet, acidic soils, low nutrient conditions, and
fires are important factors in formation and maintenance of pocosins.
Threats to pocosins include pollution, lack of fire, peat mining, logging,
and alteration of the hydrologic regime.

Pocosins are generally broken down into three sub-types. Pond pine -
fetterbush tall pocosins contain evergreen shrubs over three or four feet
(1 - 1.2 m) in height. Common shrub species include fetterbush,
inkberry, and sheep laurel, but tall pocosins also have a strong
component of sweet bay, red bay, wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), Atlantic
white cedar, and pond pine.

FETTERBUSH - SHEEP LAUREL SHORT POCOSIN
(oligotrophic saturated palustrine scrub)

Fetterbush - sheep laurel short pocosins contain the same shrub species,
but the shrubs are usually less than three or four feet (1 - 1.2 m) in
height. Fetterbush - sheep laurel short pocosins also have fewer trees.
Trees that do occur in short pocosins are predominantly stunted pond
pines with a few Atlantic white cedars.

OPEN PEAT BOG
(oligotrophic saturated palustrine herbaceous wetland)

A third variation of pocosins, the open peat bog, occurs in the North
Landing River watershed as scattered, small remnants. Either great
amounts of peat accumulation and the consequent extremely poor
nutrient availability, frequent fires, or a combination of both cause the
shrub component to be all but eliminated from a bog. Ferns
(Pteridophyta), peat mosses (Sphacinum spp.), and sedges (Carex spp.)
dominate the resultant boggy area. Several rare species, such as
spreading pogonia, are also found in this rarest of pocosin types.

CYPRESS - TUPELO SWAMP
(eutrophic semipermanently flooded forest)

The cypress - tupelo swamp is a fairly common natural community which
has outstanding occurrences in the North Landing River wetlands. This

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

swamp type is characterized by bald cypress and water tupelo (Nvssa
aquatica). Other possible tree species include swamp tupelo, ashes, red
maple, and sweet gum. This swamp type tends to border upper reaches
of the river and its tributaries; it may form a narrow fringe or a broad
expanse. Alteration of the hydrologic regime, indiscriminate logging, and
filling or draining constitute the principal threats to this community.

VIRGINIA LEAST TRILLIUM
(Trillium 12usillurn var. virginianum)

The Virginia least trillium has been recently documented from one site in
the preserve and could potentially be found in other areas. This small
three-leaved plant in the lily family bears white to pink flowers in the
early spring. Virginia least trillium grows primarily in somewhat acidic
moist to saturated soils, although it does not grow in standing water.
The plant is most often found on the margins of swamps, on high spots
within swamps, or in ground-water seepage areas. The range of Virginia
least trillium includes southeastern Virginia, northeastern North Carolina,
and disjunct areas in the mountains of western Virginia and eastern West
Virginia. Virginia least trillium is rare throughout its range and is very
rare in Virginia, where it is known from only eight counties. The plant
is listed as endangered in North Carolina and is a candidate for the
Federal endangered species list. Direct destruction of individuals, loss of
habitat, and alteration of water quantity are the principle threats to the
species.

DISMAL SWAMP SOUTHEASTERN SHREW
(Sorex longirostris fisheri)

The Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew, a small mammal of the
insectivore order, is a subspecies of the southeastern shrew
characterized by a body size significantly larger than the average for the
species. Though the species ranges throughout the Southeast, the
Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew is apparently restricted to an area
roughly equal to the historical extent of the Great Dismal Swamp and
vicinity, which includes the North Landing River watershed. Presence of
the subspecies has been documented from the cities of Suffolk,
Chesapeake, and Virginia Beach. The Dismal Swamp southeastern
shrew is currently considered rare in Virginia and throughout its small
global range of southeastern Virginia and northeastern North Carolina.
The subspecies is listed as threatened at both the federal and state
levels. The Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew is approximately four

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

inches 0 0 cm) in total length with redd ish-brown fur, small eyes, hidden
ears, and a long snout. Dismal Swamp southeastern shrews inhabit a
wide variety of habitats with substantial leaf litter or other ground cover
where they hunt for their invertebrate prey. The principle threats to this
subspecies are habitat fragmentation and destruction.

EPIPHYTIC SEDGE
(Carex decomgosita)

The epiphytic sedge, also known as cypress-knee sedge, is a one to
three foot tall slender-leaved plant that grows primarily in tussocks on
the bases of trees (especially bald cypress), cypress knees, or downed
logs in the edges of swamps. The epiphytic sedge usually is found in
undisturbed, organic-rich backwaters. It is a perennial species that bears
its fruit in early summer. At one time the range of this species included
a large area of the east coast and midwestern states, but in recent years
its range has shrunk considerably. It is now found in somewhat disjunct
locations in the Southeast. In Virginia, epiphytic sedge is known only
from the North Landing and Northwest River wetlands. The species is
considered globally rare to uncommon and extremely rare in the state.
It is a candidate for listing as threatened or endangered at the state level.
Epiphytic sedge is threatened by degradation of water quality, alteration
of hydrologic regime, and direct habitat destruction.

SCARCE SWAMP SKIPPER
(Euphyes dukesi)

The scarce swamp skipper, also known as the brown sedge skipper or
Duke's skipper, is a medium-sized butterfly appearing sooty black on top
and pale brown underneath; females have several orange spots on the
upper wing surface. Females lay their eggs on the undersides of leaves
of specific sedge species. The larvae are dependent upon these host
sedges. The scarce swamp skipper utilizes both the swamp and marsh
habitats where it can find nectar and its host sedges. The species is
distributed in a few widely separated locations throughout the East. in
Virginia, the scarce swamp skipper is known from five sites, all in the
North Landing and Northwest River wetlands. The species is very rare
in Virginia and rare to uncommon throughout its range. It is a candidate
for listing as threatened or endangered at the state level. The species is
primarily threatened by habitat destruction, especially the elimination of
the host sedge species.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

ELONGATED LOBELIA
(Lobelia elongata)

Also known as the purple lobelia, the elongated lobelia is a rare plant of
the marshes. This two to four foot tall, purple-f lowered, narrow leaved,
herb of the lobelia family is often found in the spikerush short freshwater
marshes or the bulrush-cattail freshwater marshes. This species is found
on the Atlantic Coastal Plain from Delaware to Georgia. Because the
elongated lobelia is known only from the marshes of Back Bay, the North
Landing River, and the Northwest River in Virginia, it is considered very
rare in the state. Destruction or alteration of its wetland habitat is the
major threat to elongated lobelia.

SPREADING POGONIA
(Cleistes divaricata)

The spreading pogonia ranges across the Southeast. In Virginia, the
species is documented from only eight sites in six counties and is
considered extremely rare. Spreading pogonia is a delicate orchid that
grows up to two feet (60 cm) tall and has one stem which bears a single
oblong leaf and usually one pink flower. This plant grows in bogs,
flatwoods, and other low-nutrient, open wetlands. The habitats in which
spreading pogonia is usually found are generally fire dependent. The
North Landing River Natural Area Preserve, where the plant is found in
the open peat bogs, is no exception. Alteration or destruction of its
wetland habitat, including that caused by a lack of fire, is the principle
threat to spreading pogonia.

ATLANTIC WHITE CEDAR
(Chamaecyparis thyoides)

As noted above in the Atlantic white cedar swamp discussion, Atlantic
white cedar is a very rare species in Virginia. The tree is known from 12
sites in Virginia, eight of which are in Virginia Beach and the remainder
in three other coastal plain counties. In addition to occurring in several
nearly pure stands which comprise occurrences of the rare natural
community, Atlantic white cedar can be found in small groups or as
scattered individuals in the pocosins and lower-nutrient swamps of the
preserve. Logging, fire suppression, and water quantity alteration are the
main threats to this species.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

CAROLINA LILAEOPSIS
(Lilaeopsis attenuata)

An aquatic species of the carrot family, Carolina lilaeopsis grows in quiet
shallow water or mud at the marsh's edge. The plant has slender
rhizomes or creeping stems from which grow clusters of four to 12 inch
long, spoon-shaped leaves. The leaves typically grow into tangled mats.
Diminutive white flowers bloom from short-stalked umbels. Carolina
lilaeopsis ranges on the Atlantic Coastal Plain from Virginia through north
Florida; it is considered common to uncommon globally. In Virginia, the
species is very rare, occurring at nine sites, all within the City of Virginia
Beach. It is a candidate for listing as threatened or endangered at the
state level. Direct destruction of habitat and plants from boat wakes as
well as degradation of water quality or alteration of water quantity are
threats to this species.

CANEBRAKE RATTLESNAKE
(Crotalus horridus atricaudatus)

The canebrake rattlesnake, the only rattlesnake in southeast Virginia, can
grow to over four feet (1.2 m) in length. Adults have black chevron-
shaped markings on a yellow, tan, or gray ground color. The subspecies
is found in a wide range of habitats, including both upland and wetland
forests. Canebrake rattlesnakes prey mainly on gray squirrels and to a
lesser extent upon other mammalian species. The subspecies' range
includes the southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain from southeastern
Virginia to eastern Texas. Canebrake rattlesnakes have been
documented from at least ten sites in the Commonwealth, but they are
all limited to the cities of Chesapeake, Virginia Beach, Suffolk, and
Newport News, and the County of York. Although the subspecies is
globally common, it is extremely rare and limited in distribution in
Virginia, prompting its listing as a state endangered species. Destruction
and fragmentation of habitat and killing and capture by humans are the
principle threats to the species.

LEAST BITTERN
(Ixobrychus exilis)

Least bitterns nest throughout the marshes of the North Landing River.
Because there are only thirteen known breeding sites for the species in
just eight counties in Virginia, least bitterns are considered very rare in
the Commonwealth. The species is more common in some other parts

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

of its breeding range, which includes most of the eastern United States.
Least bitterns are small wading birds, distinctively tan and white
underneath and greenish black on the crown and back. Least bitterns
nest and forage in fresh to brackish water marshes, especially those
containing stands of cattails. The birds nest solitarily or semi-colonially,
building their nest in tall marsh vegetation or small shrubs in the marsh.
Least bitterns forage for small fish, frogs, tadpoles, slugs, leeches and
other small animals in shallow water, mud, or marsh vegetation. Least
bitterns are shy and secretive; they will "freeze" in a reed-like pose if
approached to avoid detection. Habitat loss or alteration are the primary
threats to the species. Disturbance of nesting, foraging, or resting
behavior by human activities can also be a threat.

WATCH-LIST AND POTENTIAL

Some examples of watch-list species which occur in the preserve include
the southern bog lemming (Synal2tomys cooneri helaletus), harlequin
darner (Gonphaeschna furcillata), sheep laurel, American frog's-bit
(LimnobiLim spon-gia), and southern twayblade (Listera australis).
Examples of rare species which have a potential to occur on the preserve
include Hessel's hairstreak (Mitoura hesseli), bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus), barking treefrog (Hyla gratiosa), Dismal Swamp green
stinkbug (Chlorocroa dismalia), and eastern big-eared bat (Plecotus
rafinesquii). Several rare species are known from the area only in historic
records, but also have potential to be rediscovered on the preserve. An
example is large cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon).

More detailed information regarding the occurrences of all 41 natural
heritage resources in the North Landing River Natural Area Preserve can
be found in the natural heritage inventory report (Clampitt et al. 1993).

HISTORIC RESOURCES

The Virginia Department of Historic Resources has no records for
archaeological sites, historic buildings, or other historic features on the
North Landing River Natural Area Preserve. This does not mean that
historic resources do not exist on the site; the lack of information may
be a reflection of a lack of survey for historic resources. Considering
that the preserve is almost entirely wetlands, however, it is likely that
little pre-historic or historic use of the preserve occurred.

Because development pressures have been relatively low in southern

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Virginia Beach and Chesapeake, many of the historic structures remain.
Princess Anne Courthouse, Dawley Meetinghouse, Pungo Inn, Nimmo
United Methodist Church, and the Ives farmhouse are examples of
historic structures which can be found in the area. The City of Virginia
Beach has prepared several recent inventories of historic buildings and
sites in the city. Over 200 historic buildings are listed in the Blackwater,
Pungo, and Princess Anne burroughs which contain the preserve.
Several properties in the area have the potential for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places.

RECREATION RESOURCES AND PUBLIC ACCESS

Providing compatible outdoor recreation opportunities is one of the
purposes for the establishment of the North Landing River Natural Area
Preserve. The management needs of natural heritage resources will
always take priority over the demands for outdoor recreation at this site.

In 1993, VDCR conducted an assessment of public access on the North
Landing River and its tributaries published as North Landing River
Watershed Public Access and Visual Assessment (Potter et al. 1994).
Refer to that report for detailed public access information, including maps
of existing and proposed facilities in the area.

NEED FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES

There is a definite need for additional public access to outdoor
recreational opportunities throughout the Commonwealth. Access to
water-related recreation is especially in demand in Virginia and demand
for low-intensity recreational activities associated with natural areas
(birding, nature photography, etc.) is increasing, as well (VDCR 1994).
The increase in demand for both low-intensity outdoor recreation and
water-related recreation amplifies the need for access and recreation
opportunities at natural areas. Nature-based tourism is a young, but
expanding, industry in the City of Virginia Beach that will further
intensify this need.

EXISTING RECREATION

Most existing outdoor recreational activities in the North Landing River
area are water-related, but many other forms are also popular. Motor-
boating, waterskiing, jetskiing, boat fishing, bank fishing, and canoeing
are among the most popular water-related recreation. Sailing, kayaking,

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

swimming, rowing, and board-sailing also occur on the North Landing
River or its tributaries. Other recreational activities not directly related
to water which occur in the North Landing River area include hunting,
trapping, camping, picnicking, hiking, birding, nature study, sun-bathing,
and photography. Because the preserve is almost entirely wetlands,
most recreation occurs outside the site's boundaries.

As part of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, the main channel of the
North Landing River is subject to high traffic volumes of large recreational
and commercial vessels. The main channel of the North Landing River
is not suitable for canoes and other small non-motorized watercraft.
Tributary waters of the North Landing River lack the heavy traffic of large
motorized boats and are enjoyed by smaller power boats and non-
motorized watercraft. Canoe access exists along most of these
tributaries; however, many existing access do not provide trip
opportunities or trails which do not involve back tracking.

Deer hunting is a popular activity among many local residents in the area.
Although some area hunters prefer the solitude of tree-stand hunting,
many are members of a hunt club which hunt in groups. Deer hunting
is not currently allowed on the VDCR tracts, but hunting guidelines are
under development that will likely allow deer hunting for resource
management purposes. Hunting rights were retained by a few of the
previous owners of some TNC tracts; deer hunting occurs on those tracts
in accordance with the terms of the property transfer. Duck hunting is
allowed in the City of Virginia Beach only from floating blinds. TNC and
VDCR work in cooperation with the Virginia Department of Game and
Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) to establish and maintain duck hunting
guidelines for the waters adjacent the preserve.

Camping on the preserve itself is not allowed, but there are two
campgrounds in the vicinity of the preserve. In addition to the boardwalk
on the Dozier tract, hiking and walking are enjoyed at several parks in the
area. Picnicking and other activities also occur at these parks and
campgrounds. Bicycle routes do not currently exist in the vicinity of the
preserve; roads in the vicinity are typically two-lane rural routes with
minimal shoulders.

POTENTIAL RECREATION

The lands and waters in the North Landing River area offer tremendous
opportunities for development of low intensity recreational opportunities.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

The North Landing River could be considered a key component of a
water-oriented greenwaV or trails system. The river is already designated
as both a Virginia Scenic River and a Virginia Beach Scenic Waterway
and Canoe Trail. The Virginia Beach Outdoors Plan (City of Virginia
Beach 1994) suggests water as a unifying theme for outdoor recreation
in the city. Within the city's projected plans for future development are
the Landstown-Pungo Trail and the West Neck Creek Linear Park, both
located near West Neck Creek. These planned parks and facilities will
enhance the greenway and multipurpose trail opportunities in the area.
Future road improvement projects in this area could include the addition
of bikewaVs and pedestrian facilities, canoe access at bridge crossings,
and scenic or interpretive waysides.

EXISTING ACCESS

As part of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, the North Landing River
is accessible from the metropolitan Norfolk area via the Southern Branch
of the Elizabeth River and from North Carolina via Currituck Sound.
There are six boat ramps open to the public along the North Landing
River. One of these ramps is located in a publicIV-owned park; the
remainder are privately operated. Sites in the area which offer boat ramp
access include West Neck Creek Marina, Mercer Boat House, Pungo
Ferry Marina, Blackwater Trading Post, Bradley's Creek Landing, and
Munden Point Park. Additionally, tributaries can generally be accessed
by canoes from bridge crossings, but formal access facilities do not exist
at these sites. Some water access sites offer other activities. For
example, some marinas have picnicking areas or a swimming beach.
Facilities which compliment use of the waterways by boaters exist
throughout the watershed. These facilities include bait and tackle shops,
convenience stores, and small restaurants.

The Nature Conservancy has constructed an observation platform at the
confluence of the North Landing River and Pocaty Creek on the City of
Chesapeake tract (see Figure 3). The ten-foot tall platform is accessible
only by canoe or other shallow draft vessels. The tower provides a view
of parts of the North Landing River and Pocaty Creek as well as the
associated marshes and swamps. The tower is a destination point in an
interpretive canoe trail beginning at the Blackwater Road crossing of
Pocaty Creek. Canoeists must plan to backtrack to Blackwater Road for
take-out of canoes.

Just north of the crossing of Blackwater Road over Milldam Creek, The

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Nature ConservancV has*constructed a small gravel parking area and a
boardwalk over the marsh on the Dozier tract (see Figure 3). Parking is
available for approximatelV six cars and visitors can view the extensive
southern marshes of the preserve from the quarter-mile-long boardwalk.
The facilitV is maintained mostlV bV volunteers. The site is designed for
short-term daV use on1V and has no restrooms or other amenities.

Two local parks, Munden Point Park and Northwest River Park, are
located close to the preserve. Another local park, West Neck Creek
Park, has been proposed for the vicinitV. AdditionallV, Seashore State
Park lies onIV 12 miles (119 km) north of the preserve. Parks can serve
as major access points, provide a varietV of leisure and recreational
activities, and serve as focal points for special events.

Munden Point Park, located on the east shore of the North Landing River,
has a boat ramp, picnicking areas, a plaVground, and fishing areas.
Northwest River Park, less than five miles (8 km) west of the preserve,
offers a full range of outdoor activities including camping, canoeing,
hiking, and interpretive programs. Seashore State Park, Virginia's most
visited state park, also offers a varietV of outdoor recreation and
interpretive programs. Seashore State Park serves as a contact point for
dissemination of information regarding the preserve.

Augmenting the facilities and activities at these publicIV-owned parks,
Seneca Campground, a private facilitV located off Princess Anne Road,
offers camping, a swimming pool, picnic areas, and manV amenities.

POTENTIAL ACCESS

Additional small boat access could be provided at various road crossings
of the waterwaVs. This would increase public access to the waters for
small boats, while minimalIV impacting surrounding lands. Parking lots
or informal roadwaV pull-offs near or adjacent to the bridge crossings are
recommended. Perhaps a public-private partnership could be established
at some locations to provide appropriate parking.

The Kellam tract was purchased bV VDCR specificalIV to provide an area
for increased public access to the North Landing River Natural Area
Preserve. Completed plans include an access road to the site with bus
facilities and a boardwalk which leads from the parking area to a canoe
launch deck at Alton's Creek. Other site amenities include educational
and interpretive signage, opportunities to view the landscape, and picnic

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

areas.

A 12-acre parcel located north of Pungo Ferry Road on the west side of
the river may provide a public access site. The tract is currently in
private ownership. The property is bounded on the west by the
preserve, on the south by Old Pungo Ferry Road, on the east by the
North Landing River, and on the north by Alton's Creek. Although public
use of Old Pungo Ferry Road on the west side of the river was
discontinued at the opening of the new Pungo Ferry Bridge, the old road
has been retained by the City of Virginia Beach to provide the current
owner access to the property. The parcel was originally purchased as a
marina site. Three boat slips were dredged, but further construction was
never implemented. The City of Virginia Beach has expressed some
interest in acquiring this site to provide public access to the North
Landing River and Alton's Creek. Such an access area also could be
utilized as an educational or interpretive area for the preserve.

Two potential problems face the conversion of the tract into a public
access area. Vehicle entrance and exit is a safety concern. The
intersection of the old road and new road is close to the western
downgrade of the Pungo Ferry Bridge. Site security also is a concern at
this location. The site is visible from the roadway, but because it is not
located in a populated area and there are no adjacent neighbors, the
potential exists for vandalism, after-hours use, and maintenance
problems. The management of the site could incorporate a public-private
partnership. A contracted concessionaire could provide services,
equipment, and a permanent presence on the site.

The Old Pungo Ferry Road site has been identified as a critical site for
public access development in the North Landing River Watershed Public
Access and Visual Assessment (Potter et al. 1994). The tract could
provide a launch for canoes and other small, non-motorized boats to
Alton's Creek via one of the existing boat slips. Upstream on Alton's
Creek, the Kellam tract would serve as a canoe takeout or destination
point. This type of access is greatly needed in this part of the North
Landing River watershed. Other activities appropriate for this site may
include m *otorized boating access to the North Landing River via a boat
ramp on the bank of the river. Picnicking, nature observation, and
interpretive facilities could also be incorporated into the site
development. Because waterskiing and other motorized boating activities
are popular in this vicinity, signage or regulation of motorboat activity
may be needed to provide safe passage up Alton's Creek for canoes.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

LINKING EDUCATION AND RECREATION

Environmental education programs and interpretive facilities in
conjunction with public access and recreation opportunities are vital to
building support and increasing understanding of natural areas and their
value.

The opportunity to educate boaters regarding the significance of the
watershed should be considered a priority. Information could be
disseminated to boaters by providing brochures or other educational
materials at the various boater retail and service locations. Cooperative
efforts to establish exhibits and educational materials could be pursued
with other agencies and organizations, such as the Virginia Department
of Game and Inland Fisheries, the Virginia Marine Resources Commission,
and the Virginia Department of Health.

Environmental education and interpretation opportunities are numerous
within the watershed. Natural areas may serve as outdoor classrooms
through the use of interpretive signs, self-guided tours, on-site kiosks
and development of interpretive brochures. Areas conducive for hiking,
nature study, photography, bird watching, and canoeing are important
to these types of low-intensity recreational interests.

RECOMMENDATIONS

A recreation and scenic resources sub-committee of the Management
Planning Advisory Team met during the planning process to discuss
recreation and public access. The sub-committee submitted the
following recommendations:

* Hunting on the preserve should be based on the VDCR
and TNC hunting policies and the resource management
needs of the property.

* Public access should be prioritized based on the ability to
concentrate use in appropriate areas and avoid widespread
diverse use throughout the system.

Appropriate limits on access and compatible
management of visitors should be achieved through careful
planning and development of access areas. Limited parking

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

areas and support facilities on a site will ultimately restrict
the number of people able to use the site at any given time.
Well-designed visitation management tools such as signage
or boardwalks can direct the visitors to appropriate areas.
Reservation systems could be implemented to appropriately
control access by large groups.

* Some water-related activities are more appropriate on the
main river channel; some activities are better suited to the
tributaries. Table 5 shows a listing of water-related
activities and recommendations for the appropriateness of
each activity on either the main channel or tributaries.
Water use zones and restrictions along the waterways
should be developed to avoid use conflicts and to direct
appropriate use in ecologically sensitive areas. [Note:
VDCR and TNC do not regulate boat use of the North
Landing River or its tributaries; VDGIF, USACE, and USCG
would be necessary partners in any initiative designed to
regulate use of the waterways.]

* The location of public access sites should be selected
carefully to integrate appropriately the ecological needs of
40 the preserve with the needs of recreationists. Also,
compatibility of adjacent land use and activities should be
considered.

A regional cooperative effort should be initiated to
encourage appropriate public access and use of the North
Landing River Natural Area Preserve and vicinity.

Objectives 12A and 12B address the hunting issues (see Management
Direction section). Other recommendations are addressed in Objective
1413, which calls for a comprehensive access and re
creation plan.

SCENIC RESOURCES

The identification and protection of visual or scenic resources are often
not considered during management planning because of the perceived
subjectivity in evaluating the resources. It is important, however, that
scenic resources become an integral part of environmental protection and

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 5

WATER-RELATED RECREATION
AND RECOMMENDED WATERBODIES

RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDED
ACTIVITY FOR MAIN FOR
CHANNEL TRIBUTARIES

Motorboating

Waterskiing

Jet Skiing

Canoeing

Kayaking

Rowing

Sailing

Boat Fishing

Bank Fishing
Board-sailing

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

conservation efforts.

VALUE OF SCENIC RESOURCES

An awareness of the visual environment or scenic resources is key to the
protection of the environment, particularly in the conservation of natural
areas such as the North Landing River Natural Area Preserve.

The overall importance of scenery is becoming more of a concern as
citizens become more aware of the quality of their environment.
Landscar)e Aesthetics,. A Handbook for Scenery Management (USFS
1994) states the need for the conservation of natural appearing
landscapes is increasing because of the following:

expansion of urban population,

rapid advance of technology and its influence on
lifestyles,

increased demands for goods and services,

complexity of people's lives,

amount of land being developed into urban landscapes, and

disappearance of natural appearing landscapes.

Comparative studies of people under stress and people in recreational
settings show that natural landscapes and scenic quality have a positive
effect on the psychological and physiological well-being of humans
(USFS 1994). These research findings support the theory that high
quality scenery benefits human wellness and productivity despite the
absence of a dollar value being placed on scenic resources.

Further information regarding the importance of preserving scenic
resources can be found in the Draft 1995 Virainia Outdoors Plan (VDCR
1994).

The North Landing River and its tributaries also have been identified in
the Virginia Beach Outdoors Plan (City of Virginia Beach 1994) as an
area in which the city would like to encourage nature-based tourism.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

The popularity of this type of recreational activity, and the subsequent
success of nature-based tourism as a commercial endeavor, is dependent
upon the appearance of the environment as a natural landscape.

SCENIC RESOURCES OF THE PRESERVE AND VICINITY

There is a direct correlation between ecological significance of the
preserve and scenic qualities of the landscape within the area. If the
ecological quality of lands within the watershed is maintained, it is very
likely that the overall scenic value of the area will also be conserved.

The watershed provides a marvelous natural setting and should be
preserved to maintain the visual integrity of the region. The natural
landscape of the marshes and swamps is not often encroached by
development. The primary scenic features of the area are the river, its
tributaries, and the surrounding riparian areas. As long as the wetland
vegetation and forests along the riparian areas are retained, the visual
integrity of the corridor should be maintained.

Along the North Landing River and its tributaries, "viewsheds" (parts of
the landscape visible from a given observation point) may be categorized
as from the land towards the water or as from the water towards the
land. Most viewing of the area is from the water by the many people
involved in boating or other water-related recreational activities.

From the water, the visual experience usually includes the wetlands and
the water channel itself. The viewsheds from the water vary depending
on the vegetation type nearest the shoreline. Evidence of suburban or
urban development is minimal along the North Landing River and its
tributaries. Generally, alteration of the landscape is evident only at road
crossings and in the few areas where wetlands and do not lie directly
adjacent to the waterways.

Views to the water from the land are limited to public park, preserve, or
water access areas and bridge crossings. The numbers of bridge
crossings and the type of land adjacent to the shoreline further limit
opportunities for views from the land to the water. Along the North
Landing River and its tributaries there are approximately eight bridge
crossings of various water bodies.

The Munden Point Park in the City of Virginia Beach offers an expansive
view of the North Landing River to its visitors. The Nature

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Conservancy's boardwalk at Milldam Creek provides viewing of the
marsh and Milldam Creek. The observation tower provides for viewing
of the confluence of Pocaty Creek and the North Landing River and the
associated riparian areas. Also, the proposed improvements at Alton's
Creek on the Kellam tract will offer views of interior marsh areas and the
upper reach of Alton's Creek.

STATE SCENIC RIVER

The North Landing River and its tributaries have been designated a state
and local scenic resource according to the Virginia Scenic Rivers Act
(Code of Vir-ainia, sections 10.1-400 - 418). The river was evaluated
and included as a Virginia Scenic River in 1988 by the Virginia General
Assembly. Its status as Virginia Scenic River recognizes the unique
scenic and cultural resources along the waterway. The Act provides
formal recognition, but does not establish scenic buffers or restrictions
on visual intrusion to the river. Also, a five member Advisory Board is
appointed by the Governor of Virginia to advise local and state agencies
regarding issues of relevance to the river's status as an important scenic
resource for the Commonwealth. Figure 4 shows the extent of the
designated state scenic river.

The Intracoastal Waterway is an important resource for commerce and
recreation along the eastern seaboard. The numbers of boats using the
North Landing River as part of the ICW make the perceived scenic value
of the waterway especially significant.

VISUAL ASSESSMENT OF RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES

The North Landing River is predominantly surrounded by flat terrain. This
topography limits the viewshed from water to land and from land to
water based on the existing shoreline vegetation. From the headwaters
to the North Carolina state line, the western banks of the North Landing
River are predominantly protected conservation lands. The extent of
these conservation properties from the water inland averages one mile
(1.6 km). Vegetation, particularly forested areas, is generally the limiting
factor on sight distances both from the land and from the water. The
eastern banks of the North Landing River do not contain as many
protected conservation lands and there are a few visual intrusions which
impact the visual quality along the river. North of West Neck Creek the
forested swamp forms only a narrow band along the river's eastern
shoreline, if it is present at all. Housing, which can be seen from this

Bum
FIGURE 4 c::)
Ed
EXTENT OF DESIGNATED STATE SCENIC RIVER STATUS FOR
THE NORTH LANDING RIVER
k-
ev
-ASrAL w

U
ou

e' ess S AVA TION
(F RESS r FIELD)

easan
Sub ta Ridqe 1
Z-

WIE

168
3 Back B
7

-N
Land of
[TENT OF STATE SCENIC Profflise
ESIGNAT[
Hicg ER D
'o :V ON: L---j

ickor
Lo -tu
Ri _u,

Sai Blackwa
Bride 4
Bla r- reeds
Lan
4
Sir

V,
'@ @Gli-l

Riou 5

Vine

North

RGINIA -7t7- V GINIA c -@1 @5)'
Nq,@CAROLINA
CUR

C@
KILOMETERS 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7Fr raby
t==j f-I
MILES 1 0 3 4 5

7
2-

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

part of the river, has not incorporated a scenic buffer into the
development.

Because the extent of marsh increases in the southern section of the
river, the visual impression of the river is different from the northern
reach. A visual change is perceptible as one travels south of the Pungo
Ferry Bridge. The river widens and a feeling of openness increases as
one progresses toward the North Carolina state line. Again, in the
southern part of the river corridor, the marsh adjacent to the river is
narrower on the eastern banks. Also, there are fewer protected
conservation lands on this side of the river. Limited housing and other
development is visible in that area from the river.

One tributary of the North Landing River, Pocaty Creek (also known as
the Pocaty River), varies from very open at its mouth where it meets the
North Landing River to a very dense, closed corridor in its upper reaches.
The lower section of the creek includes TNC lands on both the southern
and northern banks. This area of Pocaty Creek will obviously be
protected; however, the area west (up-river) of the TNC lands are
vulnerable to visual change due to the narrow width of the creek and the
limited extent of swamp on either side.

West Neck Creek is a part of the City of Virginia Beach Waterways
system as well as a part of the designated State Scenic River. This
waterway is canoed frequently by local residents who enjoy the natural
appearing landscape along the creek corridor. While this water body is
very close to existing and expanding developments, there is little visual
evidence of the development from the water. The upper portions of
West Neck Creek give a very enclosed visual impression. Near the
confluence with the North Landing River, the vegetation changes such
that, south of West Neck Road, the viewshed becomes more open. This
area also contains more bald cypress and includes stands of Atlantic
White Cedar.

Alton's Creek is lined mostly by marshes. The marshes and its winding
character give this creek a sense of visual vastness. The adjoining tidal
marshlands allow extended views over the waterway. In fact, when
traversing this winding stream, the glimpses of the North Landing River
and landmarks along its waterway often serve as reference points in the
visual landscape. For example, at several points along the creek, grain
silos on the east shore of the North Landing River and the Pungo Ferry
Bridge are visible. Overall, this stream provides tranquil views of the

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

natural landscape with few interruptions due to human activity on the
land.

Visually, Blackwater Creek along with West Neck Creek may be the most
interesting of the North Landing River tributaries. There is a distinct
difference in the swamp located in the uppermost reaches of the river
and the marshes east of Blackwater Road. The creek is winding west of
Blackwater Road, featuring many "oxbows," which adds to its visual
interest. Also, few visual intrusions related to human activities interrupt
the natural environment which creates this attractive landscape. The
conservation lands along Blackwater Creek protect the visual integrity of
the creek.

The marshes of Milldam Creek are similar visually to Blackwater Creek.
Most of the creek flows through the vast southern marshes of the North
Landing River with no evidence of human activity apparent. Even in the
upper reaches, little development exists adjacent to this stream making
the views true to the natural environment.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following specific recommendations regarding scenic resources
resulted were made by the recreation and scenic resources sub-
committee of the Management Planning Advisory Team:

* Scenic preservation measures should be developed for the waterways
that reach beyond the boundaries of the preserve. A local or regional
scenic resources management plan, scenic buffers, and scenic
easements may be considered. The east shore of the upper reaches of
the river, Pocaty Creek west of Blackwater Road, Blackwater Creek west
of Blackwater Road, and West Neck Creek are in special need of these
protective measures. Cooperative programs with Back Bay and Great
Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuges and the State of North Carolina
should be pursued to provide regional continuity in protecting scenic
landscapes.

Because there are few viewing opportunities for
pedestrians and vehicles, pulloffs from bridges which cross
the various water bodies should be encouraged by local
governments. Construction of future facilities and the
replacement of existing bridges should incorporate visual
access from the bridge by using a design which has an

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

open rail bridge parapet.

* A designation for locally significant byways in the
vicinity of the preserve could enhance viewing
opportunities. Wayside pull-offs with interpretive facilities
or scenic vistas could be developed in cooperation with the
Virginia Department of Transportation and the local
governments.

* The Agricultural Reserve Program, if passed by the City
of Virginia Beach, also could help retain the scenic
resources of the area.

* The City of Chesapeake's cluster provision may
encourage the retention of scenic areas and landscapes.

* The disturbance and visual impact of boat wakes along
the waterways should be addressed. A literature search of
how other states manage boat wakes in sensitive areas
should be conducted. Users of the waterway should be
made aware of potential impacts to the shoreline and its
scenic value by boat wakes.

Plans with local units of government to encourage clean-
up of scenic areas should be continued where they exist
and plans for expansion explored. Two annual events
which focus on waterway and shoreline clean-up include
"Clean the Bay Day," sponsored by Clean the Bay Day,
Incorporated, and the "International Coastal Clean-up,'
sponsored by the Center for Marine Conservation.

* A GIS overlay district for the river corridor and the area
visible from the water to the land could be developed at the
request of the localities.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

CONSERVATION PLANNING

Conservation planning is an analysis of the ecological, economic, and
social features of a landscape and development of a science-based
strategy for conservation of natural areas and natural heritage resources.
Well formed conservation plans include a description of the natural
heritage resources and their conservation needs, an assessment of
stresses on the natural heritage resources, and conservation planning
boundaries designed to attenuate these stresses and facilitate the long-
term survival of the natural heritage resources. Conservation plans often
also include ecological models and protection and stewardship
recommendations.

Extensive site conservation planning for the North Landing River area,
including the protected tracts, was recently completed by VDCR as part
of a conservation planning effort for the natural areas of the City of
Virginia Beach. The purpose of the study was to provide information to
facilitate well-informed planning and wise land use decisions by the City
and other public and private land managers. Conservation Plannin or
the Management and Protection of Natural Areas in the Cily af Virginia
Beach (Erdle et a[. 1994) contains the results of the study. There are
nine natural heritage resource sites or "natural areas" in the North
Landing River ecosystem. The conservation planning report contains
conservation plans for seven of the natural areas. Each conservation
plan contains information regarding the location, biodiversity rank,
general site characteristics, natural heritage resources, management
recommendations, protection recommendations, recreational, scenic, and
education recommendations, and an assessment of information needs.
Additionally, conservation planning boundaries are mapped and explained
for each site. The remaining two sites will be covered in a supplemental
document.

The following section contains discussions that summarize and augment
the information contained in the site conservation plans already
completed for the North Landing River ecosystem. For additional
conservation planning information, refer to the conservation planning
report.

THE ECOSYSTEM

The preserve is a component of a greater ecosystem including the entire

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

North Landing River watershed. This ecosystem is, in turn, part of a still
greater ecosystem involving the entire Albemarle and Pamlico estuary
and its drainage basin. The North Landing River Natural Area Preserve
is not an isolated system. Land use and natural events at local, regional,
continental, and even global scales contribute to the status of the
preserve. For this reason, conservation planning is conducted at least on
a local ecosystem scale.

For purposes of this plan, the North Landing River ecosystem is
delineated by the surface watershed. The extent of the ecosystem is
shown in Figure 5.

BIODIVERSITY SIGNIFICANCE

Every natural area that VDCR studies, regardless of scale, is assigned a
biodiversity significance rank, or "13-rank," which indicates the site's
relative significance in terms of biological diversity on a five point scale.
13-ranks are derived primarily from an analysis of the rarity ranks and
occurrence ranks of all natural heritage resources known from a site.
General definitions for the five possible B-ranks are as follows:
0 1311 outstanding significance
B2 very high significance
B3 high significance
B4 moderate significance
B5 general significance

The North Landing River ecosystem ranks at B2. Though only one of the
nine natural areas delineated in the ecosystem ranks at B2 with the
remainder at B3, B4, or B5, the ecosystem is very significant for its
concentration of such a large number of natural heritage resources, its
relatively undisturbed character, and its ecological value to other
permanent and transient biota. The conservation planning report
contains a breakdown of 13-ranks for seven of the natural areas contained
within the ecosystem.

CONCEPTUAL ECOLOGICAL MODEL

A conceptual ecological model of the North Landing River ecosystem has
been developed by a sub-committee of the Management Planning
Advisory Team. A conceptual ecological model is a general
representation in words, pictures, or both of the structure and function

fo, BR

FIGURE 5
EXTENT OF THE NORTH LANDING RIVER ECOSYSTEM
P A@

190

Zampus)

r vlftr,
W--4-HEAC
So,th
A,=m 49\

23 urts
SO

Punso
ASTAL @WAY'

-7
7

e n

AVA TION
I F RESS FIELD)

R d
S.b,m 2@
C..

nii a
El-k B

Hi z;
un

]EXTENT OF
LCOSYSTEM

at-r

WON

Vfm

ria,
A - Gl I c
RGINI
lNlqT=CA
C
2 6 7
KILOMETERS 1 0 1 3 4
W-d P
MILES 1- -0 1 3 4
2

anthe,
'00

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

of an ecosystem. Conceptual ecological models do not contain the
extensive quantification found in mathematical or computer models.

The primary purpose of developing the conceptual ecological model is to
enhance our understanding of the ecosystem with general predictive
capabilities and thus help guide management actions in a direction that
will reach the management goals. The model helps us understand what
identify what can be affected with mi anagement and what factors. It
helps to set management priorities, guides management actions, and
allows measures of success to be established. In addition to guiding
management, the model also serves several important secondary roles.
First, the process of developing the model, a team effort, was a learning
experience. Not only did experts of different fields benefit from learning
from others, but potential future management partners also learned to
work together. Second, the model not only summarizes what we do
know about the ecosystem, it also helps to more clearly define what is
not known. Questions are formulated and refined. Research and
monitoring priorities are identified. Third, since it was developed through
team effort, the model represents a consensus of the structure and
function of the ecosystem among the key experts and resource
managers. Finally, the conceptual ecological model is a powerful
communication tool. It can be used to explain the ecosystem and
management needs and also leaves a record of knowledge, assumptions,
and questions for future managers of the preserve.

The development of a conceptual ecological model is a continuous
process. New information from scientific research or other changes in
our understanding of the ecosystem will lead to revisions or perhaps
even a complete overhaul of the model. This fact is especially true of the
North Landing River ecosystem where so many gaps in the knowledge
of the hydrology, fire regime, and biota exist. The model presented here
should be considered only the first iteration in a series of many.

STRUCTURE OF THE ECOSYSTEM

The principal building blocks in the structure of an ecosystem are its
natural communities. The natural communities of an ecosystem can be
classified in many ways. The classification system for the North Landing
River ecosystem presented here is a composite of several classification
schemes. The system is designed to be useful for the conceptual
ecological modeling and natural area management efforts. The
ecosystem structure is addressed at two hierarchical levels: classes and

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

associations. The North Landing River ecosystem contains six classes
and 19 associations. Information regarding the classes and associations
can be found on Table 6.

CLASSES

For purposes of this model, classes are determined by abiotic factors as
well as general vegetation type. The class nomenclature is based loosely
on community classification systems developed in A Classification of
Virginia's Indigenous Biotic Communities: VeQetated Terrestrial,
Palustrine, and Estuarine Community Classes (Rawinski 1992) and
Classification of Wetlands and Deer)water Habitats in the United States
(Cowardin et al. 1979). The six classes are terrestrial, woody palustrine
wetland, herbaceous palustrine wetland, herbaceous estuarine wetland,
woody estuarine wetland, and aquatic. There is a bias in the degree of
detail in the delineation of certain classes and their associations. There
is only one aquatic and one terrestrial class, but there are four wetland
classes. Further, aquatic and terrestrial classes are broken into only a
few associations each, but the wetland classes have many associations.
This bias is simply a reflection of the focus of the model; the model is
designed primarily to aid management of the North Landing River
wetlands. Further detail in the aquatic and terrestrial classes is
considered unnecessary at present, but may become a focal point with
future revisions of the model.

ASSOCIATIONS

Associations are the basic systematic unit used in the conceptual
ecological model. Associations are meant to represent an assemblage of
species that commonly occur together in the ecosystem and can be
delineated in the field by an ecological manager. Of course, associations
rarely have discrete boundaries and continuous transitions from one
association to another are common. As with the classes, there is a bias
towards the delineation of the wetland associations such that they are
divided into finer units than the upland or aquatic associations.
Association nomenclature is based upon dominant or common vascular
plant species. A "common name" is also given for each association for
convenience in discussion. Figure 6 shows a diagrammatic profile of the
North Landing River ecosystem with the general relative positions of the
associations depicted. Key rare species are also addressed at the
association level. Some of the rare species may be restricted to only a
single association for their entire life cycle, while others may occupy

Table 6 - Components of Nish Landing River Ecosystem
CIA
'S

Moderately Well-
Occupies Most of Loams & Sandy Some Wildfire, Pres.
Corn - Soybean Crops Drained to Poorly Eutrophic Burning Canebrake Rattlesnake
Upland Loams Drainded
Loblolly Pine - Submesotrophic Sometimes Present Loams & Sandy Moderately Well- Some Wildfire, Pres. Canebrake Rattlesnake,
Pine/Oak Forest Drained to Poorly Submesotrophic
White Oak Forest b/w Crops & Swamp Loams Burning Dismal Swamp Shrew
Drainded
Red Maple - Eutrophic Semiperm. b/w Uplands & Organic-Rich Silt Temporarily to Semi- Eutrophic to Canebrake Rattlesnake,
Hardwood Swamp Flooded Palustrine FRI 100+ Yrs. Dismal Swamp Shrew,
Sweetgum - Blackgum Forest Peat Wetlands Loams Permently Flooded Submesotrophic Vir. Least Tril ium

Atlantic white Cedar,
Saturated to rs.
Atlantic White Cedar Cligotro Can Be in Peat-Based Peat or Organic-Rich SeasonalIT, Flooded Canebrake Rattlesnake,
yhic Oligotrophic FRI 26-100 Y
AWC Swamp urated Pa ustrine or Non-Peat-Based
Sat Silt Loams
Red Maple Forest Forested Wetlands 0)
Oligotrqhic Saturated to Atlantic White Cedar,
Pond Pine - Pond Pine Swamp Saturated Pa ustrine Interior Wetlands Peat Seasonall Flooded Oligotrophic FRI 13-100 Yrs. C,nebrake Rattlesnake,
Red Bay - Sweet Bay Forest

Saturated to Atlantic White Cedar,
Fetterbush - Oligotrophic -25 Yrs.
Tall Pocosin Sat Interior Wetlands Peat (Thinner Peat?) Sea ligotrophic ]FRI 13
0 Canebrake Rattlesnake,
urated Palustrine sonall@)Flooded
Red Bay - Pond Pine Scrub

Atlantic white Cedar,
Oligotrophic Saturated to
Sheep Laurel - Short Pocosin Saturated Palustrine Interior Wetlands Peat (Thicker Peat?) SeasonalIT, Flooded Oligotrophic FRI 3-10 Yrs. Canebrake Rattlesnake,
Inkberry - Fetterbush Scrub 0)
Wax Myrtle - Eutrophic Semi- Ecotone b/w Marsh Temporarily to Semi- Eutrophic to
Transitional Scrub Peat or Silty Peat 7 Canebrake Rattlesnake
pperm. Flooded & Pocosin or Swamp Permently Flooded Submesotrophic
Red Maple austrine Scrub

Canebrake Rattlesnake,
FRI 3-25 Yrs. Shorter
Oligotrqhic P I -Drained Poorly Drained to
I Submesotro hic FRI Pure Cane, Longer Dismal Swamp Shrew,
Switchcane - 00,ff
Seasonally looded Up Seasonally Flooded P FRI Cane w/ Trees Vir. Least Trillium
Canebrake Savanna 1. ,or Higher Silt Loams
Pond Pine Palustrine Woodland Wetlands
Oligot hi Saturated to FRI 2-3 Yrs. Spreading Pogoma
Walter's Sedge - Open Bog Saturate roKsinine Interior Wetlands Peat (Thickest Peat?) Oligotrophic
d Pa Seasonally Flooded
Virginia Chain Fem Herbaceous Wetland
Fire 2' to,lWr,. Scarce Swamp Skipper,
Saturated to Semi I
01' trophic to I
. .... Short Herbaceous Peat Perm. Flooded (May Natura longated Lobelia
Marsh Interior Marsh @Teootrophic Unknown E
Spikerush - Twigrush Spikerush Palustrine/Estuarine be Tidal)
Weiland
Any Marsh or Poorly Drained to Mesotrophic to Fire Will Generally Least Bittern
Variable Semi-Perm. Flooded Increase Stand Vigor
Reed Marsh Tall Herbaceous Eutrophic
Common Reed fland Sunny Weiland (May be Tidal)
Estuarine We

Fire 2* to H
-Perm. Flooded
Scarce Swamp Skipper,
Semi
Olney's Three - Mid-H J h Mesotrophic to
Bulrush/Cattail Marsh e9tuarine Marsh Peat to Intermit. Exposed Natural FRI Elongated Lobelia,
Square - Narrow Herbaceous ("Tidal") Eutrophic Unknown Least Bittern
Leaved CatWI wetland
Fire 2* to H dro.
Mid-Height Intermit. E osed st Bittern
Peat Eutrophic Natural Lea
Black Needlerush Needlerush Marsh Herbaceous Estuarine marsh ("Tidall Unknown
Weiland
Fire 21 to Wro. Carolina Lilaeopis,
I
Eutrophic Natura I Least Bittern
Outer Marsh, Intermit. E osed
Big Cordgrass Cordgrass Marsh Tall Herbaceous Peat ("Tida,7
Unknown
Near Channels
Estuarine Weiland
Organic-Rich Silt Semi-Perm. Flooded ? edge
Epiphytic S
Bald Cypress - Cypress(TupelO Eutrophic Semi-Perm. Near Channels Loams or Peat to Intermit. Exposed Eutrophic
Water Tupelo Swamp Flooded Forest
Oliputrophic to Possibly Created by 7
In Peat Based anently Flooded
Perm trophic Peat Bum
Peat
Coontail Pool Lacustrine Wetlands
Bur Reed - Warm Low-Gradient Upper Reaches of Organic-Rich Silt Permanently Flooded Eutrophic None Carolina Lilaeopis
iter Creek
Blackw@ Large/Small Creek River and Tribs. Over Sand
Water Celery

and Permanen None Carolina Lilaeopis
lad Backbay Low Salinity Aquatic River and Tribs.
Hornwort - Na
Lower Reaches of
Silt and S tly Flooded Eutrophic

Figure 6
North Landing River Ecosystem Diagrammatic Profile

g 0 0 0 w
M 0 un
0 -1i P. r
:4
0 0 "V 0
z n a 0 Ot CA n" f,
10 0 n w n n ,V
0 0 fp
w w @ :P;l 0
0 0 0 0 z CA
(0 0 1

PO
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F 11 1 1 1 ?@Pm
.'+LOAM & SANDY LOAM' .1-1,111111111111f ...... A
................. SILT LOA !III Jill 11 lilt
AT
................ p
.............. 1 11
........ SILT or
SAND
Vf,M
gpw-

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

many associations at different times. Key rare species that may utilize
each association are also noted on Table 6. Additionally, associations
which comprise rare natural communities are indicated with an asterisk
(*) before their name.

Each association is described briefly below.

CORN - SOYBEAN (Zea mays - Glycine max): Most of the upland
acreage in the ecosystem is occupied by row crops or other agriculture
represented by this association. Corn, soybeans, and small grains are
the most common crops. The common name for this association of the
terrestrial class is "crops." Soils are moderately well-drained to poorly
drained loams and sandy loams. The fields are fertilized, so they are
generally nutrient rich. Canebrake rattlesnakes may use this association
temporarily while in transit to other associations.

LOBLOLLY PINE - WHITE OAK (RinAs taeda - Quercus alba): All of the
upland forest types are lumped into this one association in the terrestrial
class whose common name is "pine/oak forest." Forests may be pure
pine or may include varying proportions of hardwoods. In the early
successional stages, tuliptree (Liriodendron tuligifera), sycamore
(Platanus occidentalis), and beech (Fagus grandifolia) are common. Later
seres have more oaks and hickories (Carva spp.). American holly (Ilex
opaca), flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), and pawpaw (Asimina
triloba) are common in the understory. If present, this association
usually lies between agricultural land and the wetlands. Soils are
moderately well-drained to poorly drained loams and silt loams and the
nutrients are generally available at moderate levels. Intermittent wildfires
as well as prescribed burning of managed forests may affect this
association. Canebrake rattlesnakes and Dismal Swamp southeastern
shrews reside here.

RED MAPLE - SWEETGUM - SWAMP TUPELO (Acer rubrum -
Liguidambar styraciflua - Nvssa biflora): Though frequently dominated
by maple, sweetgum, and tupelo, other common species of the
"hardwood swamp" association of the woody palustrine wetland class
include loblolly pine, green ash, and black willow (ag!jK aWM). Shrubs
and understory trees include spicebush (Lindera -benzoin), common alder
(Alnus serrulata), and red bay. This association is the interior swamp,
generally found between the uplands and the pocosins or marshes, but
usually not close to channels of open water. Soils are organic-rich silt
loams which are eutrophic to submesotrophic and temporarily to

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

semipermanently flooded.' Fire is a factor in the hardwood swamp only
during periods of drought when fires can be quite severe. Canebrake
rattlesnakes, Dismal Swamp southeastern shrews, and Virginia least
trillium may be found in this habitat.

*ATLANTIC WHITE CEDAR - RED MAPLE (Chamaecyparis thvoides -
Acer rubrum): The "AWC swamp" is a rare natural community of the
woody palustrine wetland class. Atlantic white cedar can grow in nearly
pure stands or may be mixed with other swamp species such as red
maple, pond pine, or loblolly pine. AWC swamps can be found among
the hardwood swamps or in the peat-based swamps on organic-rich silt
loams or peat soils. Nutrient availability is generally poor and AWC
swamps are saturated to seasonally flooded. Fire is a very important
factor in this community type as discussed previously under natural
heritage resources. In addition to possibly being utilized by canebrake
rattlesnakes, Atlantic white cedar is a rare species itself.

POND PINE - RED BAY - SWEET BAY Tiaws serotina - Persea borbonia -
Magnolia virginiana): In addition to the tree species which give this
association its name, this association of the woody palustrine wetlands
class may contain species of the hardwood swamp, such as red maple,
or components of the pocosin associations, such as fetterbush. "Pond
pine swamp" is the common name given this association. It is found in
the interior wetlands on peat soils where it is saturated to seasonally
flooded and nutrient poor. Fire is an influencing factor in this
association. Atlantic white cedar and canebrake rattlesnakes can be
found here.

*FETTERBUSH - RED BAY - POND PINE (Lyonia lucida.- Persea borbonia
- Pinus serotina): This is the "tall pocosin" association discussed
previously under natural heritage resources. The association is a member
of the woody palustrine wetland class. Found in interior peat-based
wetlands, tall pocosins are characteristically nutrient poor and saturated
to seasonally flooded. As with the other associations in this class, fire
is an influencing factor. Atlantic white cedar and canebrake rattlesnakes
may be found in the tall pocosin.

*FETTERBUSH - SHEEP LAUREL - INKBERRY (Lyonia lucida - Kalmia
angustifolia - Ilex c1labra): The evergreen shrubs of the "short pocosin"
are tied together with a tangle of laurel-leaved greenbrier. This
association is a member of the woody palustrine wetland class. Pond
pines along with some Atlantic white cedar and red maple grow here, but

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

are few, scattered, and stunted - Another association of the interior peat-
based wetlands, low pocosins are saturated to seasonally flooded and
nutrient poor. Fire is important. Canebrake rattlesnakes may utilize this
habitat.

WAX MYRTLE - RED MAPLE (Myrica cerifera - Acer rubrum): This is the
"transitional scrub" found between the marshes and the swamps or
pocosins or sometimes as "islands" in the interior of large marshes.
Besides wax myrtle and red maple saplings, this association of the
woody palustrine wetland class often contains poison ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans), loblollv pine, swamp rose (Rosa l2alustris), and species of the
adjacent marsh. Soils are peat or silty peat and hydrology may be tidal
or variously flooded. The surface is usually very irregular and
"hummocky." Canebrake rattlesnakes may utilize this habitat.

SWITCHCANE - POND PINE (Arundinaria aigantea - Pinus l2alustris): This
association is called the "canebrake savanna." Only a small fraction of
the original area covered by this association remains. While surveying
the state line between North Carolina and Virginia in the 1700's, William
Byrd dubbed the area the "green sea" because of the vast expanse of
canebrake he found. Switchcane may grow in nearly pure stands with
only scattered pond pines and other woody vegetation or may form a
major or minor herbaceous componentto a woodland or forest depending
upon the frequency of fires burning through the area. For this reason,
the canebrake savanna may fall into either the woody palustrine wetland
or the herbaceous palustrine wetland classes. Canebrakes usually occur
on silt loams with only a thin organic layer and may be found in poorly
drained uplands or some of the higher wetlands. The canebrake
rattlesnake, Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew, and Virginia least trillium
may be found in this habitat.

*WALTER'S SEDGE - VIRGINIA CHAIN FERN (Carex striata -
Woodwardia virainica): The "open bog" is perhaps the rarest association
in the North Landing River ecosystem and currently occurs as small,
scattered openings in the pocosins. Woody species are nearly absent so
the association is put in the herbaceous palustrine wetland class. An
intense fire will likely enhance this association. Its rare species include
the spreading pogonia and the canebrake rattlesnake; Walter's sedge is
also a rare plant found only in this association. The open bog is the most
nutrient poor of all the peat-based interior wetlands. The association is
generally found in the interior of pocosins. Its deep saturated peat may
be domed and completely rain-fed. In the long term, it is likely that peat

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

accumulation and nutrient regime maintain this association, but fires may
reduce the stature of woody species enough to open areas of short
pocosin into bogs.

*SPIKERUSH - TWIGRUSH (Eleocharis spp. - Cladium mariscoidegall-
Composition of this rarest of the marsh associations was discussed in
the natural heritage resources section. Termed "spikerush marsh" for
convenience, this association is dominated by a wide variety of sedge
and rush species which almost always includes one or more spikerushes.
Species richness is very high and rare species, such as the elongated
lobelia and scarce swamp skipper, are often found here. Spikerush
marshes are found in the interior of marshes, away from the creeks and
guts. Because of this location and possibly to peat doming, spikerush
marshes may not be subject to as great a tidal amplitude as the outer
marsh types and, in some cases, may be influenced more by ground-
water seepage or rain-fall than tidal action (thus its placement in both the
estuarine and palustrine herbaceous wetland classes). This association
also has the lowest salinities of the marsh types. Soils of spongy peat
are deep and nutrient availability is low. Fires may not be important
natural factors, but can be used as an effective management tool.

COMMON REED (Phragmites australis): This potentially invasive grass
may form pure stands in any marsh or other sunny wetland except that
the plant does not usually grow in habitats subject to deep, prolonged
inundation. The common name for the association is "reed marsh." The
species is quite adaptable; soil, nutrient, and hydrologic tolerance limits
are wide. Its adaptability allows it to fall into either the herbaceous
palustrine wetland or herbaceous estuarine wetland class. Least bitterns
may utilize this association for cover. Except for burns in the early
growing season, fires will increase stem density and stand vigor.

*OLNEY THREE-SQUARE - NARROW-LEAVED CATTAIL (Scirous
americanus - Iyl2ha angustifolia): The "bulrush/cattail marsh" is a
marginally rare marsh type found mostly in interior marsh areas. This
association is in the herbaceous estuarine wetland class. Composition
can be quite variable; some other common species include swamp rose
mallow (Hibiscus moscheutos), seaside mallow (Kosteletzkya vir-ginica),
arrow arum, common reed, pickerelweed, duck potato, big cordgrass,
broad-leaved cattail (Tvl?ha -latifolia), southern cattail, saltmeadow hay
(Sgartina 12atens), switchgrass, spikerushes, saw grass, camphorweed,
smartweeds, rushes (Juncus spp.), and other bulrushes. This association
has more tidal influence and, thus more nutrients and slightly higher

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

salinity, than the spikerush marsh. The natural role of fire in this
association is not determined, but the hydrologic and nutrient regimes
are likely more influential than the fire regime. This association may
contain sawgrass, however, which is a fire-adapted species. The scarce
swamp skipper, elongated lobelia, and least bittern may be found in this
association.

BLACK NEEDLERUSH (Juncus roemerianus): The "needlerush marsh"
often occurs in pure stands and usually is found in the outer marshes.
When other species do occur in this association, they often include the
species listed in the bulrush/cattail marsh. This marsh type of the
herbaceous estuarine wetland class is typically eutrophic, tidal, and
slightly to moderately brackish. The natural role of fire in this association
is not determined, but the hydrologic and nutrient regimes are likely more
influential than the fire regime. This association often contains
sawgrass, however, which is a fire-adapted species. Least bitterns may
utilize this habitat.

*BIG CORDGRASS (Spartina cynosuroides): "Cordgrass marshes" also
often occur in pure stands and cover large areas of the preserve's
marshes, especially along the creeks and guts. Other species may
include any number of those listed with the bulrush/cattail marsh. This
association of the herbaceous estuarine wetland class is eutrophic, tidal,
and slightly to moderately brackish. The natural role of fire in this
association is not determined, but the hydrologic and nutrient regimes
are likely more influential than the fire regime. Least bitterns may utilize
the habitat and Carolina lilaeopsis grows at the edge of this association
in shallow water and mud flats.

*BALD CYPRESS - WATER TUPELO (Taxodium distichurn - Nyssa
aguatica): Few tree species other than bald cypress and water tupelo are
able to tolerate the essentially aquatic conditions of this association
leading to its common name, "cVpress/tupelo swamp," and its placement
into its own class, woody estuarine wetland. This association is most
common in the upper reaches of the North Landing River and its
tributaries where it lines the guts, creeks, and river. Water levels are
affected by wind tides, but salinity is generally quite low. Epiphytic
sedge may be found growing on cypress knees or flared water tupelo
trunks in this association.

COONTAIL (Ceratophyllum): The "pool" or shallow pond is an
association of the aquatic class. When oxidation of peat in the marsh or

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

peat-based swamps occurs either from fire or decomposition,
depressions in the surface may form which are below the water table
resulting in standing water. Flooding eliminates the wetland species in
favor of aquatics, such as coontail. Emergents may cling to the pool's
edges. Extreme upper reaches of guts may mimic this environment and
may also be abundant with coontail and other aquatics. Key rare species
utilization is undetermined.

BUR REED - WATER CELERY (Sl2arganium americanum - Vallisneria
americana): The open water aquatic environments have been divided
into two associations. The upper reaches of the river and its tributaries
may have submerged aquatic plants such as bur reed and water celery
or vegetation may be absent. This is the "blackwater creek" association.
These channels are normally lined by swamps, rather than marshes, and
the water appears black from the tanins that come from the swamps.
Though still subject to tides, salinity is very low. Carolina lilaeopsis may
be found in the shallow waters or mud flats at the edge of marshes in
this association.

HORNWORT - NAIAD (Ceratol2hyllum demersum - Naias guadalupensis):
The lower reaches of the river and its major tributaries are "backbay"
communities. Submerged aquatics such as hornworts or naiads may
grow in these waters. Large areas of open water, expansive bordering
marshes, tides, and fresh to slightly brackish conditions characterize this
association. There are large areas of transition between the backbay and
blackwater creek associations that have many characteristics of both
associations. Carolina lilaeopsis may be found in the shallow waters or
mud flats at the edge of marshes in this association.

FUNCTION OF THE ECOSYSTEM

The classes and association help to define the ecosystem's structure.
Ecosystem function is driven by influencing factors such as natural
ecological processes and gradients and anthropogenic disturbances and
alterations. Influencing factors of the North Landing River ecosystem are
grouped into six categories which are discussed briefly below.

SUBSTRATE: This category covers conditions, cycles, and processes
affecting the physical characteristics of all the substrates of the
ecosystem. Existing substrate conditions such as peat depth and
composition, soil type, and elevation are included. Many cycles and
processes pertaining to substrate gain, loss, or change in physical

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

character are also relevant. These influencing factors may include
erosion (of peat or soil), sedimentation, primary production (peat
accumulation), storms and floods (leading to erosion or sedimentation),
dredging, dredge spoil disposal, channel migration (consisting of
simultaneous erosion and sedimentation), and peat oxidation (as by
decomposition or fire). The ultimate effect of these influencing factors
is change or maintenance of substrate composition and structure.

NUTRIENTS: This category includes nutrient conditions, cycles, and
processes in the water and soil. Phosphorus or nitrogen are usually the
limiting nutrients of a system, but sulfur, potassium, carbon, and trace
elements also can be important. Nutrient cycling/regime, eutrophication
(as from pollution), nutrient availability, nutrient release (as from
decomposition or fire), and nutrient uptake are all relevant factors. The
ultimate effect of these influencing factors is the maintenance of or a
change in the nutrients in the ecosystem.

HYDROLOGY: Hydrologic factors include wind tides, sea level change,
ditching/d raining, impoundment, waterwithdrawal/discharge, infiltration,
runoff, evapotranspiration, flooding, ground-water recharge/discharge,
surface-water flow, ground-water flow, water table level and
fluctuations, and precipitation. All contribute to the dynamics of the
hydrology of the ecosystem.

FIRE: The fire category includes such aspects as ground versus surface
versus crown fires, fire severity, fire intensity, fire return interval, and
lack of fire. Fire may lead to the maintenance, renewal, or total change
of a given association.

SPECIES INTERACTIONS: This category includes biological succession,
interspecific competition, aggressive plant invasion, herbivory, direct
human disturbances to the system (trampling, road construction, etc.),
disease, predation, seed banks, and rodent eat-outs and trails. All relate
to the effects of one species, population, or association on another.

CHEMICAL: This category involves chemical factors of the soil, air, and
water not covered under nutrients or any of the other categories. It
includes soil oxygen content, natural soil and water Ph, BOD, acid
deposition, salinity, and spills, leaks, or other unnatural introductions of
pesticides, petroleum, metals, or other toxics.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

MAJOR INFLUENCING FACTORS

Six influencing factors from the above categories have been selected for
inclusion in the conceptual ecological model. These six influencing
factors were chosen because they meet one or both of two criteria: (1)
the influencing factor accounts for a large proportion of the function of
the ecosystem and (2) land managers may be able to exert at least some
control over the influencing factor. The six influencing factors are
represented as two gradients and four processes. The gradients are
nutrient regime and hydrologic regime and the processes are fire,
succession, eutrophication, and salinity increase. Each is discussed
below.

NUTRIENT REGIME: One of the most influential factors affecting the
natural community composition is availability of nutrients. Nutrient
availability is represented as a gradient in the model. The terms that are
used to indicate relative nutrient availability are (in order of increasing
availability) oligotrophic, submesotrophic, mesotrophic, permesotrophic,
and eutrophic. In the peat-based wetlands, nutrient levels are closely
related to peat depth. As peat accumulates in the interior wetlands (i.e.,
away from the surface channels), less water enters the association from
ground-water seepage or surface-water run-off sources and the system
moves towards being entirely rain-fed. This leads to increasingly poor
nutrient conditions. Land managers may have a limited amount of
control over the nutrient regime of the ecosystem, mostly through the
prevention of anthropogenic eutrophication which is further discussed
below.

HYDROLOGIC REGIME: As a riverine ecosystem, the hydrologic regime
is certainly one of the most important influencing factors in the North
Landing River ecosystem. Generally, the average water table gradually
rises relative to the ground surface from the uplands to the river.
Hydrologic regime is, therefore, represented as a gradient. Increasing
relative hydroperiod of aquatic and wetland associations is represented
by the following terms: saturated, temporarily flooded, seasonally
flooded, semi-permanently flooded, intermittently exposed, and
permanently flooded. Upland hydrology is referred to simply as well-
drained or poorly-drained. The hydrology of the North Landing River
ecosystem is unlike that of most estuarine ecosystems. Regular
significant lunar tidal action is negligible (Doumlele 1976). What is
generally referred to as tidal action in the North Landing River system is
more accurately described as irregular, wind-driven water-level

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

fluctuations. The word "tide" is considerably more concise and
convenient, however. Because winds must blow from a certain
direction, at a certain minimum velocity, for a certain minimum period of
time to cause a significant water-level change, tidal events, either lows
or highs, are irregular and infrequent. Most of the time, the water level
does not change significantly from the mean water level. However,
when significant water-level fluctuations do occur, they usually last
longer than lunar tidal events. Additionally, extreme water-level
fluctuations are not uncommon and may have far reaching implications,
completely draining marshes or completely inundating higher inland
wetlands for several days at a time. The wind tides of the North Landing
River system are a very important component of the hydrologic regime.
Wind tides could be separated out from the hydrology gradient and
addressed as a process in future iterations of the model. Land managers
have a variable amount of control over the ecosystem's hydrology.
Although land managers cannot control wind-tides or rainfall, they can
help to minimize disruption of natural hydrologic processes. Maintaining
locks, discouraging new canals, determining the most compatible
maintenance dredging and disposal techniques, preventing draining of
sensitive habitats, and installing water-level control structures in existing
ditches are examples.

FIRE: Many of the palustrine associations are fire adapted or fire
dependent communities. Fire can also be used as an effective
management tool for several of the estuarine associations. Fire could be
represented as another gradient expressed in terms of mean fire return
interval. Representation of a third dimension on a two dimensional
diagram is difficult, however, and fire expressed as a mean fire return
interval gradient would not allow representation of fire intensity. For
these reasons, fire is represented as a process. Land managers can have
a significant amount of control over this process, both by suppressing (or
not suppressing) wildfires and by conducting prescribed burns.

SUCCESSION: Biological succession is the replacement of one
community of organisms by another in an orderly and predictable
manner. Succession is an important influencing factor from the species
interaction category. Certain associations are linked by ecological
successions as stages or "seres" in a typical progression of one
association to another. Time is a major driving force behind succession.
In many ways, succession works opposite to fire in the ecosystem.
During periods between fires, succession occurs in many associations.
The passage of a fire may "set back" the sere of an association by

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

reducing the amount of biomass, especially that of woody species.
Succession is represented as a process in the model. Prescribed burning
and other ecological management tools can be utilized by land managers
to decelerate or remove the effects of ecological succession in some
situations.

EUTROPHICATION: Represented as a process, this influencing factor
involves the anthropogenic introduction of nutrients into the ecosystem.
Water is often the carrier of nutrients; nutrients are generally added to
associations via surface-water or ground-water flows or in the sediments
carried by the water. Fires can result in short term eutrophication,
creating a "spike" in nutrient availability through oxidation of biomass.
Land managers can exert some control over eutrophication by influencing
surrounding land management practices.

SALINITY INCREASE: Under natural conditions, the North Landing River
is a freshwater to slightly brackish water system except for periodic
intrusion of brackish waters into the lower reaches caused by wind-
driven water-level fluctuations. In fact, Doumlele (1976) found only very
low salinities (less than 1 ppt) during the marsh survey of the North
Landing River. Doumlele hypothesized that the brackish water species
growing in the system, such as big cordgrass and black needlerush, are
relict populations from a period when the North Landing River's waters
were more saline. The canals connecting the North Landing River system
to the saltier waters of the Chesapeake Bay have caused some concern
regarding increased influx of salty water, especially in the West Neck
Creek area where a connection to more saline waters has been
established with the completion of the bypass canal around Canal
Number Two. Because of this concern, salinity increase is represented
as a process. Land managers might be able to effect some control over
salinity by influencing water use.

INTEGRATION OF STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS

The associations and influencing factors of the ecosystem can be
graphically integrated into a conceptual illustration of the structure and
function of the North Landing River ecosystem. This conceptual
ecological model is depicted in Figure 7. The model is most easily
understood when considered in steps or pieces.

First, the two gradients, hydrology and nutrients, are assigned to the
horizontal and vertical axes, respectively. Nutrient availability increases

Figure 7
North Landing River Ecosystem Conceptual Ecological Model

Intense Fire Cordgrass Backbay
Marsh
Crops Reed Marsh-A' ........

Blackwater
Creek
Mild Fire h
Trans. Scrub Needlerus
Marsh
Cypress/Tupelo
Swamp

Succession Hardwood Swamp Bulrush/Cattail
Ak Mar 0:1
sh
................ Pool

- - - - - - - - 10- 00,
Eutrophication Canebrake Savanna
AWC Swam

W Pine/Oak Forest
Pond Pine Swamp
moo-.
Salinity
Increase TatPc-@osein Spikerush
Marsh
Short Pocosin
0
W / ,.4)( 1
0 @k Open Bo.'g
Well Poorly Saturated Temporarily Seasonally Semi-Perm. Intermit. Permanantly
Drained Drained Flooded Flooded Flooded Exposed Flooded
H Y D R,,- 0 L 0 G Y

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

up the vertical axis; relative average water-table level increases across
the right of the horizontal axis.

Based on this system of coordinates generated by the two gradient axes,
each association can be ordinated or "plotted" in the illustration based
on its nutrient and hydrologic tolerances. Some assumptions have to be
made and future revisions of the model may depict different relative
positions of each association. Also, several artistic liberties are taken.
For those associations which occur across a broad range of nutrient and
hydrological conditions, the association name is written as much in the
middle of those tolerances as the diagram will allow. Similarly, some
associations are spread apart a little more than they should be to avoid
crowding in the diagram.

With the associations and gradients depicted, the ecological processes
can be added. Processes are represented as arrows leading from one
association to another. In order to prevent the diagram from becoming
over-complicated, a few liberties are also taken with the process arrows.
Only those processes which are considered of major significance in the
ecosystem or which have a direct bearing on management planning are
shown. Several consequences of f ire, succession, or the other processes
that are less important ecologically or less pertinent to ecological
management are not shown. Several processes can "skip" associations,
that is, a process that drives a progression of associations can in some
instances bypass one or more of the intermediate steps. This skipping
phenomenon is not shown, but the step-wise progressions are depicted.
The succession and eutrophication arrows leading to the reed marsh
appear to originate from nowhere. Actually, the reed marsh can be
derived from so many associations via succession or eutrophication
(depending on the presence of gemmules) that these arrows are all but
omitted to help keep the diagram legible.

The model will assist ecological managers in determining management
actions and to help set measures of success. For example, if the
ecological goal is to create and maintain an open bog association, an
ecological manager can examine the model and determine that to
accomplish that objective the hydrology must be maintained, the area
must be protected from eutrophication, and the bog must be subject to
periodic burns or the association will succeed into a short pocosin.
Because the model is conceptual, however, it cannot tell the ecological
manager when to burn, how often to burn, or how much phosphorus is
too much. The model will evolve as more information becomes available.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

STRESS ASSESSMENT

An assessment of stresses facing a site is an important element of any
conservation plan, for conservation actions meant to attenuate stresses
cannot be planned and implemented successfully if the stresses are not
clearly identified. The conservation planning report discusses the
stresses to each natural area and its natural heritage resources. A brief
discussion of general stresses on the North Landing River ecosystem is
presented below. Stresses are considered in approximate order of
decreasing threat. Table 7 lists each stress, the impacts of the stress,
and the source(es) of the stress. Also included is an indication of the
presence (current or potential) and degree (low, moderate, high) of the
stress. For current stresses, degree refers to the level of threat to the
ecosystem or its natural heritage resources. If the stress is listed as
potential, degree refers to the supposed probability of that stress
occurring.

Although stresses are discussed separately, it is important to note that
often more than one stress is acting on a community or population at
once. Many of the stresses act simultaneously, cumulatively, or even
synergistically to aggravate problems afflicting the ecosystem.

FIRE DEFICIT

The decrease in the frequency of fires in the ecosystem over the past
several decades is probably the most immediate threat to many of the
natural heritage resources. Certain species and natural communities are
adapted to or even dependent upon fire to maintain their habitat or
complete their life cycle. Examples include open bogs, short pocosins,
tall pocosins, AWC swamps, pond pine, Atlantic white cedar, Walter's
sedge, and spreading pogonia. Many other species, such as large
cranberry, may return after the re-introduction of fire. Fire can also be
used as an ecological management too[ for other habitats. For example,
carefully applied prescribed fire can help halt the succession of the rare
spikerush marsh into transitional scrub. Fragmentation of the landscape,
and to a lesser degree, active fire suppression, has led to this stress.

ALTERED SURFACE-WATER QUANTITY

If predictions by meteorologists and ecologists regarding accelerated sea-
level rise are correct, sea level will likely rise faster than the associations
can adapt or migrate to accommodate the change. Local extirpation of

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 7

STRESS ASSESSMENT FOR
NORTH LANDING RIVER ECOSYSTEM

STRESSIMPACT PRESENCEMEGREE SOURCE

fire deficit: loss of fire current:high fragmented landscape, fire
dependent communities and suppression
species

altered surface-water quantity: potential:high accelerated sea-level rise,
reduction or loss of certain filling/draining wetlands,
habitats/communities subsidence, ditching/dredging,
channelizing, impoundment,
increased impervious surface
area (inc. run-off)

altered surface-water quality: current:medium point and non-point source
alteration or reduction of certain pollution including nutrients,
habitats/communities sediments, toxics (petroleum,
pesticides, metals, etc.); salt
water intrusion

altered ground-water quantity current:medium leaching of fertilizer,
or quality: alteration of ground- pesticides; spills/leaks of
water dependent/influenced toxics, large-scale ground-
habitats/cornmunities water withdrawal; increased
impervious surface area, many
others...

problem species: displacement current:medium common reed, nutria, deer,
of rare species; alteration or predators
loss of sensitive habitats and
rare natural communities

take: elimination of individuals, current:medium intentional killing, road kills,
reduced population vigor (to certain species) trampling, collecting

disturbance: interference with current:low motorboats, etc., nature-
foraging, resting, reproduction based tourism, other
or certain animals recreation; logging;
construction

direct habitat conversion: potentialJow clearing forests, draining/filling
reduction or loss of wetlands, development, etc.
habitats/communities I I

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

natural heritage resources which comprise or occur in these threatened
associations is possible. Other possible sources of altered surface-water
quantity include filling draining, impoundment, dredging, channelization,
and increased run-off from increased impervious surface area. Any
disruption of natural surface-water flow patterns or river channel
migration would fall under this category.

ALTERED SURFACE-WATER QUALITY

Water quality problems are a current and moderate stress on the system.
Degraded water quality may lead to reduction or loss of habitats and
communities and the rare species they support. Point and nonpoint
source pollution are the origins of water quality problems. Contaminants
may include nutrients, sediments, toxics (petroleum, pesticides, metals,
etc.), and salt. These contaminants either directly affect the ecosystem
or lead to other problems, such as reduced dissolved oxygen levels or
reduced light penetration.

ALTERED GROUND-WATER QUANTITY OR QUALITY

Little is known about the ground-water regime of the North Landing River
ecosystem and precise predictions as to the effects of ground-water
quality or quantity alteration are difficult to assess. Alteration of ground-
water influenced or dependent communities and habitats is a possible
problem. Sources of this stress may include leaching of fertilizers and
pesticides into the ground water from agricultural fields, spills or leaks of
toxic compounds, large-scale ground-water withdrawal, increased
impervious surface area, landfills, abandoned wells, salt-water intrusion,
ground-water injection, and septic systems.

PROBLEM SPECIES

The main problem species of concern in the North Landing River
ecosystem are common reed, nutria, and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus
virainiana). Intermediate predators, such as opossums (Didelr)his
vir-giniana), striped skunks (Mephitis mer)hitis), and raccoons (Procyon
lotor), and other invasive plants could also become threats to some
species and habitats. Problem species may cause the displacement of
rare species or may cause the reduction or loss of rare natural
communities or significant habitats upon which some rare species
depend. Problem species are a moderate, current threat to the

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

ecosystem.

TAKE

"Take" refers to the direct killing or other effective removal from the
population of individuals by humans. This is a moderate, current threat
to some rare species. Take may be in the form of intentional killing, road
kills, trampling, and collecting (plants or animals). The canebrake
rattlesnake is an example of a rare species threatened by take.

DISTURBANCE

Certain animal species, for example, great blue herons (Ardea herodias),
are sensitive to disturbance from human activities. The disturbance may
interfere with foraging, resting, or reproductive behavior and could
eventually lead to abandonment of an area. Motorboats (including
personal watercraft and waterskiing), nature-based tourism, and other
recreational pursuits can be the culprits. This is a current, but low-level,
stress to the system. The degree of this stress could increase if
recreational activities in the area increase without careful planning.

DIRECT HABITAT CONVERSION

Clearing of forests, draining or filling of marshes, development, and other
factors can directly eliminate significant habitats or rare natural
communities. Reductions in the amount of suitable habitat bring about
reductions in the populations of rare species. Fortunately, the potential
for this threat is generally low because much of the significant habitats
of the ecosystem are already protected. There are exceptions to this
generalization, however, leading to the inclusion of this stress on the list.

CONSERVATION PLANNING BOUNDARIES

Conservation planning boundaries are the key component of any site
conservation plan. They help to guide conservation efforts of a natural
area by delineating areas of ecological significance and addressing the
stresses and ecological needs of the site. Traditionally, primary
ecological boundaries and secondary ecological boundaries are used in
site conservation plans. Primary ecological boundaries encompass all
natural heritage resources of a natural area, including the habitat of rare
species and the extent of rare or exemplary natural communities.
Secondary ecological boundaries encompass all lands and waters

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

intended to mitigate natural and human stresses to the natural heritage
resources of the site, that is they generally delineate buffer areas. For
example, secondary ecological boundaries may encompass areas
intended to protect water quality, screen human activity from animals
sensitive to disturbance, or provide migration corridors between two or
more areas of rare species habitat.

Conservation planning boundaries should not be interpreted as regulatory
zones or acquisition boundaries, but as conservation tools to help guide
the protection and stewardship of the natural area.

Detailed information on the conservation planning boundaries for the
North Landing River ecosystem, including maps of the primary and
secondary ecological boundaries, can be found in the conservation
planning report. Figure 8 shows the extent of the secondary ecological
boundaries for all nine natural areas in the North Landing River
ecosystem.

190
FIGURE 8
@&Ihvge urdens
pus) Come
SECONDARY ECOLOGICAL m
Gunn
BOUNDARIES FOR THE or
NORM LANDING RIVER
ECOSYSTEM
W
LaKe ie

nm 'i
0

Is
Prin Comer

Butts
2 CD
z

AS7AL P%7,ftETWA V- P@ungo

+,an in

U
165
e san@ r
4

r
S AVA TION
er@tress (F RESS FIELD) <11
5 easan
id
Substa

,,ley

4
KEY TO NATURAL AREAS

1. STUMPY LAKE
2. GUM SWAMP 5
3. UPPER WEST NECK -4L,
4. NORTH POCATY
5. EASTERN WETILANDS -
6-
6. NORTH LANDING RIVER POCOSINS
168 7. UPPER BLACKWATER CREIX Back B
7 8 SOUTHERN MARSHES
9. OAKUM CREEK

nd of
omise
Hir
roun

icko L.0
Ri

Sal 7 4
Bride - iac

2 3 4 5 6 7 8
KILOMETERSi
9
4 5
MILES1 0 1 2 3
L
er

e
r

Northw

RGINIA v GINIA H-Cl,
r7

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

MANAGEMENT

PRIMARY LAND CLASSIFICATION

According to the State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide (vdcr
1991) developed by the VDCR Lands Classification Committee, a site
should be classified according to the format described in the
departmental land classification system. The types of land classifications
recognized by VDCR are as follows:

State Park,
State Natural Area Preserve,
State Cultural Resource Area,
State Reserve,
State Trail/Greenway, and
Special Interest Area.

In accordance with the land classification system, North Landing River
Natural Area Preserve's primary land classification is State Natural Area
Preserve.

The State Natural Area Preserve classification is defined as a "land or
water area of variable acreage that may offer low intensity public use."
"The primary purpose of the property is to support rare plant and/or
animal species and/or unique natural communities, and it is, therefore,
dedicated to ensure their preservation." (VDCR 1991)

ZONE CLASSIFICATION

According to the State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide, there
are three major zones under each of the six primary classifications which
may be applied to a property. The zones, based on resource analyses,
will direct the type of use which may occur on land areas under a major
classification. The zones recognized by the VDCR Lands Classification
Committee are as follows:

Non-sensitive,
Sensitive, and
Preservation.

The Preservation zone is further divided into three sub-types:

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Preservation - Natural,
Preservation - Cultural, and
Preservation - Special.

In accordance with the land classification system, North Landing River
Natural Area Preserve's zone classification is Preservation - Natural.
Note that all of the preserve is zoned Preservation - Natural.

Preservation Zone - Natural is defined as "actual or proposed natural area
preserves dedicated to protecting natural heritage resources managed for
the habitat of threatened or endangered species or natural communities
present on the property."

REGULATIONS, POLICIES, AND GUIDELINES

Regulations pertaining to the use and management of state-owned
natural area preserves are currently under development by VDCR. Once
use regulations have been established and codified, VDCR will also
develop departmental policies and guidelines for management of
properties within the state natural area preserve system.

According to the State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide,
guidelines should address the following topics:

recreation/other public uses,
hunting, fishing, trapping,
agriculture,
timber,
water,
minerals and geology,
soils,
roads, utilities, access,
facilities,
natural heritage resources,
wildfire,
insects and disease, and
active management of vegetation and wildlife.

TNC has developed policies for management of their preserves which
are currently under review for updating and revision.

Policies, regulations, and guidelines will be applied to tracts respective

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

of ownership. It is expected that the VDCR policies and guidelines and
the TNC policies for management will closely parallel each other in
content and will not cause conflicts or other problems in the
management of the preserve as a single unit.

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

This section contains the most important component of the management
plan: goals and objectives. The section is organized hierarchically.
Categories are the highest level. Categories identify the general topic
covered by a set of goals and objectives. A brief discussion of each
category is provided. Goals are the second level. A goal is a general
result towards which management effort is directed. The lowest level
are the objectives. Objectives are more specific aims, usually with a
measurable end result, designed to help realize the goal. Objectives are
the most basic and operational level of the management direction. As
such, they are used as the basis for development of management
synopses.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

[3 CATEGORY: Inventory and Research

There are several areas of need for biodiversity inventory and scientific
research at the North Landing River Natural Area Preserve and vicinity.
The additional information and knowledge regarding the preserve and its
ecosystem will be used to guide ecological management. Biological
monitoring is not included under this category, but under stewardship.

� GOAL 1: Conduct additional biodiversity inventory.

� OBJECTIVE 1A: Complete additional inventory for rare
plants.
� OBJECTIVE 1 B: Complete additional inventory for rare
animals.

� GOAL 2: Conduct scientific research and assessment of
ecosystem structure and function.

� OBJECTIVE 2A: Continue hydrologic, geochemical,
and vegetation research.
� OBJECTIVE 213: Continue fire and vegetation history
research.
� OBJECTIVE 2C: Document and map vegetation types.

� GOAL 3: Conduct research on priority ecological
management techniques.

� OBJECTIVE 3A: Research effectiveness of prescribed
fire in the control of common reed.
� OBJECTIVE 313: Research effectiveness of fire in
regenerating Atlantic white cedar.
� OBJECTIVE 3C: Research effects of fire on pocosin
and canebrake communities.
� OBJECTIVE 3D: Research effects of fire on marsh
communities.

� GOAL 4: Conduct research on priority water quality issues.

� OBJECTIVE 4A: Evaluate effects of maintenance
dredging of ICW.
� OBJECTIVE 413: Determine extent and effects of
salinity changes associated with bypass canal.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

13CATEGORY: Information Management and Planning

This category includes all goals and objectives related to management of
biodiversity data in BCD, environmental review, and continued
management planning. Specific reporting and planning needs are
addressed under their respective goals.

� GOAL 5: Maintain and utilize current records in BCD.

� OBJECTIVE 5A: Annually review and revise as
necessary EOR's, SBR's, and TBR's.
� OBJECTIVE 513: Enter and annually update
Stewardship Actions.
� OBJECTIVE 5C: Produce an SSS annually.

� GOAL 6: Provide appropriate environmental review services.

0 OBJECTIVE 6A: Provide appropriate environmental
review of projects proposed in the vicinity of the
preserve.

0 GOAL 7: Continue to develop resource management plan.

� OBJECTIVE 7A: Periodically review resource
management plan and revise as necessary.
� OBJECTIVE 713: Continue to refine the site
conservation plan.
� OBJECTIVE 7C: Continue to refine the conceptual
ecological model.
� OBJECTIVE 7D: Develop a fire management plan.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

13CATEGORY: Protection

Although most of the natural heritage resources of the ecosystem have
been protected through acquisition, the preserve is not isolated from the
surrounding land use. Preservation of the natural heritage resources is
not assured just by owning their habitat. Additionally, acquisition of
several tracts has not been completed as of this writing and many tracts
yet remain to be dedicated. Efforts to more adequately protect the
natural heritage resources of the North Landing River ecosystem should
continue.

� GOAL 8: Complete protection projects currently in progress.

� OBJECTIVE 8A: Complete acquisition of targeted
tracts.
� OBJECTIVE 813: Complete dedication of all tracts
owned by TNC and VDCR.

� GOAL 9: Continue to employ a variety of protection tools to
secure the viability of the natural heritage resources.

o OBJECTIVE 9A: Secure management agreements or
natural area registry on priority upland tracts.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

13CATEGORY: Stewardship

Stewardship is the long term management of land and water to maintain
and enhance its natural and cultural resources. The stewardship
category comprises the bulk of the goals and objectives for the preserve.

� GOAL 10: Provide appropriate biological monitoring.

0 OBJECTIVE 1OA: Conduct biological monitoring of
selected rare species, problem species, and
natural communities.

� GOAL 11: Provide appropriate ecological management.

� OBJECTIVE 11 A: Complete common reed
demonstration project.
� OBJECTIVE 11 B: Reintroduce fire into the
pocosins.
� OBJECTIVE 11 C: Utilize fire as a marsh
management tool.
� OBJECTIVE 11 D: Develop and implement a
problem species assessment and control plan.

� GOAL 12: Appropriately manage hunting on the preserve.

� OBJECTIVE 12A: Continue to manage duck hunting
adjacent to the preserve in cooperation with
VDGIF.
� OBJECTIVE 1213: Develop and implement a deer
hunting plan and guidelines.

� GOAL 13: Design and implement programs to restore and
maintain water quality and quantity.

� OBJECTIVE 13A: Develop a model land-use plan for
priority upland tracts.
� OBJECTIVE 1313: Design and implement a
demonstration water quality conservation project.

0 84

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

13CATEGORY: Stewardship (continued)

� GOAL 14: Provide appropriate public access and
recreational opportunities.

� OBJECTIVE 14A: Complete development of public
access facilities at Kellam tract.
� OBJECTIVE 1413: Develop and implement public
access and recreation strategies.

� GOAL 15: Provide appropriate preservation of scenic
resources.

� OBJECTIVE 15A: Review proposed projects for
potential impacts to scenic resources.
� OBJECTIVE 15B: Encourage a regional approach to
scenic resources management.

� GOAL 16: Provide appropriate preservation of historic
resources.

o OBJECTIVE 16A: Review proposed projects for
potential impacts to historic resources.

� GOAL 17: Provide appropriate site management.

� OBJECTIVE 17A: Establish and maintain
appropriate signage.
� OBJECTIVE 1713: Implement effective site security.
� OBJECTIVE 17C: Maintain access facilities and other
amenities.

� GOAL 18: Provide appropriate interpretation, education,
and promotion.

� OBJECTIVE 18A: Develop and distribute written
educational materials.
� OBJECTIVE 1813: Provide educational programs.
� OBJECTIVE 18C: Appropriately promote the
preserve.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

13CATEGORY: Cooperative Management

Cooperative management of the North Landing River Natural Area
Preserve is crucial to the successful preservation of its natural heritage
resources. In addition to the cooperative management process within
VDCR, management partners outside the agency must also be involved.

� GOAL 19: Coordinate management with existing partners.

� OBJECTIVE 19A: Coordinate management between
VDCR and TNC-
� OBJECTIVE 11913: Coordinate management with
other existing partners.

� GOAL 20: Develop new management partners and
cooperative management strategies.

� OBJECTIVE 20A: Establish a Stewardship Advisory
Committee.
� OBJECTIVE 2013: Enlist support of private landowners
and community organizations.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

MANAGEMENT SYNOPSES

Management synopses are short plans recommending why, when, and
how an objective may be accomplished and suggesting who may be
responsible for its implementation. A management synopsis for each
objective appears on the following pages. Each synopsis follows a
standard format explained below. Where an action plan is called for in
a synopsis, the words "ACTION PLAN" appear parenthetically. Action
plans are explained in a following section.

OBJECTIVE: This heading contains a reiteration of the objective.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: A more detailed version of the objective, often
containing additional information, is provided.

JUSTIFICATION: A discussion of need for the objective is furnished.

TASKS: A summary of suggested tasks or steps towards accomplishing
the objective are listed.

SCHEDULE: A time-line for implementing the objective is recommended.

PERSONNEL: Primary responsibility of accomplishing the objective is
suggested (indicated by the symbol "10"). Normally, a single person,
identified by job title, is given the responsibility of accomplishing an
objective. This suggestion is not meant to preclude delegation or joint
efforts. Personnel to assist with implementation also are recommended
(indicated by the symbol "2"'). Currently unfilled positions are indicated
by an asterisk (*).

DELIVERABLE: Possible outcomes, products, or other measures of
success for the objective are described.

PRIORITY: The relative priority of the objective, low, medium, or high,
is indicated. Priority indicates importance on a relative scale, that is,
objectives with a low priority are not unimportant, just less critical than
other objectives. Normally, objectives which pertain directly to the
preservation of natural heritage resources receive a high priority,
objectives which pertain indirectly to natural heritage resource
preservation receive a medium priority, and objectives which do not
pertain to natural heritage resource preservation receive a low priority.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 1 A: Complete additional inventory for rare plants.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Conduct additional inventory for Virginia least
trillium in the forested swamps and for historically documented rare
plants, such as large cranberry, in burned areas.

JUSTIFICATION: Much potential habitat for Virginia least trillium exists
which has not been surveyed at the appropriate time of year to detect
the plant; need to determine full extent of occurrences of this globally
rare taxon to be able to manage for the plant. Rare plants historically
documented from the area, but apparently no longer present, may return
to certain habitats following the passage of fire. These habitats need
post-burn checks for rare plants. Need this inventory data to help guide
and measure success of ecological management.

TASKS: Plan several site visits during appropriate periods (Mar. and Apr.
for trillium, several weeks to several years post-burn for others), conduct
surveys, submit field notes and EOR's.

SCHEDULE: Depends on incidence of fire for post-burn work. For
trillium - conduct surveys in Mar. or Apr. '95.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Botanist. 20 - DNH Regional Steward% TNC
Steward.

DELIVERABLE: EOR's and/or negative search data.

PRIORITY: medium

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 1113: Complete additional inventory for rare animals.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Conduct additional biological inventory on
preserve and in vicinity for a number of crustaceans, lepidopterans,
odonates, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds.

JUSTIFICATION: Animal species are not as well inventoried as plants
and communities. Need to determine complete list of natural heritage
resources which utilize the site and vicinity and where they are found to
determine if active ecological management or alterations in visitation
patterns are necessary to preserve and enhance these occurrences.

TASKS: Plan several site visits during appropriate dates; conduct
surveys; submit EOR's and field notes.

SCHEDULE: Plan surveys by 3/95; conduct surveys 4/95-11/96, submit
field notes and EOR's by 3/96.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DNH Zoologist. 20 - DNH Regional Steward*.

DELIVERABLE: EOR's and/or negative search data.

PRIORITY: medium

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 2A: Continue hydrologic, geochemical, and vegetation
research.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Continue ground-water monitoring and analysis
and associated geochemical and vegetation monitoring in the North
Landing River wetlands.

JUSTIFICATION: Need to establish some level of basic knowledge of the
ground-water regime, what associations are affected by ground water,
and how they may be affected to be able to assess stress to the system
from ground-water threats and guide ameliorative management, if
deemed necessary.

TASKS: Continue monitoring pilot transect according to project proposal
(ACTION PLAN), seek additional funding for two additional transects,
implement according to proposal (ACTION PLAN).

SCHEDULE: Monitoring of existing transect at some level of detail will
be continuous, reports due quarterly and annually, proposals for
additional funding submitted 12/94.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Stewardship Director. 20 - USGS Hydrologist,
DNH Regional Steward% TNC Stewardship Director.

DELIVERABLE: Annual and final reports, increased understanding of
ground-water regime.

PRIORITY: high

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 213: Continue fire and vegetation history research.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Analyze peat cores already taken from preserve
to establish past fire regime and plant community composition; take and
analyze additional cores.

JUSTIFICATION: Need to understand historical fire regime and plant
communities to help guide fire management actions in pocosin and other
fire dependent areas.

TASKS: Continue sampling and analysis of cores according to project
proposal (ACTION PLAN).

SCHEDULE: Study already designed and set-up; initial sampling to
continuethrough 4/95, analysis and final reportdue-dates undetermined.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DNH Stewardship Coordinator. 20 - Fire Ecology
Specialist, DNH Regional Steward% TNC Stewardship Director.

DELIVERABLE: Report of findings.

PRIORITY: high

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 2C: Document and map vegetation types.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Characterize, document, and inventory plant
community types found on preserve and in vicinity; map location and
extent of community types.

JUSTIFICATION: Knowledge of plant community composition and extent
is needed to help refine conceptual ecological model, track changes in
vegetation of the watershed over time, and guide management actions.

TASKS: Use aerial photography and other means to identify general
types and extents of plant communities; conduct field survey to
characterize and document community types and help define signature
of community types on aerial photos; map location and extent of
communities using aerial photos and extensive ground-truthing.

SCHEDULE: Undetermined.

PERSONNEL: Undetermined.

DELIVERABLE: Characterizations and maps of plant communities.

PRIORITY: medium.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 3A: Research effectiveness of prescribed fire in the
control of common reed.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Design and implement a small study to learn if
carefully timed prescribed burning alone can be used as an effective
means of controlling or suppressing the potentially invasive species,
common reed.

JUSTIFICATION: Need to find less expensive and less environmentally
damaging technique for effective control of common reed than herbicide
and other established methods.

TASKS: Formulate project plan (ACTION PLAN), implement plan.

SCHEDULE: Pending filling of DNH Regional Steward position.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Regional Steward*. 2' - TNC Stewardship
Director, DNH Stewardship Director, VDoF staff.

DELIVERABLE: Final report of findings and recommendations.

PRIORITY: high

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 313: Research effectiveness of fire in regenerating Atlantic
white cedar.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Design and conduct research to determine the
most effective methods and times to apply fire to regenerate Atlantic
white cedar stands.

JUSTIFICATION: Atlantic white cedar communities appear dependent on
fire for recruitment of seedlings and regeneration of stand; need to
determine how and when to apply fire to best benefit Atlantic white
cedar communities in the ecosystem.

TASKS: Undetermined.

SCHEDULE: Undetermined.

PERSONNEL: Undetermined.

DELIVERABLE: Report of findings and recommendations.

PRIORITY: medium

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 3C: Research effects of fire on pocosin and canebrake
communities.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Design and implement a study of fire effects on
pocosin and canebrake communities.

JUSTIFICATION: Pocosins and their related associations are fire
dependent communities. Mush area of these communities and their rare
species are being lost to succession. Need to determine best methods
for re-introducing fire into these areas to create and maintain rare natural
communities and special habitats.

TASKS: A project proposal has been developed (ACTION PLAN), seek
funding for project, implement project according to terms of proposal;
project involves background research, land-owner contact, pre- and post-
burn monitoring, and one to two pilot burns in pocosins.

SCHEDULE: Pending funding of project; implement as scheduled in
proposal.

PERSONNEL: 10 - DNH Stewardship Director. 20 - TNC Stewardship
Director, DNH Stewardship Biologist, DNH and TNC Stewardship
Assistants, DSP Site Manager, VDoF staff, other cooperators.

DELIVERABLE: Implementation of burn on pocosin, summary of findings
and recommendations.

PRIORITY: high

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 31): Research effects of fire on marsh communities.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Design and implement a study to determine
most effective methods and times to apply fire to marsh communities for
purposes of natural heritage resource management.

JUSTIFICATION: Although marshes may not be naturally f ire-dependent,
fire can be used to manage marsh communities; need to establish
techniques of burning most effective for management of marsh-related
natural heritage resources.

TASKS: Develop a research proposal (ACTION PLAN), conduct study
according to proposal; project will likely involve literature searches, pre-
and post-burn vegetation monitoring, and several burns at different times
of year.

SCHEDULE: Undetermined.

PERSONNEL: Undetermined.

DELIVERABLE: Summary of findings and recommendations, marsh
burns.

PRIORITY: medium

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 4A: Evaluate effects of maintenance dredging of ICW.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Evaluate effects on ecosystem and natural
heritage resources of the regular maintenance dredging of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway and disposal of dredged material in the North
Landing River.

JUSTIFICATION: Effects of dredging and dredged material disposal on
water quality, quantity, and natural heritage resources is unknown; need
to assess influence of this activity on these resources and identify need
for management or ameliorative measures.

TASKS: Undetermined.

SCHEDULE: Undetermined.

PERSONNEL: Undetermined.

DELIVERABLE: Report of findings and recommendations.

PRIORITY: medium

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 413: Research extent and effect of salinity changes
associated with bypass canal.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Design and implement a study (ACTION PLAN)
to determine the extent of salt water intrusion into the North Landing
River system from Canal Number Two and its bypass canal and the
effects, if any, on the plant communities in the vicinity.

JUSTIFICATIONS: Extent of salt water intrusion and effects of
vegetation from bypass canal are unknown; need to determine if
salinities are significantly changed, what the effects on the plant
communities are, and if ameliorative measures are necessary to protect
or restore natural heritage resources in vicinity.

TASKS: Develop a project proposal, seek funding for proposal, and
implement project according to proposal.

SCHEDULE: Undetermined.

PERSONNEL: Undetermined.

DELIVERABLE: Report of findings and recommendations.

PRIORITY: high

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 5A: Annually review and revise as necessary EOR's,
SBR's, and TBR's.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Review and update Element Occurrence Records
(EOR), Site Basic Records (SBR), and Tract Basic Records (TBR) in BCD
for the preserve and vicinity every year.

JUSTIFICATION: Current information in BCD is needed for preserve
management planning, protection efforts, the annual scorecard process,
and accurate report generation.

TASKS: Submit hard copies of records to staff for review; compare
records to field notes and other update information; make changes in
computerized files; make appropriate changes in manual and map files.

SCHEDULE: An annual process that should be initiated and completed
every winter.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Information Specialist. 2' - DNH Conservation
Planner.

DELIVERABLE: Current and correct EOR's, SBR's, and TBR's

PRIORITY: medium

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 513: Enter and annually update stewardship actions.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Enter stewardship actions based on objectives
of this management plan and on subsequent action plans into BCD;
update these action records annually.

JUSTIFICATION: Current information in BCD is needed for preserve
management planning, protection efforts, the annual scorecard process,
and accurate report generation.

TASKS: Gather stewardship actions data from management plan and
action plans; enter data into BCD; review actions records annually for
status and revisions; update as appropriate.

SCHEDULE: An annual process that should be initiated and completed
every winter.

PERSONNEL: 10 - DNH Information Specialist. 2* - DNH Conservation
Planner.

DELIVERABLE: Current and correct stewardship action records in BCD.

PRIORITY: medium

100

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 5C: Produce an SSS annually.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Produce a site stewardship summary (SSS)
based on updated EOR's, SBR's, TBR's, and stewardship action records
for the preserve and vicinity every year.

JUSTIFICATION: Need an annual report from BCD to show measures of
success in implementing management plan, provide up-to-date
information for protection, access, and ecological management efforts,
and helping with review and revision of management plan including site
conservation plan.

TASKS: Use BCD reporting functions to generate site stewardship
abstract.

SCHEDULE: An annual process that should occur in late winter to early
spring following updates of BCD records.

PERSONNEL: 1 DNH Information Specialist. 20 - DNH Conservation
Planner.

DELIVERABLE: Site stewardship abstract.

PRIORITY: medium

101

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 6A: Provide appropriate environmental review of projects
proposed in vicinity of preserve (See also Objectives 15A and 16A).

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Provide environmental review upon request,
including site information, natural heritage resource information, and
impact avoidance/minimization recommendations, for development, road
construction, and other projects proposed in the vicinity of the preserve.

JUSTIFICATION: Environmental review will help to facilitate the
completion of appropriate projects while ensuring the protection of the
integrity of the site and its resources.

TASKS: Respond promptly to requests for environmental review as they
are received.

SCHEDULE: As needed.

PERSONNEL: 1 DNH Project Review Coordinator% 20 - DNH Regional
Steward*.

DELIVERABLE: Project implementation with no or minimal impacts to
natural heritage resources.

PRIORITY: high

102

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 7A: Periodically review management plan and revise as
necessary.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Review the content of this preserve
management plan on a regular periodic basis; revise the goals and
objectives, when necessary, to reflect changes in knowledge and status
of the site.

JUSTIFICATION: The management plan must retain a degree of
flexibility in order to remain a useful document. The conditions and
status of the preserve as well as our understanding of its habitats and
natural heritage resources will change over time. A mechanism must be
available to allow the management plan to adapt to these inevitable
changes.

TASKS: Assemble a review committee of scientific experts, resource
managers, and administrators; review plan; revise plan as appropriate;
seek approval of VDCR Director.

SCHEDULE: First review of plan should take place two years after initial
approval; subsequent reviews should occur every five years thereafter.

PERSONNEL: 1"- DNH Regional Steward*. 2'- DSP Site Manager, DNH
Conservation Planner, DNH Stewardship Director, DNH Zoologist, DNH
Botanist, DNH Ecologist, DNH Division Director, VDCR Director, Review
Committee.

DELIVERABLE: Revised management plan.

PRIORITY: high

0
103

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 713: Continue to refine site conservation plan.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Review and revise components of North Landing
River ecosystem site conservation plans to reflect new knowledge of the
structure and function of the system and of the resources it contains.

JUSTIFICATION: New information regarding the ecosystem and its
biological resources will be discovered. Need to reflect the new
knowledge in the resource assessment, stress assessment, and
conservation planning boundaries to help achieve the most complete and
efficient preservation of the natural heritage resources of the system.

TASKS: Assess new information regarding preserve, ecosystem, or
similar systems resulting from work conducted either by VDCR or other
entities as it becomes available; incorporate pertinent new information
into site conservation plans; produce interim updated site conservation
plans, if necessary; incorporate changes into next revision of
management plan goals and objectives.

SCHEDULE: A continual process based on the availability of new
information.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DNH Regional Steward*. 2* - DNH Conservation
Planner, other scientific experts.

DELIVERABLE: Updated/revised site conservation plans.

PRIORITY: high

104

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 7C: Refine conceptual ecological model.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Review and revise conceptual ecological model
as new information regarding the structure and function of the
ecosystem is discovered.

JUSTIFICATION: New information regarding the ecosystem's structure
and function will be discovered. Need to reflect the new knowledge in
the conceptual ecological model to facilitate planning of effective
ecological protection and management actions.

TASKS: Assess new information regarding ecosystem or similar systems
resulting from work conducted by VDCR or others as it becomes
available; incorporate pertinent new information into conceptual
ecological model; revise model periodically to reflect changes;
incorporate newest iteration of model in any revisions of management
plan.

SCHEDULE: A continual process based on the availability of new
information.

PERSONNEL: 1'- DNH Regional Steward*. 20- various scientific experts.

DELIVERABLE: Revised conceptual ecological model.

PRIORITY: high

105

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 7D: Develop a fire management plan.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Develop a comprehensive fire management plan
(ACTION PLAN) that addresses both wildfire and prescribed burning.

JUSTIFICATION: Fire management plan needed to state and justify
wildfire and prescribed burn policies for the preserve, establish wildfire
protocols for preserve, and provide comprehensive prescribed burning
planning.

TASKS: Draft plan, solicit review, revise, solicit VDCR Director and TNC
Fire Manager approval.

SCHEDULE: Pending filling of Regional Steward position.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DNH Regional Steward*. 2' - TNC Stewardship
Director, DNH Stewardship Director, TNC Fire Manager, VDCR
Department Director, VDoF staff.

DELIVERABLE: Fire management plan.

PRIORITY: medium

0 106

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 8A: Complete acquisition of targeted tracts.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Complete acquisitions and transfers of Sorey
tract (VDCR), Miller tract (VDCR), and Woodly/Old tract (TNC).

JUSTIFICATION: Acquisition of these high priority tracts is needed to
secure protection of their highly significant natural heritage resources.

TASKS: Complete negotiation of land transactions and close the sales.

SCHEDULE: Closing date forsorey tract should be by 5/95 and for Miller
tract should be 11/95.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Natural Areas Program Manager. 2' - VDCR
Conservation and Development Program Supervisor, TNC Protection
Director.

DELIVERABLE: Deed of VDCR ownership of tracts.

PRIORITY: high

107

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 813: Complete dedication of all tracts owned by VDCR
and TNC.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Attach Instruments of Dedication to the deeds
of all tracts in the preserve owned by VDCR and TNC not already
dedicated.

JUSTIFICATION: Natural area dedication is the strongest form of
protection for natural heritage resources available. Dedication is needed
on all tracts of the preserve to assure appropriate use and management
in perpetuity.

TASKS: Draft instruments of dedication, solicit approval from all
appropriate parties, record instruments with deeds.

SCHEDULE: VDCR tracts dedicated upon transfer; draft of instrument for
pilot dedication of TNC tract completed and under review, remaining TNC
tracts to be dedicated subsequent to pilot dedication.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DNH Natural Areas Program Manager. 20 - TNC
Protection Director, VA Attorney General, TNC Regional Attorney.

108

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 9A: Secure management agreements or natural area
registry on priority upland tracts.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Conduct property owner contact and education
for key upland tracts and secure at least one management agreement and
20 natural area registries.

JUSTIFICATION: The preserve is not isolated from surrounding land-use
and preservation of natural heritage resources is not assured just by
protecting their habitat. Conservation of upland areas which influence
preserve is needed.

TASKS: Meet and discuss conservation options with key land-owners,
secure at least one management agreement on a priority tract targeted
for Best Management Practices (BMP) demonstration (see Objective
13B), secure natural area registry on 20 privately owned tracts within
watershed.

SCHEDULE: begin land-owner contact by 7/95, begin negotiations by
10/95, complete first natural area registry by 2/96 and first management
agreement by 3/96.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DNH Natural Areas Program Manager. 20 - TNC
Protection Director, DNH Protection Research Specialist, DCR
Stewardship Director, TNC Stewardship Director.

DELIVERABLE: conservation of priority uplands; completed protection
portfolio.

PRIORITY: high

109

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 1OA: Conduct biological monitoring of selected rare
species, problem species, and natural communities.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Conduct regular base-line biological monitoring
of selected high priority or indicator rare species, problem species, and
natural communities both on the preserve and elsewhere within the North
Landing River ecosystem.

JUSTIFICATION: Base-line biological monitoring of natural heritage
resources is needed to provide an indication of the success of active
ecological management, help track population trends and indicate when
active management is necessary, and assists with review of the
management plan. Monitoring of potential problem species is needed to
provide a means of determining the aggressiveness of a species at a site
and if it is impacting natural heritage resources. Monitoring also
furnishes a mechanism for measuring success of control initiatives if they
are implemented. Monitoring should extend beyond the preserve's
boundaries, where appropriate, to provide comprehensive information.

TASKS: Develop a biological monitoring plan (ACTION PLAN),
implement regular monitoring as dictated by the plan, report on results
regularly.

SCHEDULE: Pending filling of Regional Steward position.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DNH Regional Steward*. 2* - TNC Stewardship
Director, DNH Stewardship Director, DNH and TNC Stewardship
Assistants.

DELIVERABLE: Monitoring plan, annual report with monitoring data.

PRIORITY: medium

110

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 11 A: Complete common reed demonstration project.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Continue and complete the common reed control
demonstration project which includes, in part, the North Landing River
Natural Area Preserve.

JUSTIFICATION: The common reed demonstration project should be
continued to its culmination because it is providing valuable information
and experience to land managers, facilitating public education regarding
the common reed problem, establishing ecological management
partnerships, and represents a contract obligation.

TASKS: Complete project as dictated by project proposal (ACTION
PLAN); this includes implementation of prescribed burns, development of
an educational slide show, continued biological monitoring of the control
and treatment areas, analysis and reporting of results, and a strategic
planning meeting among project cooperators to determine further steps
on the common reed issue.

SCHEDULE: Burns to be conducted in 2/95 and possibly 5/95, progress
report due 1/95, final report and recommendations due 1/96, slide show
due 4/95, meeting to be held in late '95.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Stewardship Biologist. 20 - DNH Stewardship
Director, project cooperators.

DELIVERABLE: Progress report, final report, slide show, meeting,
controlled common reed stands.

PRIORITY: high

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 11 B: Re-introduce fire to the pocosins.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Re-introduce fire into the pocosin and related
associations of the preserve via carefully planned and safely implemented
prescribed burns.

JUSTIFICATION: Pocosins and their related associations (open bog,
pond pine swamp) are fire dependent communities. Much area of these
associations and their rare species are being lost to succession. Need to
re-introduce fire into these areas to create and maintain the rare natural
communities and special habitats.

TASKS: Tasks will follow recommendations of pocosin burn study (see
Objective 3C) and fire management plan (see Objective 7D).

SCHEDULE: Pending completion of pocosin burn study and fire
management plan.

PERSONNEL: 1' DNH Regional Steward*. 2' - DNH Stewardship
Director, TNC Stewardship Director, DNH Stewardship Biologist, DNH
and TNC Stewardship Assistants, DSP Site Manager, VDoF staff, other
cooperators.

DELIVERABLE: Implementation of prescribed burns in pocosins, fire
summary and other reports.

PRIORITY: high

112

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 11 C: Utilize fire as a marsh management tool.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Periodically conduct prescribed burns in the
marshes of the preserve to enhance natural heritage resources and other
habitats and communities.

JUSTIFICATION: Marshes will benefit from burning. Need to burn
marshes periodically to help stimulate growth and reproduction of plants,
stress invasive species, slow natural succession by woody plants, and
enhance rare species and other wildlife habitat.

TASKS: Tasks will follow recommendations of marsh burn study (see
Objective 3D); burn units, burn plans, and rotations will be included in
fire management plan (see Objective 7D), implement burns according to
plans in cooperation with VDoF, USFWS, and other partners.

SCHEDULE: Pending completion of marsh burn study.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DNH Regional Steward*. 20 - DNH Stewardship
Director, TNC Stewardship Director, TNC and DNH Stewardship
Assistants, VDoF staff, other fire management cooperators.

DELIVERABLE: Implementation of prescribed burns, fire summary
reports.

PRIORITY: medium

113

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 11 D: Develop and implement a problem species
assessment and control plan (ACTION PLAN).

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Assess the threat of problem species, such as
common reed and nutria, to the ecosystem, specific associations, and
specific taxa based on biological monitoring information (see Objective
10A) and other data; develop plans to control or suppress problem
species which are imminently threatening natural heritage resource
viability.

JUSTIFICATION: Potential problem species may pose major, minor, or
no threat to natural heritage resources of a site. Need to establish which
problem species, if any, represent major threats to natural heritage
resources. Need to formulate a realistic plan of control activities to
attenuate any major threats identified.

TASKS: Gather information, develop assessment and plan, coordinate
with conservation partners and adjacent landowners, implement plan.

SCHEDULE: Pending filling of Regional Stewardship position.

PERSONNEL: 10 - DNH Regional Steward*. 2* - TNC Stewardship
Director, DNH Stewardship Director.

DELIVERABLE: Assessment and plan, control of problem species.

PRIORITY: high

114

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 12A: Continue to manage duck hunting adjacent to
preserve in cooperation with VDGIF.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Continue efforts in cooperation with VDGIF to
guide and manage duck hunting activities on and adjacent to preserve.

JUSTIFICATION: Need to manage duck hunting to ensure natural
heritage resources are protected, public safety is addressed, and
waterfowl populations are appropriately managed.

TASKS: Continue to hold annual meetings with VDGIF regarding duck
hunting, assist VDGIF with any information needs or active management.

SCHEDULE: Annual meetings should take place annually well before
waterfowl season.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Regional Steward% TNC Stewardship Director.
20 - VDGIF staff.

DELIVERABLE: Appropriately managed duck hunting.

PRIORITY: low

0
115

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 1213: Develop and implement a deer hunting plan and
guidelines (ACTION PLAN).

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Develop a plan for management for deer hunting
on preserve which contains guidelines for administration and
implementation deer hunting; secure any necessary leases and
agreements and implement plan.

JUSTIFICATION: Comprehensive deer hunting guidelines for the
preserve have not been determined. Deer hunting could be conducted
on the preserve for resource management purposes, in exchange for site
management services, or as a retained property right. Deer hunting
regulations differ from tract to tract respective of ownership and
conditions of transfer. A comprehensive deer hunting plan and
guidelines are needed to resolve deer hunting issues and appropriately
manage and administer any deer hunting on the preserve while ensuring
preservation of natural heritage resources.

TASKS: Develop a plan and guidelines in cooperation with VDGIF,
implement terms of plan according to guidelines.

SCHEDULE: Undetermined, pending revision of VDCR hunting
regulations for natural area preserves and review of TNC hunting
guidelines.

PERSONNEL: Undetermined.

DELIVERABLE: Deer hunting plan and guidelines.

PRIORITY: low

116

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 13A: Develop a model land use p-lan (ACTION PLAN) for
priority for priority upland tracts.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Evaluate possible strategies for water quality
and quantity conservation on upland tracts influencing the preserve and
develop a model land-use plan which outlines the most effective
measures.

JUSTIFICATION: The preserve is not isolated from land uses beyond its
boundaries; need to evaluate and recommend land-use strategies for
adjacent tracts that will help preserve the natural heritage resources of
the preserve.

TASKS: Evaluate data from hydrology study and other sources and
develop strategies for land-use, complete model land-use plan and
present to appropriate agencies and landowners.

SCHEDULE: Submit model plan by 9/30/95.

PERSONNEL: 1'- VDSWCD staff. 20 - TNC Stewardship Director, VDCR
Stewardship Director, VDCR Regional Steward*.

DELIVERABLE: Model land-use plan.

PRIORITY: medium

117

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 1313: Design and implement a demonstration water
quality conservation project.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Design and implement a water quality
conservation project on a farm as a demonstration of land use compatible
with the preservation of natural heritage resources on the preserve.

JUSTIFICATION: The preserve is not isolated from land uses beyond its
boundaries; need to implement a water quality conservation project as
a demonstration of practices that will help preserve the natural heritage
resources of the preserve.

TASKS: Make landowner contacts (see Objective 9A), select a
demonstration farm and secure a management agreement with owner
(see Objective 9A), complete farm conservation plan (ACTION PLAN) and
implement water quality BMP's and water quality monitoring.

SCHEDULE: Select farm by 9/30/95, complete plan by 12/15/95, install
BMP's by 7/96.

PERSONNEL: 10-VDSWCDstaff. 2'-VDCR Stewardship Director, TNC
Stewardship Director, VDCR Regional Steward% VDCR Protection
Research Specialist.

DELIVERABLE: Farm conservation plan, BMP's implemented on
demonstration farm.

PRIORITY: medium

118

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 14A: Complete development of public access facilities at
Kellam tract.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Complete construction of the access road,
parking area, boardwalk, canoe launch and other facilities designed for
the Kellam tract.

JUSTIFICATION: Because of topography and lack of road frontage,
public access opportunities to preserve are limited. Need to provide
access facilities to preserve. This access site will also provide a setting
for interpretive and educational facilities and programs.

TASKS: Facilities have been designed, most approvals and permits have
been obtained; final permitting, contracting of labor/materials, and actual
construction remain.

SCHEDULE: Time-line dependent on final permit approvals, bidding
process, and weather during construction period, but facilities should be
in place by 6/95.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Landscape Architect. 20 - DSP Site Manager,
DNH Natural Areas Program Manager.

DELIVERABLE: Completion of facilities.

PRIORITY: low

119

North Lending River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 1413: Develop and implement a comprehensive public
access and recreation assessment and plan (ACTION PLAN).

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Based on the recommendations of the Advisory
Team, develop an assessment of current public access and recreation
opportunities, demands for access and recreation, and recommendations
for meeting the access and recreation demands and integrating access
and recreation development with local efforts within the preservation
purpose of the site. Implement the recommendations of the plan.

JUSTIFICATION: As a tertiary purpose for the establishment of the site
is to provide outdoor recreation opportunities, an assessment and plan
is needed to address these issues while maintaining the biodiversity of
the site.

TASKS: Assemble an assessment and planning committee, develop
assessment and plan, implement recommendations of plan.

SCHEDULE: Complete plan and assessment by 3/96; complete
implementation according to schedule in plan.

PERSONNEL: For plan development: 1 0 - DPRR Recreation Planner. 20 -
DNH Landscape Architect, DSP Site Manager, DNH Regional Steward*,
Recreation and Access Assessment and Planning Committee. For plan
implementation: 1 0 - DNH Landscape Architect. 20 - DSP Site Manager,
DNH Regional Steward% other cooperators.

DELIVERABLE: Assessment and plan; public access and recreation
facilities.

PRIORITY: low

120

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 15A: Review proposed projects for potential impacts to
scenic resources (see also Objective 6A).

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Review all proposed site management projects
and other projects which may affect the site's or surrounding's scenic
resources for potential visual impacts and assure that visual concerns are
addressed before project implementation.

JUSTIFICATION: Need to preserve all natural and cultural resources of
the site, including scenic resources. Review of projects for possible
visual impacts will assure that no avoidable scenic impacts occur.

TASKS: Review projects as they are proposed; make recommendations
to avoid or minimize scenic impacts.

SCHEDULE: As needed.

PERSONNEL: 1 * - DPRR Scenic Resources Specialist. 2' - DSP Site
Manager, DNH Landscape Architect, DNH Regional Steward*.

DELIVERABLE: Uncompromised scenic resources.

PRIORITY: low

121

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 1513: Encourage a regional approach to scenic resources
management.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Based on the recommendations of the
Management Planning Advisory Team, encourage a regional approach
involving public and private property owners, local and regional
government, and other conservation agencies and organizations towards
comprehensive preservation of scenic resources within the North Landing
River Watershed.

JUSTIFICATION: Viewshed management units can extend only as far as
TNC or VDCR ownership, but viewsheds from the preserve can be
interrupted by activities outside the preserve. Therefore, need to develop
a regional approach to scenic resources preservation.

TASKS: Regional cooperation has already begun through completion of
public access and visual resources study (Potter 1994). Assemble
representatives who have an interest in or influence over scenic
resources in the watershed, develop a regional scenic resources plan
(ACTION PLAN), implement recommendations of plan.

SCHEDULE: Hold initial meeting of working group by 10/95; complete
plan by 10/96.

PERSONNEL: 10 - DPRR Planner. 20 - members of working group.

DELIVERABLE: Regional scenic resources plan; intact scenic resources.

PRIORITY: low

122

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 16A: Review proposed projects for potential impacts to
historic resources (see also Objective 6A).

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Review any proposed construction of public
access or other facilities through Department of Historic Resources for
assessment of possible impact to historic resources and
recommendations regarding how to avoid or minimize potential impacts.

JUSTIFICATION: Need to preserve all natural and cultural resources of
the site, including historic resources. Review of projects for possible
historic resource impacts will assure that no avoidable impacts occur and
that unavoidable impacts are minimized.

TASKS: Request review of proposed projects by Department of Historic
Resources; implement recommendations to best capability within
preservation purview of site.

SCHEDULE: As needed.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DNH Landscape Architect. 20 - DSP Site Manager,
DHR Project Review Supervisor.

DELIVERABLE: Completed project with no or minimal impacts to historic
resources.

PRIORITY: low

123

North Lending River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 17A: Establish and maintain appropriate signage.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Establish and maintain entrance, directional,
boundary, rules, interpretive and other signage at the preserve in order
to enhance enjoyment of the site by visitors, provide for environmental
education, and encourage compliance with resource protection and safely
rules.

JUSTIFICATION: Because sufficient staff does not exist to guide,
educate, and supervise each visitor to the preserve, signs are needed to
provide pleasant and educational visits to the preserve while assuring
safety and resource protection.

TASKS: Design signs for the site including entrance, directional, rules,
boundary, and interpretive signs; have signs manufactured; install
signs; maintain and replace signs as necessary.

SCHEDULE: As needed or in relation to other site development projects.

PERSONNEL: 10 - DSP Site Manager. 20 - DNH Landscape Architect,
DNH Regional Steward% TNC Stewardship Director, Stewardship
Volunteers.

DELIVERABLE: Signs.

PRIORITY: low

124

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 11713: Implement effective site security.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Provide adequate site security measures
including patrolling, enforcement, signage, and education.

JUSTIFICATION: Need to assure resource protection rules and
regulations are followed and that visitor safety is addressed.

TASKS: Complete marking of all boundaries with appropriate signs,
periodically patrol site and implement law enforcement actions as
necessary, educate visitors regarding preserve use rules.

SCHEDULE: Continuous.

PERSONNEL: 1'- DSP Site Manager orTNC Stewardship Director. 2'-
DNH Regional Steward% TNC Stewardship Assistant.

DELIVERABLE: Marked boundaries, increased public awareness, incident
reports, etc.

PRIORITY: medium

125

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 17C: Maintain access facilities and other amenities.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Maintain, replace, and repair existing facilities
designed for public access or other purposes; this refers primarily to
access roads, parking areas, boardwalks, restrooms, picnic tables, and
the other facilities in the public access areas.

JUSTIFICATION: Existing facilities must be properly maintained to retain
their effectiveness and safety.

TASKS: Maintain, replace, or repair the existing facilities and maintain,
replace, or repair any future facilities.

SCHEDULE: As needed.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DSP Site Manager or TNC Stewardship Director
(respective of tract ownership).

DELIVERABLE: Well-maintained facilities.

PRIORITY: low

126

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 18A: Develop and distribute written educational
materials.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Design, produce, and update written educational
materials, such as fact sheets, regarding the preserve, its ecosystem,
and its resources.

JUSTIFICATION: Educational materials can be distributed to the public
through direct contact, special events, direct mailings, or at
presentations and used to increase public awareness of the significance
and ecology of the site and to help promote appropriate visitation of the
preserve.

TASKS: Preserve fact sheet, pocosin fact sheet, and cypress/tupelo
swamp fact sheet already developed, update preserve fact sheet,
develop fact sheets on marshes and selected rare species.

SCHEDULE: Updated preserve fact sheet by 5/95; other fact sheets and
brochures developed as resources allow.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DSP Site Manager. 20 - DNH and TNC Stewardship
Assistants, DVCS Public Communications Manager, DNH Regional
Steward *

DELIVERABLE: Updated preserve fact sheet, additional fact sheets and
brochures.

PRIORITY: low

127

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 11813: Provide educational programs.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Provide field tours, presentations, and other
educational programs designed to increase public awareness of the
preserve, its resources, and its ecosystem.

JUSTIFICATION: Educational programs are needed to increase public
awareness to biodiversity and other ecological issues, explain basic
ecologic principles, and engender support for the preserve, natural
heritage resource preservation, and conservation programs in general.

TASKS: Provide guided educational tours of preserve; give presentations
regarding the preserve to school groups, civic associations, special
interest groups, etc; display educational exhibits at special events or
community gathering places; develop other educational programs.

SCHEDULE: Tours to be provided upon sufficient demand or when
deemed appropriate by staff; presentations provided upon request when
resources allow; display exhibits as opportunities arise, implement other
programs when appropriate.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DSP Site Manager. 20 - DNH and TNC Stewardship
Assistants, DVCS Public Communications Manager, TNC Director of
Communications.

DELIVERABLES: Tours, presentations, exhibits, other educational
programs.

PRIORITY: low

10 128

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 18C: Appropriately promote preserve.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Promote greater awareness of the preserve and
appropriate visitation through a variety of techniques including press
releases, mapping, other publications, and remote signage.

JUSTIFICATION: Promotional programs are needed to increase public
awareness of the existence of the preserve and preserve system,
biodiversity and other ecological issues, to engender support for the
preserve, natural heritage resource preservation, and conservation
programs in general, and to encourage appropriate visitation and use of
the site. Promotional programs must always balance visitation with the
needs of the natural heritage resources of the site.

TASKS: Arrange for an articles to appear in local and/or regional
newspapers about the preserve; consider whether to have the preserve
included on state road maps and other maps utilized by travelers;
consider whether to have preserve included in other publications, such
as state parks brochures or local or state-wide magazines; consider
directional signage off-site designed to guide visitors to the preserve.

SCHEDULE: Continuous.

PERSONNEL: 1' - DSP Site Manager. 20 - TNC Communications
Director, TNC and DNH Stewardship Assistants, DNH Regional Steward%
DVCS Public Communications Manager.

DELIVERABLE: Newspaper articles, maps showing preserve (?), articles
in other publications (?), off-site signage (?).

PRIORITY: low

129

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 19A: Coordinate management between VDCR and TNC.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Coordinate management planning and activities
between TNC and VDCR.

JUSTIFICATION: Management coordination efforts are needed to
facilitate timely and effective cooperative management efforts and assure
that management planning and implementation initiatives are completed
appropriately.

TASKS: Determine responsibilities for cooperative management and any
issues which will be managed independently. Coordinate management
informally by diligent efforts to keep communications open and assist
each other in accomplishing tasks. Coordinate management formally
through quarterly meetings of VDCR and TNC management staff in
which progress and status of management actions are reviewed.

SCHEDULE: Continuous, meetings quarterly.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Regional Steward* and TNC Stewardship
Director. 2' - VDCR NAMT, DSP Site Manager.

DELIVERABLE: Coordinated management efforts.

PRIORITY: medium

130

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 1913: Coordinate management with other existing
partners (see also Objectives 2A, 2B, 3A, 7A, 713, 7C, 7D, 11 A, and 17A
which require involvement of other conservation partners).

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Coordinate planning, site management, and
ecological management efforts among VDCR, TNC and other existing
management partners such as the Virginia Department of Forestry, the
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the U.S Army Corps of Engineers.

TASKS: Coordinate management informally by diligent efforts to keep
communications open and assist each other in accomplishing tasks.
Coordinate management formally through meetings of VDCR and TNC
management staff with other management partners in which progress
and status of management actions are reviewed.

SCHEDULE: Continuous, meetings as needed.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Regional Steward* and TNC Stewardship
Director. 2* - VDCR NAMT, other management partners.

DELIVERABLE: Coordinated management efforts.

PRIORITY: medium

131

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 20A: Establish a Stewardship Advisory Committee.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: VDCR and TNC will jointly establish a
Stewardship Advisory Committee consisting of representatives of local
governments, state and federal resource management agencies, scientific
experts, and other appropriate individuals whose purpose shall be to
advise and assist TNC, VDCR, and their management partners in the
management of the preserve and act as advocates for the preserve in the
community.

JUSTIFICATION: VDCR and TNC lack the complete expertise and
knowledge of all aspects of the North Landing River ecosystem to
effectively manage the preserve alone. An advisory group is necessary
to help fill gaps in knowledge of the system and to act as advocates for
the preserve in the community.

TASKS: Compose a list of candidates for membership on the
Stewardship Advisory Committee, invite candidates to participate, host
quarterly meetings of group and utilize group for information and other
needs.

SCHEDULE: Produce list of candidates and alternates by 5/95, invite
candidates to participate by 7/95, conduct first quarterly meeting by
11/95 and quarterly thereafter.

PERSONNEL: 1* - DNH Regional Steward% 2* - DNH Stewardship
Director, TNC Stewardship Director.

DELIVERABLE: Functional stewardship advisory committee.

PRIORITY: low

go
132

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

OBJECTIVE 2013: Enlist support of private landowners and community
organizations.

DETAILED OBJECTIVE: Solicit support and assistance with certain
preserve management tasks from neighboring private land-owners and
local community organizations, and other volunteers.

JUSTIFICATION: Since VDCR and TNC land management resources are
limited, assistance from local residents, community organizations, and
other volunteers is needed.

TASKS: Solicit assistance from local residents and community
organizations for specific tasks or in general depending upon need and
opportunity.

SCHEDULE: As needed.

PERSONNEL: Variable.

DELIVERABLE: Management assistance from residents or organizations.

PRIORITY: medium

133

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

MANAGEMENT UNITS

Management units are parcels of land within the preserve delineated
based on land use and receiving a particular management treatment.
Management units indicate compatible uses within defined areas on a
property. Some management units may be mutually exclusive or
adjacent, but others may overlap or be nested.

The State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide developed by the
VDCR Lands Classification Committee lists the following thirteen types
of management units:

concentrated use,
support/administrative,
historical and cultural use,
dispersed recreation,
viewshed,
natural area preserve,
zoological/botanical,
geologic,
wildlife,
timber,
agricultural,
scenic river, and
control limitation and special use.

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve contains three types of
management units: natural area preserve, concentrated use, and scenic
river.

MANAGEMENT UNIT DELINEATION

The extent of the management units are mapped in Figure 9 and
discussed below. Although the management units encompass both TNC
and VDCR tracts, ultimate management authority and responsibility for
a tract lies with the owner.

The entire extent of the properties of the natural area preserve comprise
the natural area preserve management unit. All other management units
are nested within the natural area preserve management unit.

The concentrated use management units center on the public access

134

\-V
-,Ille-= C" 0'
_tV --B-T
_rZ
@M or
FIGURE 9
MANAGEMENT UNITS OF NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE
t
m rA
I py
Lake 16-zl w
0

Prin Co

6
Buns
C:)

d
T14C -Z-

7-
ngo

TNC --a-

0 w7 4*

155 ou
e ant

S AVA TI
6tress RESS FIELD)

Su Mono J,
TNC:;@--

KFY
wle-
rner
NATURAL AREA PRESERVE cc)
NLNNAGEMENTIUNIT 4
0

CONCENTRATED USE
MANAGEMETI"UNIT

SCENIC RIVER
MANAGEMENTUNIT
VDCR

TNC i.-
169 Back B

Land of
Promise

r un

TNC
ickor Lo
R J

Blackwo
S
Bride reeds
Laa n
Str p

No
F'\
KILOMETERS 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
CR
4 5 5@
MILES 1@' 0 --;lNlA
lu@
CURR
R

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

areas. There are three concentrated use management units. These units
include the parking lot and boardwalk on the Dozier tract, the proposed
access facilities on the Kellam tract, and the observation platform on the
City of Chesapeake tract.

The scenic river management unit includes scenic buffers on either side
of the North Landing River and its tributaries that have been designated
as state scenic rivers. Generally, the buffer includes all open lands
adjacent the river and a minimum 100 foot scenic buffer strip of forest
beyond the river or open land to preserve the viewshed from the river.

MANAGEMENT STANDARDS

Management standards reflect the management direction set in the goals
and objectives and further define and direct land use for each
management unit. Standards ensure that land uses are compatible within
a management unit and among management units. On the following
pages, the intent of each management unit is summarized as the "desired
future" and management standards for 15 land use categories are stated.

Because TNC has ultimate authority and responsibility for management
of the tracts they own, the management standards presented below may
not apply to TNC-owned property in some situations.

136

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Management Standards for Natural Area Preserve Management Unit

Desired Future Natural area preserve management units consist of
areas on private or public land which have been
dedicated as natural area preserves. Formal
classification of these units can only occur with the
approval of the VDCR Director and an ecological
assessment and recommendation by the Division of
Natural Heritage. The purpose of this management
unit is to preserve natural heritage resources. Only
uses compatible with this purpose are permitted. The
natural area preserve management unit encompasses
the entire preserve; other management units are
nested within this unit. In any situation where the
management standards of the natural area preserve
management unit and the standards of other units
appear to conflict, the standards for the natural area
preserve unit assume priority.

Standards

Geologic and Soil Removal or alteration of geologic or soil resources is
Resources prohibited, except for small alterations necessary to
develop public access facilities or to provide for
ecological management.

Water Quality All activities within this management unit must be
conducted in a manner to avoid or minimize impacts
to water quality.

Air Quality Prescribed burning shall be conducted only in
compliance with VDEQ air quality regulations and
VDoF smoke management guidelines. Burn plans
must delineate smoke management strategies.

Landscape Anthropogenic landscaping is prohibited, except
Management within concentrated use management units for
purposes of facilitating or enhancing public access or
enjoyment and within the scenic river management
unit for purposes of providing a visual buffer.
Plantings shall be of native stock whenever possible.
If non-native stock must be used, only non-invasive
species shall be planted.

Agriculture Agriculture uses prohibited.

137

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Watercourses Watercourses shall not be altered or impounded,
except for purposes of restoration to a natural
condition.

Wetlands Wetlands shall not be altered, except that small areas
of wetlands within concentrated use management
units may be altered under certain circumstances and
conditions to facilitate approved public access (see
concentrated use management prescription) and that
wetlands may be altered to restore an area to natural
conditions for purposes of natural heritage resource
management. Projects will comply with local, state,
and federal wetlands regulations at all times.

Insect and Disease Programs to control insect and disease outbreaks are
prohibited, except for purposes of protecting natural
heritage resources or natural ecological processes or
when a public health emergency is declared. Any
control programs implemented under the above
conditions must have approval of the tract owner or
be mandated by law.

Forest Resources Management of forest resources solely for fiber
production is prohibited. When necessary to meet
natural heritage resource management needs, limited
forest management activities may be permitted.

Historic Resources Any artifacts, archaeological sites, historic structures,
or other historic resources discovered on the site will
be managed for preservation. If compatible with
preservation of historic and natural heritage
resources, interpretation and research of historic
resources may be permitted.

Recreation Resources Recreational uses shall be permitted only if they are
compatible with preservation of natural heritage
resources. Recreational use will generally be limited
to the concentrated use management units.

Scenic Resources Scenic resources shall be preserved, except where
their alteration is necessary for natural heritage
resource management.

138

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Natural Heritage Preservation of natural heritage resources is the
Resources principal purpose of this management unit. Only land
uses which either further the preservation intent or do
not interfere with the preservation intent are
permitted. Habitat manipulation and protective
measures favoring natural heritage resources shall be
undertaken as specified in the goals and objectives of
this resource management plan.

Collection of Natural or Collection of natural or historic resources is
Historic Resources prohibited, except with a valid permit from VDCR or
TNC and any other applicable agencies.

Fish and Wildlife Management actions intended to augment fish and
Resources wildlife populations solely for the enhancement of
recreational hunting, fishing, or trapping are
prohibited. Waterfowl hunters may enter the unit to
search for downed waterfowl. Deer hunting rights
have been retained on certain tracts by the previous
owners. Hunting and trapping for resource
management purposes may occur under the guidance
of a plan.

139

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Manaaement Standards for Concentrated Use Mananement Units

Desired Future Concentrated use management units generally include
areas which serve concentrations of people, such as
day use areas, visitor services facilities, and water
access areas. The purpose of the concentrated use
management units is to provide public access to the
preserve and direct the public to less sensitive parts
of the site. Generally, low-intensity public uses such
as birding, photography, and non-manipulative
educational activities are encouraged within this unit.
Natural heritage resource management shall retain
priority over any and all public access development or
recreational within this unit.

Standards

Geologic and Soil Removal or alteration of geologic or soil resources is
Resources prohibited, except for small alterations necessary to
develop public access.

Water Quality All activities within this management unit must be
conducted in a manner to avoid or minimize impacts
to water quality.

Air Quality Prescribed burning is generally not conducted within
concentrated use management units, but any burning
that is conducted shall follow the same air quality
standards of the natural area preserve management
unit.

Landscape Landscaping and related work may occur for
Management purposes of facilitating or enhancing public access or
enjoyment or for minimizing erosion associated with
construction projects. Plantings shall be of native
stock whenever possible. If non-native stock must be
used, only non-invasive species shall be planted.

Agriculture Agriculture uses prohibited.

Watercourses Watercourses shall not be altered or impounded,
except for purposes of restoration to a natural
condition.

140

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Wetlands Small areas of wetlands may be altered only if other
options to avoid wetland alteration are not reasonably
possible. If wetlands must be altered, impacts will be
minimized to the greatest extent possible and the
project will comply with local, state and federal
wetlands regulations at all times.

Insects and Disease Programs to control insect and disease outbreaks are
prohibited, except for purposes of protecting natural
heritage resources or natural ecological processes or
when a public health emergency is declared. Any
control programs must have approval of the tract
owner or be mandated by law.

Forest Resources Generally, management of forest resources solely for
fiber production is prohibited. When necessary to
facilitate public access, limited forest management
activities may be permitted if they are compatible
with natural heritage resource preservation.

Recreation Resources Recreational uses shall be permitted only if they are
compatible with preservation of the natural heritage
resources. Recreational uses of the preserve will
generally be restricted to these units.

Scenic Resources Scenic resources shall be preserved, except where
their alteration is necessary for natural heritage
resource management.

Natural Heritage Preservation of natural heritage resources is the
Resources principal purpose of this site. Only public access and
use which is compatible with natural heritage
resource preservation shall be permitted. Habitat
manipulation and protective measures favoring
natural heritage resources shall be undertaken as
specified in the goals and objectives of this resource
management plan.

Collection of Natural or Collection of natural or historic resources is
Historic Resources prohibited, except with a valid permit from VDCR or
TNC and any other applicable agencies.

141

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Fish and Wildlife Management actions intended to augment fish and
Resources wildlife populations solely to enhance recreational
hunting, fishing, and trapping are prohibited. Hunting
and fishing are generally prohibited within
concentrated use management units.

142

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Management Standards for Scenic River Manacement Unit

Desired Future The Virginia State Scenic Rivers Act provides formal
recognition of scenic waterways, but does not
provide scenic buffers or other viewshed protection
measures. Scenic river management units generally
include the shores of state or federally designated
scenic waterways and protect the largely primitive
and pristine visual surrounding of the waterway with
an adequate scenic visual buffer. The purpose of this
management unit is to provide a visual buffer to the
designated state scenic waterway. Natural heritage
resource management shall retain priority over any
and all scenic resource protection measures.

Standards

Geologic and Soil Removal or alteration of geologic or soil resources is
Resources prohibited, except for small alterations necessary to
develop public access or ecological management
facilities.

Water Quality All activities within this management unit must be
conducted in a manner to avoid or minimize impacts
to water quality.

Air Quality Prescribed burning shall be conducted only in
compliance with VDEQ air quality regulations and
VDoF smoke management guidelines. Burn plans
must delineate smoke management strategies.

Landscape Anthropogenic landscaping is prohibited, except
Management where necessary to provide adequate visual buffers.
Plantings shall be of native stock whenever possible.
If non-native stock must be used, only non-invasive
species shall be planted.

Agriculture Agriculture uses prohibited.

Watercourses Watercourses shall not be altered or impounded,
except for purposes of restoration to a natural
condition.

143

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Wetlands Wetlands shall not be altered, except that small areas
of wetlands within concentrated use management
units may be altered under certain circumstances and
conditions to facilitate public access (see
concentrated use management prescription) and that
wetlands may be altered to restore an area to natural
conditions for purposes of natural heritage resources
management. Projects will comply with local, state,
and federal wetlands regulations at all times.

Insects and Disease Programs to control insect and disease outbreaks are
prohibited, except for purposes of protecting natural
heritage resources or natural ecological processes or
when a public health emergency is declared. Any
control programs implemented under the above
conditions must have approval of the tract owner or
be mandated by law.

Forest Resources Generally, management of forest resources solely for
fiber production is prohibited. When necessary to
meet natural heritage resource management needs,
limited forest management activities may be
permitted.

Historic Resources Any artifacts, archaeological sites, historic structures,
or other historic resources discovered on the site will
be managed for preservation. If compatible with
preservation of scenic, historic, and natural heritage
resources, interpretation and research of historic
resources may be permitted.

Recreation Resources Recreational uses shall be permitted only if they are
compatible with preservation of the scenic and
natural heritage resources. Recreational use will
generally be limited to the concentrated use
management units.

Scenic Resources Adequate visual buffers between the scenic
waterway and visual intrusions shall be provided.

Natural Heritage Only land uses which are compatible with natural
Resources heritage resource preservation are permitted. Habitat
manipulation and protective measures favoring
natural heritage resources shall be undertaken as
specified in the goals and objectives of this resource
management plan.

Collection of Natural or Collection of natural or historic resources is
Historic Resources prohibited, except with a valid permit from VDCR or
TNC and any other applicable agencies.

144

North Lending River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Fish and Wildlife Management actions intended to augment fish and
Resources wildlife populations strictly for the purpose of
enhancing recreational fishing, hunting, or trapping
are prohibited. Waterfowl hunters may enter the unit
to search for downed waterfowl. Deer hunting rights
have been retained on certain tracts by the previous
owners. Hunting and trapping for resource
management purposes may occur under the guidance
of a plan.

145

North Lending River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

ACTION PLANS

Action plans are documents which outline in more detail than a
management synopsis the steps that will be taken to accomplish an
objective. Action plans are generally recommended in situations where
the number and complexity of tasks needed to reach an objective exceed
the capacity of a management synopsis alone. Action plans are often
utilized when evaluations of existing conditions or team planning efforts
are needed. Action plans normally include budget and schedule
information. Many action plans consist of project proposals or grant
applications.

The management synopses recommend the development of 15 action
plans. Table 8 lists the 15 action plans along with the applicable
objective and whether the action plan is existing or proposed.

146

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 8

ACTION PLANS FOR THE
NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE

ACTION PLAN TITLE RELATED OBJECTIVE EXISTING /PROPOSED___]

Hydrologic and Geochemical 2A: Continue hydrologic,
Investigations of the wetlands geochernical and vegetation existing
of the North Landing River research.

Fire History Investigations of 213: Continue fire and vegetation
the Pocosins of the North history research. existing
Landing River and the Great
Dismal Swamp

Trial Use of P rescribed Burning 3A: Research effectiveness of
for the Control of Common prescribed fire in the control of proposed
Reed common reed.

Restoring a Wetland 3C: Research effects of f ire on
Ecosystem: a Fire Management pocosin and canebrake existing
Proposal for the North Landing communities.
River Wetlands

Use of Prescribed Fire as a 3D: Research effects of fire on
Management Tool for the marsh communities. proposed
Marshes of the North Landing
River

Salinity Changes and Effects on 413: Determine extent and effect
Vegetation in West Neck Creek of salinity changes associated proposed
and the North Landing River with bypass canal.

North Landing River Natural 713: Develop a fire management
Area Preserve Fire Management plan. proposed
Plan

North Landing River Natural 1OA: Conduct biological
Area Preserve Biological monitoring of selected rare proposed
Monitoring Plan species, problem species, and
natural communities.

Control of Common Reed in the 11 A: Complete common reed
Southern Watersheds: a Habitat demonstration project. existing
Demonstration Project

North Landing River Natural 11 D: Develop and implement a
Area Preserve Problem Species problem species assessment proposed
Assessment and Control and control plan.
Recommendations

147

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

TABLE 8 (CONTINUED)

ACTION PLAN TITLE RELATED OBJECTIVE EXISTING /PROPOSED

North Landing River Natural 1213: Develop and
Area Preserve Deer Hunting implement a deer hunting proposed
Plan and Guidelines plan and guidelines.

Model Land Use Plan for 13A: Develop a model land
Lands within the North use plan for priority upland proposed
Landing River Watershed tracts.

Agricultural BMP Plan for a 1313: Design and implement
Demonstration Farm in the a demonstration water proposed
North Landing River quality conservation plan.
Watershed

Comprehensive Access and 1413: Develop and
Recreation Plan for the implement public access proposed
North Landing River Natural and recreation strategies.
Area Preserve and Vicinity

Regional Scenic Resources 1513: Encourage a regional
reservation Plan for the approach to scenic proposed
North Landing River resources management.
Watershed

148

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

. REFERENCES

ad hoc Southern Watersheds Committee. 1994. Virginia Beach Agricultural Reserve Program. 30
April 1994. 43 pp.

Bales, J.D., and S.C. Skrobialowskii. 1993. Salt transport in a tidal canal, West Neck Creek,
Virginia. pp. 1422-1427in H.W. Shen, S.T. Su, and F. Wen, eds., Hydraulic Engineering
'93. American Society of Civil Engineers.

Christensen, N.L., R.B. Wilbur, and J.S. McLean. 1988. Soil-Vegetation Correlations in the
Pocosins of Croatan National forest, North Carolina. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Biological Report 88(28). 97 pp.

City of Chesapeake. 1990. A Comprehensive Plan for the City of Chesapeake, Virginia. 153 pp.

City of Virginia Beach. 1992. City of Virginia Beach, Virginia: the Comprehensive Plan.

City of Virginia Beach. 1994. Virginia Beach Outdoors Plan - Draft.

Clampitt, C.A., J.C. Ludwig, T.J. Rawinski, and C.A. Pague. 1993. A Natural Areas Inventory
of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report #93-14.Virginia
Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA.
1 March 1993.

Copeland, B.J., R.G. Hodson, S.R. Riggs, and J.E. Easley, Jr. 1983. The Ecology of Albemarle
Sound, North Carolina: an Estuarine Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of
Biological Services, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-83/01. 68 pp.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
DeeDwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/3 1. U.S. Department of Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 103 pp.

DMIMIE. 1993. Geologic Map of Virginia. Virginia Division of Mineral Resources. 1:500,00scale.

Dournlele, D.G. 1976.City of Virginia Beach Marsh Inventory, Volume 1: North Landing River and
Tributaries. Special report #118, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point,
VA. 49 pp.

Erdle, S.Y., M.A. Donoff, L.R. Smith, C.A. Caljouw, and H.D. Bernick, Ill. 1994. Conservation
Planning for the Management and Protection of Natural Areas in the City of Virginia
Beach, VA. Natural Heritage Technical Report #94-12. Virginia Department of
Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. June 1994.

Frost, C.C. 1989.History and Status of Remnant Pocosin, Canebrake, and White Cedar Wetlands
in Virginia. unpublished report submitted to Virginia Department of Conservation and
Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. 35 pp.

Hatch, D.R., J.E. Belshan, S.M. Lantz, G.R. Swecker, and E.E. Starner. 1985. Soil Survey of the
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service. 131 pp.

149

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

REFERENCES (CONTINUED)

HRPDC. 1993. Hampton Roads Databook: 1993. Hampton Roads Planning District Commission.
218 pp.

Laderman, A.D. 1989. The Ecology of the Atlantic White Cedar Wetlands: a Community Profile.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.21). 114 pp.

Lillywhite, D.P., and K. Nieman. 1993.Virginia Population Projections 2010.Virginia Employment
Commission, Richmond, VA. 180 pp.

NOAA. 1993. Local climatological data for Norfolk, Virginia, 1992. U.S. Department of
Commerce, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, NC. 8 pp.

Potter, J.L, M. Heinricht, and C.A. Caljouw. 1994.North Landing River Watershed Public Access
and Visual Assessment. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Richmond,
VA. 69 pp.

Rawinski, T.J. 1990.A Classification of Virginia's Indigenous Biotic Communities: Phase 1, Upper
Levels of the Hierarchy. unpublished report, Virginia Department of Conservation and
Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA. 11 pp.

Rawinski, T.J. 1992. A Classification of Virginia's Indigenous Biotic Communities: Vegetated
Terrestrial, Palustrine, and Estuarine Community Classes. Natural Heritage Technical
Report #92-2 1. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural
Heritage, Richmond, VA. 25 pp.

Richardson, C.J., and J.W. Gibbons. 1993. Pocosins, Carolina bays, and mountain bogs. pp
257-310 in W.H. Martin, S.G. Boyce, and A.C. Echternacht, eds. Biodiversity of the
Southeastern United States / Lowland Terrestrial Communities. John Wiley and Sons,
Inc.

Riggs, S.R., J.T. Bray, R.A. Wyrick, C.R. Klingman, J.C. Hamilton, D.V. Ames, and J.S. Watson.
1993. Sedimentation and Sediment Quality in the North Landing River, Currituck Sound
Estuarine System, North Carolina and Virginia. Report #92-22, Albemarle-Pamlico
Estuarine Study. 42 pp.

Sharitz, R.R., and J.W. Gibbons. 1982. The Ecology of Southeastern Shrub Bogs (Pocosins) and
Carolina Bays: a Community Profile.. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Biological
Sciences, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-82/04.93 pp.

USFS. 1994 Landscape Aesthetics, a Handbook for Scenery Management. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Handbook #701.

VDCR. 1991. State Lands Resource Management Plan Guide. Report of the VDCR Lands
Classification Committee, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation,
Richmond, VA. 10 pp.

VDCR. 1993. Virginia Nonpoint Source Pollution Watershed Assessment Report. Virginia
Department of conservation and Recreation, Division of soil and Water Conservation,
Richmond, VA. 157 pp.

150

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

REF@ERENCES (CONTINUED)

VDCR. 1994. The 1995 Virginia Outdoors Plan - Draft. Virginia Department of Conservation and
Recreation, Division of Planning and Recreation Resources, Richmond, VA.

VDEQ. 1995. General report of all waterbody data: North Landing River. 27 January 1995.
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water. 3 pp.

VWCB. 1992. Virginia Water Quality Assessment, 305(b) Report to EPA and Congress. Virginia
Water Control Board Information Bulletin # 588.

Weigman, D.L., and C.J. Kroehler. 1989. Threats to Virginia's Groundwater. Virginia Water
Resources Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
44 pp.

Wickham, W.P. 1988. The Waters of Southeastern Virginia, Volume II: a Regional Waterways
Guide. Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission, Chesapeake, VA. 135 pp.

151

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

APPENDIX 1
0 NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE
MANAGEMENT PLANNING ADVISORY TEAM

0 152

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

. APPENDIX 1

NORTH LANDING RIVER NATURAL AREA PRESERVE
MANAGEMENT PLANNING ADVISORY TEAM

H. Clayton Bernick, III
City of Virginia Beach
Department of Planning

Dana Bradshaw
Center for Conservation Biology at William and Mary

Julie Bright
Virginia Dare Soil and Water Conservation District

David Brownlie
Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge

John Carlock
Hampton Roads Planning District Commission

Judy Dunscomb
The Nature Conservancy, Virginia Chapter

Billie Jean Elmer
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Soil and Water Conservation

Roger Everton
VA Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water

Michael Focazio
US Geologic Survey

Cecil Frost
NCDA Plant Conservation Program

Carl Garrison
VA Department of Forestry

153

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

QMC Len Gunther
U.S. Coast Guard

Fred Hazelwood
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of State Parks

Valerie King
City of Virginia Beach
Department of Parks and Recreation

Philip Koury
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of State Parks

Scott Kudlas
Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department

Joe McCauley
Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge

Chris Ludwig
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritage

Randy Owen
VA Marine Resources Commission

William Petree
City of Chesapeake
Department of Parks and Recreation
Northwest River Park

Jaleh Pett
City of Chesapeake
Department of Planning

Janit Potter
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Planning and Recreation Resources

154

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

Andrew Reid
US Army Corps of Engineers
Operations and Readiness Branch

Steve Roble
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritage

Robert Rose
Old Dominion University
Department of Biological Sciences

Mimi Sadler
VA Department of Historic Resources

Alan Savitzky
Old Dominion University
Department of Biological Sciences

Cindy Schulz
US Fish and Wildlife Service

Don Schwab
VA Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
Division of Wildlife

Gene Silberhorn
VA Institute of Marine Science

John Tate
VA Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
Office of Plant Protection

155

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

PROJECT LEADERS

Kennedy H. Clark
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritage

Sandra Erdle
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritage

VDCR NATURAL AREAS MANAGEMENT TEAM

Caren Caljouw
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritage

Theresa Duffey
VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Division of Natural Heritage

CZMP GRANTS COORDINATOR

Laura McKay
VA Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Intergovernmental Coordination

156

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition
.10

APPENDIX 2
DEFINITIONS OF RARITY RANKS 9
AND LEGAL STATUS ABBREVIATIONS

0
157

Definition of Abbreviations Used on Natural Heritage Resource Lists
of the
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation

Natural Heritage Ranks
Q
e following ranks are used by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation to set protection priorities for
turat heritage resources. Natural Heritage Resources, or IINHR's,w are rare plant and animal species, rare and exemplary
turaL communities, and significant geologic features. The primary criterion for ranking NHR's is the number of
populations or occurrences, i.e. the number of known distinct Localities. Also of great importance is the number of
individuals in existence at each locality or, if a highly mobile organism (e.g., sea turtles, many birds, and butterflies),
the total number of individuals. Other considerations may include the quality of the occurrences, the number of protected
occurrences, and threats. However, the enoasis remains on the number of populations or occurrences such that ranks will
be an index of known biological rarity.
S1 Extremely rare; usually 5 or fewer populations or occurrences in the state; or may be a few remaining individuals;
often especially vulnerable to extirpation.
S2 Very rare; usually between 5 and 20 populations or occurrences; or with many individuals in fewer occurrences; often
susceptible to becoming extirpated.

S4 Common; usually >100 populations or occurrences, but way be fewer with many Large populations; may be restricted
to only a portion of the state; usually not susceptible to immediate threats.

S5 Very common; demonstrably secure under present conditions.

SA Accidental in the state.

SB# Breeding status of an organism within the state.

SE Exotic; not believed to be native in the state.

SH Historically known from the state, but not verified for an extended period, usually > 15 years; this rank is used
primarily when inventory has been attempted recently.

SN# Non-breeding status within the state. Usually applied to winter resident species.

Reported from the state, but without persuasive documentation to either accept or reject the report.
ou status uncertain, often because of Low search effort or cryptic nature of the element.
Sx Apparently extirpated from the state.

Sz Long distance migrant whose occurrences during migration are too irregular, transitory and/or dispersed to be
reliably identified, mapped and protected.

Global ranks are similar, but refer to a species' rarity throughout its total range. Global ranks are denoted with a IIGII
followed by a character. Note that GA and GN are not used and GX means apparently extinct. A 11011 in a rank indicates that
a taxonomic question exists concerning that species. A I,?" in a rank indicates uncertainty as to that species' rarity.
Ranks for subspecies are denoted with a 'IT". The global and state ranks combined (e.g. G2/S1) give an instant grasp of a
species' known rarity.

These ranks should not be interpreted as legal designations.

Federal Legal Status

The Division of Natural Heritage uses the standard abbreviations for Federal endangerment developed by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Division of Endangered Species and Habitat Conservation.

LE -Listed Endangered 3A - Former candidate - presumed extinct
LT -Listed Threatened 3B - Former candidate - not a valid species under
PE -Proposed Endangered current taxonomic understanding
PT -Proposed Threatened 3C - Former candidate - common or well protected
C1 -Candidate, category 1 NF - no federal Legal status
C2 -Candidate, category 2

State Legal Status

The Division of Natural Heritage uses similar abbreviations for State endangerment.

Listed Endangered PE - Proposed Endangered SC - Special Concern
- Listed Threatened PT - Proposed Threatened
40 - Candidate NS - no state Legal status

For information on the Laws pertaining to threatened or endangered species, contact:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for all FEDERALLY listed species
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Plant Protection Bureau for STATE Listed plants and insects
Department of Game and Inland Fisheries for all other STATE Listed animals

3/94

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition
0

APPENDIX 3 9
SCIENTIFIC NAMES

9
159

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

APPENDIX 3

SCIENTIFIC NAMES

To enhance readability, common names of species are used in the text
of this document. Scientific names are given parenthetically at the first
use of each common name. Below, the scientific name for each common
name is listed.

American frog's-bit Limnobium soonaia
American holly llex or)aca
Atlantic white cedar Charnaecyparis thvoides
arrow arum Peltandra virainica .
bald cypress Taxodium distichurn
bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
barking treefrog Hvla aratiosa
beech Faaus arandifolia
big cordgrass Spartina cynosuroides
black needlerush Juncus roemerianus
black willow Salix nj=
broad-leaved cattail Tyr)ha latifolia
bulrushes Scirous spp.
bur reed Sparoanium americanum
camphor weed Pluchea foetida
canebrake rattlesnake Crotalus horridus atricaudatus
Carolina lilaeopsis Lilaeopsis attenuata
cattails Tvr)ha spp.
common alder Alnus serrulata
common reed Phraamites australis
coontail Ceratophyllum spp.
corn Zea mays
Dismal Swamp green stinkbug Chlorocroa dismalia
Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew Sorex lonairo tris fisheri
duck potato Saoittaria falcata
eastern big-eared bat Plecotus rafinesouii
elongated lobelia Lobelia elonnata
epiphytic sedge Carex decom[)osita
fetterbush Lvonia lucida
ferns Pteridophyta
flowering dogwood Cornus florida
great blue heron Ardea herodias
green ash Fraxinus oennsylvanica
harlequin darner Gonphaeschna furcillata
Hessel's hairstreak Mitoura hesseli
hickories Carva spp.
hornwort Cerator)hvllum demersum
Ol inkberry 160 llex glabra

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

SCIENTIFIC NAMES (CONTINUED)

large bog cranberry Vaccinium macrocarpon
laurel-leaved greenbrier Smilas laurifolia
least bittern Ixobrychus exilis
lobiolly pine Pinus taeda
naiad Najas guadalupensis
narrow-leaved cattail Typha angustifolia
nutria Myocastor coypus
oaks Ouercus spp.
Olney's three-square Scirpus americanus
opossum Didelphis virginiana
pawpaw Asimina triloba
peat mosses Sphagnum spp.
pickerelweed Pontederia cordata
poison ivy Toxicodendron radicans
pond pine Pinus serotina
raccoon Procyon lotor
red bay Persea borbonia
red maple Acer rubrum
rushes Juncus spp.
saltmeadow hay Spartina patens
sawgrass Cladium mariscus var. jamaicense
scarce swamp skipper Euphyes dukesi
seaside mallow Kosteletzkya virginica
sedges Carex spp.
sheep laurel Kalmia angustifolia
smartweeds Polygonum spp.
southern bog lemming Synaptomys cooperi helaletus
southern cattail Typha domingensis
southern twayblade Listera australis
soybean Glycine max
spicebush Lindera benzoin
spikerushes Eleocharis spp.
spreading pogonia Cleistes divaricata
striped skunk Mephitis mephitis
swamp rose Rosa palustris
swamp rose mallow Hibiscus moscheutos
swamp tupelo Nyssa biflora
sweet bay Magnolia virginiana
sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua
switchcane Arundinaria gigantea
switchgrass Panicum virgatum
sycamore Platanus occidentalis
tuliptree Liriodendron tulipifera
twigrush Cladium mariscoides
umbrella sedges Cyperus spp.
Virginia chain fern Woodwardia virginica

161

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

SCIENTIFIC NAMES (CONTINUED)

Virginia least trillium Trillium pusillum var. virainianum
Walter's sedge Carex striata
water celery Vallisneria americana
water tupelo Nyssa aouatica
wax myrtle Myrica cerifera
white oak Quercus alba
white-tailed deer Odocoileus virainiana

162

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition
0

APPENDIX 4
ACRONYMS 0

163 0

North Landing River Natural Area Preserve Resource Management Plan, First Edition

APPENDIX 4

ACRONYMS

Several acronyms are used in this document. Each is defined at its first
use and in the following list.

AWC Atlantic White Cedar
BCD Biological Conservation Datasystem
BMP Best Management Practice
C&A Chesapeake and Albemarle
EOR Element Occurrence Record
DPRR Division of Planning and Recreation Resources
DNH Division of Natural Heritage
DSP Division of State Parks
DSWC Division of Soil and Water Conservation
DVCS Division of Volunteerism and Constituent Services
GIS Geographic Information System
1CW Intracoastal Waterway
NAMT Natural Area Management Team
SBR Site Basic Record
SSS Site Stewardship Summary
TNC The Nature Conservancy
TBR Tract Basic Record
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USCG United States Coast Guard
USGS United States Geologic Survey
VDCR Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
VDoF Virginia Department of Forestry
VDGIF Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
VDSWCD Virginia Dare Soil and Water Conservation District

164

APpendices:

D. Natural Resources Pror
,des

'
p
I *

, 'Ahk
I XE
:,, qw
1IL:

THE, BAY
A.

ALLIANCE FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY

h. into the Bay's mouth. Some accounts
credit the Viking explorer, Thorfinn
ruarisienni as early as the 11th Cen.
tury. Others claim that the Italian,
Giovanni da Verrazano, set foot on its
shores when he sailed along the coast
from the Carolinas to Maine in 1524.
And yet a third group credits Pedro
Menendez de Aviles, the Spaniard
who founded St. Augustine in 1566.
Regardless of who was first, it was
P
the start of big changes for the Bay as
Europeans came in search of trea-
sure, conquest and resources to fuel
@k expanding commercial ventures and
THE MANY FACES OF 7 burgeoning colonial empires.
THE CHESAPEAKE Of course, the Europeans did not
The very words, Chesapeake Bay, find the Bay region uninhabited-
evoke a kaleidoscope of images, place Native Americans had been in resi-
names, and folklore. It is the nation's dence since 8000 B.C. The Native
largest estuary, a place where salt Americans had already cleared fields,
water from the ocean meets fresh established large towns, and were
managing woodlands for hunting.
water from rivers, and its impressive Washingr., Archaeology provides evidence of the
stature is reflected in the early names extent of the Indians'use of Bay
that paid the Bay tribute: "Great resources. Every year, empty oyster
Waters," "Mother of Waters" and shells were stacked on top of the past
"Great Shellfish Bay." Throughout his- year's discarded shells to form piles
tory, the Chesapeake has played an known as "midden heaps." The
integral role in the lives of its people. largest recorded midden heap was
If you were a Susquehannock Indian between 18 and 20 feet deep and cov-
Nving in the early 1600s, the Bay was ered 30 acres near Popes Creek on the
ystery-both a source of edible de- Potomac River.
Whts and a pathway for your adver- 16
7 Still, the Bay the Europeans found
sary, the Piscataways. If you were a %
was so rich and productive it seemed
soldier in the War of 1812, you might boundless and inexhaustible. The
have fought some bloody battles on its
waters. And if you were a coffee mer early colonists adopted some Native
chant in Baltimore in the early 1900s, American ways, (like eating oysters
and smoking tobacco) and from the
you very likely depended on the arrival 0414,C Indian word "Tschiswapeki" derived
of "The Josephine" for your livelihood, the name "Chesapeake." They took
Indeed, the Chesapeake Bay and its over the ready-made fields, and estab-
complex ecosystem defy easy descri p- lished their own towns on the old
tion and understanding. From its ori-
gins at Cooperstown, New York to its
mouth in southern Virginia, one can River Ocean
witness geographical and biological %
diversity to match the wide spectrum
FRESH WATER
of cultures that exist here: Amish farm- 7
ers, government workers in the
Nation's Capitol, sailors on a weekend
excursion in Norfolk, sixth-generation CAI-
watermen whose trace of Elizabethan
accent confirms their Cornish heritage. 0 Fresh Wat r a Salt
This fact sheet can only give you a water mix in Bay Bottom
taste of the Bay's history@ ecology and
challenges. Consider it an invitation Indian sites. The town of Crisfield,
to learn more and as you learn, to take 44f,
an active role in Bay restoration. Maryland, or example, was built atop
old oyster shells in 1663.
CHESAPEAKE PAST: As the European settlements grew,
A Bit of History more and more land was cleared in
the effort to "tame the wilderness."
In our concern over today's pollution By 1675, all of Virginia's Eastern
nadlines and our apprehension for
Bay's future, we sometimes forget Shore had been parceled out. Over
time, new technologies like the gun
0, hundreds of years of human events and the moldboard plow began to
44

that combined to set the stage for the
Chesapeake's current dilemma. Where reshape the Bay system in ways we
did it all begin? Historians disagree on are only now beginning to compre-
who was the first European to travel hend. And from the earliest days of
colonial history to modern times runs

a constant thread-conflict over scopic free-floating plants to the much or all of the water's dis- Specific commitments are out-
ownership of the Chesapeake's pine trees along the Shenandoah, solved oxygen. Such areas of lined in such areas as water
riches. Warfare, piracy, forced all have a part in maintaining low or no dissolved oxygen can- quality, public education, living
labor, and bloody disputes over this system's balance. not support other Bay creatures. resources, and population
boundaries and oyster bars have The Bays physical nature as Population growth and its growth and development. A
all left their marks. Many of an estuary is both the source of effect on the Bay is the most direct outgrowth of the Agree-
today's policy debates are rooted its richness and the source of its complex and politically sensitive ment is a concerted, c0opeA&e
in such past conflicts. vulnerability. The overall pro- issue facing Bay managers campaign taking place in 1W
portion of fresh and salt water today. A study released in Jan- Bay community to meet these
C,"")@ESAPEAKE PRESENT: in the Bay depends largely on uary, 1989 by the 2020 panel - commitments and manage the
J-1 Complex and the amount of rainfall that is a commission appointed by the Bay's resources wisely. For the
Fragile System carried to the Bay from the Bay state governors -predicts past two and a half years, such
Chesapeake's major rivers. another 2.6 million residents efforts have included the con-
Geologically speaking, Chesa- During a wet year, the entire .(20 percent increase) in the cerns and advice of citizens, sci-
peake Bay is very young. It was Bay will be somewhat fresher watershed by the year 2020. A entists and local government
created by the death of the last than normal, and conversely a population increase of this mag- officials. Proposed policies have
Ice Age, some 12-18,000 years dry year will result in higher- nitude translates into extensive been circulated and open to pub-
ago. As the glaciers retreated than-average salinities. The Bay changes in current land use pat- lic scrutiny, inviting all of us
and the polar ice caps shrank, is also dependent on the quality terns to more developed land. If who use the Bay to have a voice
the huge volume of melting ice of freshwater flowing from the this growth is not rationally in governing it.
caused sea level to rise. The ris- tributaries. Pollution flowing to planned, the report warns we While the monitoring and
ing ocean in turn engulfed the the Chesapeake tends to stay will all pay the costs in the form modeling programs put into
coast and flooded the river val- there- either in the water col- of more pollution, inadequate place have resulted in an exten-
ley of the ancient Susquehanna umn, the bottom sediments or infrastructure, and more expen- sive body of information that
river, creating Chesapeake Bay. the Bays living resources. sive transportation. Many fear helps direct public policy, we are
The Bay we know today is near- that sprawling or scattered far from understanding the in-
ly 200 miles long, fed by 48 CHES.4,FEAKE AT RISK development will undermine the tricacies of so powerful a system
major rivers and 100 small tribu- A Divcrsity of ProbIc-ims progress made by Bay restora- as Chesapeake Bay. The rates
tarics draining a 64,000 square tion efforts thus far. and magnitude of declines in
mile basin. Earth and water What ails the Chesappake? Bay resources, however, force us
continue to compete for this ter- For people working to restore BAY PESTCPAT!0N.' to set directives based upon
ritory, redrawing the shoreline the Bay, this is a commonly Identifying tl@, e Pro U1,11arn, what we do know, and to modify
as land is built up in some areas heard question and one that de- policies as more knowledge
and lost beneath the waves in fies simple explanation. Depend- Efforts to halt the degrada- becomes available. In some
other places. People have also ing on where you are in the tion occurring in Chesapeake areas of study, we are just begin-
redrawn shorelines, often on a Chesapeake, the problem is dif- Bay started as early as 1973, ning to know what questions to
much faster scale than nature. ferent. Highly industrialized when then-Senator Charles ask. Throughout this process,
Excessive clearing and poor land areas such as the ports of Balti- Mathias conducted a tour of we need to keep the following
management have increased up- more and Hampton Roads have water quality problems in the points in mind:
land erosion, sending tons of sed- suffered from years of toxic estuary. The trip resulted in a Each of us %kill affect tho..
iment downstream. Asa result, heavy metals and dangerous conversation with the adminis- -that fact is inescapable.
communities that were once chemical compounds dumped trator of EPA and eventually led However, it is up to each of us
important ports are now land- by neighboring industries. In to a five-year, $25 million EPA to decide whether our impact
locked. On the other side, the other urban areas, such as the study. Out of ten candidate will be a positive or negative
construction of seawalls and Anacostia and Potomac rivers, issues, three were chosen as tar- one.
breakwaters has interfered with runoff from the land, huge flows gets for the study: nutrient en- The Bay's ecosystem depends
the natural flow of sand, caus- of treated wastewater, and con- richment, toxics, and the disap- upon each of it's constituent
ing beaches to rapidly erode. tarninated sediments are to pearance of underwater grasses parts. We cannot sacrifice
Saltwater mixes into the Bay blame. In the northern and in- (called submerged aquatic vege- the wetlands, the tributaries,
from the Atlantic Ocean. Fresh- land reaches of the watershed, tation or SAV by scientists). or the land, and still save the
water flows from the Bay's trib- runoff from agricultural lands The report, presented to Con- Bay.
utary rivers, with about 50 per- bringing sediments, nutrients gress in 1983, concluded that nu- The Bay suffers from a vari-
cent coming from the Susque- and pesticides is the culprit. In trient enrichment was the chief ety of problems, some of
hanna. Saltwater is heavier short, the answer to "What ails factor in the decline of SAV beds. which have developed over
than freshwater, so it tends to the Bay?" is "you and me." Responding to the serious impli- many years. We cannot
.. creep" up the Bay along the Each one of us contributes to cations of the study's findings expect the solutions to be
bottom while the freshwater the Bay's woes by the activities and underscoring their commit- quick or simple.
flows down from the tributaries that we undertake each day. ment to the Chesapeake, the Bay
on the surface. As a result, the From driving our cars, to flush- states and EPA signed the first
Chesapeake ranges from totally ing our toilets, to using toxic Chesapeake Bay Agreement in
freshwater areas in the North chemicals, we represent the December, 1983. Programs Chesapeake Regional
and upstream in its rivers, to source of the Bay's problems. were soon put in place to begin Information Service
areas near the Bay's mouth that A particularly difficult pollu- reducing the input of nutrients 1-800-662-CRIS
arc about as salty as the ocean. tion problem in the Bay and its and Baywide coordinated moni- Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay
Thus, the Bay can support rivers is excess nutrients- toring and modeling began.
both fresh and marine life nitrogen and phosphorus. Nutri- A second Bay Agreement, 717-236-8825-Perinsylvania
forms, plus those that can toler- ents wash off the land in sedi- signed in 1987 by the governors 301-377-6270-Maryland
ate fluctuating salinity levels. ments and fertilizers, and enter of Pennsylvania, Maryland and 804-775-095 I-Virginia
The variety of conditions sup- the Bay from sewage treatment Virginia, the Mayor of the Dis-
ports some 2,700 species. All plants. In overabundance, they trict of Columbia, the Chesa- This fact sheet is a publication of the
are linked in a complex, interde- set off a chain reaction, causing peake Bay Commission and the Alliance for the Chesa,:@,c Bagige.
pendent web of producers and phytoplankton to grow explo- EPA, expands upon the first As part of its commiLm . re
consumers. From the eagle's sively or"bloom", then die and agreement and delineates state ible use of natural resource,, P@W.
huge nest high in a wetland tree sink to the bottom. Bacteria and federal participation was made possible by a generous
to the worms in the Bay's bot- begin to decompose the dead through a defined set of compIL- grant from:
torn sediments, from the micro- algae and in the process use up mentary goals and objectives. &A
Nalav
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER VIRGINIA POWER

r r_

_BA CK BA Y.
Recent concerns about water quality and fishery landings, raising, grain (field corn and winter wheat) and soybean cropping,
both commercial and recreational, in the Albemarle and ho ise breeding, and some vegetable and fruit production. Another
Pan-Aico Sounds resulted in ajoint study by the U. S. 3,005 acresare d eloped for urban uses.
@v
Environmental Protecqon Agency and the State
of North Carolina. The Albemarle-Pamlico Back Bay has,,experienced only small lunar tides (maximum lunar
REDWING LAK
Estuarine Study (APES) Program is an effort to tide range is approximately six inches) after the closing of
identify current and potential problems in the Currituck Inlet during a storm in 1830. Since that time Back
estuary and to develop a management plan to Bay has changed from a tidally influenced salt water estuary to
improve and maintain the health of the a wind tide dominatedfresh/brackish estuary. Floraandfauna
estuary. within the estuary changed as well. The stripedbass, shrimp,
BRINSONS INLET JAKE and clams that depended on salt water were replaced by
The health of Back Bay and the largemouth bass, crappie and other fresh water inhabit-
Currituck Sound are closely linked. ants.
Likewise, the water quality of the
Currituck Sound has a great effect BLACK G@T
on the Albemarle and Pamlico
Sounds. Back Bay is an expansive
estuary located in the southeastern LOTUS GARDENS
ARK
portion of the City.of Virginia Beach
and protected from the ocean by the
Malse Cape barrier beach. The water- Human activities have had a
IMM contains 66,750 acres, including NORTH SAY significant influence on the
25, 100 acres ofopen water. Anexten- Bay as well. Dune stabili-
sive network of streams and lakes N zation efrorts along the shoreline south of
drains the watershed. LITTLE ISLAND Sandbridge ended periodic storm overwash.
These infusions of seawater were associated
The watershed is primarily undis- 11101Z11-111 SHIPPS SAY with apparent increases in water clarity and
turbed with 15,039 acres of land ec* submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV)
classified as undeveloped. An addi- a growth. The flushing effect of overwash
tional 9,795 acres of undeveloped events may have been a significant factor
land are protected in two National in the hydrologic workings of the Bay.
Wildlife Refuges, a State Park, and
two state Waterfowl Management
The closing of the western channel
44 J@ around Knott's Island, during
REDHEAD BAY the construction of the Knott's
Jsland Causeway in the 1890s,
further diminished lunartides
and reduced water exchange
between Back Bay and* the
Currituck Sound. In-1920,
Carrey's Ditch Was dug
BACK BAY through this area in an
DEVIL CREE effort to increase, flush-
ing in the southwestern
TROJAN WILDLIFE portions of the Bay.
MANAGEMENT AREA
Areas. Development is further restricted
In hopes of reversing
by the City of Virginia Beach's Southern POCAHONTAS W1DUFE
Wqft MANAG.EMENT AREA waterquality declines,
, Ltshed Management Ordinance which
J&@i jWablished to protect the rural charac- MACKAY ISLAND the City of Virginia
'wleri'mos of the southern portion of the city. NATIONAL WILDLIFE Beach operateda salt
REFUG
water pumping fa-
Agricultural uses accountfor 13,811 acres ofthe VIRGINIA cility at Little Is-
watershed. Chief agricultural uses include hog NORTH CAROL land Coast Guard

Station from 1964 to 1987 that discharged The decline in Eurasian milfbil in the American peregrine falcon, and the brown
seawater into the Shipps Bay subregion of Chesapeake Bay was attributed to the ef- pelican.
Back Bay. Increasing the average salinity fects of two diseases, Northeast Disease
of the Bay, from 0.7 parts per thousand and Lake Venice Disease. Northeast Dis- Back Bay has a limited ability to assi d
(ppt) (Average Bay Salinity, May 27,1965) ease was believed tobe produced by avirus, pollutantloads. Thereareonlytwo,
to 3 ppt (ten percent of the strength of a virus-like particle, or a toxin produced ted point source discharges with combin
seawater) was expected to increase water within and released by an infected plant. flows of less than 50,000 gallons per day of
clarity and SAV growth without signifi- Lake Venice Disease modified the cellular secondary treated domestic wastewater.
cantly impacting the fresh water species structure of the leaf surface, allowing ex-
inhabiting the Bay. However, the average tensive algal buildup on the leaf surface. Non-point sources contribute significant
baywide salinity remained well below the This buildup reduced the ability ofthe plant pollutant loads to Back Bay. Runoff from
stated goal. to photosynthesize, eventually stopping agricultural fields and swine feed lots, and
transpiration and smothering the plant. to a lesser extent from urban development
In 1983, due to few pumping interruptions Both diseases have been identified in Back contribute pesticides, phosphorus, and ni-
and low rainfall, the average baywide sa- Bay. trogen.
linity increased to 1.5 - 1.8 ppt. Due to the
circulation patterns of the Bay, however, Current research has proposed another hy- Within the watershed are eight swine rais-
the average monthly salinity in Northand pothesis to explain the decline of SAV. In ing operations, which use anaerobic waste
Shipps Bays was nearly 3 ppt and a daily response to elevated nutrient levels, par- lagoons to manage animal wastes. These
high of6.42 ppt was recorded in North Bay. ticularly nitrogen, SAV tends to grow so lagoons are expected to be maintained and
This may seem high, but average salinity fast that its stems become fragile and pumped out on a regular basis, with the
after a storm overwash event often reached crumble readily underphysical. stress, caus- waste being applied to the land. A recent
22.5 ppt. Due to a lack of demonstrated -ing theplants tobreakoffnear the roots and evaluation of the issue concluded that on a
positive effects on the Bay's resources, the die. These "corpses" can be seen com- collective basis, the -equipment and the
pumping ofsaltwater into theBay ceased in monly in both Back Bay and the North necessary access for management do exist.
August, 1987. Carolina Sounds. It was determined that water quality was
not negatively impactedby the current state
Growth patterns of SAV in Back Bay have "The diversity and abundance of wildlife of hog waste management in the Southern
followed a pattern of introduction, coloni- resources in the Back Bay watershed are Watersheds.
zation, stabilization, depletion, and de- directly related to the distribution and va-
cline. This cycle has been observed over riety of vegetation in the area." (Mann & Recreational activities in the watershed
the last century for several different species Associates, 1984) Back Bay is an impor- include both boat and shore fishing, h W&
of SAV. In the history ofthe Bay no species tantbreeding ground, livingquarters, hunt- ing, canoeing, wildlife observation, wqF
has ever substantially repopulated after its ing ground, rest stop, and nursery to a wide skiing, biking, and camping.
initial decline. variety of terrestrial and marine life. It is
particularly important as awintering ground The City of Virginia Beach recently com-
The most recent SAV species to populate for mallards, black ducks, pintails, Canada pleted a Southern Watershed Management
the.Bay was Eurasian milfbil. First re- geese and snow geese. For species migrat- Area Report, which identifies several prob-
ported in the late sixties, the new grass had ing further, it acts as an important rest stop lems in the watershed, and outlines recom-
spread across the entire Bay in less than a on the Atlantic Flyway. Loggerhead turtles mended strategies and solutions for deal-
decade. It flourished in areas not thought come ashore at False Cape to lay their eggs. ing with them.
able to support plant life and grew so dense White tailed deer, red fox, opossum, rac-
that it had to be cut back in areas of regular coon, gray squirrel, red tailed hawk, and a The Back Bay Watershed has been desig-
boat traffic. By the mid-eighties, only host of other species make a home in the nated as a component ofthe Back Bay Focal
scattered stands and colonies in the eastern upland areas of the Back Bay watershed. Area for implementation of the North
expanses of the Bay remained. This The nationally threatened piping plover is American Waterfowl Management Plan.
parallelled the experience of Eurasian mil- thought to breed in the dunes of Back Bay This program and other state, regional, and
foil in the Chesapeake Bay only a few years National Wildlife Refuge. Other species local efforts are expected to enhance envi-
prior. that make their homes in the Back Bay ronmental conditions in the Watershed.
Watershed include.the bald eagle, the

Albemarle-Pamlico
Drainage Area This Albemarle-Pamlico Profile ...

... was produced by the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission with
arle-Pamlico
funding from the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study. The Albem
... .........
System, second largest estuary in the nation, drains 30,000 square miles in
two states. The Study is authorized by the Clean Water Act of 1987 and is
funded jointly by the US EPA and the State of North Carolina. It is one of 17
..........
national estuarine programs in the country whose purpose is to produce a
H GkROL
... ............... ..............
management plan for maintaining the health of our estuaries. To find out more
about the Study and how to get involv6d, call (919) 946-6481.

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1993

Jam- PROFILES
bum
Ob--
........... .. woo
11111110IMPAn-
lw@

--------- -

NORTH LANDING! IVER

Recent concerns about water quality and Northwest River areas, as
fishery landings, both commercial and
recreational, in the Albemarle and one of the' premiere
unspoiled natural areas in
Pandico Sounds resulted in a joint
the state. The North Land-
study by the U. S. Environmental Pro- ing area was named the top
tection Agency and the State ofNorth
natural area in Virginia. With
Carolina. The Albemarle-Pamlico the help of the Nature Conser
Estuarine Study (APES) Program vancy, the Division of Natural Heri-
is an effort to identify current and tage has established the North Landing
potential problems in the estuary ALBEMARLE WOIA@ River Natural Area Preserve. Currently,
AND
and to develop a management plan cNEs"Ema cANAL ROAO 5,612 of a proposed 10,000 acres have
to improve and maintain the health been acquired. The core of the protected
of the estuary. lands extends along the North Landing
River across Pungo Ferry Road east of
The health of both the North Landing Blackwater Road. The Nature Conser-
River and the Currituck Sound, which vancy has acquired several more tracts
receives water from the North Landing in Virginia Beach and Chesapeake to
River, theNorthwestRiver, andBackBay add to theNorth LandingRiverNatural
has a direct effect on the Albemarle Sound. AreaPreserve. The Division ofNatural
Heritage is completing fieldworkfor its
.,dlkThe North Landing River flows from Great Natural Areas Inventory and expects to
IWridge Locks in Chesapeake through south- recommend acquisition of additional
western VirginiaBeach to the Currituck Sound. acreage to protect the more than 3 8 rare
Its traverse ofChesapeake and Virginia Beach or endangered species of plants and
covers 22 miles and it drains approximately C9011 animals that are concentrated along
71,794 acres of land. The Great Bridge Lock the river.
is the western terminus ofthe Albemarle and
Chesapeake Canal which links the Southern West Neck Creek and Virginia Beach
Branch of the Elizabeth River with the Canal Number 2 connect the North
North Landing River. The Albemarle and Landing and Lynnhaven rivers. To-
Chesapeake Canal is 8.5 miles long. The gether, these water bodies comprise the
Intracoastal Waterway makes use of the spine of the City of Virginia Beach's
North Landing as a vital part of the Scenic Waterways System. Several tribu-
north-south route. taries of the North Landing River are also
0
part of the Virginia North Landing State
The North Landing Watershed com- Scenic River. These include West Neck
prises a total area of more than 74,636 PU14GO FERRY ROAD Creek, Pocaty Creek/River, and
acres, of which 2,841 acres are open Blackwater Creek. Other tributaries in-
water. Like Back Bay, the primary land clude Cooper's Ditch, Walnut Creek,
use in the North Landing Watershed is 0,A Snake Creek, Nfilldam Creek, Oakem's
agriculture. Soybeans, field corn, and wheat Creek, Chelydra Stream, and Stumpy
are the predominant crops. Potatoes, strawber- Lake.
ries, squash, beans, andtomatoes are also grown. MUNDEN OIN
Agricultural activities use 32,633 acres of the PARK Stumpy Lake is a reserve reservoir
available land in the basin, and 26,164 acres M4 DAM CREEK for the City of Norfolk's water sys-
are undeveloped. Developed land, including tem. Storm overflow is drained
residential, commercial, industrial, and road- _"0 from the lake to the North Landing
ways only cover 12,997 acres of the watershed. River. Stumpy Lake has been clas-
sified as "eutrophic" by the Vir-
*Me Virginia Department of Conservation and ginia State Water Control Board.
Recreation, Division of Natural Heri-
tage, has identified the North Landing VIRGINIA The City of Virginia Beach re-
River area, as well as the Back Bay and - - - NORTH CAR LINA cently completed a Southern

WatershedManagementAreaReportwhi ch quality problems are often assumed to be
identifies several problems in the River, as related to the water quality problems along
well as Back Bay's, and outlines recom- the Elizabeth River. Another concern of
mended strategies and solutions for deal- late, however, is the link between the
ing with them. Lynnhaven River and the Chesapeake Bay
to the North Landing River by means of
Recreational activities in the watershed West Neck Creek and Canal No. 2. Fears
include both boat and shore fishing, hunt- have been expressed about this connection,
ing, canoeing, wildlife observation, water principally due to the potential for water
skiing, and power boating. from the Chesapeake Bay to increase salin-
ityintheNorthLandingRiverandCunituck
Water quality monitors have indicated the and Albemarle Sounds. These issues are
following problems in the North Landing currently being studied.
River: low dissolved oxygen, high concen-
trations of fecal coliform, nutrient (phos- The North Landing River Watershed has
phorous) loadings, and metals (manganese been designated as a component of the
and iron). Most of these problems stem Back Bay Focal Area for implementation
from non-point sources such as animal of the North American Waterfowl Man-
waste and fertilizers running off agricul- agement Plan. This program and other
tural and recreational lands. Several small state, regional, and local efforts are ex-
point sources do contribute to these prob- pected to enhance environmental condi-
lems, including the NorfolkDredging Com- tions in the Watershed.
pany, Southeastern Elementary School,
Bergy's Dairy Farm, and Hope Haven -
Union Nfission.

The Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal once
played a vital role in interstate commerce
and transportation, but when water trans-
portation was replaced by rail and high-
ways, the canal lost much of its former
importance. At one time the canal allowed
both goods and tourists to flow from Nor- AL
folk to ports south. Steamboats, rivcrboats,
and barges plied their way through the
canal. In 1890, nearly 400,000 tons of
freight passed through the canal's waters.
Today, although still used for some com-
mercial trips, the canal is most often used
by pleasure craft making small day or week
trips to the Sounds of North Carolina or
those making the long voyage between
northern harbors and Florida and the Car-
ibbean.

Concerns have been raised about the pos-
sible negative impacts of the Albemarle
and Chesapeake Canal connecting the North
Landing River and the Southern Branch of
the Elizabeth River. Downstream water

Albemarle-Pamlico
Drainage Area This Albemarle-Pamlico Profile ...

......................
....X ... was produced by the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission with
'VIRGINIA"
....... ......
funding from the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study. TheAlbemarle-Pamlico
...........
System, second largest estuary in the nation, drains 30,000 square miles in
.... .............
two states. The Study is authorized by the Clean Water Act of 1987 and is
funded jointly by the US EPA and the State of North Carolina. It is one of 17
.................................... national estuarine programs in the country whose purpose is to produce a
NORTH CAROL management plan for maintaining the health of our estuaries. To find out more
. .. .............. .. . .. . .....,..........
.. . .......
.. ....... .... .......
... ....... ....... ....
.....................
about the Study and how to get involved, call (919) 946-6481.
...........
_J

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1993

M1 -PROFILES

NORTHWEST RIVER

Recent concerns about water quality and fishery landings, both before entering the Currituck Sound. The drainage basin covers
commercial and recreational, in the Albemarle andPamlico Sounds approximately 66,436 acres.
resulted in a joint study by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and the State of North Carolina. The Albemarle-Pamlico Land in the Northwest RiverBasin is primarily undeveloped, being
Estuarine Study (APES) Program is an effortto identify current and either wetlands or uninanaged forest lands. Nearly 46,356 acres in
potential problems in the estuary and to develop a management the basin fall into this category. Agricultural lands comprise
plan to improve and maintain the health of the estuary. another 16,527 acres, and urban activities use only 3,554 acres of
land in the basin.
The health of both the Northwest River and the Currituck Sound,
which receives water from the Northwest River, the North Landing The Northwest River Basin, which is entirely contained within the
Coastal Plain, is characterized by low lying lands with very few
locations exceeding 25 feet above mean sea level.
0 The Northwest River Basin's soils are predomi-
nantly of the mucky peat variety, ranging from
0
somewhat poorly drained to very poorly drained.
Due to soil composition, land in the Northwest
River Basin is generally unsuited for septic
drain fields.

The City of Chesapeake started with-
drawing water from the river in
1980 as its main source of drink-
ing water, culminating more
River, N INDIAV CREEK ROA0
and Back Bay,
has a direct effect on the NORTHWEST RIVER
7- @@ PARK
/Z
Albemarle Sound.

The Northwest River experiences small
tidal flucMations; and occasional reverse flows
due to winds. It has been classified as an estua- 016 NORTHI&EST
rine body by the Virginia State Water Control
Board. The discharge from the Northwest River is
difficult, if not impossible, to quantify due to a very low
current velocity (on calm days current velocity of less
than two centimeters per second is common) and the LRqINIA
NORTH CAROLINA
domination of its current by wind direction. Scientists
say that the Northwest River behaves more like a lake or
reservoir than a river. J(,

Following storms, concentrations of fecal colif- than a decade of planning. Accord-
orm bacteria and nutrients tend to rise, with an ing to its permit from the U.S. Army
increase in available dissolved oxygen and bio- Corps of Engineers, the City is al-
chemical oxygen demand. Dissolved oxygen lowed to withdraw a maximum of ten
drops as biological oxygen demand is satisfied. million gallons per day (mgd). Actual
Due to weak currents, dissolved oxygen replen- withdrawal has averaged 8 mgd. Due to the
ishment is slow. Without another storm, algal unusual flow patterns of the river, increased down-
looms peak within 10 to 15 days of the previous storm. stream salinity may result from water withdrawals from the river.
This has been a major concern to the -City and the regulatory
The Northwest River flows 13 miles in a southeasterly direction agencies. In recent years, the salinity of the Northwest River has
across the City of Chesapeake from near the Dismal Swamp indeed increased during periods of low flow or drought. This has
entering North Carolina at Tull's Bay. It flows another two miles restricted the use of the river as a drinking water source during

7-ILL
these periods. In 1985 increased water Ditch, Mill Stream, Indian Creek, and
withdrawals coupled with a drought and Smith Creek.
othernatural occurrencescombinedto make
water taken from the Northwest River too Recreational uses of the river include both
salty to be safely consumed by residents on shore and boat fishing, power boating and
salt-restricted diets. During this period, water skiing, wildlife observation, and ca-
the City provided access to wells for drink- noeing. Northwest River Park, a city park,
ing water at the municipal complex. is bordered by the Northwest River along
its southern border, Smith Creek and In-
The Northwest River has regularly suf- dian Creek on its east and westborders, and
fered dissolved oxygen depletion, high Indian Creek Road on the north. This park
nutrient (both phosphorus and nitrogen) provides easy access to the riverfor fishing,
loadings, and pH problems. Most water canoeing, row boating, and other recre-
quality problems are due to non-point ational activities. The Northwest Wilder-
sources and normal swamp drainage. ness Area in southern Chesapeake adds to
(Swamp drainage, although a naturally natural area recreation opportunities. The
occurring condition, contributes to water Area consists of 180 acres in its natural
quality standards violations in the North- condition and is located on the site of the
west River.) Point source dischargers to Naval Security Activity, Northwest.
the river include the Naval Security Group
Activity - Northwest Sewage Treatment The Northwest River Watershed has been
Plant, Saint Brides Correctional Center, designated as a component ofthe Back Bay
Chesapeake Water Treatment Plant and Focal Area for implementation ofthe North
Chesapeake WTP sludge lagoons. American Waterfowl Management Plan.
This program and other state, regional, and
According to the Virginia State Water local efforts are expected to enhance envi-
Control Board (VSWCB) and Virginia ronmental conditions in the Watershed.
Institute of Marine Science reports, the
Northwest River, due to its estuarine type
flow and swamp drainage, has a severely
limited ability to assimilate pollutants.
Accordingly, the VSWCB advised against
siting any facilities whose activities might
endanger the drinking water supply in the
Northwest River Basin.
6 ?N
Chesapeake and state regulatory agencies
classify a portion ofthe Northwest River as
a Public Water Supply zone. This classifi-
cation encompasses the area that extends
five miles upstream and five miles down-
stream of the raw water intake point to
protect the water supply. The City also
restricts urban-type development within
the watershed above the intake to protect
the water supply.

Tributaries of the Northwest River include
the Northwest Canal, Twelve Foot Ditch,
Weston Ditch, Happer Ditch, Beaverdam

Albemarle-Pamlico
Drainage Area This Albemarle-Pamlico Profile ...

...........
............
.............
was produced by the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission with
VRGINJA
-Pamlico Estuarine Study. The Albemarle-Pamlico
...................... .... funding from the Albemarle
...........
........ ......... System, second largest estuary in the nation, drains 30,000 square miles in
two states. The Study is authorized by the Clean Water Act of 1987 and is
funded jointly by the US EPA and the State of North Carolina. it is one of 17
........ ...... .. ......... ....................
...........
national estuarine programs in the country whose purpose is to produce a
......... ...............................
management plan for maintaining the health of our estuaries. To find out more
.. ...................
about the Study and how to get involved, call (919) 946-6481.
.................
..............

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1993

NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY

3 6668 14111950 5