l&k)
PROt^
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
New England Region
Boston, Massachusetts
Ecological Characterization
Of The
Housatonic River
September 2002
Environmental Remediation Contract
General Electric (GE)/Housatonic River Project
Pittsfield, Massachusetts
Contract No. DACW33-94-D-0009/032
|||
gjIWOQDLOT
^^iJ*lALTrR\iTIV!:s, INC.
I I h I a#Hili HTiL CdhlUiririrL
www. woodlotalt. com
-------
Ecological Characterization
Of The
Housatonic River
September 2002
Prepared by
Woodlot Alternatives. Inc.
Topsham, Maine 04086
Prepared under
EPA Contract No. DACW33-94-D-0009/032
with Weston Solutions, Inc.
Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 1
Boston, Massachusetts
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
SECTION I INTRODUCTION 1-0
1.0 Introducti on I-1
1.1 Purpose of Report I-1
2.0 Report Organization 1-2
3.0 Relationship to Previous and Ongoing Studies 1-4
3.1 Previous Ecological Investigations 1-4
3.1.1 Preliminary Wetland Characterization and FVA 1-4
3.1.2 Preliminary Ecological Characterization 1-5
3.2 Risk Assessment Support 1-6
3.2.1 Amphibian Reproductive Study 1-6
3.2.2 Wood Frog and Leopard Frog Collections 1-6
3.2.3 Aquatic Macrophyte Sampling 1-7
3.2.4 Fish Tissue and Biomass Sampling 1-7
3.2.5 Waterfowl Collection and Tissue Sampling 1-7
3.2.6 Soil Invertebrate Sampling 1-8
4.0 Literature Cited 1-9
SECTION II STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION 11-0
1.0 Introducti on II-1
2.0 Land Use Patterns and Population Trends II-l
2.1 Historical Land Use Patterns and Population Trends II-l
2.2 Current Land Use Patterns and Population Trends II-4
3.0 Biophysical Setting H-5
3.1 Climate II-6
3.2 Geology II-6
3.2.1 Regional Geological Setting H-6
3.2.2 B edrock Geol ogy II-7
3.2.3 Glacial Geology II-8
3.2.4 Soils 11-8
3.3 Hy drol ogy II-10
3.3.1 Groundwater 11-10
3.3.2 Surface W ater s II-10
3.4 Natural Communities 11-13
4.0 Reference Areas II-15
4.1 Hinsdale Flats State Wildlife Management Area II-l5
4.2 October Mountain State Forest 11-16
4.3 Ashley Lake 11-16
4.4 Threemile Pond State Wildlife Management Area 11-17
5.0 Literature Cited II-18
SECTION III ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION 111-0
Chapter 1 Natural Communities and Rare Plants 1-1
i
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Section Page
1.0 Introducti on 1-1
2.0 Methods 1-3
2.1 Background 1-3
2.2 Literature revi ew 1-4
2.3 Aerial Photograph Interpretation 1-4
2.4 Field Surveys 1-5
3.0 Natural Community Descriptions 1-6
3.1 Lacustrine Communities 1-17
3.2 Riverine Communities 1-17
3.3 Palustrine Communities 1-18
3.4 Terrestrial Communities 1-19
3.5 Rare Natural Communities and Plants 1 -20
3.5.1 Rare Natural Communities 1 -20
3.5.2 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants 1-22
4.0 Developed Communities 1-54
4.1 Agricultural Lands 1-55
4.2 Residential, Commercial, and Public Development 1-55
4.3 Transportation 1-56
4.4 Recreational Facilities 1-56
5.0 Literature Cited 1-57
Chapter 2 Macroinvertebrates 2-1
1.0 Introduction 2-1
2.0 Methods 2-1
2.1 Incidental Observations 2-1
2.2 Mussel Survey 2-1
2.3 Dragonfly Surveys 2-3
2.3.1 Exuvia Collection 2-3
2.3.2 Adult Collection 2-5
2.4 Vernal Pool Invertebrate Survey 2-6
2.5 Earthworm Sampling 2-6
2.6 Terrestrial Litter Invertebrate Survey 2-6
3.0 Macroinvertebrate Community Descriptions 2-7
3.1 Aquatic Macroinvertebrates 2-7
3.1.1 Mussels 2-7
3.1.2 Dragonflies 2-14
3.1.3 Vernal Pool Invertebrates 2-21
3.2 Terrestrial Macroinvertebrates 2-38
3.2.1 Earthworms 2-38
3.2.2 Litter Invertebrates 2-3 8
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Macroinvertebrates 2-41
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Section Page
5.0 Literature Cited 2-47
Chapter 3 Fish 3-1
1.0 Introducti on 3-1
2.0 Methods 3-1
2.1 Species :Habitat Association 3-1
2.2 Existing Fisheries Data 3-2
2.3 Electrofishing and Netting 3-2
3.0 Fish Community Description 3-3
3.1 Reach 5A and 5B Fish Community - Confluence to Roaring Brook 3-11
3.2 Reach 5C Fish Community - Roaring Brook to Backwaters 3-11
3.3 Reach 6 Fish Community - Woods Pond and Backwaters 3-12
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Fish 3-13
5.0 Literature Cited 3-15
Chapter 4 Reptiles and Amphibians 4-1
1.0 Introduction 4-1
2.0 Methods 4-1
2.1 Species :Habitat Association 4-1
2.2 Incidental Observations 4-2
2.3 Visual and Acoustic Surveys 4-3
2.4 Breeding Pool Surveys 4-3
2.5 Aquatic Funnel Trap Surveys 4-4
2.6 Pitfall Trap Surveys 4-6
3.0 Reptile and Amphibian Community Descriptions 4-6
3.1 Herptiles 4-6
3.2 Reptiles 4-7
3.2.1 Snakes 4-7
3.2.2 Turtles 4-8
3.3 Amphibians 4-11
3.3.1 Toads and Frogs 4-15
3.3.2 Salamanders 4-23
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Reptiles and Amphibians 4-31
4.1 Reptiles 4-31
4.2 Amphibians 4-32
5.0 Literature Cited 4-35
Chapter 5 Birds 5-1
1.0 Introducti on 5-1
2.0 Methods 5-1
2.1 Species :Habitat Association 5-1
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Section Page
2.2 Incidental Observations 5-2
2.3 Waterfowl Trapping 5-2
2.4 Wading and Marshbird Surveys 5-3
2.5 Hawk and Owl Surveys 5-4
2.6 Belted Kingfisher Nest Surveys 5-5
2.7 Forest Bird Surveys 5-5
3.0 Bird Community Description 5-6
3.1 Carnivorous Birds 5-8
3.1.1 Hawks and Owls 5-8
3.1.2 Wading Birds 5-13
3.1.3 Belted Kingfishers 5-14
3.1.4 Tree Swallows 5-14
3.1.5 Other Species 5-14
3.2 Omnivorous Birds 5-17
3.2.1 Waterfowl 5-17
3.2.2 Marsh Birds 5-18
3.2.3 Other Species 5-20
3.3 Herbivorous Birds 5-20
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Birds 5-20
5.0 Literature Cited 5-26
Chapter 6 Mammals 6-1
1.0 Introduction 6-1
2.0 Methods 6-1
2.1 Species :Habitat Association 6-1
2.2 Incidental Observations 6-2
2.3 Mink and Otter Surveys 6-2
2.3.1 Snow Tracking 6-2
2.3.2 Scent Post Surveys 6-3
2.3.3 Otter Scat Analysis 6-4
2.4 Small Mammal Surveys 6-4
2.4.1 Small Mammal Trapping 6-4
2.4.2 Placental Scar Analysis 6-5
2.5 Bat Surveys 6-6
2.5.1 Field Sampling 6-6
2.5.2 Computer Analysis 6-7
3.0 Mammal Community Description 6-7
3.1 Pi scivorous Mammal s 6-8
3.1.1 River Otter 6-9
3.1.2 Mink 6-12
3.2 Omnivorous and Carnivorous Mammals 6-14
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Section Page
3.2.1 Large 6-15
3.2.2 Small 6-18
3.3 Insectivorous Mammals 6-20
3.3.1 Bats 6-20
3.3.2 Shrews 6-24
3.3.3 Moles 6-26
3.4 Herbivorous Mammals 6-27
3.4.1 Large Herbivores 6-27
3.4.2 Small Herbivores 6-27
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Mammals 6-33
5.0 Literature Cited 6-37
SECTION IV ATTACHMENTS IY-0
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Title Page
Table 1-1 State status and ranking definitions 1-2
Table 1-2 Natural communities in the PSA and reference areas 1-7
Table 1-3 Rare plants known or suspected to occur in the PSA1 1-23
Table 1-4 Summary of rare plants documented in the PSA and reference areas 1-26
Table 2-1 Exuviae transect habitat descriptions 2-4
Table 2-2 Freshwater mussels of the Housatonic River drainage 2-8
Table 2-3 1998 freshwater mussel survey results at reference sites 2-10
Table 2-4 1999 dragonfly survey results 2-16
Table 2-5 1999 dragonfly exuviae collection results 2-18
Table 2-6 1999 damselfly survey results 2-20
Table 2-7 1998 aquatic funnel trap results from 17 vernal pools 2-22
Table 2-8 2000 terrestrial litter invertebrate collection results 2-40
Table 3-1 Fishes of the Housatonic River system 3-5
Table 3-2 2000 fish biomass sampling results 3-8
Table 4-1 Species use of 68 vernal pools in the PSA 4-12
Table 5-1 1999 raptor survey results 5-11
Table 5-2 1998 forest bird survey results 5-16
Table 5-3 1998 marsh and wading bird survey results 5-19
Table 6-1 1999 bat survey results 6-21
Table 6-2 1998 and 1999 small mammal trapping results 6-28
vi
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Title Page
Figure 1-1 Representative section of PSA - upper section (Reach 5A) 1-13
Figure 1-2 Representative section of PSA - middle section (Reach 5A) 1-14
Figure 1-3 Representative section of PSA - lower section (Reach 5B) 1-15
Figure 1-4 Representative section of PSA - lower section (Reach 5C) 1-16
Figure 1-5 Leaves and fruit of black maple 1-27
Figure 1-6 Mudflat spikesedge 1-28
Figure 1-7 Inflorescence of pendulous bulrush 1-30
Figure 1-8 Carpellate (i.e., seed-bearing) plant of autumn willow 1-31
Figure 1-9 Leaves and flowers of wapato 1-32
Figure 1-10 Flowers and fruits of bristly crowfoot 1-35
Figure 1-11 Variegated scouring-rush 1-36
Figure 1-12 Flowers of eastern black currant 1-38
Figure 1-13 Leaf of bur oak 1-39
Figure 1-14 Crooked-stemmed aster 1-41
Figure 1-15 Inflorescence of foxtail sedge 1-42
Figure 1-16 Inflorescence of Gray's sedge 1-43
Figure 1-17 Leaf of hemlock-parsley 1-45
Figure 1-18 Fringed gentian 1-46
Figure 1-19 Upper branch of hoary willow 1-47
Figure 1-20 Upper stem and inflorescence of hard-stem bulrush 1-49
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
(Continued)
Title Page
Figure 1-21 Upper stem and inflorescence of oblong bulrush 1-50
Figure 1-22 Inflorescence of downy wild-rye 1-51
Figure 1-23 Flowering stem of early blue cohosh 1-52
Figure 1-24 Upper stem and fruits of cluster sanicle 1-54
Figure 2-1 Dragonfly exuvia on reed canarygrass 2-5
Figure 2-2 Adult female arrow clubtail 2-43
Figure 2-3 Adult male zebra clubtail 2-44
Figure 2-4 Adult female riffle snaketail 2-45
Figure 3-1 Weight of dominant fish captured during 2000 biomass sampling 3-10
Figure 4-1 Typical floodplain vernal pool in mid-April and mid-June 4-4
Figure 4-2 An aquatic funnel trap being removed from pool 4-5
Figure 4-3 Wood frog tadpoles 4-5
Figure 4-4 Drift fencing and pit traps encircling a vernal pool 4-6
Figure 4-5 Common garter snake 4-8
Figure 4-6 Female painted turtle laying eggs 4-9
Figure 4-7 Adult wood turtle 4-10
Figure 4-8 Adult wood frogs captured in pit traps 4-16
Figure 4-9 Wood frogs in amplexus 4-16
Figure 4-10 Wood frog egg masses 4-17
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
(Continued)
Title Page
Figure 4-11 Wood frog metamorph 4-17
Figure 4-12 Spring peeper 4-18
Figure 4-13 Male American toad vocalizing during breeding season 4-19
Figure 4-14 Northern leopard frog 4-20
Figure 4-15 Pickerel frog 4-21
Figure 4-16 Male green frog 4-22
Figure 4-17 Green frog egg mass 4-22
Figure 4-18 Red-spotted newt adult 4-24
Figure 4-19 Red eft 4-24
Figure 4-20 Spotted (upper two) and Jefferson salamanders 4-25
Figure 4-21 Spotted salamander egg masses 4-26
Figure 4-22 Spotted salamander without its usual markings 4-27
Figure 4-23 Jefferson salamander egg mass 4-28
Figure 4-24 Northern four-toed salamander captured in PSA 4-30
Figure 5-1 Clover-leaf walk-in type trap 5-3
Figure 5-2 Wading bird survey in PSA 5-4
Figure 5-3 Virgina rail 5-18
Figure 6-1 Small mammal uterus 6-6
Figure 6-2 White-footed mice fetuses 6-6
ix
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
(Continued)
Title Page
Figure 6-3 River otter forefoot track 6-10
Figure 6-4 River otter tracks 6-10
Figure 6-5 River otter scat 6-11
Figure 6-6 Mink tracks 6-13
Figure 6-7 Mustelid scat 6-13
Figure 6-8 Bobcat tracks 6-16
Figure 6-9 Black bear 6-18
Figure 6-10 Eastern gray squirrel 6-30
Figure 6-11 Porcupine 6-31
Figure 6-12 Beaver lodge 6-33
x
-------
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Title
Attachment A Natural Community Profiles
Attachment B Animal Profiles
Attachment C Species:Habitat Matrix
Attachment D Amendment to Supplemental Investigation Work Plan
Attachment E Natural Community Data Forms
Attachment F List of Plant Names
Attachment G Rare Plant Forms
Attachment H Rare Animal Forms
Attachment I Photographs
Attachment J Maps
-------
SECTION I INTRODUCTION
SECTION 1-0
-------
1.0 Introduction
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and Army Corps of
Engineers (ACOE) are characterizing the natural resources and contaminants found in
and adjacent to the Housatonic River in portions of Pittsfield, Lenox, and Lee,
Massachusetts. The river section being investigated for this report is approximately 12
miles (19 km) long and extends from Fred Garner Park in Pittsfield downstream to
Woods Pond Dam in Lee (Map 1-1). This area, with the associated floodplains, is
referred to as the primary study area (PSA) in this report. The PSA includes riverine
habitat, adjacent floodplain wetlands, and uplands associated with the main stem of the
river. Elevated levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which originated from the
General Electric facility in Pittsfield, have been found in this area (Blasland, Bouck &
Lee, Inc. 1996).
This report contains a characterization of the ecosystems found in the PSA, including
descriptions of methods used to perform the characterization and results of the survey
efforts.
1.1 Purpose of Report
The objective of this study was to characterize the ecosystems occurring within the PSA,
including both plant and animal communities. Information in this report is intended to
complement and update material found in a preliminary characterization of the PSA
(TechLaw, Inc. 1999). The wetlands in the PSA were also characterized using a
functions and values assessment (FVA) prior to the studies reported in 1999 (TechLaw,
Inc. 1998). These and other related investigations are reviewed in Section 3.0,
Relationship to Previous and Ongoing Studies, below.
The ecological characterization was one of a series of biological investigations designed
to support baseline human health and ecological risk assessments and modeling efforts
(Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). These biological investigations included:
• Investigations to support fate and transport modeling
SECTION I-1
-------
• Investigations to support ecological characterization
• Investigations to support ecological risk assessment
The ecological characterization investigations were defined in a series of eight work
plans that included study objectives, methods, and quality assurance/quality control
protocols (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). The eight study plans addressed:
• Rare Plants and Natural Communities
• Dragonflies
• Freshwater Mussels
• Reptiles and Amphibians
• Raptors and Waterfowl
• Forest Birds and Marsh and Wading Birds
• Small Mammals
• River Otter, Mink, and Bats
The purpose of this document is to report on the results of these investigations within the
context of an overall ecological characterization.
2.0 Report Organization
The report is organized into three sections:
• Section I Introduction
• Section II Study Area Description
• Section HI Ecological Characterization
Section I introduces the purpose of the report, describes the report organization, and
explains the relationship between the ecological characterization and previous and
ongoing studies of a similar nature. A broad description of the PSA is provided in
SECTION 1-2
-------
Section II and includes discussions of land use patterns, the biophysical setting of the
PSA, and descriptions of four reference areas used for previous and ongoing
investigations.
The bulk of the report is contained in Section in, the Ecological Characterization. This
section is further divided into six chapters describing:
• Chapter 1 Natural Communities and Rare Plants
• Chapter 2 Macroinvertebrates
• Chapter 3 Fish
• Chapter 4 Reptiles and Amphibians
• Chapter 5 Birds
• Chapter 6 Mammals
Each chapter is intended to stand alone as a reference to users working on other aspects
of the Housatonic River investigation. For this reason, each chapter includes an
introduction to the taxonomic group, a description of the methods used to characterize the
resource, a characterization of the specific plant or animal community, and a listing of
any rare, threatened, or endangered species that were found in the PSA.
The report includes several attachments that provide important background or species-
and community-specific information, such as profiles of natural communities found in the
PSA and selected communities from the reference areas, profiles of animal species that
are the focus of related Risk Assessment work, and a species:habitat matrix of vertebrate
wildlife species expected to occur in the PSA. Other attachments include field data forms
for some of the investigations conducted from 1998 to 2000.
The electronic version of this document is formatted for convenient use in a digital
environment, enabling the reader to use Adobe Acrobat Reader software to view the files
and attachments. The main document includes links between the various sections and
chapters of the report as well as between the body of the report and relevant attachments.
SECTION 1-3
-------
In reviewing natural communities in the PSA (Section IE, Chapter 1, Natural
Communities and Rare Plants), for example, users can link to the natural community
profiles and the species-habitat matrix. Navigation through the document is achieved by
clicking on various text and photo links, or by using navigation arrows in Acrobat
Reader.
Specific data quality objectives and quality assurance/quality control protocols were
provided in the eight separate study plans that comprised the technical directive for the
ecological characterization effort. An amendment to Section 5, Field Investigation Tasks,
of the Supplemental Investigation Work Plan is provided in Attachment D.
3.0 Relationship to Previous and Ongoing Studies
The ecological characterization reported in this document follows several previous
ecological investigations and is a compilation of data collected during approximately
three and a half years of study. It is also related to an ongoing study of amphibian
reproduction in vernal pools of the PSA by the same investigators (Woodlot Alternatives,
Inc. in prep). Staff members involved with the ecological characterization have also
served in support roles for investigators conducting the risk assessments. For these
reasons, and for the sake of clarity, the relationship of the ecological characterization to
previous and ongoing studies is explained below.
3.1 Previous Ecological Investigations
3.1.1 Preliminary Wetland Characterization and FVA
A preliminary characterization of the wetlands in the PSA was developed using
information from available maps and aerial photographs as well as several site visits in
early 1998 (TechLaw, Inc. 1998). A four-phase approach was used to estimate wetland
boundaries. The first phase consisted of collecting and reviewing existing information on
wetlands in the PSA. The second phase involved reviewing stereo-pairs of color infra-
red aerial photographs to identify areas with a wetland signature, which were used for the
third phase of work, field verification. The purpose of the field verification task was to
confirm and adjust the photo-interpretation, as needed, and to characterize representative
SECTION 1-4
-------
wetland community types. Wetland communities were primarily classified according to
the system of Cowardin et al. (1979). Once the field verification was completed, the final
task of creating a digital map commenced. Wetland-upland boundaries and wetland
community boundaries (e.g., the boundary between forest and shrubland communities)
were digitized as distinct layers on a digital base map provided by the USEPA.
The wetland maps produced as a result of the 1998 surveys were used as base maps for
the ecological characterization studies reported in this document.
3.1.2 Preliminary Ecological Characterization
Following the wetland mapping and functions and values assesssment, an initial
characterization of the ecological communities occurring within the PSA was conducted.
This work was divided into six complementary studies based on species groups or
communities for which initial baseline information was needed. They included reptiles
and amphibians; mammals; birds; freshwater mussels; rare plants and natural
communities; and rare animals.
A literature review was first conducted to identify the potential wildlife communities and
the species present in each habitat type in the vicinity of the PSA. A list of potential
species was created based on known habitat requirements of each species and available
habitats in or near the PSA. Field surveys were then conducted to verify the occurrence
of individual wildlife species, species groups, or required habitats. The methods used
were reconnaissance-level, habitat-based assessment surveys.
These methods allowed for the development of general statements on the relative
abundance of certain species and the habitats they used in the PSA. Additional, more
detailed survey techniques were used to document species use of the PSA using
established field methodologies. More specific habitat information was also collected
and mapped wetland habitats, as well as uplands adjacent to the river, were more
accurately classified using natural community classification systems available at the time
(Weatherbee and Crow 1992).
SECTION 1-5
-------
The current studies were designed to complement and update the information reported in
the preliminary ecological characterization.
3.2 Risk Assessment Support
Investigators involved with conducting the ecological characterization reported in this
document also participated in several studies designed to support the risk assessment. In
some cases, data collected to support the risk assessment were also used to complete the
ecological characterization. The general nature of these investigations and the data that
were used in the ecological characterization are briefly discussed below.
3.2.1 Amphibian Reproductive Study
A study of amphibian reproductive success within vernal pools in the PSA began with
field studies in 1999. Field methodologies for the study are described in the
Supplemental Investigation Work Plan (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000).
Documenting amphibian reproductive success within vernal pools was conducted
because these animals may be influenced by PCBs in contaminated sediments. They may
also bioaccumulate PCBs, which can then be passed on to other animals in the food
chain. In addition, several herps that could occur in the PSA are of conservation concern
and are listed as State-Endangered, Threatened, Special Concern, or Watch List Species
(MNHESP 1997). These include the Jefferson salamander, spotted salamander, marbled
salamander, spring salamander, and four-toed salamander.
Field work for the amphibian reproductive study was completed in 1999. This study
documented two species of conservation concern (Jefferson salamander and four-toed
salamander) in the PSA (Woodlot Alternatives, Inc. in prep) and was used, in part, to
update amphibian and vernal pool community characterization data originally presented
in the Final Preliminary Ecological Characterization report (TechLaw, Inc. 1999).
3.2.2 Wood Frog and Leopard Frog Collections
The Stover Group investigated the potential impact of PCB exposure on larval frog
development, with a focus on leopard frogs and wood frogs. Ecological characterization
SECTION 1-6
-------
investigators have participated in these studies by collecting adult frogs and egg masses
from the PSA in 1999 and 2000. These collections were also useful in documenting
courtship, breeding, and egg laying dates for frogs in the PSA.
3.2.3 Aquatic Macrophyte Sampling
Sampling and analysis of macrophytes, periphyton, plankton/detritus, and filamentous
algae, which make up the base of the food chain in aquatic systems, were conducted to
provide information for the fate and transport model (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000).
Ecological characterization investigators assisted with the collection of samples for these
investigations. Characterizing the species composition and spatial distribution of the
aquatic macrophyte community was of particular use in characterizing the aquatic
habitats in the PSA.
3.2.4 Fish Tissue and Biomass Sampling
Fish have been collected to determine the PCB and other organic contaminant
concentrations in tissues for use in both human health and ecological risk assessments, to
evaluate congener patterns by species for use in fish and mink reproduction studies, and
in the PCB fate and effects model. Fish have also been collected to estimate biomass for
use in the fate and transport model (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). These efforts provided
information on species composition of the fish community in the various river reaches
being modeled. They also provided size class distribution and length and weight data for
use in the ecological characterization.
3.2.5 Waterfowl Collection and Tissue Sampling
Waterfowl, including mallards and wood ducks, have been observed using Woods Pond
and upstream floodplain wetlands for breeding, brood rearing, and feeding, and
waterfowl hunting is a common activity in this portion of the PSA. For these reasons,
these areas were chosen as collection sites to evaluate the potential for risk, to the
waterfowl directly and to humans consuming waterfowl, due to PCB accumulation in the
tissue. Wood ducks and mallards were collected from both the PSA, and a reference area
located at Threemile Pond State Wildlife Management Area (SWMA) in Sheffield,
SECTION 1-7
-------
Massachusetts. These investigations provided information on waterfowl habitat use for
brood rearing and feeding that was used in the ecological characterizations.
3.2.6 Soil Invertebrate Sampling
The primary objective of this study was to collect representative samples of soil-dwelling
invertebrates for the analysis of PCBs, dioxins/furans, and organochlorine pesticide
concentrations in tissue. Results were intended to be used in the ecological risk
assessment to model exposure through the food chain of higher trophic level consumers.
In addition, results of tissue analysis and co-located soil samples were intended to be
used to determine the relationship between earthworm tissue concentrations and
corresponding soil concentrations (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000).
Soil invertebrates were divided into two groups based on their availability to receptors
and their degree of exposure to contaminated soils: (1) invertebrates living in the soil,
represented by earthworms; and (2) invertebrates living primarily on the soil surface in
the leaf litter, as represented by snails, slugs, beetles, and other arthropods (i.e., litter
invertebrates). The information collected from this study was used to characterize the
soil macroinvertebrate community within portions of the PSA.
SECTION 1-8
-------
4.0 Literature Cited
Blasland, Bouck & Lee, Inc. 1996. Supplemental Phase n/RCRA Facility Investigation
Report for the Housatonic River and Silver Lake, Vol. 1 or 2. Report prepared for
General Electric Company, Pittsfield, MA, USA.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands
and Deep Water Habitats of the United States. U.S. Government Printing Office.
Hunter, M.L., J. Albright, and J. Arbuckle. 1992. The Amphibians and Reptiles of Maine.
Maine Agricultural Experiment Station, Orono, ME, USA.
MNHESP (Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program). 1997.
Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas. 1997-98 ed. Massachusetts Division of
Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000. Supplemental Investigation Work Plan for the Lower
Housatonic River, General Electric (GE) Housatonic River Project, Pittsfield
Massachusetts. Volumes 1 and 2. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
North Atlantic Division, New England District, Concord, MA, USA.
Soil Conservation Service. 1984. Soil Survey of Berkshire County, Massachusetts. U.S.
Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service.
Swain, P.C., and J.B. Kearsley. 2000. Classification of the Natural Communities of
Massachusetts. Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program,
Westborough, MA, USA.
TechLaw, Inc. 1998. Preliminary Report: Wetland Characterization and Function-Value
Assessment, Housatonic River from Newell Street to Woods Pond. TechLaw, Inc.,
Boston, MA, USA.
1999. General Electric n, Pittsfield, Massachusetts: Final Preliminary Ecological
Characterization, Newell Street to Woods Pond. Vol. 1 and 2. Prepared for USEPA,
Region 1. TechLaw, Inc., Boston, MA, USA.
SECTION 1-9
-------
Weatherbee, P.B., and G.E. Crow. 1992. Natural plant communities of Berkshire County,
Massachusetts. Rhodora 94:171-209.
Woodlot Alternatives Inc. in prep. Amphibian Reproductive Success with Vernal Pools
Associated with the Housatonic River from Newell Street to Woods Pond. Report
prepared for Roy F. Weston, Inc.
SECTION I-10
-------
SECTION II STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
SECTION n-o
-------
1.0 Introduction
In this section, land use patterns and population trends, climate, geology, and soils are
described as they relate to the overall ecological characterization. Information on
hydrology and plant communities is also presented for both the PSA and reference areas.
2.0 Land Use Patterns and Population Trends
2.1 Historical Land Use Patterns and Population Trends
Native American peoples were present in Berkshire County prior to European settlement.
Two small groups of Mahican Native Americans were known to subsist along the
Housatonic River in the early 1700s and as recently as 1735 (Weatherbee 1996). They
primarily used the alluvial plain for hunting and agriculture. Because cutting of trees was
primarily done for heating purposes, and crops (such as corn, beans, and squash) were
often planted in abandoned beaver impoundments, it is believed that the impact of the
Native Americans on the natural communities was minimal (Weatherbee 1996). The
Native American population at this time had been reduced by European diseases, most
notably smallpox. All the resident Native Americans of the Great Barrington area were
moved in 1736 to a mission established in Stockbridge (Southern Berkshire Chamber of
Commerce 2001). It was near and shortly after that time that several local towns (e.g.,
Pittsfield, Great Barrington, Sheffield) became incorporated and European settlers began
to exert significant influences on the landscape (see Section 2.1).
Settlement of the Central Valley1 of Berkshire County progressed in the late 1700s and
early 1800s. Both the forest products industry and summer vacationing brought people to
the Central Valley towns in the 1800s (Southern Berkshire Chamber of Commerce 2001,
Weatherbee 1996). Great Barrington was reported to have grown from a rural
community of 961 people in 1776 to become a manufacturing center of 2,264 people in
1830 (Southern Berkshire Chamber of Commerce 2001). Paper mills, blast furnaces,
wool factories, and grist mills were important industries in the mid to late 1800s, all of
1 The geographic region of Berkshire County in which the PSA is located.
SECTION n-1
-------
which relied on timber or river resources for material stock and power. The influx of
summer people into Berkshire County, primarily after the Civil War, led to swelling
seasonal populations and home construction to accommodate the temporary residents.
European settlement brought rapid land clearing to Berkshire County (Dwight 1822,
Brooks 1953). In some parts of the County, as much as 77 percent of the forests had been
cleared for agriculture by 1800 (Brooks 1953), and wood shortages were reported from
the region (Federal Writer's Project 1938). Sargent (1884) reported one-third to one-half
of Berkshire County was forested. Most of the broad-leaved and eastern hemlock forests
had been replaced by second- or third-growth eastern white pine stands. At that time,
only the spruce forests of the high hillsides and ridgelines were still intact. In addition to
clearing land for crop space, local industries began to affect the surrounding forests in the
19th century. Sawmills, tanneries, railroads and their engines, iron furnaces, and lime
kilns all required trees for everyday operation (Weatherbee 1996). In 1867, the first
paper mill in the area was established in Lee. Local timber supplies were eventually
exhausted and raw materials were transported from increasingly more distant sources
(Federal Writer's Project 1938).
By the end of the 19th century, two factors caused a reduction in the use of the forest
products in the area. The first factor was the development of Midwestern farms and the
creation of the Erie Canal, which allowed farm products to be transported to the east.
The second factor was the exhaustion of marketable timber from the surrounding forests
(Fisher 1933). Farm abandonment and reforestation, in the form of both natural and
planted trees, began to shape the landscape of Berkshire County in the early part of the
20th century.
Berkshire County population grew steadily over the first half of the 1900s. From 1900 to
1960, it experienced a 48 percent increase in population, starting from 95,667 and ending
with 142,135 people over that time period (United States Census Bureau 2001a).
Neighboring counties in western Massachusetts, while also experiencing overall growth,
did so at differing rates compared to Berkshire County over the same time period (e.g.,
Franklin County grew at 33 percent, Hampden County grew at 144 percent) (United
States Census Bureau 2001a).
SECTION H-2
-------
As a result of this historical population growth and development in the region,
considerable disturbances and modifications to the Housatonic River in the vicinity of the
study area have occurred. These modifications take the form of river channelization and
impoundment.
Channelization has taken place largely within the limits of urban Pittsfield. Much of the
river, from above Newell Street to Holmes Road, has been highly modified by
realignments and the introduction of artificial banks and substrates such as rip-rap of
large boulders, concrete, and even asphalt.
Impoundment has occurred upstream of the PSA in association with paper making
facilities, and the downstream limit of the PSA is a storage dam. Impoundment of
riverine systems changes shoreline configuration, traps fine sediments above dams, and
scours riverbeds below dams. In addition, impoundment typically changes the natural
flow regimes of a river system.
Municipal, agricultural, and industrial uses of the river and its riparian systems have also
occurred. Industrial and municipal discharges to the Housatonic River contribute
significantly to the flow quantities of the river. Approximately 1.3 cubic meters per
second (cms) is added to the flow of the river from several industrial facilities and seven
municipal facilities in Massachusetts, including the Pittsfield Wastewater Treatment
Facility (WWTF), which discharges into the river within the study area (Blasland, Bouck,
& Lee, Inc. 1996a; Harrington Engineering and Construction, Inc. 1996). Clearing of
riparian areas for development purposes has occurred throughout the study area as well.
This includes urban development in the upper 3.1 miles (5 km) of the PSA. Agricultural
fields, including corn and hay fields, are a predominant land use within the PSA, and
have affected the size of the natural riparian habitats in the middle section of the PSA and
downstream sections near New Lenox Road.
From 1937 to 1977, GE used PCBs as insulating liquids for certain transformer
applications (Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1991). These materials came to be
located in the sediments of the Housatonic River and associated floodplain by direct
discharge from the facility, discharge from Silver Lake, erosion and runoff of
SECTION n-3
-------
contaminated soil, discharge of contaminated groundwater, and inadvertent discharge due
to spills and other events (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 1998a). Elevated levels of PCBs (1 ppm)
appear to be largely confined to the ten-year-flood zone (Blasland and Bouck Engineers,
P.C. 1991, 1992, 1993; Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc. 1994a). During the channelization
of the Housatonic River, a number of oxbows were filled (MADEP 1995). Some of the
fill material was contaminated by PCBs (Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc. 1996b). The total
extent of PCBs in the sediments has been under investigation.
2.2 Current Land Use Patterns and Population Trends
In contrast to the earlier portion of the century, Berkshire County has experienced
population decline since 1970. From the period of 1970 to 1990, the county has lost
2,783 residents amounting to a population decline of one percent (United States Census
Bureau 2001a). More recently, Berkshire County was reported to have a population of
132,218 people in 1999. This represents a 5.1 percent decline in population since 1990
(United States Census Bureau 2001b). Farm abandonment, industrial factory closure and
downsizing, and general migration to other population centers are reasons that may have
contributed to the observed population decline.
Land use patterns have changed during this recent period as well. Most of the PSA is
contained in the Housatonic River Valley State Wildlife Management Area. This
management area extends over 5.6 miles (9 km) from the confluence of the East and
West Branches of the Housatonic River to Woods Pond. This area is primarily used by
outdoor recreation enthusiasts; hunting, fishing, and paddling are primary activities
observed in the wildlife management area. Horseback riding, running, and birding also
take place. A smaller wildlife sanctuary is located at Canoe Meadows, a Massachusetts
Audubon property below Holmes Road.
Much of the upper two-thirds of the PSA appears to have been cleared for agriculture at
one time. Active cropland, however, is relatively uncommon and generally restricted to a
few locations upstream of the Pittsfield WWTF outfall, where corn, squash, and pumpkin
are grown. Fallow fields are found more often, with the majority of this land located
south of New Lenox Road.
SECTION n-4
-------
The current use of the Housatonic River in Pittsfield, Lenox, and Lee is primarily as a
natural area. Though several bridges, a railroad, former agricultural fields, buried sewer
lines, and abutting residences influence the character of the riparian communities, most of
the PSA is managed as a wildlife area and is largely free of development and forest
clearing activities. Non-native flora, altered local hydrology, and open rights-of-way and
fields are some of the more observable ecosystem impacts that human habitation and
transportation system development have had on the Housatonic River floodplain
communities.
The railroad line along the west edge of the lower PSA is a berm of crushed stone that is
elevated above the ten-year-flood line. The substrate is coarse (over 1 cm in diameter),
and therefore is well drained. This xeric habitat contains unique flora relative to other
portions of the PSA. Wild thyme, love grass, common mullein, and tower mustard are
species capable of growing on the xeric, crushed stone substrate. These weedy,
colonizing species do not invade the neighboring communities because the soil moisture
regimes are very different between the dry, railroad berm and the hydric, wetland soils.
The significant impacts of the railroad include bisection of rare natural communities and
altered hydrology. The cleared railroad line has been placed through and adjacent to a
black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage swamp, a community of state
conservation concern. Furthermore, ditching for the railroad has created linear, ponded
areas in regions that were formally closed canopy forest with pit-and-mound topography.
3.0 Biophysical Setting
The study area is located in central Berkshire County, Massachusetts (Map 1-1).
Berkshire County is on the western edge of the state and is bordered by Connecticut
(south), New York (west), and Vermont (north). This part of Massachusetts contains the
most topographical relief, as well as the highest point in the state (Mount Greylock - 1064
meters). Though sometimes referred to by different names, Berkshire County is usually
divided into three geographic sections: (1) the Berkshire Plateau; (2) the Taconic Range;
and (3) the Central Valley region (New England River Basins Commission 1980, Veit
and Petersen 1993, Weatherbee 1996). The Berkshire Plateau, a southern extension of
SECTION H-5
-------
Vermont's Green Mountains, forms a ridge that runs along the eastern edge of the county.
The Taconic Range, extending from Vermont to New York, forms the western edge of
the county. The Central Valley region lies between these two mountain ranges, and is
where the PSA is located.
3.1 Climate
Berkshire County is considered to have a continental climate, similar to the rest of
interior New England, characterized by cold winters and hot summers (Soil Conservation
Service 1988). Average annual temperature, average daily July temperature, and average
daily January temperature for Lanesboro (immediately north of Pittsfield) have been 6,
19, and -8 degrees Celsius, respectively, for the time period between 1981 tol987. The
number of frost-free days (i.e., the growing season) ranges from 103 - 144 days.
Growing season for native vegetation begins in March (e.g., willows, evergreen trees,
skunk cabbage) and ends in October with the last frost-tolerant herbs (e.g., asters,
gentians) (Weatherbee 1996). Moisture supply usually exceeds evaporation, except
during periods of drought. Average total rainfall is 109 cm and is evenly distributed
throughout the year (i.e., 55 percent of the annual precipitation occurs between April and
September). Average total snowfall is 181 cm (Weatherbee 1996).
3.2 Geology
The geologic features of the Berkshire County region and the PSA have been
summarized in previous engineering and characterization reports (e.g., Blasland, Bouck
& Lee 1994b; Roy F. Weston, Inc. 1998b; TechLaw, Inc. 1999; Roy F. Weston, Inc.
2000). This section provides an overview of those aspects relevant to the ecological
characterization, as derived from a review of engineering reports and pertinent scientific
literature.
3.2.1 Regional Geological Setting
The Housatonic River lies within the New England Physiographic Province, more
specifically within the Taconic geologic region of western Massachusetts. The river
occupies a broad, sediment-filled valley (i.e., the Central Valley) that separates two major
SECTION H-6
-------
geologic: the Taconic Hills to the west, and the Berkshire Plateau (also referred to as the
New England Uplands) to the east. The geomorphology of the region is typified by
rounded hills and mountains draped with glacial deposits, and relatively narrow, steep-
sided valleys cut into the hills by streams and rivers. Due to extensive continental
glaciation and the thick deposits of glacial materials left behind, bedrock formations are
generally exposed only in the hills and mountains.
3.2.2 Bedrock Geology
The Taconic region has been subjected to a series of depositional and tectonic events over
the past 600 million years, related to repeated openings and closings of the Iapetus ocean
basin (precursor to the Atlantic) and resultant continental collisions. From the late
Cambrian to the early Ordovician period (from about 450 - 500 million years ago) the
Pittsfield region was on the edge of a stable, warm-water continental shelf, located near
the equator. Shallow water marine sediments, dominated by carbonates such as
magnesium-rich dolomite and calcium-rich limestone (mapped as the Stockbridge
formation), and quartz-rich sands (the Cheshire formation), were deposited in the
Pittsfield area at this time, while deeper-water deposits such as mud and silt were
deposited in an ocean basin that lay further to the east.
In the late Ordovician period (about 410 - 440 million years ago) the closing of the
Iapetus ocean basin represented the onset of the Taconic Orogeny (mountain building
activity), a tectonic event that compressed and buried the offshore deep-water sediment
pile, metamorphosing the mud and silt into a series of slates and pelitic schists mapped as
the Nassau, Everett, and Woolumsac Formations and the Greylock Schist (Zen 1983).
Continued compression eventually pushed these basin deposits up and over the shelf
carbonate rocks, forming a series of stacked, fault-bounded thrust sheets that today form
the Taconic Hills west of the Housatonic River. As the ocean basin closed completely, a
series of older, highly metamorphosed schists and gneisses (representing either the
leading edge of the colliding continent or more deeply buried sediments on the western
side of the basin) was also pushed upward and westward to form the Berkshire Plateau,
which lies east of the study area.
SECTION H-7
-------
During the Devonian period (350 - 400 million years ago) another tectonic event (the
Acadian Orogeny) further compressed and heated the rocks in the region, producing an
overprinted series of geologic faults, folds, and fractures and completing the
transformation of Stockbridge Formation dolomite and limestone into the marble that
underlies the Housatonic valley today. Subsequent dissolution of this marble along
fractures and joints has established a network of interconnected fractures and openings,
producing a significant groundwater aquifer in the region (Olcott 1995). These marble
formations are also important not only because they are the largest economic marble
deposits in the State of Massachusetts, but because their character significantly impacts
the hydrology, groundwater chemistry, soil composition, and resultant natural
communities in the study area.
3.2.3 Glacial Geology
The most recent chapter in the area's geologic history involved extensive glaciation and
Quaternary sediment deposition over the past 14,000 years. As in most of New England,
continental glaciers advanced and retreated over the study area several times during the
last 100,000 years, scouring bedrock and leaving behind discontinuous deposits of sand,
silt, clay, and a series of poorly sorted gravels generally referred to as glacial till.
Following the last glacial retreat in Wisconsinan time (10,000 - 14,000 years ago) glacial
till and sands filled the Housatonic valley locally to depths of 30 m or more.
Within the study area, till is reported to overlie marble bedrock directly under the
Housatonic River, with till thickness ranging from 0.6 m to more than 15 m (Blasland,
Bouck & Lee 1994b; Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). Cobbles of reworked marble within
glacial tills suggest that the Stockbridge formation marble was exposed and scoured by
the glaciers, contributing significant amounts of carbonate material to the sediments.
Subsequent erosion and reworking of these deposits by streams has produced a complex
set of surficial deposits that serve as aquifers and exert control over the hydrologic
features of the region.
3.2.4 Soils
SECTION n-8
-------
Six major soil associations are present in the Housatonic River basin (New England River
Basins Commission 1980). Three of the associations, Paxton-Woodbridge, Charlton-
Hollis, and Lyman-Peru-Marlow-Berkshire, are derived from glacial till and schist.
These soils are characterized by shallow depth to bedrock, hardpan, stoniness, or steep
slope. Two of the soil associations are derived from limestone and schist. These are
called Copake-Groton, found in the Central Valley region, and Stockbridge-Farmington-
Amenia-Pittsfield, located in the Taconic Range. They are characterized by deep, well-
drained soils. The final soil association is called the Hinckley-Merrimac. This
association is located along the valley edges on glacial outwash terraces. It is
characterized by deep, sandy, well-drained, acidic soils.
The most common soils in the PSA are sandy loams, silt loams, and organic-rich mucks.
At least 17 soil series are represented within the project boundary. Within the PSA, the
soils are comparable to the Copake-Groton soil association, which are typically deep,
well-drained loamy soils derived from glacial outwash. Housatonic River floodplain
soils are derived directly from bedrock (marble or schist), from glacial outwash, or from
calcareous glacial till (United States Department of Agriculture 1988). Overwash of silt
and fine sand into the floodplain is apparent in much of the low floodplain. Heavier soil
particles, such as medium to coarse sands, remain within the channel and are the
dominant soils of the riverbanks and bars (Bent 1996).
The regional juxtaposition of more acidic source material (e.g., schists) with more neutral
carbonate-rich bedrock (e.g., marble) has created a diverse series of soils that contribute
to the richness of the natural communities. Though this contributes to diversity and
species richness, it likely does not contribute to rare plants as all known rare plant
occurences (except one) occur on calcareous bedrock regions.
PCBs have come to be located in the sediments of the Housatonic River and adjacent
riparian areas. It is estimated that the amount of sediment containing PCB concentrations
greater than 1 part per million (ppm) between the GE facility and Woods Pond is 600,636
cubic meters (Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc. 1996a). For the same section of river, the
estimated volume of sediments containing PCB concentrations higher than 10 ppm and
50 ppm is 374,919 m3 and 198,171 m3, respectively (Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc.
SECTION H-9
-------
1996a). Use of cesium-137 for geochronological dating indicates that peak PCB levels
and transport occurred in the early 1960s (Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc. 1996a).
3.3 Hydrology
3.3.1 Groundwater
The calcareous bedrock in the Housatonic Valley is the principal aquifer for the region,
and its composition also influences the ground water quality. Ground water from this
aquifer generally contains high concentrations of calcium and magnesium compared to
water in other rock types, resulting in moderately hard to very hard water (i.e., a neutral
pH and relatively high concentration of dissolved solids) (Olcott 1995). Ground water
moving through the aquifer may also come in contact with calcareous glacial tills, which
can maintain or increase the pH and mineral content of the water.
Regional groundwater in the Housatonic basin originates in upland areas, which consist
dominantly of schist, quartzite and marble bedrock locally overlain by thin glacial
deposits. Groundwater recharge presumably includes precipitation percolating through
the glacial overburden or directly into the carbonate aquifer, and ground water movement
is assumed to follow the carbonate bedrock surface down gradient toward the Housatonic
River. Ground water entering the study area thus retains its neutral pH and high nutrient
content, enhancing the rich soil conditions present along the river and floodplain areas.
3.3.2 Surface Waters
The water resources for the PSA include lacustrine, riverine, and palustrine wetlands.
Woods Pond is an impoundment section of the Housatonic River and functions as a
lacustrine community.
Berkshire County possesses seven major river systems that drain into three watersheds.
The Hoosic River, along with Bash Bish and Kinderhook Brooks, drain into the Hudson
River. The Deerfield and Westfield Rivers empty into the Connecticut River. The
Housatonic River, which eventually collects waters from the Farmington River, flows
into Long Island Sound. Approximately 197 lakes are located in Berkshire County
SECTION n-10
-------
(McCann and Daly undated). Forty-five percent of these are artificial ponds and
reservoirs. A number of the remaining water bodies have been altered or enlarged in
some fashion, usually for recreation or water-power purposes.
Because of the varied topography of Berkshire County, there are an abundance of ponds,
peatlands, and marshes. An estimated three percent of the county is considered to be
occupied by palustrine communities (i.e., wetlands not associated with rivers, lakes, or
tidal waterbodies) (Technical Planning Associates 1959). The Housatonic River basin is
noted to contain the majority of wetlands in the county.
The PSA includes the Housatonic River, the Woods Pond impoundment, and the
downstream portions of Yokum Brook and Willow Creek. Several small brooks, which
drain from the west side of October Mountain, enter the Housatonic River south of New
Lenox Road. Because of the topographical relief, however, only short sections of these
brooks, primarily near their confluence with the Housatonic River, occur within the ten-
year-flood zone of the PSA. South of New Lenox Road, the PSA is primarily bounded
on the west by the Springfield Terminal railroad line (except where the ten-year-
floodplain extends further west at Yokum Brook and Willow Creek) and on the east by
October Mountain.
The Housatonic River is the major water feature in the PSA. It is formed by the
confluence of the East Branch and West Branch Housatonic River in Pittsfield. The East
Branch begins in Dalton and Hinsdale from headwater tributaries. The West Branch
starts at Onota and Pontoosuc Lakes in Pittsfield and Lanesborro and is augmented by
flows from the Southwest Branch. The Housatonic River ranges in elevation in the PSA
from 295 m above mean sea level (msl) near the confluence of the East and West Branch
to 292 m above msl at the Woods Pond impoundment. This equates to approximately 15
cm of drop per kilometer of river. Most of this elevation loss occurs in the upstream half
of the PSA, particularly between the confluence and the outfall of the Pittsfield WWTF.
Average flow rates are 4.0 cubic meters per second (cms) in the upper portion
(confluence to New Lenox Road), and 6.3 cms in the downstream portion (New Lenox
Road to Woods Pond) (Canonie Environmental 1995). Based on measurements collected
from late May to late September 1993, temperature in the Housatonic River ranged from
SECTION n-11
-------
11-32 degrees Celsius, dissolved oxygen ranged from 6.2 - 9.4 mg/L, and pH ranged
from 7.9 - 8.3.
Woods Pond is an approximately 24-ha impoundment created in 1890. Most of the pond
is less than 2 m deep, with the maximum depth at 4.8 m. In 1989, a new dam for Woods
Pond was constructed approximately 55 m downstream of the historic dam (Canonie
Environmental 1995). Based on measurements collected from late May to late
September 1993, temperature in Woods Pond ranged from 12 - 33 degrees Celsius and
dissolved oxygen ranged from 3.2 - 11.2 mg/L (Chadwick & Associates 1994).
Yokum Brook originates in Pleasant Valley, on the east side of Lenox Mountain, in
Lenox. Its east and west branches have numerous small ponds and wetland areas along
its course. Just before entering the Housatonic River, south of New Lenox Road and
west of the Springfield Terminal railroad line, Yokum Brook expands into a large
wetland system that is within the ten-year-flood zone of the PSA. This wetland system
includes low-gradient stream, deep emergent marsh, shrub swamp, and red maple swamp
communities.
Willow Creek is a small stream, approximately 4.2 km long, that originates between two
ridges just north of Lenox Village. While most of the stream is narrow and quick-
flowing, its final kilometer, before the confluence with the Housatonic River, slows and
broadens into an expansive wetland system of deep emergent marshes and shrub swamps.
The volume of the water resources in the PSA is affected by industrial and municipal
discharges that contribute significant flow quantities to the Housatonic River. Municipal
treatment plants located in Massachusetts add 0.6 cms of wastewater flow to the river,
while industrial plants contribute an additional 0.7 cms (Frink et al. 1982). The Pittsfield
WWTF, which discharges its effluent near the midpoint of the PSA, contributes an
average flow of 0.5 cms to the Housatonic River (Harrington Engineering and
Construction, Inc. 1996). These discharges represent approximately 20, 24, and 17
percent of the local flow of the river, respectively.
SECTION H-12
-------
3.4 Natural Communities
Eighteen natural communities occur within the PSA: one is a lacustrine community; ten
are palustrine communities primarily associated with the Housatonic River floodplain and
shoreline; three are riverine communities either within the channel itself or draining into
it; and four are upland communities included within the 10-year flood zone. Full
descriptions of the natural communities are provided in Attachment A. Though organic
soils do occur in the PSA (primarily as shallow surface layers), all the palustrine
communities are considered to be mineral soil systems (i.e., there are no peatlands in the
PSA).
Within the PSA, the structure of the palustrine communities are heavily influenced by
wetland hydrology and river flooding. Most of the existing landscape is forested, except
where disturbance (i.e., forest clearing) or permanent flooding (i.e., river channel and
backwater slough) prohibit tree growth. The forests can generally be categorized as one
of two types—those areas that receive groundwater discharge and those that do not.
Most of the PSA forests do not receive groundwater discharge and are largely classified
as transitional floodplain forests. These forests are within the riparian corridor of the
Housatonic River and are subject to inundation during spring flooding and other high
water events. Vernal pools are common throughout this community and are found in
most depressions. At a few locations, the floodplain forests are situated on elevated
berms and are referred to as high-terrace floodplain forests. This community does not
experience the same frequency of flooding as other floodplain communities, and has
floristic similarity to rich, hardwood slopes. In the lower portion of the PSA, the
floodplain forests give way to black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage
swamps. These forested communities are low-lying wetlands that are enriched by high-
pH groundwater discharge. These discharge areas can be recognized by the occurrence
of standing water in depressions and a calciphilic (i.e., calcium-loving) flora. Red maple
swamps, another type of forested wetland in the PSA, are primarily found in the
transition between the floodplain forests and calcareous seepage swamps.
Portions of the PSA have been cleared for various purposes, primarily agriculture,
residences, and various right of ways (e.g., roads, railroads, power lines). Agricultural
SECTION n-13
-------
disturbances are the major source of forest clearing within the riparian zone of the upper
Housatonic River. Several large wet meadows can be found in the PSA in which the
species composition is influenced by past farming practices. Shrub swamps are common
along pool and river channel borders, but they are especially frequent as an intermediate
successional stage in areas where pasture is reverting to forested floodplain. Some
transitional floodplain forest areas were farmed in the past century as evidenced by the
subcanopy species present (i.e., dotted hawthorn routinely colonizes regenerating pasture
land and survives in the subcanopy of floodplain forests for some time after the tree
stratum has returned to the site).
Significant portions of the PSA are open palustrine wetlands and riverine systems
dominated by submersed, floating-leaved, and emergent herbaceous vegetation. With the
exception of Woods Pont, most of the Housatonic River in Pittsfield, Lenox, and Lee is
classified as a low-gradient stream. This natural community is characterized by slow-
moving water, often with abundant submersed vegetation. Woods Pond and some of the
larger backwater areas to the immediate North are considered to be a moderately alkaline
lake/pond. This relatively shallow impoundment has a similar flora as the downstream
portions of the Housatonic River in the PSA. A short section of the upper PSA and
sections of the river downstream of the Woods Pond impoundment are considered
medium-gradient streams. High-gradient streams flow off the west slope of October
Mountain and enter the ten-year-flood zone as they cross the Woodland Road. This
riverine habitat is characterized as having moderately fast flowing water with some riffles
and runs, and sparse aquatic vegetation.
Riverine point bar and beaches occur occasionally along the Housatonic River, primarily
near bends in the channel. Mud flats of limited size begin to appear later in the season as
the water levels decline and expose previously flooded substrate. Deep emergent
marshes, which are usually inundated through the growing season and vegetated by
robust herbs, are frequent along the river channel and backwater edges. Shallow
emergent marshes, which are areas with saturated soil or shallow water and lower herbs,
are less frequent in the study area and most commonly observed within the more
permanent vernal pools.
SECTION H-14
-------
Very little terrestrial or upland habitat is found in the PSA. Red oak-sugar maple
transition forests are located in a few widely scattered locations. Cultural grasslands.
which are open, upland habitats periodically disturbed by mowing or grazing, do occur in
near New Lenox Road. A few upland inclusions of northern hardwoods-hemlock-white
pine forest also occur north of Yokum Brook. Most of the upland habitats occur adjacent
to the PSA as cultural grassland, northern hardwoods-hemlock-white pine forest, and
rich mesic forest.
4.0 Reference Areas
Four separate reference areas were utilized during the biological surveys. Reference
areas were chosen based on similarity to the PSA in natural communities, area, and land
use. Necessary features of the reference areas included emergent, shrub, and forested
wetland communities, considerable area occupied by or adjacent to forest land, and lack
of extensive residential use. Reference areas could contain some housing and agricultural
land, as these features were present in the PSA. The four reference areas included (1)
Hinsdale Flats SWMA; (2) October Mountain State Forest; (3) Ashley Lake; and (4)
Threemile Pond SWMA.
4.1 Hinsdale Flats State Wildlife Management Area
This reference area occurs in three parcels of property totaling 586 ha (1,454 acres)
primarily in the town of Hinsdale (Map II-1). It encompasses a large section of the upper
East Branch Housatonic River and borders the north end of Muddy Pond, the primary
surveyed feature. This moderately alkaline lake/pond community is found at 440 meters
elevation, higher than many other examples of this community in the Central Valley
region of Berkshire County (most fall between 221 and 391 m). Muddy Pond covers an
approximate area of 13 ha (32 acres) and is the headwater pond for the East Branch
Housatonic River. It is a shallow (mostly less than 3.0 m deep), soft-bottomed lake that
harbors rare plant species. On the northwest shore of the pond is a calcareous seepage
marsh, a rare community in Massachusetts that contains plants of state conservation
concern. This emergent, herbaceous-dominated community is supplied by high pH
groundwater discharge that supports calciphilic plants. A railroad line passes along the
SECTION n-15
-------
west shore of Muddy Pond and serves as the primary access way. Though the wildlife
management area contains uplands dominated by hardwood and mixed conifer-hardwood
stands, substantial portions of the area are wetlands. Shallow emergent marshes, shrub
swamps, and red maple swamps are dominant.
4.2 October Mountain State Forest
This state forest is the largest in Massachusetts, covering an area of about 6,451 ha
(15,940 acres). It is located primarily in the town of Washington and includes terrain
from 294 - 605 m (964 - 1,984 feet) in elevation (Map H-2). October Mountain State
Forest includes several lakes and reservoirs, including Washington Mountain Lake, the
primary surveyed feature. This reservoir is an acidic brownwater lake/pond community
reduced greatly in size from its past impoundment area of approximately 77 ha. The lake
basin is now largely filled with shrub swamp and emergent marsh habitat. Several beaver
flowages, averaging 1 - 3 ha in size, represent the only ponded conditions presently
available. The basin overlies acidic bedrock (gneiss and quartzite) and has darkly stained
water from the input of organic acids provided by adjoining peatlands. The state forest
contains a diversity of natural communities, including rich mesic forests, northern
hardwoods-hemlock-white pine forests, spruce-fir-northern hardwood forests, high-
gradient streams, cultural grasslands, woodland vernal pools, and deep emergent marshes
that border open water. It also contains a section of the Appalachian National Scenic
Trail. A number of rare and uncommon plant species were seen in mature stands of sugar
maple, white ash, and basswood (rich mesic forest community) (Attachment A).
Woodland vernal pools here were found to be used extensively by wood frogs for
breeding.
4.3 Ashley Lake
Ashley Lake is a 38 ha impoundment that serves as a water reservoir for the city of
Pittsfield. It is located in the town of Washington in a rural, forested area adjacent to
October Mountain State Forest (Map II-3). Ashley Lake is a clear softwater lake/pond
community, characterized by clear, acidic water. The lake overlies granite and quartzite
bedrock. Aquatic vegetation is generally sparse compared to other lakes in the Central
SECTION n-16
-------
Valley region. Though a deep emergent marsh is located adjacent to the lake in a cove on
the western shore, the majority of the shoreline is gravel or rock, or abruptly rises to the
neighboring uplands. Red oak-sugar maple transition forests dominated by American
beech and spruce-fir-northern hardwood forests surround the lake. The Ashley Lake
area is used by a large number of wildlife species, including larger mammals such as
mink, fish, river otter, coyote, and white-tail deer.
4.4 Threemile Pond State Wildlife Management Area
This wildlife management area contains 241 ha of land primarily in the town of Sheffield
(Map II-4). It includes upland and wetland habitats in two separate parcels. Most of the
shoreline of Threemile Pond, the primary survey feature, is contained in the management
area. This impounded, moderately-alkaline pond community lies at 275 m elevation and
covers an area of 32 ha. It is a shallow pond that contains dense colonies of submersed
and floating-leaved aquatic plants, including a high proportion of non-native and invasive
species. To the north of Threemile Pond is a large wetland complex containing deep
emergent marshes, shallow emergent marshes, shrub swamps, red maple swamps, and
wet meadows. The latter community is unusual in that is possess a number of rare or
uncommon calciphilic plants. Much of the uplands surrounding Threemile Pond are
hardwood and mixed conifer-hardwood forests, including mature sugar maple stands.
The pond is used extensively by waterfowl during open water periods and several species
of mustelids, including river otter, were documented during tracking surveys.
SECTION n-17
-------
5.0 Literature Cited
Bent, G.C. 1996. Suspended-Sediment Characteristics in the Housatonic River Basin,
Western Massachusetts and Parts of Eastern New York and Northwestern
Connecticut, 1994-1996. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resouces Investigation
Report 00-4059.
Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1991. MCP Interim Phase II Report/Current
Assessment Summary for Housatonic River. Syracuse, NY, USA.
1992. Addendum to MCP Interim Phase II Report/Current Assessment Summary for
Housatonic River. Syracuse, NY, USA.
1993. Report on January 1993 Housatonic River Floodplain Property Sampling and
Analysis. Syracuse, NY, USA.
Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc. 1994a. Housatonic River Floodplain Properties, Results of
Supplemental Site Characterization Sampling. Syracuse, NY, USA.
1994b. MCP Interim Phase II Report and Current Assessment Summary for East
Street Area 2/USEPA Area 4, Volume 1 of 12. Report prepared for General Electric
Company, Pittsfield, MA, USA.
1996a. Supplemental Phase n/RCRA Facility Investigation Report for the
Housatonic River and Silver Lake, Vol. 1 or 2. Report prepared for General Electric
Company, Pittsfield, MA, USA.
1996b. MCP Interim Phase II Oxbow Report. Syracuse, NY, USA.
Brooks, R.R. 1953. Williamstown, the First Two Hundred Years. The McClelland Press,
Williamstown, MA, USA.
Canonie Environmental. 1995. Proposal for the Preliminary Investigation of Corrective
Measures for the Housatonic River and Silver Lake Sediments. Report Prepared for
General Electric Company, Pittsfield, MA, USA.
SECTION n-18
-------
Chadwick & Associates. 1994. Aquatic Ecology Assessment of the Housatonic River,
Massachusetts. Prepared for General Electric Company, Pittsfield, MA, USA.
Dwight, T. 1822. Travels; in New England and New York, m. Timothy Dwight, New
Haven, CT, USA.
Federal Writer's Project. 1938. The Berkshire Hills. Duell, Sloan, and Pearce, New York,
NY, USA.
Fisher, J.T. 1933. New England's Forests: Biological Factors, p. 213-223. In J.W. Wright
(ed.) New England's Prospects. American Geography Society, New York, NY,
USA.
Foth, H.D. 1951. Fundamentals of Soil Science. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA.
Frink, C.R., B.L. Sawhney, K.P. Kulp, and C.G. Fredette. 1982. Polychlorinated Biphenyls
in Housatonic River Sediments in Massachusetts and Connecticut: Determination,
Distribution, and Transport. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin
800.
Harrington Engineering and Construction Inc. 1996. Report on the Preliminary
Investigation of Corrective Measures for Housatonic River and Silver Lake
Sediment. Report prepared for General Electric Company, Pittsfield, MA, USA.
MDEP (Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection). 1995. Revised Public
Involvement Plan. MA, USA.
McCann, J. A., and L.M. Daly. Undated. An Inventory of the Lakes, Ponds, and Reservoirs
of Massachusetts, Berkshire and Franklin Counties. Publication No. 10-2. Water
Resource Research Center, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA.
New England River Basins Commission. 1980. Housatonic River Basin Overview. Report
prepared for the Water Resources Council, Washington, DC, USA. 199pp.
SECTION n-19
-------
Olcott, P.G. 1995. Ground Water Atlas of the United States: Connecticut, Maine,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont: Carbonate
Rock Aquifers. U.S. Geological Survey Publication HA 730-M.
Roy F. Weston, Inc. 1998a. Upper Reach-Housatonic River Ecological Risk Assessment.
Report prepared for USEPA, Boston, MA, USA.
1998b. Source Area Characterization Report, Technical Support Services, General
Electric (GE) Housatonic River Project, Pittsfield, Massachusetts. Prepared for U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, North Atlantic Division, New England District,
Concord, MA, USA.
2000. Supplemental Investigation Work Plan for the Lower Housatonic River,
General Electric (GE) Housatonic River Project, Pittsfield, Massachusetts. Volumes
1 and 2. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Atlantic Division, New
England District, Concord, MA, USA.
Sargent, S.C. 1884. Report on the Forests of North America. Department of the Interior,
Government Printing Office. 611pp.
Southern Berkshire Chamber of Commerce. 2001. Towns and History. URL
http://greatbarrington.org/towns.html.
TechLaw, Inc. 1999. General Electric n, Pittsfield, Massachusetts: Final Preliminary
Ecological Characterization, Newell Street to Woods Pond. Vol. 1 and 2. Prepared
for USEPA, Region 1. TechLaw, Inc., Boston, MA, USA.
Technical Planning Associates. 1959. Berkshire County, Massachusetts, A Regional
Planning Study, Volume 2. New Haven, CT, USA.
United States Census Bureau. 2001a. Massachusetts: Population of Counties by Decennial
Census. URL http://www.census.gov/population/cencounts/mal90090.txt.
2001b. State and County Quickfacts: Berkshire County, Massachusetts. URL
http://quickfacts.census.gov/cgi-bin/county?cnty=25003.
SECTION n-20
-------
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1988. Soil Survey of
Berkshire County, Massachusetts. Amherst, MA, USA.
Veit, R.R., and W.R. Petersen. 1993. Birds of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Audubon
Society, Lincoln, MA, USA.
Weatherbee, P.B. 1996. Flora of Berkshire County Massachusetts. The Berkshire Museum,
Pittsfield, MA, USA.
Zen, E.A. 1983. Bedrock Geologic Map of Massachusetts. U.S. Geological Survey.
SECTION n-21
-------
SECTION III ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION
SECTION in-o
-------
Chapter 1 Natural Communities and Rare Plants
1.0 Introduction
Surveys for natural communities and rare plants were conducted in the PSA. Natural
communities provide detailed landscape descriptions and a framework to discuss animal-
habitat associations. Rare species provide a measure of landscape uniqueness, as they
occur more frequently in regions with unusual physical aspects (e.g., high elevation,
high-pH bedrock) or in transition zones between ecoregions. Furthermore, rare plants are
protected from taking by the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (M.G.L. c. 131 A)
and its implementing regulations (321 CMR 10.00).
A natural community is an assemblage of interacting plants and animals and their
common environment, recurring across the landscape, in which the effects of recent
human intervention are minimal (Gawler 2000). Natural communities, therefore, include
the biota and the physical substrate, and are repeatable units identified by their unique
combination of plants and animals. They serve, therefore, as convenient categories for
landscape discussion. Some communities are populated by common species with general
habitat requirements, while other communities are inhabited by rare species with very
specific substrate requirements and habitat.
Rare plants are those species that are considered by the State of Massachusetts to be of
conservation concern (MNHESP 1999). Rare species, including plants, are commonly
classified according to their rarity. Factors that influence a given species' rarity include
number of state occurrences, number of global occurrences, vulnerability to disturbances,
rarity of the associated natural community, fecundity, and other aspects of its biology.
Definitions of rarity (e.g., endangered, threatened) can be found in Table 1-1.
SECTION m - 1-1
-------
Table 1-1 State status and ranking definitions.
Term
Definition
Endangered
Native species which are in danger of extinction throughout all or part of their range or which
are in danger of extirpation from Massachusetts, as documented by biological research and
inventory.
Threatened
Native species which are likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future, or which are
declining or rare as determined by biological research and inventory.
Special Concern
Native species which have been documented by biological research or inventory to have
suffered a decline that could threaten the species if allowed to continue unchecked, or which
occur in such small numbers or with such restricted distribution or specialized habitat
requirements that they could easily become threatened within Massachusetts.
Watch List
Rare or uncommon species in Massachusetts that are not formally protected by legislation but
are monitored by the MNHESP. This category contains species that may have been dropped
from the official rare plant list, are candidate species for listing, may have questions as to
taxonomic identity or native range, or have had insufficient collection effort to ascertain rarity
in Massachusetts.
SI
Critically imperiled in Massachusetts because of extreme rarity (five or fewer or very few
remaining individuals or hectares) or because some aspect of its biology makes it especially
vulnerable to extirpation from the State of Massachusetts
S2
Imperiled in Massachusetts because of rarity (6 - 20 occurrences or few remaining
individuals or hectares) or because of other factors making it vulnerable to further decline.
S3
Rare in Massachusetts (on the order of 20 -100 occurrences).
S4
Apparently secure, but with cause for long-term concern.
S5
Demonstrably secure.
SH
Occurred historically in Massachusetts, and could be rediscovered; not known to have been
extirpated.
SX
Apparently extirpated in Massachusetts (historically occurring species for which habitat no
longer exists in Massachusetts).
SU
Possibly in peril in Massachusetts but status uncertain; need more information.
S?
Probably rare or historic in Massachusetts, based on status elsewhere in New England, but not
yet reviewed or documented by MNHESP.
Global ranks
("G" instead of "S")
Follow the criteria for state ranks, but refer to the entire range of a species, rather than just its
statewide distribution.
SECTION m - 1-2
-------
2.0 Methods
2.1 Background
Plants and natural communities of conservation concern are those that are rare from a
global or state perspective. Species and communities listed as rare follow Maine Natural
Heritage and Endangered Species Program (MNHESP) (1999) and Swain and Kearsley
(2000). Rare plants and natural communities are defined as those with a state "rank" of
SI, S2, S3, SU, S?, SH, or SX, or those with a state "status" of endangered, threatened,
special concern, or watch list. These terms follow MNHESP (1999) definitions and are
described in Table 1-1.
Plant species and communities are also provided ranks based on the quality of the
occurrence. The element occurrence (EO) rank is an average of four individual ranks:
EO quality (size/productivity); EO condition (pristineness/ability to recover from
impacts); EO viability (long-term existence prospects); and EO defensibility (how
protectable the occurrence is). The EO rank is a relative rating system based on range-
wide observations. It primarily utilizes four classes of ranks: A (excellent); B (good); C
(marginal); and D (poor). A ranking of E is sometimes provided for EOs that are extant
but for which information was inadequate to provide a qualitative score.
Landscape analysis, a multi-step process involving information collation, interpretation,
and summarization (Lortie el al. 1992), was performed to provide a macroscopic view of
the PSA's history and ecology. The landscape analysis process identified habitats in the
PSA that had moderate to high potential for containing a targeted feature (e.g., rare
plants, animals, or natural communities). It involved using available natural resource
information such as United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute topographic
maps, surficial and bedrock geology maps, aerial photographs, soils maps, wetlands
maps, land use history information (e.g., fire, cutting, herbicide spraying), and species
descriptions to develop a search image of the targeted feature (e.g., a rare plant) or its
associated natural community. The PSA was then assessed to determine if areas occurred
that could harbor the target feature. Identified areas were field surveyed at the
SECTION HI - 1-3
-------
appropriate time to determine if the rare species and natural communities occurred in the
study area.
2.2 Literature review
Available information on rare plants and natural communities was collected from
published and unpublished sources. The MNHESP was contacted for rare plant and
community information. The locations of known rare features were plotted on PSA base
maps. MNHESP botanists and natural community scientists were also consulted
regarding the availability of reports on plants and communities for the PSA. Information
on rare plant species taxonomy and biology was collected from botanical texts (e.g., Flora
of North America Editorial Committee 1993, 1997 and 2000, Gleason and Cronquist
1991, Fernald 1950, Haines and Vining 1998) and herbarium vouchers. Available
information on rare plants and communities in and near the PSA was reviewed to predict
whether additional rare plant or community sites might occur in the PSA based on species
ranges and habitat types.
Taxonomy of vascular plants follows Haines and Vining (1998) and Flora of North
America Editorial Committee (1993, 1997, and 2000). Natural community classification
largely follows Swain and Kearsley (2000), which represents the most current and
comprehensive system for Massachusetts. Many river and lake ecosystems, however, are
not described. Classification of these latter communities follows Weatherbee (1996) and
Weatherbee and Crow (1992). Gawler (2000) and Swain (pers. comm., A. Haines of
Woodlot Alternatives with P. Swain of the MNHESP, several contacts in 1999 and 2000)
were referenced for community characterizations.
2.3 Aerial Photograph Interpretation
Color infra-red aerial photographs (1:12000 scale) were used to review the types and
locations of natural communities in the PSA. Wetland maps previously prepared by the
USEPA (TechLaw, Inc. 1998) were also reviewed to identify the location of riparian
forest communities. Natural communities in the PSA that appear to be in a natural state
(i.e., not altered by agricultural activities, development, human-induced flooding, or other
SECTION HI - 1-4
-------
factors) were identified on maps and aerial photographs. In addition, based on
information collected during the literature review, potential sites to field survey were
located on aerial photographs and project maps.
2.4 Field Surveys
Field surveys to verify the existence of rare species or communities were conducted by
experienced botanists trained in plant taxonomy. Using the list of rare plant species and
natural communities that are known or suspected to occur in the PSA (prepared during
landscape analysis), and aerial photographs and base maps showing potential survey
sites, field botanists surveyed areas for rare occurrences. Survey efforts focused on areas
identified during landscape analysis as having a moderate to high potential for containing
a targeted rare plant or natural community. Surveyed sites were carefully examined to
identify potential micro-habitats containing the occurrences of interest.
Most of the remainder of the PSA was also surveyed in a less intense manner during
other field exercises to determine if potential habitats were missed during landscape
analysis. When potential rare plant or natural community habitats were identified during
these efforts, they were also carefully surveyed. Surveys were performed during periods
when individual species could be positively identified (e.g., in flower or with mature
fruit). Multiple site visits were used, as necessary, to ensure plants were observed in an
appropriate stage for accurate identification. Taxonomic keys and herbarium specimens
were used to verify species identification.
At each extant rare plant or natural community site, information on population size,
evidence of reproduction, likely persistence, location, and existing threats (e.g., on an all-
terrain vehicle trail), was collected in field notebooks. Photographs were taken of rare
plants and their habitats when possible. Areal cover was estimated through use of figures
(comparison charts showing various proportions) contained in Color Communications,
Inc. (1997). Voucher specimens were collected for many species when sufficient
numbers existed such that collection would not harm the population (the number
dependent of the species' biology). Locations of rare plant populations were surveyed
using Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment. Trimble Pro-XR GPS survey
SECTION m - 1-5
-------
equipment was used that, depending on conditions, captured locations with 1 - 2 m
accuracy. MNHESP Rare Plant Observation Forms were completed for all rare plants
observed in the PSA.
3.0 Natural Community Descriptions
Eighteen natural communities occur in the PSA. An additional seven communities
located in reference areas were surveyed and described due to their importance in various
biological studies. A listing of each community with summary information, including
description, example locations, synonyms, and extent in the PSA, can be found in Table
1-2. Detailed narratives of the communities can be found in Attachment A. Map 1-1
provides natural community type and location for the entire PSA. Community data forms
are provided in Attachment E. Scientific names for plants referenced in this document
are listed in Attachement F.
Beginning from the confluence of the East Branch and West Branch Housatonic River,
the floodplain is relatively narrow (ca. 100 - 250 m) and less structurally diverse
compared to downstream portions of the PSA. Where the natural communities are intact,
the upstream region is primarily vegetated by riparian forests that receive over bank flow
during high-water events. Herb- and shrub-dominated, seasonally flooded depressions
occured in this area and were found to be utilized by breeding amphibians. The main
stem of the Housatonic River in this section has moderately fast water with pool, riffle,
and run habitat. The channel walls are vertically cut and bottom substrate is often gravel
and sand. Impacts to the floodplain communities are largely residential in nature and
include housing lots, manicured lawns, and open rights-of-way for power lines and
sewage systems. Non-native and invasive plant species are prevalent in this area. A
representative cross-section is provided in Figure 1-1.
SECTION m - 1-6
-------
Table 1-2
Natural communities in the PSA and reference areas.
Community Name
Brief Description
Example Location
Area in
PSA (ha)
State
Rank
Synonyms
Cowardin
etal. (1979)
Weatherbee1
Lacustrine Communities^
Acidic brownwater
lake/oond
Ponds found on the Berkshire Plateau that
have stained water resulting from organic
inputs from adjacent peatlands.
Washington Mountain
Lake.
Not present
in PSA
NA
LUB
Acidic brownwater
lake/pond
Clear softwater
lake/oond
Ponds found on the Berkshire Plateau that
are relatively oligotrophic and do not have
adjoining peatlands.
Ashley Lake.
Not present
in PSA
NA
LOW
Clear softwater
lake/pond
Moderately alkaline
lake/oond
Ponds located in the central valley region
with calcareous bedrock underneath.
Threemile Pond, Woods
Pond.
9.2
NA
LAB
Moderately alkaline
lake/pond
Riverine Communities^
Hiah-aradient stream
Small streams with swift-flowing sections
generally devoid of vegetation except at
edges of quiet pools.
Roaring Brook.
0.04
NA
ROW
High-gradient stream
Low-aradient stream
Slow-moving water that may have
abundant submersed aquatic plants.
Housatonic River south
of Holmes Road.
106.4
NA
RAB
Low-gradient stream
Medium-aradient
stream
Streams with moderate flows and some
riffles. Vascular vegetation is sparse.
East Branch Housatonic
River.
6.7
NA
RUB
Medium-gradient
stream
Sorina
Occur where groundwater discharge
creates small water bodies and rivulets.
Often colonized by golden saxifrage.
Pool WML-2.
Not present
in PSA
NA
NA
Spring
Palustrine Communities
Black ash-red maole-
tamarack calcareous
seepage swamp
Hydric forests dominated by red maple,
black ash, and bur oak. Occur in high pH
groundwater discharge areas.
Most swamps on west
side of Housatonic
River south ofYokum
Brook confluence.
47.4
S3
PFO
Circumneutral
hardwood swamp (in
part)
SECTION in - 1-7
-------
Community Name
Brief Description
Example Location
Area in
PSA (ha)
State
Rank
Synonyms
Cowardin
etal. (1979)
Weatherbee1
Calcareous seepaae
Emergent marshes that experience high
pH groundwater discharge. Calciphilic
indicator plants are present.
Northwest end of
Muddy Pond.
Not present
in PSA
S2
PEM
Robust emergent
marsh (in part).
marsh
Deep emeraent marsh
Herb dominated wetland community that
often remains inundated with water
through the growing season. Dominated
by robust graminoids grass-like plants or
aquatic, broad-leaved herbs.
Many vegetated
backwater areas
upstream of Woods
Pond.
21.5
S4
PEM
Robust emergent
marsh (in part)
Hiah-terrace floodplain
Riparian forests with a mixture of trees
from wetter sites (e.g., silver maple,
American elm) and trees from rich, upland
sites (e.g., sugar maple, white ash,
basswood). Herb layer with characteristic
species of high-nutrient forests.
Floodplain forest
upstream of WWTF
outfall and to some
extent around 8-VP-1.
4.4
S2
PFO
Floodplain forest (in
part)
forest
Mud flat
Sparsely vegetated, saturated mucky soils
that become exposed in the summer as
the water level recedes. Occur at the
edges of vernal pools and river channels.
Many vernal pools
transform to this
community when the
water completely
recedes.
Present in
PSA, but
seasonal in
occurrence
S4
PEM
Not specifically
addressed
Red maple swamp
Hydric forests dominated by red maple.
South of New Lenox
Road in vicinity of
vernal pool 46-VP-1.
61.2
S5
PFO
Circumneutral
hardwood swamp (in
part)
Riverine point bar and
Open sand and mucky sand bars along
the edge of river channels.
Accretion bars along
Housatonic River.
0.4
S3
RUS
Low gradient stream
(in part)
beach
Shallow emeraent
Herb dominated wetland community with
saturated soils or inundated at some
locations. Vegetation diverse, but lacking
robust, grass-like herbs characteristic of
deep emergent marshes.
Vernal Pool 38-VP-2.
30.3
S4
PEM
Circumneutral
graminoid marsh (in
part) and robust
emergent marsh (in
part)
marsh
SECTION in - 1-8
-------
Community Name
Brief Description
Example Location
Area in
PSA (ha)
State
Rank
Synonyms
Cowardin
etal. (1979)
Weatherbee1
Shrub swamp
Hydric shrublands lacking a closed
canopy.
Vernal Pool 46-VP-1.
103.8
S5
PSS
Circumneutral shrub
swamp
Transitional floodplain
forest
Riparian forests dominated by silver
maple, box-elder, and American elm.
Most floodplain forests
adjacent to river
channel north of Yokum
Brook confluence.
84.1
S2
PFO
Floodplain forest (in
part)
Wet meadow
Shallow emergent mashes that are
periodically disturbed by mowing or
grazing.
Hydric fields south of
New Lenox Road.
18.4
S4
PEM
Graminoid marsh (in
part); sloping
graminoid fen (in
part)
Woodland vernal pool
Small, vernally flooded depressions in
upland settings.
October Mountain State
Forest.
Not present
in PSA
S3
PAB
Not specifically
addressed
Terrestrial Communities
Cultural arassland
Open uplands dominated by grass-like
herbs that are periodically disturbed by
mowing, grazing, or fire.
Upland fields near New
Lenox Road.
22.0
NA
NA
Old field
Northern hardwoods-
hemlock-white Dine
forest
Upland forests dominated by sugar maple,
eastern hemlock, red oak, and eastern
white pine.
Some forests along east
side of Woodland Road.
24.3
S5
NA
Mesic northern
hardwood forest (in
part)
Red oak-suaar maple
transition forest
Mesic upland forest dominated by red oak,
and sugar maple, white ash. Flora of this
community lacks extreme indicators of
northern and southern forests.
Upland forest near
Lenox Station on east
side of Springfield
Terminal rail line.
6.6
S4
NA
Mesic northern
hardwood forest (in
part)
Rich mesic forest
Mesic upland forest dominated by sugar
maple, white ash, and basswood with a
characteristic herb flora of high-nutrient
sites.
Some forests along east
side of Woodland Road.
2.0
S3
NA
Rich mesic forest
SECTION in - 1-9
-------
Community Name
Brief Description
Example Location
Area in
PSA (ha)
State
Rank
Synonyms
Cowardin
etal. (1979)
Weatherbee1
Soruce-fir-northern
hardwood forest
Moderate to high elevation forest
dominated by trees adapted to cooler
microclimates, such as red spruce,
balsam fir, red maple, paper birch, and
mountain ash.
Forest surrounding pool
WML-3.
Not present
in PSA
S4
NA
Mesic northern
conifer forest
Successional northern
hardwoods
Young forests growing on sites with a
recent history of canopy disturbance.
Dominant trees include quaking aspen,
paper birch, and eastern white pine.
Forests around pools
23b-VP-1 and
23b-VP-2.
2.2
S5
NA
Mesic northern
hardwood forest (in
part)
1 Weatherbee (1996) and Weatherbee and Crow (1992) are both sources for previous community classification.
2 Lacustrine and riverine communities are not yet classified by Swain and Kearsley (2000); therefore, classification follows Weatherbee (1996) and Weatherbee and Crow (1992).
SECTION in - 1-10
-------
Moving downstream, the river slows and widens somewhat. Though the stream banks
are generally vertically cut, a number of small sand beaches were found. The floodplain
varies in width and ranges from ca. 50 - 400 m wide. Riparian forests are still the
dominant feature, although in many areas they have been cleared for agriculture (hay and
food crop production). This section harbors several rich, forested areas that are home to a
number of rare plant species (see Map 1-2 and Attachment A). Vernal pools are common
in this section as well. A number of beaver-influenced wetlands occur on the west side of
the Housatonic River channel near the Canoe Meadows Wildlife Sanctuary. A
representative cross-section is provided in Figure 1-2.
South of the Pittsfield WWTF and in the vicinity of New Lenox Road, significant
portions of the riparian forests have been cleared for agriculture. The remaining forest
fragments are bordered by wetland and upland fields that were largely fallow during the
survey period. Despite the forest clearing, numerous open pools dominated by emergent,
herbaceous vegetation occur in the low areas of the field. It was found that these pools
were being used by breeding amphibians and wading birds. The Housatonic River
channel is highly sinuous in this area and a number of oxbow pools were found. Channel
banks are still vertically cut and a number of mucky sand beaches and accretion bars
were located that often harbored the rare mudflat spikesedge. A representative cross-
section is provided in Figure 1-3.
Nearing the Yokum Brook confluence and below, the floodplain becomes limited on the
east side due to the proximity of October Mountain. It is extensive on the west side of
the channel, however, and the floodplain commonly exceeds 500 m in width. Here the
river channel lacks the well-defined, vertically cut banks of the upper portions of the
PSA. Bottom substrate is typically silt and fine organic particles. Numerous, and often
large, backwater pools and sloughs occurred in this area. These inundated habitats are
vegetated by a diversity of plants (e.g., emergent, floating-leaved, submergent).
Floodplain forests are restricted to high banks adjacent to the channel. Most of the
forested areas are dominated by swamps. These forested wetlands occur in lower areas
that are saturated at or near the surface and frequently enriched with high pH
groundwater discharge (pH typically greater than 7.0). These seepage swamps contain
SECTION in - 1-11
-------
the highest concentration of rare plants in the PSA and show the least amount of
influence from non-native plants (see Map 1-2 and Attachment A). They are also the
largest forested tracts in the PSA. Although largely intact, portions of the forests in this
portion of the PSA have been cleared for railroad lines and power lines. Two major
streams enter from the west, with large wetland complexes prior to their confluence. The
downstream end of the PSA is comprised of the impoundment creating Woods Pond.
This moderately alkaline pond is relatively shallow and contains aquatic vegetation. A
representative cross-section is provided by Figure 1-4.
For descriptive purposes, the natural communities occurring in the PSA have been
grouped together into systems. Systems are large-scale classification units comprised of
different natural communities that share common features, such as hydrology and canopy
development. Four systems occur in the PSA: lacustrine (Section 3.1); riverine (Section
3.2); palustrine (Section 3.3); and terrestrial (Section 3.4). Definitions for these systems
are found preceding the natural community descriptions in each section.
SECTION HI - 1-12
-------
Figure 1-1 Representative section of PSA - upper section (Reach 5A).
SECTION in - 1-13
-------
Figure 1-2 Representative section of PSA - middle section (Reach 5A).
SECTION in - 1-14
-------
Figure 1-3 Representative section of PSA - lower section (Reach 5B)
SECTION in - 1-15
-------
Figure 1-4 Representative section of PSA - lower section (Reach 5C).
SECTION in - 1-16
-------
3.1 Lacustrine Communities
The lacustrine system is made up of wetlands and deepwater habitats located in
topographic depressions and impounded river channels. These communities have limited
(less than 30 percent) areal coverage of woody and emergent herbaceous plants and may
also have active wave-formed shoreline features (Cowardin etal. 1979).
Most of the lacustrine communities in the PSA are impoundment features created either
by humans or American beavers. Due to their location and high pH (7.0-9.0), these
ponds are considered moderately alkaline lake/pond communities. This community type
is found in the Central Valley region of Berkshire County and overlies high-pH bedrock,
such as limestone and marble, which creates alkaline, hard water conditions. Alkalinity
measurements usually range from 18-73 mg/liter HCO3 (Weatherbee and Crow 1992).
At the downstream end of the PSA is a dam that creates Woods Pond. This 20-ha
impoundment was largely less than 2 m deep and contains abundant submerged and
floating-leaved vegetation.
3.2 Riverine Communities
The riverine system is made up of wetlands and deepwater habitats with continually or
periodically flowing water contained within a channel. They are not significantly
dominated by woody or emergent herbaceous vegetation (having less than 30 percent
areal cover) and do not have ocean-derived salts exceeding 5 ppt. Riverine systems may
occur in natural or created channels, and sometimes are merely connections between two
bodies of water (Cowardin et al. 1979).
Four riverine communities were identified in the PSA. The majority of the Housatonic
River in the PSA is classified as a low-gradient stream, characterized by slow-moving
water, fine sediments, and abundant vascular vegetation. The upstream portion of the
main stem of the Housatonic River, north of the Pittsfield WWTF outfall, is classified as
medium-gradient stream due to moderate-flowing water, courser substrate, and general
lack of aquatic vegetation. Several high-gradient streams enter the PSA from the steep
slopes of October Mountain State Forest. These fast-moving, low-order streams possess
SECTION IE - 1-17
-------
gravel and cobble substrate and are generally devoid of plants in the channel itself.
Spring communities are small, ephemeral or permanent features that resemble spring
rivulets or tiny pools. They emerge along or at the base of slopes when groundwater is
redirected by an impervious layer. One spring was located in the PSA. It was not
mapped, however, due to its small size.
3.3 Palustrine Communities
The palustrine system is made up of various types of non-tidal wetlands that are
dominated by plants (Cowardin et al. 1979). These communities may occur in
topographic depressions and drainage basins, adjacent to lakes and rivers, or anywhere
groundwater is discharged, such as at the base of a slope that intersects an impermeable
layer. As these communities are wetlands, the soil is inundated or at least saturated at or
near the surface during a portion of the growing season.
Eleven palustrine communities were identified in the PSA. These communities are often
divided into two groups for classification purposes—those that are forested and those that
are open. Transitional floodplain forests are the dominant forested wetland in the PSA.
These forests are dominated by silver maple, box-elder, and eastern cottonwood, and are
temporarily flooded during high water events. Transitional floodplain forests are the
most common wooded community upstream of New Lenox Road. South of this road,
this community type is restricted to the edge of the river channel. High-terrace
floodplain forests are somewhat similar but are found on elevated banks and berms and
possess a flora characteristic of high-nutrient sites. This community is restricted in
occurrence and the best examples are found upstream of the Pittsfield WWTF outfall.
Red maple swamps were found in the vicinity of the Pittsfield WWTF outfall and south
of New Lenox Road. These forested wetlands are dominated by red maple and occur in
lower, wetter areas than the floodplain forests. The final type of forested wetland
identified in the study area is black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage swamp.
This community is dominated by red maple, black ash, and bur oak and is located in
downstream portions of the PSA where high pH groundwater discharge occurs. This
SECTION HI - 1-18
-------
community contains a number of species with affinity to calcareous substrate, and was
found to harbor the greatest concentration of state-listed rare plants.
Emergent marshes are open, herb-dominated wetlands in which the vegetation grows
upright, above the water level (when standing water is present). Three types of marshes
were observed in the PSA. Deep emergent marshes are those wetlands that frequently
remain inundated through the growing season and are dominated by robust, often grass-
like herbs. Shallow emergent marshes occur in areas with saturated soils or shallow
water, and they lack the tall, grass-like plants. Wet meadows are similar to shallow
emergent marshes but are periodically disturbed by mowing or grazing, which alters the
character and species composition. All of these marsh types become more abundant in
the PSA as one moves south of the Pittsfield WWTF outfall.
Four additional wetland communities that lacked closed canopies were observed in the
PSA. Shrub swamps are one of the most extensive community types found in the 10-
year-floodplain. This community is dominated by a number of short, woody plants and
occasionally had scattered trees as well. Shrub swamps are likely common in the PSA
due to land use history. Significant portions of the Housatonic River Valley State
Wildlife Management Area were farmed at one time, and shrub swamp communities
appear to represent a stage of succession from wet meadow to forested wetland. Also
observed was the riverine point bar and beach, which is a river shore community
comprised of sand or mucky sand substrate in the form of linear beaches and accretion
bars. This community is dominated by short-statured, often annual, herbs that are
tolerant of submersion. Mud flat is another community that appeared later in the season
as the water level receded from vernal pools and shallow water areas of the Housatonic
River. It is generally a sparsely vegetated community growing on saturated mud.
3.4 Terrestrial Communities
The terrestrial system is comprised of uplands that lack prolonged inundation or soil
saturation. They may have closed canopies or be relatively open and dominated by low
herbs. Terrestrial communities occur in a variety of locations with respect to elevation,
slope, and aspect.
SECTION HI - 1-19
-------
Four terrestrial or upland communities were identified in the PSA. Only one of the
terrestrial communities was an open habitat lacking trees. Cultural grasslands are herb-
dominated habitats that are periodically disturbed by mowing, grazing, or burning.
Though managed, and not necessarily natural, they are included under the category of
natural communities as they are used extensively by wildlife common to minimally
managed areas, including rare birds. The community ranges from mesic (e.g., pastures
and fields) to xeric (e.g., open barrens and airports). The former type often has a higher
percentage of non-native species.
Northern hardwoods-hemlock-white pine forests are located near New Lenox Road
where upland inclusions occur within the ten-year-floodplain. This community is
dominated by red oak, eastern hemlock, sugar maple, and eastern white pine. Red oak-
sugar maple transition forest is limited in extent in the PSA. These forests are transitional
in species composition between southern and northern forests. Dominant trees included
red oak, sugar maple, American beech, and white ash. Spruce-fir-northern hardwood
forests were identified in higher elevation, cooler microsites in October Mountain State
Forest. Common canopy trees include red spruce, white spruce, red maple, paper birch,
balsam fir, and mountain ash. Successional northern hardwoods are young forest stands
growing on sites with a history of past disturbance. Quaking aspen, paper birch, and
eastern white pine are common colonizing trees on these sites. This habitat occurs in and
around the borrow pits near the Pittsfield WWTF.
3.5 Rare Natural Communities and Plants
3.5.1 Rare Natural Communities
Seven communities of state conservation concern were identified in the PSA: black ash-
red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage swamp; transitional floodplain forest; high-
terrace floodplain forest; riverine point bar and beach; woodland vernal pool; calcareous
seepage marsh; and rich mesic forest. A brief discussion of the rare natural communities
and their conservation status follows. Detailed descriptions of the natural communities
can be found in Attachment A.
SECTION HI - 1-20
-------
Black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage swamps are forested wetlands
enriched with high-pH groundwater. This community is ranked S3 in Massachusetts and
occurrences are restricted to the western portion of the state. It is one of the more
common communities in the PSA on the west side of the Housatonic River south of
Yokum Brook confluence. Black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage swamps
have been impacted in the PSA by clearing for railroad lines and power line rights-of-
way. One area harboring rare species was being inundated by a beaver impoundment in
2000.
Transitional floodplain forests are wooded areas subject to flooding during high water
events. This community is ranked S2 in Massachusetts and occurrences are found
primarily in the western portion of the state. It can be found adjacent to the river channel
nearly throughout the PSA, but it is best developed from the confluence of the East and
West Branch Housatonic River to the Yokum Brook confluence area. Extensive clearing
and development of this community has occurred in Pittsfield and Lenox for agriculture,
residential lot construction, and river channelization. The proximity of urban Pittsfield
has led to extensive colonization of non-native species in some areas. Garlic-mustard and
dame's rocket are ubiquitous in the floodplain forests of this area, while cuckoo flower,
Morrow's honeysuckle, moneywort, and purple loosestrife are common in particular
tracts.
High-terrace floodplain forests are wooded areas adjacent to river channels that are
positioned on elevated terraces or berms so that they are less frequently flooded than the
previous community. This community is ranked S2 in Massachusetts and occurrences
are concentrated in the western half of the state. The best example of this community in
the PSA is found upstream of the Pittsfield WWTF.
Riverine point bars and beaches are stream shoreline communities created by the
accretion of fluvial sediments. This habitat can be found in the PSA upstream of the
Yokum Brook confluence. This community is ranked S3 in Massachusetts and
occurrences are restricted to the western half of the state.
SECTION m - 1-21
-------
Woodland vernal pools are temporary bodies of water in upland settings that may be used
as breeding habitat by amphibians. This community is ranked S3 in Massachusetts and
occurrences are scattered throughout the state. Examples in the PSA can be found in
October Mountain State Forest.
Calcareous seepage marshes are herb-dominated wetlands that are supplied with high pH
groundwater. This community is ranked S2 in Massachusetts and occurrences are
restricted to the western half of the state. This habitat can be found at the Hinsdale Flats
SWMA reference area. The single observed occurrence of this community has been
impacted by a railroad line. The wetland has been bisected by a large berm of crushed
stone and the site's hydrology has likely been affected as well. The unusual aspect of
calcareous seepage marshes is provided by the calciphilic flora that is supported by
enriched groundwater seepage.
Rich mesic forests are wooded areas that usually occur on or at the base of slopes and are
enriched by groundwater seepage or gravity-assisted accumulation of nutrient matter.
This community is ranked S3 in Massachusetts and occurrences are scattered throughout
the state. Examples in the PSA can be found along the west facing slopes of October
Mountain. Canopy clearing is a major threat to this community. Maintenance of forest
integrity is an important conservation measure. Limiting disturbance also assists in
preventing the colonization of non-native species.
3.5.2 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants
The landscape analysis yielded 32 plants of state conservation concern that are known or
suspected to occur in the PSA. These species are presented in Table 1-3. Field surveys
documented a total of 20 state-listed species from 37 sites, including 19 from the
landscape analysis and 1 additional Special Concern species (pendulous bulrush). These
results are summarized in Table 1-4. Discussion of each species from the PSA follows
and includes population details, species ecology, and threats. New England state
occurrences were gathered from Seymour (1982) and Magee and Ahles (1999). Rare
plant listings for New England states were obtained through the The Natural Heritage
Network (2001). See Attachment G for rare plant data forms.
SECTION HI - 1-22
-------
Table 1-3 Rare plants known or suspected to occur in the PSA1
Species
Historically
Present In Area
Found during
19982, 1999, or
2000 Surveys
State Status
Communities Present In PSA That Species Is
Likely To Occur In
black maple
(Acer nigrum)
Yes
Yes
Special Concern
High-terrace Floodplain Forests
green dragon
(Arisaema dracontium)
No
No
Threatened
High-terrace Floodplain Forests
smooth rock-cress
(Arabis laevigata)
No
No
Threatened
High-terrace Floodplain Forests
foxtail sedge
(Carex alopecoidea)
Yes
Yes
Threatened
Wet Meadow, Open areas in floodplains
Davis's sedge
(Carex davisii)
No
No
Endangered
High-terrace Floodplain Forests
Gray's sedge
(Carex grayi)
Yes
Yes
Threatened
Black Ash-Red Maple-Tamarack Calcareous Seepage
Swamps, Transitional Floodplain Forests
Schweinitiz's sedge
(Carex schweinitzii)
No
No
Endangered
Black Ash-Red Maple-Tamarack Calcareous Seepage
Swamps
hairy-fruited sedge
(Carex trichocarpa)
No
No
Threatened
Transitional Floodplain Forests
cat-tail sedge
(Carex typhina)
No
No
Threatened
Alluvial Red Maple Swamps
early blue cohosh
(Caulophyllum giganteum)
No
Yes
Watch List
High-terrace Floodplain Forests, Rich Mesic Forests
Virginia spring beauty
(Claytonia virginica)
No
No
Threatened
High-terrace Floodplain Forests
hemlock-parsley
(Conioselinum chinense)
No
Yes
Special Concern
Black Ash-Red Maple-Tamarack Calcareous Seepage
Swamps
SECTION in - 1-23
-------
Species
Historically
Present In Area
Found during
19982, 1999, or
2000 Surveys
State Status
Communities Present In PSA That Species Is
Likely To Occur In
mudflat spikesedge
(Eleocharis intermedia)
No
Yes
Threatened
Mud Flats
downy wild-rye
(Elymus villosus)
No
Yes
Threatened
High-Terrace Floodplain Forests
variegated scouring-rush
(Equisetum variegatum)
No
Yes
Watch List
Disturbed, hydric ground in limestone bedrock regions
Frank's love grass
(Eragrostis frankii)
No
No
Threatened
Riverine Point Bar and Beaches
fringed gentian
(Gentianopsis crinita)
No
Yes
Watch List
Wet Meadows
many-fruited false loosestrife
(Ludwigia polycarpa)
No
No
Threatened
Oxbows in Transitional Floodplain Forests
winged monkey-flower
(Mimulus alatus)
No
No
Endangered
Mud Flats
bur oak
(Quercus macrocarpa)
Yes
Yes
Special Concern
Black Ash-Red Maple-Tamarack Calcareous Seepage
Swamps
bristly crowfoot
(.Ranunculus pensylvanicus)
Yes
Yes
Threatened
Openings in swamps and floodplains
eastern black currant
(Ribes americanum)
Yes
Yes
Watch List
Black Ash-Red Maple-Tamarack Calcareous Seepage
Swamps, Transitional Floodplain Forests
swamp dock
(Rumex verticillatus)
No
No
Threatened
Transitional Floodplain Forests
Wapato
(Sagittaria cuneata)
Yes
Yes
Endangered
Mud Flats, Shallow Emergent Marshes (in depressions
within Transitional Floodplain Forests)
hoary willow
(Salix Candida)
Yes
Yes
Watch List
Calcareous Seepage Marshes
SECTION in - 1-24
-------
Species
Historically
Present In Area
Found during
19982, 1999, or
2000 Surveys
State Status
Communities Present In PSA That Species Is
Likely To Occur In
autumn willow
(Salix serissima)
No
Yes
Watch List
Wet Meadows, Shrub Swamps
cluster sanicle
(Sanicula odorata)
No
Yes
Threatened
High-terrace Floodplain Forests
hard-stem bulrush
(Schoenoplectus acutus)
No
Yes
Watch List
Deep Emergent Marshes, Calcareous Seepage Marshes
oblong bulrush
(Schoenoplectus acutus X S.
tabernaemontanii)
No
Yes
not formally listed
Deep Emergent Marshes, Calcareous Seepage Marshes
crooked-stem aster
(Symphyotrichum prenanthoides)
No
Yes
Special Concern
Red Maple Swamps
Culver's root
(Veronicastrum virginicum)
Yes
No
Special Concern
High-terrace Floodplain Forests
barren strawberry
(W aldsteinia fragarioides)
No
No
Threatened
High-terrace Floodplain Forests
List was compiled through landscape analysis and agency consultations.
2 TechLaw, Inc. 1999
SECTION in - 1-25
-------
Table 1-4 Summary of rare plants documented in the PSA and reference areas
Common Name
Latin Name
State
Status1
State Rank
Global
Rank
Year First
Observed
Number of
Sites
Town(s)
Element
Occurrence
Rank
black maple
Acer nigrum
SC
S2
G5
1999
1
Pittsfield
C
foxtail sedge
Carex alopecoidea
E
S2
G5
1998
1
Lenox
C
Gray's sedge
Car ex grayi
T
S2
G4
1998
1
Lenox
B
early blue cohosh
Caulophyllum giganteum
WL
S?
G3/G5
2000
3
Pittsfield, Lee,
Washington
B-C
hemlock-parsley
Conioselinum chinense
SC
S3
G5
1998
1
Lenox
C
mudflat spikesedge
Eleocharis intermedia
SC
S2
G5
1998
3
Pittsfield, Lenox
B-C
downy wild-rye
Elymus villosus
T
G5
S2
2000
1
Pittsfield
C
variegated scouring-rush
Equisetum variegatum
WL
S3
G5
1998
3
Pittsfield,
Washington
B-C
fringed gentian
Gentianopsis crinita
WL
S4
G4
2000
1
Sheffield
D
bur oak
Quercus macrocarpa
SC
S3
G5
1998
1
Lenox
A
bristly crowfoot
Ranunculus pensylvanicus
T
S2
G5
1999
1
Lenox
C
eastern black currant
Ribes americanum
WL
S4
G5
1998
7
Pittsfield, Lenox
C
wapato
Sagittaria cuneata
E
SI
G5
1998
3
Lenox
B-D
hoary willow
Salix Candida
WL
G5
2000
1
Washington
C
autumn willow
Salix serissima
WL
S3
G5
1999
1
Sheffield
B
cluster sanicle
Sanicula odorata
T
S2
G5
2000
1
Lenox
C
hard-stem bulrush
Schoenoplectus acutus
WL
S?
G5
2000
1
Hinsdale
B
oblong bulrush
Schoenoplectus acutus X S.
tabernaemontanii
NA
NA
G?
2000
2
Washington-
Hinsdale,
Pittsfield
B-C
pendulus bulrush
Scirpus pendulus
SC
S2
G5
1999
3
Lenox,
Washington
C-D
crooked-stem aster
Symphyotrichum prenanthoides
SC
S3
G4/G5
1998
1
Lenox
C
State status explanation: E=endangered; T=threatened; SC=special concern; WL=watch list.
SECTION in - 1-26
-------
Black Maple
Black maple is a deciduous tree that can reach a height of 40 m (Figure 1-5). It normally
grows in rich, mineral soil of rocky hillsides and floodplains. This species occurs
primarily in the eastern half of the United States and adjacent southern Canada. In New
England it occurs in all states except Maine and Rhode Island. Black maple is listed as a
species of conservation concern in all New England states in which it occurs in. The
rarity of this species is likely due to the clearing of its habitat, particularly floodplain
areas that are preferred areas for agriculture in most New England states. As well, New
England is near the northern limit for this species
Figure 1-5 Leaves and fruit of black maple.
Black maple was located in the PSA at Canoe Meadows Wildlife Sanctuary, south of the
Holmes Road and west of the Housatonic River channel (Map 1-2). This station is a
historically known locality that was rediscovered during 1999 field efforts. It occurred as
a single individual in a floodplain forest near the base of the upland terrace. The tree had
an approximate diameter of 50 cm. No flowers or fruits were observed during the first
observation on 27 May 1999. Developing fruits were observed, however, in the spring of
2000. The black maple tree was part of a floodplain forest community, which in this
location is merely a narrow strip along the river that likely exwas more extensive prior to
clearing for agriculture. Much of the surrounding landscape is open field or early
successional forest. Associated species include sugar maple, green ash, false hellebore,
wild leek, bloodroot, zig-zag goldenrod, Morrow's honeysuckle, lady fern, and
Pennsylvania sedge.
SECTION in - 1-27
-------
Due to land ownership of the site (Massachusetts Audubon), black maple likely has no
short-term threats to its existence in the PSA. Long-term prospects for continued
existence are poor. With only a single mature tree known from the area, it will likely be
difficult for the population to maintain itself indefinately. This station was provided an
EO rank of C on the basis of small population size, relic community size, and public
ownership of property.
Mudflat Spikesedge
The mudflat spikesedge is a diminutive, tufted sedge that grows in wet soil of open areas
(Figure 1-6). As its name implies, this species frequents muddy areas such as rivershores
and tidal flats. It occurs in the eastern United States and adjacent Canada. In New
England it is found in all states except Rhode Island. Mudflat spikesedge is also listed as
a species of conservation concern in Maine and Vermont. In New England, this species
favors soil of high pH, and therefore is usually found in limestone regions. This type of
bedrock is relatively scarce in New England and, therefore, so is the mudflat spikesedge.
Pittsfield was the first town in Massachusetts found to harbor a population of this plant
(date of collection 1902) (Hoffman 1904).
Figure 1-6 Mudflat spikesedge.
Data for mudflat spikesedge occurrences were collected at three locations in the PSA
(Map 1-2). A fourth location on the West Branch Housatonic River could not be
surveyed in detail due to storm flow conditions. All locations were mucky silt/sand
beaches and bars on the rivershore, commonly on the inside of bends where silt and
organic particles accumulate. One site on the West Branch Housatonic River was not
SECTION III - 1-28
-------
documented due to flood flows and heavy siltation, which made locating and counting the
plants impossible. Common associates include false pimpernel, common water-purslane,
Canada lovegrass, dock-leaved smartweed, false nutsedge, barnyard grass, and common
cocklebur. Due to the type of habitat this plant occurred in, most sites were small and
limited to 15 m stretches along the accretion bars. EO ranks for the three surveyed sites
were B (one site) and C (two sites).
Though mudflat spikesedge populations are small, there are several stations in the PSA
and this species also occurs in most Central Valley towns in Berkshire County
(Weatherbee 1996). EO ranks for PSA populations range from B (one site) to C (three
sites). Threats to this plant include factors that would alter or disrupt channel flows, such
as impoundments, continued urbanization of upstream areas (leading to abrupt water
level changes after storm events), and natural changes in stream location (e.g., oxbow
formation).
Pendulous Bulrush
Pendulous bulrush is a grass-like, perennial herb of wet, open areas such as meadows,
fens, and graminoid marshes (Figure 1-7). It has inconspicuous, wind-pollinated flowers,
which together with its vegetative morphology, creates a plant that is frequently
overlooked. It is found primarily in the eastern half of the United States. In New
England, pendulous bulrush occurs in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts,
and Connecticut and is listed as a species of conservation concern in those states. The
rarity of this species in Massachusetts is due, in part, to this state being near the periphery
of the plant's range and its preference for higher pH sites, which are naturally scarce.
This species was first documented in Massachusetts in the town of Stockbridge (date of
collection 1902) (Hoffman 1904).
SECTION HI - 1-29
-------
¦<*T i'-4
Figure 1-7 Inflorescence of pendulous bulrush.
Pendulous bulrush was observed in wet gravel of a parking lot near the Housatonic River,
at the edge of a managed pond in the October Mountain State Forest, and in damp, open
depressions along the Willow Creek Road (Map 1-2). The land adjacent to the parking
lot is predominantly open land and is maintained as such due to power line right of ways
and agriculture. Much of the open area is wetland, with significant areas of shrub swamp
and wet meadow. Due to the highly disturbed nature of the site and a small population,
this occurrence was considered to possess an EO rank of D. The pond shore site is a
small impoundment with an open, maintained lawn on the west shore. Pendulous bulrush
grew in shallow water at the very edge of the shoreline and its flowering stem was cut
during mowing of the lawn. This site also consisted of few individuals, but due to public
land ownership, it was considered a C-ranked occurrence. The sites along the Willow
Creek Road are maintained as openings due to road and power line passage. The main
population was the largest observed, consisting of about 15 individuals with a total of
approximately 75 flowering stems. Associated species included silky willow, white
bedstraw, fox sedge, black bulrush, jointed rush, northern arrowwood, heart-leaved
willow, meadowsweet, and pointed broom sedge. Some of the smaller colonies of
pendulous bulrush are known to be recent stations as they are now occurring in the center
of trails that were essentially devoid of vegetation (due to frequent use) in 1998. This
occurrence was given an EO rank of C.
Threats to pendulous bulrush include extensive site disturbance and community
succession. Though this species frequents areas that have been modified by past human
activity, it is not typically a weed species of exposed soils. It appears to prefer areas that
SECTION in - 1-30
-------
have been cleared of dense woody vegetation but have had time to recover as wet
meadows. However, most sites would not remain open meadows; they would succeed to
shrub-dominated and, later, tree-dominated communities, ultimately excluding pendulous
bulrush from those sites. This sedge likely inhabits the landscape in a dynamic fashion,
colonizing new openings while being extirpated from other areas by canopy formation.
Autumn Willow
Autumn willow is a branched shrub that grows from 1 - 4 m tall (Figure 1-8). Willows
are dioecious species, meaning that they have unisexual flowers (i.e., flowers that bear
pollen or ovules, but not both) borne on separate plants. Therefore, reproduction in most
species requires two individuals of complimentary sex. Autumn willow grows in fens
and swamps that are influenced by relati vely high-pH groundwater, due to circumneutral
or basic bedrock. Autumn willow occurs primarily in the northern United States east of
the Rocky Mountains and in mid-western and eastern Canada. In New England, this
willow is found in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Vermont. It is listed as a species of
conservation concern in all of those states. This is due to the requirement of high-pH
wetlands, a resource that is naturally scarce in New England.
Figure 1-8 Carpellate (i.e., seed-bearing) plant of autumn willow.
Autumn willow was found in a circumneutral shrub swamp that bordered a rich, wet
meadow north of Threemile Pond (Map 1-3). The fen-like meadow possesses a number
of plants that indicate its unusual character and high pH. These plants included shrubby
cinquefoil, grass-of-Parnassus, purple avens, and swamp saxifrage. Autumn willow
occurred on the periphery of this meadow, mixed with plants typical of shrubs swamps of
SECTION III - 1-31
-------
the region, such as pussy willow. Approximately 50 plants were observed, nearly half of
these with dehisced capsules and dispersing seeds. The population area was ca. 50 m x
20 m. This station possessed an EO rank of B due to the moderate population size and
unsual character of the natural community.
Threats to the autumn willow include cutting and alteration of water level. The wet
meadow is a small, low area in a larger agricultural field. It has been cleared in the past
during periodic cutting of the field. If attempts are made to reclaim/expand the current
field by cutting of adjacent shrubs, the autumn willow could be extirpated from this site.
The shrub swamp is immediately north of and hydrologically connected to Threemile
Pond. Future adjustments to the pool level of Threemile Pond, which is impounded by an
earth dike at the south end, may have adverse effects on the autumn willow population
Wapato
Wapato is a floating-leaved or, more commonly in Massachusetts, an emergent aquatic
plant of shallow, still or slow moving water (Figure 1-9). Due to the extreme variability
in type and shape of leaves produced by species of this genus, identification usually
depends on flowers or fruits. Wapato occurs over a large portion of northern United
States and southern Canada. In New England, this plant is found in all states except
Rhode Island. It is also considered a species of conservation concern in Connecticut and
New Hampshire. Oddly, it is rare and localized in Massachusetts, absent from many
areas with suitable habitat (Sorrie 1987).
Figure 1-9 Leaves and flowers of wapato.
From a vernal pool in the Housatonic River floodplain.
SECTION III - 1-32
-------
One station of wapato was rediscovered in 1998 and two new stations were discovered in
1999 (Map 1-2). The 1998 location was north of New Lenox Road in a moderate-sized,
permanent backwater pool of the Housatonic River. The pool was connected to the river
by a narrow channel during high water events, but it becomes separated as water levels
fall. About 40 stems of this species were located in wet silt/muck near the periphery of
the pool. The edges of the pool were often densely vegetated by shrubs or herbs.
Wapato was not located in those areas, however, but was found in a sparsely vegetated
area with some exposed substrate. Associated species at this site included common
arrowhead, wool-grass, three-way sedge, purple loosestrife, American bur-reed, and
pickerelweed. This station was provided an EO rank of B due to moderate population
size, fair community condition, and public ownership of property.
One of the stations observed in 1999, found north of New Lenox Road, was located in
wet mud of a shaded vernal pool. The site, located within a floodplain forest dominated
by silver maple, was inundated for most of the spring season, and one plant was observed
in flower after the water level had decreased. Sixteen total plants were observed in an
area about 6 m2 Associated species at that site included false water-pepper, common
arrowhead, needle spikesedge, purple loosestrife, and northern water-plantain. This
occurrence was provided an EO rank of C based on small population size and public
ownership of property. The second station observed in 1999 was south of Willow Creek
in a small pool of water at the edge of a black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous
seepage swamp. The plants were located in a seasonally flooded depression that becomes
a wet, mucky basin as the water level decreases later in the growing season. Twelve
plants were observed in an area about 3 m . Four of the wapato plants were in flower and
one was in fruit. Associated herbaceous species included northern water-plantain, purple
loosestrife, moneywort, sensitive fern, false-nettle, and northern water-horehound. This
station was considered to possess an EO rank of C based on factors such as small
population size and fair community condition.
Wapato was historically known from the PSA in seven locations. Four of these sites
were carefully searched for the species. Only at the site described above (1998
rediscovery) were any plants of this species observed at previously documented stations.
SECTION m - 1-33
-------
At one historic location, north of New Lenox Road, the backwater area was completely
filled with intertangled rhizomes of false water-pepper. There was no available substrate
(e.g., exposed, saturated mud) and it is likely that wapato no longer occurs there. At the
two remaining historic sites, upstream of the confluence with Yokum Brook and south of
the Holmes Road, no wapato plants were observed. Common arrowhead, a closely
related species, was observed at both locations.
Threats to wapato in the PSA include alteration of hydrology and invasive plants.
Known stations of wapato along the Housatonic River occur in seasonally flooded pools
and backwaters that show significant reduction or complete lack of standing water
(except after storm events) during the summer growing season. Few plants can tolerate
that range of conditions (i.e., from fully aquatic to terrestrial wetland). Changes in
hydrology, such as in increase in mean pool elevation of Woods Pond, would alter the
specific micro-site for one station of wapato and potentially cause local extirpations.
Invasive plants are those species capable of growing at densities that exclude other
vegetation. Some vernal pools immediately north of New Lenox Road have been
aggressively colonized by false water-pepper. Though native, false water-pepper, which
is capable of tolerating the varied seasonal conditions of temporary pools, can supplant
other vegetation and form nearly monotypic colonies. Periodic monitoring and careful
removal of this species from pools containing wapato could become an important
conservation practice in this region.
Bristly Crowfoot
Bristly crowfoot is an annual or sometimes perennial herb of wetlands and shores (Figure
1-10). It, like many other members of its genus, is reported to possess poisonous
vegetative parts. Bristly crowfoot occurs throughout northern North America and eastern
Asia. This species occurs in all of the New England states. In addition to Massachusetts,
it is listed as a plant of state conservation concern in Connecticut and Vermont.
SECTION HI - 1-34
-------
Bristly crowfoot was found in a small, rocky opening along the shore of the Housatonic
River north of Woods Pond (Map 1-2). Though historically known from the PSA, this
station represented a new location for this species. The opening, approximately 2 nr in
size, occurred adjacent to the river channel and was surrounded by a circumneutral shrub
swamp dominated by red-osier dogwood, American hornbeam, and American hazelnut.
Six plants were observed, four in flower and two in fruit. Associated herbaceous plants
included sensitive fern, northern three-lobed bedstraw, northern water-horehound,
clearweed, virgin's bower, tall meadow-rue, and water-parsnip. This station was
considered to possess an EO rank of C based largely on small population size and public
ownership of property.
Figure 1-10 Flowers and fruits of bristly crowfoot.
The historic location (i.e., mapped by MNHESP) for bristly crowfoot in the PSA was
visited during the 1999 field season. This site was occupied by two crowfoots—creeping
crowfoot and swamp crowfoot. Creeping crowfoot is a European species that has been
introduced to North America. It is occasionally found in or adjacent to disturbed or
cleared areas along the Housatonic River. Swamp crowfoot is a native species of
forested wetlands and is a frequent plant of the PSA. It is not known if this location is
based on a misidentified voucher specimen or if bristly crowfoot no longer occurs there.
The primary threat to bristly crowfoot is alteration of hydrology. This would include
increase in mean pool elevation of Woods Pond. As the known occurrence of this species
occurs immediately adjacent to the river channel, a slight increase in water level could
SECTION III - 1-35
-------
inundate the plants. Though this species is an obligate wetland plant, it does not
normally grow in standing water.
Variegated Scouring-Rush
Variegated scouring-rush is a small, colonial, free-sporing vascular plant (Figure 1-11).
Closely related to ferns, this species does not produce true flowers, but rather reproduces
by spores released from a terminal spore cone. Variegated scouring-rush usually occurs
in disturbed, wet areas with high pH, such as ditches, eroding banks, marble quarries, and
shores in limestone bedrock regions (Sorrie 1987). This species possesses a circumboreal
distribution, occurring as far south in North America as Pennsylvania and Colorado, hi
New England, this plant can be found in all states except Rhode Island. Variegated
scouring-rush is also listed as a species of state conservation concern in Maine and New
Hampshire.
¦
li
1
Figure 1-11 Variegated scouring-rush.
Upper stem and strobilus (i.e., spore cone).
Variegated scouring-rush was discovered growing at three locations, including two in the
PSA and one in the October Mountain State Forest (Maps 1-2 and 1-4). hi 1998, a large
population comprised of thousands of stems was discovered on the sloping west shore of
a small pool in a gravel pit near the Pittsfield WWTF. The upper part of the population
was growing in dry sand, while the lower part was growing in wet sand that was
inundated for much of the year. Silky dogwood, common reed, common flat-topped
SECTION III - 1-36
-------
goldenrod, and purple loosestrife were associated species growing with this rare horsetail.
This site possesses an EO rank of B based on large population size and public ownership
of property.
The second population was discovered in a small, excavated depression in a field within
urban Pittsfield in 1999. The field was a former oxbow and is adjacent to the Housatonic
River floodplain. Approximately 1,000 stems were observed during the 1999 field
season, with 70 percent of the larger stems bearing spore cones. The plants occurred in a
15 m2 area. Associated herb species, typical of wet, agricultural fields in New England,
included common horsetail, old-field cinquefoil, heart-leaved willow, reed fescue,
sensitive fern, tall goldenrod, foxtail sedge, and larger straw sedge. This site possesses an
EO rank of C due to fair population size and poor community condition.
The third population was discovered in the October Mountain State Forest in 2000. The
plants occurred in an 8 m x 2 m colony along the edge of a gravel road that passed
between two small ponds. The shoulder of the road was vegetated with early
successional herbs and shrubs including wild strawberry, golden Alexanders, beaked
willow, heart-leaved willow, red clover, white bedstraw, and Canada goldenrod. Though
this site was adjacent to a road and threatened by vehicle traffic and future road
maintenance activities, the location was in an out-of-way area that does not experience
high traffic flow. This site possesses an EO rank of C based on factors such as fair
population size and public ownership of property.
Variegated scouring-rush is a wetland species that occupies recently disturbed areas of
appropriately high pH. The located sites are or have been altered by mowing, grading, or
excavation, and these activities have removed woody competitors. Of concern to this
species would be drastic alterations to the site, such as topsoil removal, grading, paving,
or ditching to lower the local water table. Such changes may eliminate the extant
favorable micro-habitat and potentially preclude future opportunities for growth of
variegated scouring-rush at the sites.
SECTION m - 1-37
-------
Eastern Black Currant
Eastern black currant is a small, somewhat colonial shrub of northeastern and north-
central United States and adjacent Canada (Figure 1-12). It grows in the understory and
in openings of wet-mesic to hydric forests. This species can be somewhat inconspicuous,
but it is easily identified once located due to an odd coating of tiny, yellow resin dots on
the leaves, flowers, and fruits. Eastern black currant is known from all New England
states. No other state reports this plant as a species of conservation concern. In
Massachusetts, this species is reported to be locally common along the Housatonic River
(Sorrie 1987).
This shrub was found in riparian forests nearly throughout the PSA (Map 1-2). Detailed
occurrence data were collected for seven populations along the Housatonic River.
Eastern black currant was found in both marginally hydric sites (i.e., high-terrace
floodplain forests) and frequently inundated areas (i.e., black ash-red maple-tamarack
calcareous seepage swamps). It did not appear to show preference for micro-sites, such
as mounds or depressions. Populations were comprised of as few as one individual to as
many as 40, although most sites had fewer than 10 individuals. Associated vascular
plants varied widely due to major community differences at each site. Box-elder, red
maple, silver maple, ostrich fern, drooping woodreed, and bur oak were plants that were
found at two or more of the American black currant locations. All observed stations were
provided an EO rank of C.
Figure 1-12 Flowers of eastern black currant.
SECTION in - 1-38
-------
Eastern black currant was often found in and adjacent to small openings within wetland
forests along the Housatonic River. The openings were caused by microsite conditions
(i.e., a pool of water in which trees could not grow) and anthropogenic disturbance (i.e.,
forest clearing activity). This suggests that eastern black currant can tolerate, and in
some cases benefit from, light canopy disturbance. However, intensive forest clearing
that alters multiple community strata would likely extirpate this species. Eastern black
currant is a wetland species and alterations to site hydrology would likely impact extant
populations.
Bur Oak
Bur oak is a wetland tree well known for its large and conspicuously fringed fruits
(Figure 1-13). It is found over much of eastern and central United States and adjacent
Canada. It is known to be one of the most cold tolerant oaks and is primarily found in
limestone or calcareous clay regions (Nixon 1997). The species is capable of growing to
heights of 30 m
Figure 1-13 Leaf of bur oak.
This tree was found in many locations in the PSA south of New Lenox Road (Map 1-2).
In all cases, it occurred in forested swamps. In most areas, it was an infrequent member
of the community. In the wetter black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage
swamps, for example, where surface water was often visible in depressions between the
mounds, bur oaks were generally scattered subcanopy trees with narrow stems (diameter
SECTION III - 1-39
-------
at breast height [dbh] less than 25 cm) growing on the mounds. Associated trees in these
areas were red maple and black ash. In one area, upstream of Woods Pond in the broad
floodplain west of the Housatonic River, this oak was sometimes codominant, with large
canopies and thick stems (many stems exceeding 40 cm dbh). Some of the trees in this
area exceeded 100 years of age. In this area the ground was relatively level and micro-
site differences were not great (i.e., the ground surface lacked pronounced pit and mound
topography). Associated tree species at these sites included red maple and American
hornbeam. Additionally, bur oak was found as a single stem or a few trees in several
areas where the floodplain forest had not been cleared for agricultural purposes. This
species was previously reported to occur in the PSA, but several new locations were
discovered. The observations of bur oak south of New Lenox Road are considered to
have belonged to a single macrosite. The occurrence was provided an EO rank of A.
Though forest clearing and non-native species have reduced community condition in this
area, the population was large, occurred on publicly owned land, consisted of large and
reproductive individuals, and was not likely to be extirpated by extrinsic human factors.
Threats to bur oak include canopy removal and changes in site hydrology. Clearing of
floodplain forest along the Housatonic River for any purpose could extirpate bur oak
plants. This species can be found in wet-mesic to hydric soils in the PSA. It would be
affected by changes in the water table as it was not found in well-drained soils or soils
that are inundated for prolonged periods during the growing season. Therefore,
preservation of bur oak in the PSA requires both local and watershed level protection of
hydrological resources.
Crooked-Stem Aster
Crooked-stem aster is an upright herb of rich, moist, sometimes temporarily flooded soils
of eastern United States (Figure 1-14). It is a colonial species that forms loose colonies
from its underground, horizontal stem called a rhizome. Like other species of
composites, it has small flowers aggregated into larger, false flowers referred to as
capitula. This species is found only in Connecticut and Massachusetts in New England
and is listed as a species of conservation concern in both states.
SECTION HI - 1-40
-------
Figure 1-14 Crooked-stemmed aster.
This species was discovered growing along the edge of a narrow, single-lane road
through a young red maple swamp south of New Lenox Road (Map 1-2). This forested
area had been cleared for agriculture in the recent past, as evidenced by the young-aged
trees and bordering open fields. Approximately 60 stems of crooked-stemmed aster were
observed in 1998. Associated understory species included heart-leaved aster, sensitive
fern, lady fern, and choke cherry. Crooked-stem aster was not previously documented to
occur in the PSA. The occurrence was provided an EO rank of C based on factors such
as moderate population size, community condition, and existence of current threats to the
population.
This species is currently threatened by road maintenance. The single lane road that
passes by the crooked-stem aster plants is an infrequently used right-of-way to access two
fields south of New Lenox Road. In 1998, this population was decimated by vegetation
clearing to keep the road open. About 25 percent of the population remained. The
colony persisted but did not substantially recover in 1999 or 2000. Other activities that
disturb vegetation or site hydrology are also threats to this species.
SECTION III - 1-41
-------
Foxtail Sedge
Foxtail sedge is a tufted, grass-like herb of wet or temporarily flooded meadows, shores,
and open areas. This species produces tiny, wind-pollinated flowers borne in a spike at
the summit of a slender, triangular stem (Figure 1-15). It occurs over much of the north-
central and northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. Foxtail sedge is reported
from all six New England states. In addition to Massachusetts, it is also listed as a
species of state conservation concern in Maine, Connecticut, and Vermont.
This species was observed growing in an open power line right-of-way adjacent to the
Housatonic River north of New Lenox Road (Map 1-2). The site was located within the
annual flood zone of the river channel and, due to vegetation management within the
right-of-way, occurred as an ostrich fern meadow. The sedge occurs on level ground in
deep fluvial silt deposits. The surrounding, intact community is a transitional floodplain
forest. Only two individuals, both with mature fruit, were seen during the field survey.
This occurrence was provided an EO rank of C. Though the population was small and
within a disturbed right-of-way, it is located in the Housatonic River Valley State
Wildlife Management Area where abundant suitable habitat exists. The site was last
documented in 1993 by the MNHESP.
Figure 1-15 Inflorescence of foxtail sedge.
SECTION III - 1-42
-------
Gray's Sedge
Gray's sedge is a grass-like herb of mesic to hydric forests (Figure 1-16). In the
northeast, it is frequently found growing in forests that occur on rich floodplains of
medium to large rivers. The range of Gray's sedge includes north-central and
northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. In New England, this species occurs in
Massachusetts, Vermont, and Connecticut and is listed as a species of conservation
concern in Massachusetts and Vermont. Though described as occurring "not infrequently
in wet woods" by Hoffman (1904), Gray's sedge is rare and possesses a global rank of
G4. The cause for concern is that much of its former habitat has been converted to
agricultural land.
Figure 1-16 Inflorescence of Gray's sedge.
Approximately 25 fruiting plants of this species were seen over approximately 0.5 ha in a
black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage swamr during 1998 surveys (Map 1-
2). The site was west of the Housatonic River channel near the large backwater areas
upstream of Woods Pond. Most of the canopies of the forested swamps in this area were
dominated by red maple and black ash. However, where Gray's sedge was observed,
large bur oak trees were locally common. Other herbs common in the area were brome-
like sedge, sensitive fern, and calico aster. The population was provided an EO rank of B
based on factors such as moderate population size, public ownership of property, and
occurrence with other species of state conservation concern. Site visits in 2000 showed a
reduced population due to flooding of the community. The high water levels were the
result of a heavy rain year and perhaps also beaver activity, which had increased in area.
SECTION III - 1-43
-------
Gray's sedge was historically known from the PSA just downstream of the confluence
with Yokum Brook. It was last seen in that area in 1920, but field surveys in 1998 and
2000 did not reveal any plants. Assuming the occurrence was accurately mapped, it is
not known why plants no longer occur there given that an intact natural community does
exist.
Gray's sedge is threatened by activities that change or degrade the quality of local plant
community. These activities include forest clearing and changes in site hydrology (e.g.,
impoundments, ditching). The site containing Gray's sedge was inundated for most of
the 2000 growing season. Gray's sedge is a wetland plant, but it does not normally grow
in standing water and will likely be affected by prolonged inundation. Though the
weather cannot be controlled, beaver dams that may be contributing to the observed
increase in water level can be removed.
Hemlock-Parsley
Hemlock-parsley is a temperate and boreal herb of open and forested wetlands (Figure
1-17). In the northeast, it is frequently found in wetlands and stream shores that contain
some conifer species in the canopy. This plant has dissected leaves and small, white
flowers borne in umbels like many other members of its family (the carrot family).
Hemlock-parsely is found in all New England states except Rhode Island, although only
Massachusetts lists this plant as a species of state conservation concern. Sorrie (1987)
reports that hemlock-parsely is common is some areas of Berkshire County but rare
elsewhere in the state.
SECTION HI - 1-44
-------
Figure 1-17 Leaf of hemlock-parsley.
Hemlock-parsley was located in a black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage
swamp adjacent to the west edge of a large power line clearing north of Willow Creek
(Map i -2). This community is considered rare in Massachusetts (S2) and is enriched by
calcareous groundwater as evidenced by the occurrence of brome-like sedge and rough-
leaved goldenrod. Seven plants of hemlock-parsely were observed, two of which
possessed flowers and fruits. In the vicinity of the plants, two conifer species, eastern
hemlock and eastern white pine, were locally abundant. Associated herbs included
cinnamon fern, purple-stemmed aster, and marsh fern. This species has not previously
been documented in the PSA. The site is provided an EO rank of C due to factors such as
small population size and good community condition.
Threats to hemlock-parsley include forest clearing and alteration to site hydrology. The
seepage swamp it occurs in has been impacted to the east by a wide power line clearing.
As well, the swamp is currently being cut on its west edge. If cutting activity continues
further into the swamp, it may impinge on the hemlock-parsley population. As this
species is a wetland plant, events that alter site hydrology can effect populations.
Protecting the site from large-scale disturbances will benefit this EO.
Fringed Gentian
Fringed gentian is an annual, upright herb with showy, blue flowers (Figure 1-18) that are
pollinated, in part, by bees (Order Hymenoptera). Like many other members of its family
in the northeast, these species flower late in the growing season (as late as October). It
SECTION III - 1-45
-------
occurs in the northeastern and north-central United States and adjacent Canada. In New
England, it is found in all states and is listed as a species of state conservation concern in
three (Vermont, New Hampshire, Rhode Island). Additionally, it was listed as rare in
Maine in the previous decade. Fringed gentian possesses a global rank of G4. It grows
in open and often moist areas, such as meadows, streamsides, and occasionally ditches.
Figure 1-18 Fringed gentian.
Fringed gentian was first identified from the Threemile Pond SWMA reference area on
20 April 2000 (Map i -3). At this time, the plants were dormant with no living material
above ground. However, approximately 15 withered, persistent stems from the previous
season were observed. At that time, it was growing in an open field that was adjacent to
a wet, circumneutral meadow. Several high-pH indicator plants were known to grow in
the vicinity, including shrubby cinquefoil, grass-of-Parnassus, and autumn willow. Other
plants growing in the immediate vicinity included tall flat-topped white aster, marsh fern,
red clover, male-berry, and palmate hop-clover. The site was again visited on 7
September 2000 to observe the plants in flower and collect population information. The
population had moved 50 m from the location observed in the spring, and was occurring
in and along an infrequently used single-lane road. Five plants were observed along less
than 10 m of road. This appeared to represent a reduction in population size; however,
the entire area was not systematically searched for more individuals. Fluctuation in
population size and shifting location is not uncommon with annual plants. This site was
provided an EO rank of D due to small population size and occurrence in a modified
habitat.
SECTION III - 1-46
-------
As with all plants that possess large, colorful flowers, over collection by wildflower
gatherers will be a continuing threat to populations. Drastic changes in site hydrology
(draining or inundation) also would threaten fringed gentian. Landscape alterations that
change the water level are not uncommon in agricultural areas. Therefore, protecting the
site from hydrological alterations would also help preserve fringed gentian at this
locality.
Hoary Willow
Hoary willow is a short, dioecious, colonial shrub of high-pH wetlands (Figure 1-19). It
typically grows in open or sparsely wooded fens and marshes. Like other willows, it
produces tiny unisexual flowers aggregated into an ament (or catkin). Each flower is
subtended by one or more glands that function as a nectary to attract potential pollinators.
This species' name is derived from the dull white hairs that cover the new stems and
leaves, providing a gray cast to the plant. It is found throughout a large part of glaciated
Canada and United States. Hoary willow is known from all New England states except
Rhode Island. In addition to Massachusetts, Maine and Vermont also list hoary willow as
rare.
Figure 1-19 Upper branch of hoary willow.
Hoary willow was seen in the Hinsdale Flats SWMA on 8 September 2000 (Map 1-5). It
was growing in a calcareous seepage marsh with high organic soil content at the
SECTION III - 1-47
-------
northwest end of Muddy Pond. The soil was saturated to the surface or, in areas, had
standing water about 1 cm deep. Approximately 110 upright stems were counted in an
area less then 10 m2 Associated plants included oblong bulrush, wire sedge, sweet gale,
beaked sedge, marsh cinquefoil, pussy willow, beaked willow, and shrubby cinquefoil,
the former two being dominant. Lepidopteran larvae (i.e., caterpillars) were observed on
some leaves, but they did not appear to be defoliating the shrubs. This occurrence was
provided an EO rank of C based on anthropogenic disturbance near the margin of the
community, small population size, and publicly owned property.
Because hoary willow is a wetland shrub, activities that alter the site hydrology could
threaten the plants. A large railroad line passes within 10 m of the occurrence, bisecting
the wetland that the willow grows in. Crushed stone has been used to create an elevated
berm for the tracks, which potentially acts as a hydrologic barrier. Continued expansion
or maintenance of the railroad could further impact the wetlands around Muddy Pond.
This EO should be brought to the attention of both the rail line company and land
managers of the state wildlife management area for discussion of conservation issues.
Hard-Stem Bulrush
Hard-stem bulrush is a robust, grass-like herb of open wetlands (Figure 1-20). Its leaves
are extremely reduced and do not perform the majority of the individual's photosynthesis
as with most other plants. Instead, hard-stem bulrush photosynthesizes by its green stem.
Its flowers are reduced, wind-pollinated, and aggregated together in an inflorescence near
the apex of the stem. Hard-stem bulrush is found throughout most of temperate North
America and occurs in all New England states except Rhode Island. In addition to
Massachusetts, hard-stem bulrush is also listed as rare in Connecticut.
SECTION HI - 1-48
-------
Hard-stem bulrush was observed on the east shore of Muddy Pond on 28 September 2000
(Map 1-5 ). The primary occurrence was a large, rhizomatous colony consisting of over
10,000 aerial stems (i.e., above-ground). The plants grew in 30-100 cm of water.
Associated plants included yellow water-lily, sweet gale, water-willow, floating
pondweed, water shield, and white water-lily. Three other smaller colonies were
observed at the southeast end of Muddy Pond in the vicinity of the outlet to the East
Branch Housatonic River. This occurrence was provided an EO rank of B based on
factors such as large population size, intact natural community, and public ownership of
property.
Also located on the shores of Muddy Pond were four colonies of the hybrid between
hard-stem and soft-stem bulrush (Map 1-5). This hybrid, referred to as oblong bulrush, is
relatively similar to hard-stem bulrush, but it varies subtly in several morphological
characters when closely inspected (Figure 1-21). Three of the colonies occurred at the
southeast end of the pond and one colony (the larger) occurred at the northwest end of the
pond. Those found at the southeast end occurred in relatively similar habitat to the hard-
stem bulrush (i.e., shallow water associated with aquatic plants). The colony located at
the northwest end, however, grew in soils with high organic matter content and very
shallow water (i.e., less than 10 cm deep). Associated plants there included broad-leaved
cattail, wire sedge, beaked sedge, hoary willow, shrubby cinquefoil, and marsh
cinquefoil. This station of oblong bulrush was provided an EO rank of B due to factors
SECTION III - 1-49
-------
such as moderate population size, presence of other state-listed species, and public
ownership of property.
Figure 1-21 Upper stem and inflorescence of oblong bulrush.
Oblong bulrush is the hybrid of hard-stem bulrush and soft-stem bulrush.
Oblong bulrush was also found along the southeast shore of Silver Lake. It grew in a
deep emergent marsh community that has been reduced in size by road construction and
several concrete shoreline structures. The population was large, occurring over 90 meters
of shoreline and comprised of at least 4,000 aerial stems. Associated species included
broad-leaved cattail, red-osier dogwood, northern three-lobed bedstraw, pussy willow,
and American willow-herb. Non-native species such as narrow-leaved cattail, purple
loosestrife, and yellow iris were also prevalent. Hybrid plants such as oblong bulrush
tend to be more prevalent in somewhat disturbed habitats (Smith 1969). Therefore it is
not surprising these plants were located where they were. Despite its moderately large
population size, this EO was provided a C rank due to the poor community condition
(e.g., anthropogenic impacts and non-native species).
Both hard-stem and oblong bulrush normally occur as large, rhizomatous colonies in
open habitats and are not often collected by people. Therefore, threats to these plants are
similar to those that threaten the community they occur in. Wetland impacts such as
filling and ditching are prime examples of activities that can harm populations of these
sedges. Protecting the surrounding natural community will serve to protect these two
plants.
SECTION III - 1-50
-------
Downy Wild-Rye
Downy wild-rye is a slender, tufted perennial grass of forests, woodlands, rocky slopes,
and riverbanks. It often occurs in mesic soils in limestone bedrock regions but is also
found on drier substrates in the western and northern plains (Barkworth and Campbell, in
ed.). The tiny flowers of this species are borne in arching to drooping spikes and are
concealed by subtending scales that terminate in long bristles (Figure 1-22). Downy
wild-rye is found in all New England states except Maine and New Hampshire. It is
listed as a species of state conservation concern in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and
Vermont.
Figure 1-22 Inflorescence of downy wild-rye.
Downy wild-rye was discovered in the PSA in a rich, floodplain terrace of the
Housatonic River upstream of the Pittsfield WWTF outfall. The high-terrace floodplain
forest had been reduced in size due to clearing for agricultural land. Furthermore, the
forest community was occupied by many non-native species (e.g., Morrow's
honeysuckle, Japanese barberry, common buckthorn, wood bluegrass). The site,
nonetheless, possesses qualities that make it a valued occurrence, which included
harboring additional state-listed species and being one of few remaining examples of its
community type in the Pittsfield area. Downy wild-rye grew under a canopy of
basswood, white ash, and black cherry. Fifty-five aerial stems were observed along a
115-m stretch of floodplain. Additional associated species included early blue cohosh,
white snakeroot, wild leek, long-beaked sedge, stream bank wild-rye, bottlebrush grass,
and American hornbeam. Though the population was of moderate size and occurred on
SECTION III - 1-51
-------
public property, the community was inhabited by many non-native species and has been
greatly diminished in size. Therefore, this population was provided an EO rank of C.
Threats to downy wild-rye include forest clearing and invasive species. The community
that currently harbors downy wild-rye has been drastically reduced in size to make space
for agricultural purposes (currently for corn). Further clearing would threaten this rare
grass. Several non-native shrubs were prevalent at the site and are capable of reducing
vigor of, or eliminating, downy wild-rye through competition for space and light. These
non-native plants may need to be controlled if preservation of downy wild-rye is
considered an important conservation objective.
Early Blue Cohosh
Early blue cohosh is an upright, deciduous, perennial herb of northeastern United States
and adjacent southern Quebec. It grows in rich, mesic, hardwood forests and is most
common, at least in New England, in limestone bedrock regions. This species possesses
somewhat precocious flowers. This means that the flowers mature prior to the expansion
and development of mature leaves (Figure 1-23). Early blue cohosh has unusual seeds.
As the ovules develop, they soon rupture the ovary wall and mature as naked, bright blue
seeds. This species is found in New England only in New Hampshire, Vermont, and
Massachusetts.
Figure 1-23 Flowering stem of early blue cohosh.
Early blue cohosh was discovered in three locations: two in the PSA and one in the
October Mountain State Forest reference area (Maps 1-2 and 1-4). One site adjacent to
the Flousatonic River was located in Pittsfield upstream of the WWTF. The physical and
SECTION III - 1-52
-------
biological details of this site are discussed under downy wild-rye. Associated spring-
emerging species included trout lily, wild leek, and Dutchman's breeches. The early blue
cohosh population was comprised of 55 aerial stems in a 50 m x 30 m area. This site was
provided an EO rank of C based on moderate population size and marginal community
condition (i.e., prevalence of invasive species).
The second site adjacent to the Housatonic River was in Lenox along the Woodland
Road. The plants were located near the upland edge of the river floodplain in a rich
mesic forest. The canopy was dominated by white ash and black cherry. Choke cherry,
hazelnut, and Morrow's honeysuckle were common shrubs. Associated herbs included
Virginia waterleaf, trout lily, Christmas fern, purple trillium, wild ginger, bellwort, false
Solomon's seal, and long-stalked sedge. The population of early blue cohosh was
moderately large, comprised of over 800 stems. This EO is provided a rank of B due to
population size, good community condition, and publicly owned property.
The third site for early blue cohosh was in the October Mountain State Forest. It was
located in a mesic, hardwood forest southeast of Washington Mountain Lake. The young
canopy was dominated by sugar maple, white ash, and paper birch. Common shrubs
were sugar maple and balsam fir seedlings. Dominant herbs included trout lily,
Christmas fern, marginal wood fern, wild leek, and white wood aster. The population
was comprised of over 150 aerial stems. This population is provided an EO rank of C
based on moderate population size and young age of canopy trees.
The prime threat to early blue cohosh populations is forest clearing. Extensive canopy
removal for any purpose will modify the understory habitat and be detrimental to this
species. Policies that protect forest stands will serve to also protect early blue cohosh.
Cluster Sanicle
Cluster sanicle is a perennial herb of the carrot family with palmately divided leaves
(Figure 1-24). It possesses unisexual flowers borne in separate portions of the
inflorescence on the same plant. Its carpellate (i.e., ovule-bearing) flowers appear as burs
due to the abundant prickles borne on the ovary. This species occurs in the eastern
United States and adjacent southern Canada. Cluster sanicle is found in every New
SECTION HI - 1-53
-------
England state except Rhode Island. It is listed as a species of state conservation concern
in Massachusetts, Maine, and New Hampshire.
Figure 1-24 Upper stein and fruits of cluster sanicle.
Cluster sanicle was observed growing along a historic railroad line north of Willow
Creek (Map 1-2). The site is located in a mixed hardwood-conifer forest adjacent to a
large, red maple swamp complex. Eastern hemlock was observed as a locally dominant
canopy tree in the area. Other species of herbs that favor rich mesic sites were present,
such as lopseed. This colony of cluster sanicle was provided an EO rank of C based on
factors such as moderate population size and occurrence in a disturbed community.
Threats to cluster sanicle include forestry activity and recreational traffic. Though it may
utilize small openings and edges, cluster sanicle is a species of forests and would likely
be extirpated from areas of widespread canopy clearing. The railroad bed this plant
occurs along was infrequently used by motor vehicles and was being used as a horse-
riding trail. Trampling of stems or road maintenance may have an adverse affect on the
plants. Locating the occurrence and diverting activity away from the plants could be
achieved through landowner contact.
4.0 Developed Communities
Developed communities are those areas that have recent and on-going human
modification. These communities, such as residential and business lots, roadways, and
intensely managed fields, are substantially different from regionally pristine sites.
SECTION III - 1-54
-------
Absence of forest canopy, large areas of impervious surface, and prevalence of non-
native, colonizing plants serve to identify developed communities in the absence of
obvious indicators such as buildings, paved roads, and recreational fields.
4.1 Agricultural Lands
Significant portions of the Housatonic River floodplain in Pittsfield and Lenox have been
used for food and hay production. Those areas that are still in use, such as upstream of
the Pittsfield WWTF outfall, are considered here. Areas no longer managed for food or
hay production, although sometimes mowed on an annual basis, are described as wet
meadow or cultural grassland, depending on site hydrology. Corn is a major crop plant in
the Housatonic River valley, along with pumpkin and squash. This community generally
resembles a monoculture of the planted food species, with non-native species occupying
the edge of the tilled ground. Horse-nettle, oak-leaved goosefoot, pigweed, and alfalfa
are common species seen near agricultural fields and rarely elsewhere in the PSA. Use of
agricultural fields has affected the condition of remaining natural communities. Non-
native species that become established in agricultural fields are able to colonize disturbed
areas in natural communities. Pumpkins, for example, can be observed growing on
riverine point bars and beaches upstream of New Lenox Road. Animals can be directed
away from natural communities during certain seasons based on the availability of refuse
crops. American crows, gray squirrels, and Canada geese, in particular, utilize
agricultural fields during fall and winter rather than exclusively using natural
communities.
4.2 Residential, Commercial, and Public Development
Urban Pittsfield represents the largest tract of public development in and adjacent to the
PSA. This community is characterized by homes, lawns, buildings, and paved lots. Its
influences on the natural communities of the Housatonic River are apparent. Much of the
public development is relatively impervious to precipitation. This causes storm water to
rapidly enter the East Branch Housatonic River and quickly alter the water level. Many
species of ornamental shrubs have escaped and now occur as a non-native presence in the
riparian forests. These plants include European spindle-tree, Chinese spindle-tree,
SECTION HI - 1-55
-------
Morrow's honeysuckle, goutweed, and common privet. Clearing of floodplain forests,
channelization of the river, and filling former oxbow ponds are additional impacts of
public development on local natural communities. Accumulation of trash and discarded
debris are apparent in some areas of the PSA.
4.3 Transportation
Transportation-related development in the PSA largely consists of roads (both paved and
gravel) and rail lines. Both of these features form bisecting paths through riparian and
upland communities in the study area. Maintenance of these passages disturbs soil and
provides a colonization site for non-native species. Morrow's honeysuckle, for example,
is most common, and sometimes dominant, in October Mountain State Forest within 100
m of the main gravel roads. Beyond this distance, the species becomes scarce or absent.
The rail line system has a characteristic flora that grows on the xeric, crushed stone
substrate. Spotted knapweed, thyme, purple lovegrass, common mullein, and tower-
mustard are commonly observed along railroad systems but not in undisturbed
communities in the PSA.
4.4 Recreational Facilities
Several types of outdoor enthusiasts utilize the Housatonic River and the associated
riparian communities. Paddlers are frequent on the downstream sections of the river and
the Joe Decker Canoe Launch (off New Lenox Road) was constructed, in part, for this
purpose. Hunters and anglers also use this boat launch, as well as an informal landing at
Woods Pond, to access waterfowl and fish resources. Several trails, including those off
the Brunswick Road near the confluence, the Woodland Road, and the Springfield
Terminal rail line are used by people for walking and birding. The Woodland Road
(October Mountain State Forest) also experiences extensive use by runners and mountain
bikers.
SECTION HI - 1-56
-------
5.0 Literature Cited
Barkworth, M.E., and J.J.N. Campbell. In ed. Elymus in Flora of North America Editorial
Committee. Flora of North America. Oxford University Press, NY, USA.
Color Communications Inc. 1997. Earth Colors Soil Color Book. NY, USA.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands
and Deep Water Habitats of the United States. U.S. Government Printing Office.
Fernald, M.L. 1950. Gray's Manual of Botany. Eighth ed. Van Nostrand Company, New
York, NY, USA.
Flora of North America Editorial Committee. 1993. Flora of North America. Vol. 2.
Oxford University Press, NY, USA.
1997. Flora of North America. Vol. 3. Oxford University Press, NY, USA.
2000. Flora of North America. Vol. 22. Oxford University Press, NY, USA.
Gawler, S. 2000. Natural Communities of Maine: Keys and Descriptions, field draft
review. Maine Natural Areas Program, Augusta, ME, USA.
Gleason, H.A., and A. Cronquist. 1991. Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern United
States and Adjacent Canada. Second ed. The New York Botanical Garden, NY,
USA.
Haines, A., and T.F. Vining. 1998. Flora of Maine. V.F. Thomas Company, Bar Harbor,
ME, USA.
Hoffman, R. 1904. Notes on the flora of Berkshire County, Massachusetts. Rhodora 6:202-
206.
Lortie, J.P., S.C. Rooney, and J. McMahon. 1992. Landscape Analysis and Inventory of the
Nahmakanta Management Unit. Report to the Bureau of Public Lands, Augusta,
ME, USA.
SECTION HI - 1-57
-------
Magee, D.W., and H.E. Ahles. 1999. The Flora of the Northeast. University of
Massachusetts Press, MA, USA.
MNHESP (Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program). 1999.
Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas: 2000-2001 Edition. Division of Fisheries
and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
The Natural Heritage Network. 2000. U.S. Natural Heritage Programs. URL
http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/usmap.html.
Nixon, K.C. 1997. Quercus in Flora of North American Editorial Commitee. Flora of North
America, Vol. 3. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA.
Seymour, F.C. 1982. The Flora of New England. Phytologia Memoirs V.
Smith, S.G. 1969. Natural hybridization in the Scirpus lacustris complex in north central
United States, p. 175-199. In J.E. Gunckel (ed.) Current Topics in Plant Science.
Academic Press Inc., NY, USA.
Sorrie, B.A. 1987. Notes on the rare flora of Massachusetts. Rhodora 89:113-196.
Swain, P.C., and J.B. Kearsley. 2000. Classification of the Natural Communities of
Massachusetts. Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program,
Westborough, MA, USA.
TechLaw, Inc. 1998. Preliminary Report: Wetland Characterization and Function-Value
Assessment, Housatonic River from Newell Street to Woods Pond. TechLaw, Inc.,
Boston, MA, USA.
1999. Preliminary Report, Housatonic River Ecological Characterization.
Massachusetts.
Weatherbee, P.B. 1996. Flora of Berkshire County Massachusetts. The Berkshire Museum,
Pittsfield, MA, USA.
Weatherbee, P.B., and G.E. Crow. 1992. Natural plant communities of Berkshire County,
Massachusetts. Rhodora 94:171-209.
SECTION HI - 1-58
-------
Chapter 2 Macroin vertebrates
1.0 Introduction
Components of the invertebrate community in the PSA were studied over a three-year period,
from 1998 to 2000. The goal of the invertebrate investigations was to gather qualitative
information on invertebrates in the PSA. This was not a complete, comprehensive survey of all
taxa because of the immense diversity that naturally occurs in a local or regional invertebrate
community. Instead, several species groups were selected that were relatively easy to sample
with specific methods, targeted for tissue analysis as part of ongoing ecological and human
health risk investigations, or easy to sample in conjunction with the other targeted invertebrate
and vertebrate studies. The invertebrate groups selected included freshwater mussels,
dragonflies, vernal pool invertebrates, earthworms, and terrestrial litter invertebrates.
2.0 Methods
2.1 Incidental Observations
The presence of certain invertebrate taxa within the PSA was documented during year-round
field investigations in 1998, 1999, and 2000. Many of those field investigations were detailed
studies in support of ecological risk assessment surveys, and consisted of specific methods
targeted at collecting animals from a variety of taxonomic groups to sample their tissues. Those
investigations also provided an opportunity to confirm the presence of some invertebrate
populations within the PSA and reference areas through incidental observations of any species.
During the course of the field investigations, observations and opportunitic captures of certain
invertebrates (i.e., freshwater mussels and dragonflies) within the PSA and reference areas were
recorded, along with the habitat that they occurred in. When appropriate, other notes were
recorded, including activity, interactions with other species, and general health.
2.2 Mussel Survey
Freshwater mussel surveys were undertaken in 1998 to: 1) determine the historic distribution of
mussels in the Housatonic River drainage; 2) determine the historic and current distribution of
mussels within the PSA, as well as upstream and downstream; 3) identify the host fish, if known,
SECTION HI - 2-1
-------
for the mussels that occurred or still exist within the PSA; and 4) identify the wildlife species
that are known or expected to prey upon the mussel species found in the PSA.
To accomplish the survey objectives, a literature study and a field study were conducted. Dr.
Doug Smith of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst was retained to determine the historic
distribution of mussels in the Housatonic River drainage system. This was accomplished by
summarizing scientific and technical literature on historic and recent freshwater mussel surveys
in the region, and by reviewing collections at regional museums including the Museum of
Zoology at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, the American Museum of Natural
History in New York, the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University in
Cambridge, MA, and the National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. In addition,
regional guides on the distribution and ecology of freshwater mussels (Clarke 1981, Fichtel and
Smith 1995, Smith 1995, Strayer and Jirka 1997, Nedeau et al. 2000) and various scientific
journals were reviewed to identify the ecology, habitat requirements, and natural history of
mussel species occurring in Massachusetts, particularly any found within the PSA.
Field surveys incorporating largely qualitative search methods commonly used for freshwater
mussel surveys were conducted within the PSA, as well as at upstream and downstream sites.
Surveys were conducted in areas that were shallow enough to observe the river bottom through
viewing scopes or glass-bottomed viewing buckets. This was generally limited to water that was
less than 1 m (3 ft.) deep, depending on clarity, and included a nearly continuous search from the
upstream end of the PSA to just upstream of the Pittsfield WWTF. In downstream portions of
the PSA, deeper water and soft sediments restricted the work to shorelines and shallow areas that
were surveyed with viewing buckets from a canoe.
Similar surveys were conducted in representative habitats upstream and downstream of the PSA.
In general, representative habitats for freshwater mussels include stable substrates of coarse sand
or sand-gravel mixtures, although some species (particularly the genus Pyganodon) use soft, silty
sediments (Pennak 1978, McMahon 1991). Upstream surveys extended up the East Branch
Housatonic River to Hinsdale and included five sites, while downstream surveys were conducted
at six sites that extended down the main stem of the Housatonic River to Great Barrington (Map
2-1). In addition, mussel observations were also recorded from the reference areas used for other
SECTION HI - 2-2
-------
ecological surveys in 1999 and 2000 (Muddy Pond, Ashley Lake, Washington Mountain Lake,
and Threemile Pond).
At all sites where mussels were found, the total number of each species (both live and relic
shells) was recorded. Any observations on the condition of the mussels such as gravid females
or gross shell deformities were also recorded. Finally, habitat characteristics such as substrate,
water depth, and water velocity were recorded on data sheets at all survey sites, regardless of the
presence or absence of mussels. Mussel locations within the study area were also located by
GPS survey.
2.3 Dragonfly Surveys
2.3.1 Exuvia Collection
When larval dragonflies (also called nymphs) leave the water to transform into their adult form,
they shed their exoskeletons and transform into their first flight-capable stage, called the teneral
stage. Tenerals then mature to become adult dragonflies. These shed exoskeletons that are left
behind are called exuvia. Dragonfly surveys in the PSA consisted of exuvia collection along the
riverbanks and the opportunistic aerial netting of teneral and adult dragonflies. Exuvia surveys
were conducted along nine 200-m transects (Maps 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4), which are characterized in
Table 2-1. Transect locations were based on the diversity of communities to ensure the
maximum number of habitat types were represented from the confluence of the East and West
Branch Housatonic River downstream to the inlet of Woods Pond. Each transect was surveyed
five times between May and September 1999. Two observers slowly walked or canoed each
transect and collected exuvia from vegetation, rocks, logs, and exposed substrates. Because
larvae rarely travel more than 2 m from the water when they shed their exuviae, surveys were
conducted by foot in the shallow upstream portions of the PSA and by canoe in the deeper
downstream areas along the immediate shoreline of the river. Exuviae were placed in round
paperboard containers, cataloged, and sent to a contracted lab for identification.
SECTION HI - 2-3
-------
Table 2-1 Exuviae transect habitat descriptions.
Transect
Number
Bank Morphology
Adjacent Communities
Channel
Width
(m)
Flow
Characteristics
Substrate
Water Depth
(m)
1
Vertically cut bank with
exposed roots; accretion
bar at abrupt turn.
Transitional floodplain
forest.
16
Quick-flowing
water; pool, riffle,
and run habitats.
Sand and
cobble.
0.6-2.5
2
Vertically cut bank with
exposed roots; accretion
bar at abrupt turn.
Transitional floodplain
forest.
16-25
Quick-flowing
water; pool, riffle,
and run habitats.
Sand, cobble,
and soft
muck.
1.3
3
Vertically cut bank with
exposed roots; accretion
bar at abrupt turn.
Transitional floodplain
forest.
20-25
Slow-flowing
water; run habitats.
Sand, cobble,
and soft
muck.
1.3
4
Vertically cut bank with
exposed roots; accretion
bar at abrupt turn.
High-terrace
floodplain forest.
25-33
Slow-flowing
water; pool and run
habitats.
Sand, cobble,
and soft
muck.
1.3-2.0
5
Sloping bank; accretion
bar at abrupt turn.
High-terrace
floodplain forest.
25-33
Slow-flowing
water; pool and run
habitats.
Sand, cobble,
and soft
muck.
1.3-2.0
6
Vertically cut bank with
overhanging vegetation.
Shrub swamp, wet
meadow, and
transitional floodplain
forest.
23-26
Slow-flowing
water; run habitat.
Soft muck.
>2.0
7
Vertical bank with
emergent herbaceous and
woody vegetation.
Shrub swamp, wet
meadow, and
transitional floodplain
forest.
25-30
Slow-flowing
water; run habitat.
Soft muck.
>2.0
8
Sloping bank consisting of
shrub vegetation; narrow
peninsula dominated by
reed canarygrass.
Shrub swamp, shallow
emergent marsh, and
transitional floodplain
forest.
25-33
Slow-flowing
water; run habitat.
Soft muck.
>2.0
9
Sloping bank with
emergent herbaceous and
woody vegetation.
Shrub swamp, deep
emergent marsh, and
transitional floodplain
forest.
25-150
Still and slow-
flowing water.
Soft muck.
>2.0
SECTION HI - 2-4
-------
Figure 2-1 Dragonfly exuvia on reed canarygrass.
Abandoned exoskeletons of the larvae are known as exuviae
and are as useful in identification to species as are the larvae
themselves (Brunelle 1999).
Exuviae were also collected opportunistically, when observed, from throughout the PSA and
reference areas. Reference areas included Muddy Pond in Hinsdale Flats SWMA, Washington
Mountain Lake in October Mountain State Forest, and Threemile Pond SWMA (Maps II-1, 11-2,
and H-4).
2.3.2 Adult Collection
Opportunistic aerial netting for dragonflies and damselflies was also conducted during the course
of exuviae collections and other field surveys. The opportunistic collection period was between
early June and late September, coinciding with the exuviae surveys. Teneral and mature adult
dragonflies and damselflies were netted, given a preliminary identification, euthanized in a
killing jar if needed, cataloged as reference specimens, and sent to a contracted lab for
verification. Since this method was more destructive to the individual dragonflies, it was limited
to a maximum of two specimens for each common species and one specimen for rare species.
Dragonflies and damselflies were also collected from reference areas including Threemile Pond
SWMA, Washington Mountain Lake in October Mountain State Forest, and Muddy Pond is the
Hinsdale Flats State Wildlife Management Area. Field identification was aided by the use of
Walker (1953, 1958), Needham and Westfall (1954), Walker and Corbet (1975), Holder (1996),
and Legler etal. (1998).
SECTION III - 2-5
-------
2.4 Vernal Pool Invertebrate Survey
Seventeen vernal pools in the PSA were surveyed for aquatic macroinvertebrates during 1998
(Map 2-5). Each pool was surveyed twice, once in May and once in June. Ten aquatic funnel
traps were randomly placed in each of the 17 pools selected for sampling by establishing a
transect line along the long axis of the pool, selecting random distances along the transect, and
then selecting random distances laterally from the transect, into the pool. Traps were placed in
the pools either in the evening, and collected the following morning, or in the early morning, and
collected several hours later. The time and date when traps were placed in the pool were
recorded on data sheets. Water quality data, such as water temperature, pH, conductivity, and
dissolved oxygen, were also recorded. When traps were collected, all aquatic invertebrates in the
aquatic funnel traps were collected and preserved in 90 percent ethyl alcohol and submitted to an
identification laboratory (Lotic, Inc. of Unity, ME). In addition, all 68 vernal pools identified
within the PSA in 1998 were visited and presence of common invertebrates (e.g., fairy shrimp,
water beetles, mayflies) was noted.
2.5 Earthworm Sampling
Earthworms were collected from three sites in the PSA for toxicological analysis. These
collection sites were co-located with small mammal collection sites (Sites 13, 14, and 15) (Map
6-7). Two sites occurred in transitional floodplain forest communities and one in a black ash-red
maple-tamarack calcareous seepage swamp community. Earthworms were collected from the
soil surface to 15 cm below the surface. Reference earthworms were collected from each site
and shipped to an earthworm taxonomist at Ohio State University for identification, which
followed Dindal (1990).
2.6 Terrestrial Litter Invertebrate Survey
Terrestrial litter invertebrates were collected in conjunction with the earthworm collection.
Invertebrates were collected by hand from the leaf litter and beneath decaying woody debris.
Invertebrates were identified to order, and percentages of total mass per order were estimated.
SECTION HI - 2-6
-------
3.0 Macroinvertebrate Community Descriptions
3.1 Aquatic Macroinvertebrates
3.1.1 Mussels
Twelve species of freshwater mussels are known to occur in Massachusetts, and all of these are
historically or presently known to occur somewhere in the Housatonic River drainage (Table
2-2). However, five species have not been seen in the drainage since the mid-1800s or early
1900s (Smith 1999). Of the remaining seven species, only five are known from the portion of
the Housatonic River drainage that is in Massachusetts and none are known from within the
PSA.
Field surveys within the PSA resulted in the location of three freshwater mussel species,
including eastern elliptio, eastern floater, and triangle floater. Of these, the eastern floater was
the most abundant and occurred in the lower portion of the PSA, from the mouth of Yokum
Brook to the north end of Woods Pond in Lenox and Lee (Map 2-6). Eighteen live individuals
and fourteen relic shells were found on shallow flats less than 0.6 m deep or near the surface on
steep riverbanks. Three of the live individuals were gravid females ranging from 98 - 122 mm
long. Several of the relic shells found had indications of predation such as cracked or chewed
shells.
Eastern floater sites were mostly soft silt and muck substrates near Woods Pond and firmer silt
loam banks with occasional rocks and gravel deposits at upstream sites. Host fish for eastern
floater include common carp, white sucker, threespine stickleback, bluegill sunfish, and
pumpkinseed sunfish (Clarke 1981, Martin 1997, Nedeau et al. 2000). All but the stickleback
are known to occur within the PSA.
SECTION HI - 2-7
-------
Table 2-2 Freshwater mussels of the Housatonic River drainage.
Scientific Name
Common Name
State/Fed
Status*
Observed
at 1998
Survey
Sites?
Notes**
Alasmidonta heterodon
Dwarf wedgemussel
E/E
No
Known only from 1840s records
from CT.
Alasmidonta undulata
Triangle floater
SC/NL
Yes
Extant population in PSA. Shells
found at Reference Site 11.
Alasmidonta varicosa
Brook floater
E/NL
No
Known only from 1920s records
from CT.
Anodonta implicata
Alewife floater
NL
No
Known only from 1840s records
from CT.
Elliptic) complanata
Eastern elliptio
NL
Yes
Relic shell found in PSA.
Population found at Reference Site
9 and shells found at Reference
Site 11. Also found at Muddy
Pond, in the Hinsdale Flats
reference area.
Lampsilis cariosa
Yellow lampmussel
E/NL
No
Known only from 1840s records
from CT.
Lampsilis radiata
Eastern lampmussel
NL
No
Extant populations in drainage in
CT and NY.
Leptodea ochracea
Tidewater mucket
SC/NL
No
Known only from 1840s records
from CT.
Ligumia nasuta
Eastern pondmussel
SC/NL
No
Extant populations in the drainage
in NY.
Margaritifera
margaritifera
Eastern pearlshell
NL
No
A population at Reference Site 9
was reported in 1998 but was not
verified during field investigations.
Pyganodon cataracta
Eastern floater
NL
Yes
Extant population in PSA. Also
found at Muddy Pond, in the
Hinsdale Flats reference area.
Strophitus undulatus
Creeper
SC/NL
Yes
Shells found at Reference Site 11.
Sources: Strayer and Jirka 1997, Smith 1995
* E = Endangered, SC = Special Concern, NL = Not Listed
** See Mao 2-1 for Reference Site Locations.
SECTION HI - 2-8
-------
The triangle floater (also known as the heavy-toothed wedgemussel) was the next most
abundant mussel found in the PSA during field surveys. It is listed as a Special Concern
species (MNHESP 2000). A small population of eight live mussels was found just
downstream of the Holmes Road bridge in Pittsfield (Map 2-6). These mussels ranged
from 25 - 54 mm long and one was a gravid female 45 mm long. Substrates at the site
consisted of soft, fine, shifting sands in the western half of the river channel and packed,
algae covered gravel in the eastern half of the channel. Individual mussels, however,
were found only in the packed gravel substrate. Water depths in the area ranged from 7.6
- 50.8 cm deep. Known host fish for this species include the common shiner, longnose
and blacknose dace, white sucker, pumpkinseed sunfish, fallfish, largemouth bass, and
slimy sculpin (Martin 1997, Strayer and Jirka 1997, Nedeau et al. 2000). All except the
slimy sculpin are known to occur in the PSA.
One relic shell of an eastern elliptio was found in the PSA. This specimen was found just
downstream of a gravel riffle, between Dawes and Pomeroy Avenues (Map 2-6). Known
host fish for the eastern elliptio include yellow perch, largemouth bass, and banded
killifish, which have been historically documented in the Housatonic River, and several
species of sunfish (Clarke 1981, Martin 1997, Strayer and Jirka 1997).
Table 2-3 lists the results of mussel surveys conducted at the upstream and downstream
reference sites. In general, four species were found. These included the three species
found in the PSA in addition to the creeper. Mussels were only found at two sites, both
of which occurred in the Stockbridge-Great Barrington area, well downstream of the
PSA.
Reference sites upstream of the PSA were largely dominated by cobble habitats while
downstream sites generally had packed gravel and sand habitat with occasional gravel
and cobble riffles. Site 11 had the greatest species richness, with shells of four species
being found. Of the four species found, triangle floater shells were the most abundant
(15 shells), followed by the creeper (8), eastern floater (2), and eastern elliptio (1).
SECTION HI - 2-9
-------
Table 2-3 1998 freshwater mussel survey results at reference sites.
Site Number*
Town
Species
Notes
Upstream Sites
1
Hinsdale
None
Cobble/gravel.
2
Dalton
None
Cobble/boulder.
3
Dalton
None
Packed gravel.
4
Dalton
None
Cobble/boulder.
5
Pittsfield
None
Packed gravel.
Downstream Sites
6
Lee
None
Cobble.
7
Lee
None
Gravel and cobble/gravel.
8
Lee
None
Packed gravel and sand.
9 (Konkapot Brook)
Stockbridge
Eastern elliptio
Packed gravel and sand.
>50 live elliptios found.
10
Great Barrington
None
Cobble and cobble/gravel.
11
Great Barrington
Eastern elliptio
Eastern floater
Creeper
Triangle floater
Packed gravel and sand.
Only relic shells were found.
*See Mao 2-1 for site location mat).
SECTION HI- 2-10
-------
The creeper is another species of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Its known host fish
include the creek chub, largemouth bass, yellow perch, fallfish, spotfin shiner, golden
shiner, common shiner, plains killifish, fathead minnow, longnose dace, bluegill, green
sunfish, walleye, slimy sculpin, and the black and yellow bullhead (Clarke 1981, Strayer
and Jirka 1997, Nedeau et al. 2000). However, it is believed that the creeper is one of the
few species of freshwater mussel that has a free-living larval stage that is not dependent
on a host fish (Strayer and Jirka 1997).
Site 9, Konkapot Brook (Map 2-1). was the only other downstream reference site where
mussels were found. Konkapot Brook is a small tributary to the Housatonic River in
Stockbridge that averages 1 - 1.5 m wide and 15 - 40 cm deep. A group of over 50 live
elliptio was found approximately 450 m from the confluence of the river and Konkapot
Brook, and relic shells were found in the brook within 45 m of the confluence. A
population of eastern pearlshells was reported at this site in 1998, the first confirmed
record of this species within the Housatonic River drainage in Massachusetts (D. Smith,
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, pers. comm.). However, this species was not
found during these field investigations.
Of the reference areas used during other 1999 and 2000 field investigations, only Muddy
Pond in Hinsdale Flats SWMA was found to contain freshwater mussels. Large
populations of eastern elliptio and eastern floaters were found in the soft substrate of the
pond. No estimate of population size was made, although well over 100 live individuals
of each species was observed.
Historical records indicate that the Housatonic River drainage once had a relatively
diverse assemblage of 12 freshwater mussel species (Table 2-2). However, seven of
these species were only known from the lower part of the drainage in Connecticut and
New York. Furthermore, five of those species—the dwarf wedgemussel, brook floater,
yellow lampmussel, tidewater mucket, and alewife floater—have not been found since
their original documented reports by Linsley and Jacot in the mid-1800s and early 1900s
(Smith 1999). More recent surveys have documented only five species within the
SECTION HI-2-11
-------
Massachusetts portion of the drainage (Smith 1982), and no information is available on
historical mussel surveys in PSA.
Because of a lack of historical (i.e., pre-1900s) mussel information from within the PSA
itself, it is difficult to speculate if current low mussel richness and abundance has always
occurred or is due to natural factors or human-induced impacts. Suitable mussel habitats
do occur in the PSA, particularly the upper half, which was dominated by fast water over
packed gravel and sand substrates with riffles of cobble/gravel substrates. These habitats
are suitable for adults of most species and for the establishment of juvenile mussels
(Neves and Widlak 1987). Despite this, only one relic elliptio shell and one small,
localized triangle floater population were found. The eastern floaters that were found in
the lower portions of the PSA were in softer sediments, which is typical habitat for that
species (Clarke 1981).
Many natural factors can limit the occurrence and distribution of freshwater mussels.
Rivers of the North Atlantic Slope (i.e., Housatonic River to Atlantic Canada) have low
mussel diversity compared to those of southern Atlantic and interior (Mississippian)
watersheds, due to limited refugia during the last glaciation (Smith 1982, Strayer 1990,
Strayer and Jirka 1997). The Taconic Mountains and the southern Green Mountains form
the divide between the species-depauperate northeastern watersheds and the species-rich
Mississippian watersheds (Smith 1982).
Mussel diversity also tends to decrease in low order (i.e., upstream) portions of a
watershed (Strayer 1983, Mackie and Topping 1988), and rivers that are hydrologically
unstable (i.e., prone to frequent flooding) typically have fewer species than river systems
that are more stable (Strayer 1993, Di Maio and Corkum 1995). This helps explain some
of the present distribution of mussels in the Housatonic River drainage. For example, the
PSA is located far upstream in the drainage (Map 2-1), and rich species assemblages in
the drainage were historically known only from high order (downstream) portions of the
watershed (Smith 1999). In addition, the PSA is prone to periodic flooding in spring, and
during summer and fall storm events.
SECTION in-2-12
-------
A number of natural predators of are known to feed on freshwater mussels including
muskrats, raccoons, river otters, and birds (Strayer and Jirka 1997). Among these,
muskrat predation can have the greatest effect on local mussel populations (Neves and
Odom 1989). Muskrats were the most commonly observed mussel predator in the PSA,
and some shells had indications of predation such as shell fractures at the abductor
muscle locations. However, large shell middens often made by muskrats were not
observed, indicating that muskrats are not preying on large numbers of mussels in the
study area, middens have been periodically washed downstream during high flows, or
that large populations of mussels are simply not available for muskrats.
While any of these natural factors could have affected the freshwater mussel community
in the area, human-induced impacts have also occurred. River channelization and
realignment is common in urban areas and has the potential to destroy individual mussels
and create unsuitable habitats such as well-armored banks of boulders, rubble, and other
hard materials. Floodplain clearing and conversion to agricultural lands can increase
erosion and sedimentation into a river because of less stable banks, and the decrease in
bank shading tends to increase water temperature (Strayer and Jirka 1997). In addition,
construction of dams can flood riffle habitats, accumulate soft sediments, impede the
movement of suitable host fish, and scour suitable habitats below the dam (Strayer 1993,
Martin 1997). All of these types of disturbances can be detrimental to mussel
populations and have occurred in the PSA.
Also associated with past land uses and urban development is decreased water quality
from biological and chemical pollutants. Freshwater mussels are filter feeders and have
the ability to filter large amounts of water. Strayer et al. (1994) found that some
3 2
freshwater mussel beds can filter anywhere from 0.1- 2.0 m of water per m of substrate
per day. Uptake of biological or chemical pollutants in the water, such as agricultural
herbicides and pesticides, sewage and wastewater treatment effluent, and industrial
pollution, can occur during the course of normal feeding and can significantly affect
mussel populations (Metcalfe and Charlton 1990, Goodreau et al. 1993).
It is likely that many of these environmental and anthropogenic factors identified above
have helped shape the freshwater mussel community within the PSA and the Housatonic
SECTION in-2-13
-------
River watershed as a whole. The results of the 1998 surveys indicate that some mussels,
including gravid females, exist within the PSA and may represent populations that have
been maintaining themselves. Conversely, they could also represent populations that are
beginning to reestablish in the area. However, there are large areas of suitable habitat in
the PSA that are uninhabited by mussels. Definitive reasons for the lack of mussels in
these areas are unknown.
3.1.2 Dragonflies
There are currently 164 Odonate species recorded in Massachusetts, with 97 species
documented for Berkshire County. The 164 Odonates in Massachusetts include 115
species of dragonflies and 49 species of damselflies. In Berkshire County, the 97 species
of Odonates include 70 species of dragonflies and 27 species of damselflies (Leahy et al.
2000). A total of 40 species were identified during the 1999 dragonfly surveys. This
included 38 species from the PSA and two species found only in the reference areas
(Table 2-4).
A total of 628 dragonfly exuviae, representing 21 species, were collected from within the
PSA. The results of the exuviae collection surveys are summarized in Table 2-5. Three
State-listed species were collected: arrow clubtail, zebra clubtail, and riffle snaketail.
The zebra clubtail has a state status of endangered, while the arrow clubtail and riffle
snaketail both have a state status of threatened (MNHESP 1999). Zebra clubtail exuviae
were collected from eight transect locations, while arrow clubtail and riffle snaketail
exuviae were collected from six and two transect locations, respectively (Table 2-5). The
lance-tipped darner was the only species identified during opportunistic exuviae
collections that was not observed during transect collection, bringing the total number of
dragonfly species for which exuviae were collected in the PSA to 22.
Opportunistic aerial netting of adult and teneral dragonflies collected 44 specimens from
the PSA and reference areas, representing 24 confirmed species. Two arrow clubtails
were collected, one along an exuviae survey transect, and the other at the Threemile Pond
SWMA reference area. Opportunistic aerial netting of adult and teneral damselflies
collected 19 specimens from the PSA, representing six confirmed species (Table 2-6).
SECTION in-2-14
-------
Opportunistic collection of exuviae and adult dragonflies from the reference areas
resulted in 12 confirmed species from Threemile Pond, five species from Washington
Mountain Lake, and six species from Hinsdale Flats (Table 2-4). The delta-spotted
spiketail and Williamson's emerald were the only two species observed in the reference
areas that were not observed in the PSA. Due to taxonomic uncertainty within the
scientific community concerning the status of the meadowhawks, specimens collected
during this study were grouped at the genus level. This grouping represents a potential of
three separate meadowhawk species. Similar difficulty occurred in trying to separate the
spine-crowned clubtail from the mustached clubtail (Jeremiah Trimble pers. com.), so
these specimens were also grouped at the genus level. Six damselfly species were
identified during opportunistic adult and teneral collections within the PSA, while four
additional species were collected at two reference areas (Threemile Pond and Hinsdale
Flats SWMAs). Some exuviae and adult dragonfly specimens were damaged by
floodwater flows and other natural conditions. While these specimens were identified to
the genus level when possible, some could not be identified.
SECTION in-2-15
-------
Table 2-4 1999 dragonfly survey results.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Housatonic
River (PSA)
Threemile
Pond SWMA
Muddy Pond
in Hinsdale
Flats SWMA
Washington
Mountain
Lake in
October
Mountain
State Forest
Canada darner
Aeshna canadensis
X
X
lance-tipped darner
Aeshna constricta
X
variable darner
Aeshna interrupta
X
X
shadow darner
Aeshna umbrosa
X
common green darner
Anax Junius
X
X
X
lilypad clubtail
Arigomphus furcifer
X
unicorn clubtail
Arigomphus villosipes
X
fawn darner
Boveria vinosa
X
calico pennant
Celithemis elisa
X
X
halloween pennant
Celithemis eponina
X
X
delta-spotted spiketail
Cordulegaster diastatops
X
racket-tailed emerald
Dorocordulia libera
X
X
X
black-shouldered spiny leg
Dromogomphus spinosus
X
beaverpond baskettail
Epitheca canis
X
common baskettail
Epitheca cynosura
X
prince baskettail
Epitheca princeps
X
X
eastern pondhawk
Erythemis simplicicollis
X
spine-crowned clubtail1
or
mustached clubtail
Gomphus abbreviatus
Gomphus adelphus
X
lancet clubtail
Gomphus exilis
X
ashy clubtail
Gomphus lividus
X
dusky clubtail
Gomphus spicatus
X
dragonhunter
Hagenius brevistylus
X
crimson-ringed whiteface
Leucorrhinia glacialis
X
X
dot-tailed whiteface
Leucorrhinia intacta
X
slaty skimmer
Libellula incesta
X
X
SECTION HI- 2-16
-------
Common Name
Scientific Name
Housatonic
River (PSA)
Threemile
Pond SWMA
Muddy Pond
in Hinsdale
Flats SWMA
Washington
Mountain
Lake in
October
Mountain
State Forest
chalk-fronted skimmer
Likellula iulia
X
X
X
widow skimmer
Libellula luctuosa
X
X
common whitetail
Libellula Ivdia
X
X
twelve-spotted skimmer
Libellula pulchella
X
X
riffle snaketail2
Ophiogomphus carolus
X
rusty snaketail
Ophiogomphus rupinsulensis
X
blue dasher
Pachydiplax longipennis
X
eastern amberwing
Perithemis tenera
X
X
forcipate emerald
Somatochlora forcipata
X
X
Williamson's emerald
Somatochlora williamsoni
X
zebra clubtail3
Stylurus scudderi
X
arrow clubtail2
Stylurus spiniceps
X
X
saffron-winged meadowhawk
Sympetrum costiferum
X
X
cherry-faced meadowhawk1
ruby meadowhawk
Jane's meadowhawk
Sympetrum internum
Sympetrum rubincundulum
Sympetrum janae
X
X
yellow-legged meadowhawk
Sympetrum vicinum
X
X
Species Richness =
38
13
6
5
1 Questionable taxonomy of this group precluded accurate determination (Leahy et al. 2000).
2 State threatened
3 State endangered
SECTION in-2-17
-------
Table 2-5 1999 dragonfly exuviae collection results.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Transect
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
shadow darner
Aeshna umbrosa
2
darner spp.1
Aeshna spp.
1
common green darner
Anax junius
1
3
lilypad clubtail
Arigomphus furcifer
1
fawn darner
Boyeria vinosa
6
14
58
35
13
12
6
racket-tailed emerald
Dorocordulia libera
1
black-shouldered spinyleg
Dromogomphus spinosus
1
1
beaverpond baskettail
Epitheca canis
4
common baskettail
Epitheca cynosura
1
1
12
prince baskettail
Epitheca princeps
1
eastern pondhawk
Erythemis simplicicollis
1
7
spine-crowned clubtail2
or
mustached clubtail
Gomphus abbreviatus
Gomphus adelphus
1
lancet clubtail
Gomphus exilis
1
7
ashy clubtail
Gomphus lividus
1
3
1
1
dusky clubtail
Gomphus spicatus
3
dragonhunter
Hagenius brevistylus
1
dot-tailed whiteface
Leucorrhinia intacta
3
common whitetail
Libellula lydia
4
SECTION in-2-18
-------
Common Name
Scientific Name
Transect
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
skimmer spp.1
Libellula spp.
1
riffle snaketail3
Ophiogomphus carolus
1
1
rusty snaketail
Ophiogomphus rupinsulensis
1
1
snaketail spp.1
Ophiogomphus spp.
1
blue dasher
Pachydiplax longipennis
1
zebra clubtail4
Stylurus scudderi
3
4
85
57
4
13
23
1
arrow clubtail3
Stylurus spiniceps
12
35
6
88
69
5
cherry-faced meadowhawk1
ruby meadowhawk
Jane's meadowhawk
Sympetrum internum
Sympetrum rubincundulum
Sympetrum janae
1
7
Total Number of Exuvia =
11
19
159
131
25
115
110
22
36
1 Identification limited to genus level because of partial specimen.
2 Questionable taxonomy of this group precluded accurate determination (Leahy et al. 2000).3 State threatened
4 State endangered
SECTION in-2-19
-------
Table 2-6 1999 damselfly survey results.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Housatonic
River
Threemile
Pond
Muddy Pond
variable dancer
Argia fumipennis
X
river jewelwing
Calopteryx aequabilis
X
ebony jewelwing
Calopteryx maculata
X
familiar bluet
Enallagma civile
X
skimming bluet
Enallagma geminatum
X
X
orange bluet
Enallagma signatum
X
fragile forktail
Ischnura posita
X
eastern forktail
Ischnura verticalis
X
X
X
elegant spreadwing
Lestes inaequalis
X
slender spreadwing
Lestes rectangularis
X
Species Richness =
6
4
3
SECTION HI - 2-20
-------
3.1.3 Vernal Pool Invertebrates
A variety of aquatic invertebrates were collected in the aquatic funnel traps at the 17
surveyed vernal pools. Major groups collected were crustaceans, arthropods, mollusks,
annelids, roundworms, and flatworms. The common orders collected included water
fleas (Cladocera), scuds (Amphipoda), mayflies (Ephemeroptera), beetles (Coleoptera),
flies and midges (Diptera), and bivalves (Bivalvia). Table 2-7 lists invertebrates that
were collected in the 17 intensively surveyed vernal pools in 1998. Unless otherwise
noted, the data presented in the text refers to the intensive funnel-trap sampling of the 17
pools in 1998. Other data were also collected in 1998, 1999, and 2000 on an incidental
basis in the entire set of 68 pools located in the PSA. These data, some of which are also
presented in the text, refer to overall...
SECTION HI - 2-21
-------
Table 2-7 1998 aquatic funnel trap results from 17 vernal pools.
GROUP
FAMILY
GENUS
COMMON NAME
VERNAL POOL IDs
5-VP-2
5-VP-3
8-VP-l
8-VP-4
18-VP1
18-VP-2
23 A-VP-1
23B-VP-1
23B-VP-2
40-VP-3
42-VP-l
46-VP-l
46-VP-2
46-VP-5
61A-VP-1
61A-VP-2
66 A-VP-1
COELENTERATA
Hydridae
Hydras
X
X
TURBELLARIA
Flatworm
X
TRICLADIDA
Planariidae
Flatworm
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
NEMATODA
Roundworm
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Snails
X
X
GASTROPODA
Hydrobiidae
Little pond snail
X
GASTROPODA
Hydrobiidae
Amnicola
Little pond snail
X
X
GASTROPODA
Lymnaeidae
Pond snail
X
X
GASTROPODA
Lymnaeidae
Fossaria
Pond snail
X
X
X
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Lymnaeidae
Stagnicola
Pond snail
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Physidae
Pouch snail
X
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Physidae
Aplexa
Pouch snail
X
X
X
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Physidae
Physa
Pouch snail
X
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Physidae
Physella
Pouch snail
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Planorbidae
Orb snail
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Planorbidae
Gyraulus
Orb snail
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Planorbidae
Planorbella
Orb snail
X
GASTROPODA
Planorbidae
Promenetus
Orb snail
X
X
X
X
X
GASTROPODA
Valvatidae
Valvata
Pond snail
X
BIVALVIA
Sphaeriidae
Clams
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
BIVALVIA
Sphaeriidae
Musculium
Clams
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
BIVALVIA
Sphaeriidae
Pisidium
Pill clams
X
BIVALVIA
Sphaeriidae
Sphaerium
Sphere clams
X
X
OLIGOCHAETA
Lumbriculidae
Aquatic earthworm
X
OLIGOCHAETA
Lumbriculidae
Lumbriculus
Aquatic earthworm
X
X
X
X
SECTION HI - 2-22
-------
GROUP
FAMILY
GENUS
COMMON NAME
VERNAL POOL IDs
5-VP-2
5-VP-3
8-VP-l
8-VP-4
18-VP1
18-VP-2
23 A-VP-1
23B-VP-1
23B-VP-2
40-VP-3
42-VP-l
46-VP-l
46-VP-2
46-VP-5
61A-VP-1
61A-VP-2
66 A-VP-1
OLIGOCHAETA
Naididae
Aquatic earthworm
X
OLIGOCHAETA
Naididae
Pristina
Aquatic earthworm
X
X
X
OLIGOCHAETA
Tubificidae
Sludge worm
X
X
X
X
OLIGOCHAETA
Tubificidae
Limnodrilus
Sludge worm
X
GNATHOBDELLIDA
Hirudinidae
Haemopis
Leech
X
X
X
PHARYNGOBDELLIDA
Erpobdellidae
Erpobdella
Leech
X
X
X
X
X
X
RHYNCHOBDELLA
Glossiphoniidae
Leech
X
X
X
X
RHYNCHOBDELLA
Glossiphoniidae
Alboglossiphonia
Leech
X
X
RHYNCHOBDELLA
Glossiphoniidae
Helobdella
Leech
X
X
X
X
ACARIF ORMES
Eremaeidae
Water mite
X
ACARIF ORMES
Hydrachnidae
Hydrachna
Water mite
X
ACARIF ORMES
Hydryphantidae
Pseudohydryphantes
Water mite
X
X
X
ACARIF ORMES
Pionidae
Water mite
X
ACARIF ORMES
Pionidae
Tiphys
Water mite
X
ACARIF ORMES
Sperchonidae
Sperchon
Water mite
X
ORIBATEI
Eremaeidae
Mite
X
COLLEMBOLA
Springtail
X
X
X
COLLEMBOLA
Sminthuridae
Bourletiella
Globular springtail
X
X
EPHEMEROPTERA
Baetidae
Callibaetis
Mayfly
X
EPHEMEROPTERA
Baetiscidae
Baetisca
Mayfly
X
EPHEMEROPTERA
Caenidae
Caenis
Mayfly
X
EPHEMEROPTERA
Ephemerellidae
Mayfly
X
EPHEMEROPTERA
Ephemerellidae
Ephemerella
Mayfly
X
EPHEMEROPTERA
Ephemerellidae
Eurylophella
Small mayfly
X
X
X
X
X
X
EPHEMEROPTERA
Leptophlebiidae
Leptophlebia
Small mayfly
X
EPHEMEROPTERA
Siphlonuridae
Siphlonurus
Mayfly
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ODONATA
Aeshnidae
Aeshna
Mosaic Darner
X
X
SECTION HI - 2-23
-------
GROUP
FAMILY
GENUS
COMMON NAME
VERNAL POOL IDs
5-VP-2
5-VP-3
8-VP-l
8-VP-4
18-VP1
18-VP-2
23 A-VP-1
23B-VP-1
23B-VP-2
40-VP-3
42-VP-l
46-VP-l
46-VP-2
46-VP-5
61A-VP-1
61A-VP-2
66 A-VP-1
ODONATA
Corduliidae
Epitheca
Baskettail
X
ODONATA
Gomphidae
Stylurus
Hanging clubtail
X
ODONATA
Libellulidae
Libellula
King Skimmer
ODONATA
Libellulidae
Sympetrum
Meadowhawk
X
X
X
ODONATA
Coenagrionidae
Coenagrion
Broad-winged Damselly
X
ODONATA
Coenagrionidae
Enallagma
Bluet
X
ODONATA
Lestidae
Lestes
Spread-winged Damselfly
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
HEMIPTERA
Belostomatidae
Lethocerus
Giant water bug
X
HEMIPTERA
Corixidae
Water boatman
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
HEMIPTERA
Corixidae
Callicorixa
Water boatman
X
HEMIPTERA
Corixidae
Hesperocorixa
Water boatman
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
HEMIPTERA
Corixidae
Ramphocorixa
Water boatman
X
HEMIPTERA
Gerridae
Limnogonus
Water strider
X
HEMIPTERA
Notonectidae
Backswimmer
X
X
HEMIPTERA
Notonectidae
Notonecta
Backswimmer
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
HEMIPTERA
Pleidae
Neoplea
Pigmy backswimmer
X
X
TRICHOPTERA
Limnephilidae
Limnephilus
Northern caddisfly
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Beetles
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Curculionidae
Weevil
X
COLEOPTERA
Curculionidae
Emphyastes
Weevil
X
COLEOPTERA
Curculionidae
Lixus
Weevil
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Acilius
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Agabetes
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Agabus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Celina
Predaceous diving beetle
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Colymbetes
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Copelatus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
SECTION HI - 2-24
-------
GROUP
FAMILY
GENUS
COMMON NAME
VERNAL POOL IDs
5-VP-2
5-VP-3
8-VP-l
8-VP-4
18-VP1
18-VP-2
23 A-VP-1
23B-VP-1
23B-VP-2
40-VP-3
42-VP-l
46-VP-l
46-VP-2
46-VP-5
61A-VP-1
61A-VP-2
66 A-VP-1
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Copotomus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Dytiscus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Hydaticus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Hydroporus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Hydrovatus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Hygrotus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Ilybius
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Laccophilus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Laccornis
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Lioporius
Predaceous diving beetle
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Neoscutopterus
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Dytiscidae
Oreodytes
Predaceous diving beetle
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Gyrinidae
Gyrinus
Whirligig beetle
X
COLEOPTERA
Haliplidae
Haliplus
Crawling water beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Haliplidae
Peltodytes
Crawling water beetle
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Helophoridae
Helophorus
Water scavenger beetle
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Hydrophilidae
Water scavenger beetle
X
COLEOPTERA
Hydrophilidae
Berosus
Water scavenger beetle
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Hydrophilidae
Enochrus
Water scavenger beetle
X
COLEOPTERA
Hydrophilidae
Helochares
Water scavenger beetle
X
COLEOPTERA
Hydrophilidae
Hydrochara
Water scavenger beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Hydrophilidae
Tropisternus
Water scavenger beetle
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Noteridae
Hydrocanthus
Burrowing water beetle
X
X
X
COLEOPTERA
Scirtidae
Cyphon
Marsh beetle
X
COLEOPTERA
Scirtidae
Scirtes
Marsh beetle
X
X
MEGALOPTERA
Corydalidae
Chauliodes
Fishfly
X
MEGALOPTERA
Sialidae
Sialis
Alderfly
X
X
X
SECTION HI - 2-25
-------
GROUP
FAMILY
GENUS
COMMON NAME
VERNAL POOL IDs
5-VP-2
5-VP-3
8-VP-l
8-VP-4
18-VP1
18-VP-2
23 A-VP-1
23B-VP-1
23B-VP-2
40-VP-3
42-VP-l
46-VP-l
46-VP-2
46-VP-5
61A-VP-1
61A-VP-2
66 A-VP-1
DIPTERA
Chaoboridae
Chaoborus
Phantom midge
X
X
X
X
DIPTERA
Chironominae
Chironomus
Midge
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
DIPTERA
Chironominae
Endochironomus
Midge
X
X
DIPTERA
Chironominae
Glyptotendipes
Midge
X
DIPTERA
Chironominae
Parachironomus
Midge
X
X
DIPTERA
Chironominae
Paratendipes
Midge
X
DIPTERA
Culicidae
Mosquito
X
X
X
DIPTERA
Culicidae
Aedes
Mosquito
X
X
X
X
X
DIPTERA
Dolichopodidae
Midge
X
DIPTERA
Orthocladiinae
Camptocladius
Midge
X
DIPTERA
Orthocladiinae
Cricotopus
Midge
X
X
DIPTERA
Orthocladiinae
Euryhapsis
Midge
X
DIPTERA
Stratiomyidae
Hedriodiscus/
Odontomyia
Soldier flies
X
DIPTERA
Tanypodinae
Natarsia
Midge
X
DIPTERA
Tanypodinae
Procladius
Midge
X
DIPTERA
Tanypodinae
P sectrotanypus
Midge
X
X
X
DIPTERA
Tanypodinae
Tanypus
Midge
X
DIPTERA
Tanypodinae
Thienemannimyia
Midge
X
DIPTERA
Tipulidae
Cane fly
X
CLADOCERA
Water flea
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
COPEPODA
Copepod
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CONCHOSTRACA
Clam shrimp
X
X
X
AMPHIPODA
Scuds
X
X
X
X
X
X
AMPHIPODA
Crangonyctidae
Scuds
X
AMPHIPODA
Crangonyctidae
Crangonyx
Scuds
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
AMPHIPODA
Hyalellidae
Hyalella
Scuds
X
X
X
SECTION HI - 2-26
-------
VERNAL POOL IDs
GROUP
FAMILY
GENUS
COMMON NAME
5-VP-2
5-VP-3
8-VP-l
8-VP-4
18-VP1
18-VP-2
23 A-VP-1
23B-VP-1
23B-VP-2
40-VP-3
42-VP-l
46-VP-l
46-VP-2
46-VP-5
61A-VP-1
61A-VP-2
66 A-VP-1
DECOPODA
Cambaridae
Crayfish
X
X
ISOPODA
Asellidae
Caecidotea
Aquatic sow bug
X
X
X
X
X
OSTRACODA
Seed shrimp
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Total Number of Taxa per Pool:
36
25
21
23
34
34
29
37
18
45
50
13
35
20
29
45
26
SECTION HI - 2-27
-------
Crustaceans
Crustaceans were the most abundant group of aquatic invertebrates recorded from vernal
pools in the PSA. Crustacea is a subphylum of Arthropoda, which contains 80 percent of
all known species in the animal kingdom (Peckarsky et al. 1990). Four major crustacean
classes were collected from the PSA vernal pools, including Branchipoda, Malacostraca,
Copepoda, and Ostracoda.
Seed shrimp (Ostracoda) were the most abundant of all the invertebrates, with over 3,000
individuals captured. They were recorded from all but 5 of the 17 pools sampled with
funnel traps. Most seed shrimp species are not free-swimming and thus are less likely to
be captured in aquatic funnel traps, suggesting that the true abundance of this invertebrate
is likely even greater than reported here Seed shrimps have a bivalve carapace and
resemble tiny clams, typically less than 1 mm long (Pennak 1978). These tiny crustaceans
can be found in nearly every aquatic habitat, tolerating a wide range of temperature and
water chemistry. They are commonly found among aquatic vegetation and in the
decaying matter on the pool bottom where they feed on detritus, algae, bacteria, and
molds. Small fish and other invertebrates such as midges, worms, and copepods prey
upon seed shrimp (Thorp and Covich 1991).
Copepods were the second most abundant invertebrate; however, more than 90 percent of
the individuals were collected from one pool. Copepods are microcrustaceans made up
of seven orders, four of which are parasitic and three are free-living. Copepods captured
during aquatic funnel trapping were made up of the free-living orders: Calanoda,
Cyclopoida, and Harpacticoida. Free-living freshwater copepods range in size from 0.5
- 2.0 mm in length (Thorp and Covich 1991). They are found in a variety of habitats,
with Calanoda being associated primarily with plankton and Cyclopoida and
Harpacticoida being primarily littoral and benthic. Copepods are extremely abundant,
often making up the major portion of biomass and secondary production in a wide variety
of aquatic habitats (Thorp and Covich 1991). Copepods play an important role in the
food chain as intermediates between microscopic plankton and larger carnivores, such as
SECTION HI - 2-28
-------
fish. Within vernal pools, copepods are likely preyed upon by other aquatic invertebrates
and larval amphibians.
Branchiopods included water fleas (Cladocera), clam shrimp (Conchostraca), and fairy
shrimp (Anostraca). Water fleas were collected from 70 percent of the sampled pools,
while clam shrimp were found in only three pools; however, they were very abundant in
those three pools. Like copepods, these microcrustaceans play an important role in food
chains as intermediates between microscopic plankton and larger carnivores (Thorp and
Covich 1991). Fairy shrimp are common microcrustacean in vernal pools and were
observed in approximately one-third of the 68 pools within the PSA; however, none were
caught in aquatic funnel traps during 1998. Fairy shrimp are obligate vernal pool species
and were documented in 5 of the 17 pools sampled with aquatic funnel traps and 20 of
the 68 pools surveyed overall in 1998.
Taxa in the Malacostraca were dominated by three orders: scuds (Amphipoda), sow bugs
(Isopoda), and crayfish (Decopoda). Scuds were one of the most universal invertebrates,
being collected from all but one of the funnel-trapped vernal pools. Scuds, like the water
fleas and clam shrimp, are important intermediates in aquatic food webs (Thorp and
Covich 1991). Aquatic sow bugs (Isopods) were the least common crustaceans captured
in aquatic funnel traps and were found in small numbers in only four pools. Isopods are
scavengers and detrital feeders and are most commonly found on the pool bottoms
beneath stones and woody debris (Thorp and Covich 1991), which indicates that they
were probably under-represented in the aquatic funnel trap samples.
Crayfish were the only group of macrocrustaceans found in the PSA, and several small
crayfish were collected in aquatic funnel traps in 1998. Crayfish were more common in
the river channel, but they were occasionally seen in vernal pools. Interestingly, many
adult crayfish were observed undertaking overland travel from vernal pools to the river as
the pools began drying, and were captured in pit traps during 1999 and 2000 wood frog
and leopard frog studies. In addition, crayfish were captured for toxicological analysis
from the river channel throughout the PSA during 2000. Nearly all the crayfish collected
were Orconectes virilis. A small number of Cambarus robustus were collected from
rocky medium-gradient stream communities near Dalton, MA, upstream of the PSA.
SECTION in - 2-29
-------
Crayfish are omnivorous, feeding on vegetation (mainly detritus) and a variety of animals
(mainly invertebrates). Crayfish play a role in several trophic levels; they are important
decomposers of detritus as well as herbivores and carnivores. Crayfish are preyed upon
by many aquatic or semi-aquatic organisms, including fish, turtles, mink, otter, and
raccoons.
Arthropods
A wide variety of arthropods were commonly found during aquatic funnel trapping. The
largest classes of arthropods observed, excluding crustaceans, were the insects. Insects
are the most widespread class of arthropods, and include mayflies (Ephemeroptera),
caddisflies (Trichoptera), fishflies and alderflies (Megaloptera), midges and mosquitoes
(Diptera), dragonflies (Odonata), beetles (Coleoptera), and true bugs (Hemiptera).
Mayflies, caddisflies, fishflies, alderflies, midges, mosquitoes, and dragonflies are
aquatic only during their larval stages, while aquatic beetles and bugs can be found in the
water during all of their life stages. Aquatic beetles and true bugs typically utilize vernal
pools during the breeding season, fly to more permanent water to overwinter, and return
to the pools in the spring. Spiders and mites (Arachnids) were another common class of
arthropod found within vernal pools, consisting primarily of mites. Springtails were the
final class of arthropods found within the vernal pools.
Mayflies were recorded from 88 percent of the 17 surveyed pools. Mayflies were the
most abundant insects with 847 individuals of 8 genera captured, representing 7 mayfly
families. The Siphlonuridae was the most abundant and widespread family, making up
more than 80 percent of the individuals collected, and were found in 82 percent of the
sampled pools. Ephemeridae was another common family, being found in approximately
half of the vernal pools. Mayflies are ephemeral in that they emerge in mass, form large
swarms, mate, deposit eggs, and die all within a few hours to a few days. Eggs may
hatch soon after being laid or the eggs may diapause over winter, with the nymphs
developing rapidly after hatching in the spring. The nymph stage may last from two
weeks to two years depending upon the pecies, but most mayflies utilizing permanent
habitats overwinter as nymphs, and metamorphose into adults the following spring. Most
mayfly nymphs are grazers feeding on algae and detritus, and a few are predaceous,
SECTION IE - 2-30
-------
especially Siphlonurus. (Merrit and Cummins 1978, Peckarsky et al. 1990, Thorp and
Covich 1991)
Beetles were the second most abundant insects recorded from the funnel-trapped vernal
pools. Two suborders of beetles were recorded, Adephaga and Polyphaga. Water beetles
(Adephaga) are aquatic during all of their life stages and include the predaceous diving
beetle, the most abundant beetle collected. Polyphaga includes some species with aquatic
adult stages but most are terrestrial.
The predaceous diving beetle is the largest family of water beetle, with about 30 genera
occurring in the northeastern United States. Eighteen of these genera were recorded
during the funnel trap survey. These beetles are highly adapted to the aquatic
environment. Adults range from 1-40 mm in length and have elongated, flattened hind
legs, which serve as oars to propel them through the water (Pennak 1978). One
generation is produced each year. Adults mate and lay eggs in the spring on aquatic
vegetation near the surface. Larvae typically develop over a few weeks time, during
which they are voracious feeders taking a variety of aquatic insects, tadpoles, and even
small fish. Larvae leave the water and burrow into nearby soil to pupate, which typically
lasts 5-14 days. Adults emerge and re-enter the aquatic habitat, taking similar prey as
the larvae. Adults will fly from pool to pool and typically fly to permanent water to
overwinter. Most predaceous diving beetles live for one year, dying after mating in the
spring, but a few species have been known to live for two or three years (Peckarsky et al.
1990, Thorp and Covich 1991).
The crawling water beetle (Haliplidae) was another commonly observed water beetle.
Crawling water beetles are small (2.5-5.0 mm) and despite their name are adapted to
swim (Thorp and Covich 1991). These beetles are herbivorous and are commonly found
on aquatic vegetation and in filamentous algae mats. The larvae are not able to swim and
spend the 3 - 5 weeks of this life stage crawling on aquatic vegetation. Pupation occurs
in moist soil near the larval development site, lasting 2-3 weeks. Adults emerge and re-
enter the water. Most adults overwinter in the water, but a few species are known to
overwinter in terrestrial sites adjacent to the water (Peckarsky et al. 1990).
SECTION in-2-31
-------
Whirligig beetles and burrowing water beetles were also recorded from the funnel-
trapped vernal pools but in smaller numbers than other water beetles. The life histories of
these beetles are similar to predaceous diving beetles. Both are predators of small
invertebrates or scavengers. Larval burrowing water beetles are somewhat omnivorous,
living and pupating among the submerged roots of vegetation. Whirligigs pupate in
cocoons on emergent vegetation. They fly to, and overwinter in, permanent bodies of
water, returning to the pools to mate in the spring (Peckarsky et al. 1990, Thorp and
Covich 1991).
Water scavenger beetles are the most abundant of the Polyphaga beetles in the surveyed
vernal pools. The eggs of the aquatic species are deposited in cocoons attached to aquatic
vegetation or, in some species, carried by the adult. Larvae are herbivorous, crawling and
feeding on vegetation. A few species have terrestrial larvae. Adults of the genera mostly
crawl along vegetation, but a few species have adaptations for swimming. Adults often
consume decaying vegetation, giving them the name scavenger beetles, but they also
consume large amounts of living plant material, mainly algae. The life cycle is similar to
other beetles with the larval stage lasting a few weeks and adults overwintering in either
permanent water or moist terrestrial sites (Thorp and Covich 1991, Merritt and Cummins
1978).
Weevils were not commonly collected in the aquatic funnel traps. They are likely more
common on emergent vegetation than in the water. Weevils are herbivorous during all
life stages and are known to commonly occur on arrowhead, pickerelweed, water lilies,
bulrushes, and sedges. A few marsh beetles were collected from the vernal pools. Adult
marsh beetles are terrestrial but the larval stage is aquatic. The larvae are found on
vegetation in shallow ponds, marshes, and swamps. Larvae are detritivores but little else
is known about their aquatic habits (Merritt and Cummins 1978).
Flies (Diptera), including mosquitoes and midges, were another abundant order of insects
observed. Two suborders of Diptera were recorded during vernal pools surveys. The
first is Brachycera, which includes most true flies (e.g., horseflies, deer flies, soldier flies,
drone flies), and the second was Nematocera, which includes midges and mosquitoes.
True flies were uncommon in vernal pools, with only two individuals being collected.
SECTION in - 2-32
-------
Mosquitoes and midges were both abundant in the PSA. Phantom midges and crane flies
were also recorded from the vernal pools, but they were much less common than other
Nematocera.
Mosquitoes (Culicidae) were the most abundant flies, making up almost half of all
Diptera collected. Mosquitoes in the PSA vernal pools are from the genus Aedes. These
mosquitoes lay their eggs in moist ground depressions during the late summer and the
eggs remain dormant until they are flooded the following spring. Mosquito larvae are
abundant in pools during the early spring and are an important food source for many
aquatic organisms. The larval stage typically lasts seven to ten days during which they
feed on detritus. Mosquito larvae molt four times with the final molt producing the
pupa. The pupal stage last three or four days during which the pupa floats at the surface
of the pool and does not feed. The adult develops within the pupa and emerges by
splitting the dorsum. The adult then uses the pupal skin as a float until wings dry (Thorp
and Covich 1991). Adult mosquitoes feed on plant juices to meet their energy
requirements. Females require a blood meal to obtain the needed protein for egg
production, making them vectors for many human and animal diseases (Merritt and
Cummins 1978). Mosquitoes were not collected from a large number of pools during
funnel trapping. This is likely due to the timing of the surveys; many mosquitoes may
have already emerged by the time surveys were conducted. Mosquito larvae were
observed in nearly all of the 68 pools during the early spring.
Midges (Chirononmidae) were also abundant in the vernal pools. Midges from three
subfamilies and thirteen different genera were collected from 65 percent of the sampled
vernal pools. Tanypodinae and Chironominae subfamilies were the most common, as
they prefer lentic, warm-water habitats. The Orthocladiinae were less common and
typically prefer cold-water habitat with rock and gravel substrate. Like other flies,
midges have four life stages: egg, larvae, pupa, and adult. The eggs hatch within a few
days of being laid and the larval stage lasts from several weeks to years, largely
dependent upon water temperature. The pupal stage lasts only a few days after which
adults emerge, swarm, mate, and die typically within a few days time. Most midges feed
only during the larval stage and most are opportunistic omnivores, feeding on a variety of
SECTION in - 2-33
-------
algae, diatoms, detritus, and small invertebrates (Thorp and Covich 1991). The most
abundant midge genera in the PSA vernal pools were the Chironomus. These midges
burrow into the substrate or build small tubes to protect themselves and are primarily
herbivorous, as are most Chironominae and Orthocladiinae. Tanypodinae, especially the
common Psectrotanypus, are primarily predaceous. They are free swimming and
actively search for prey, which is often water fleas, scuds, and other midges (Merritt and
Cummins 1978, Peckarsky etal. 1990, Thorp and Covich 1991)
True bugs (Hemioptera) such as water boatman, backswimmers, water striders, and giant
water bug were commonly collected during aquatic funnel trapping. Most are adapted to
swimming by having fringes of long hair on the flattened legs. Water striders are found
on the surface of water where they use the surface tension to stay above the water.
Metamorphosis in true bugs is gradual, with several molts occurring and the final molt
producing the adult form. Eggs are deposited in the spring and the larvae develop over
several weeks, and adults emerge in the late summer and fall. These bugs are mainly
predaceous, feeding on small invertebrates, with the exception of water boatman, which
feed mainly on detritus, algae, and protozoans. Merritt and Cummins 1978, Thorp and
Covich 1991)
Caddisflies (Tricoptera) were found in over 65 percent of the pools surveyed. Only one
genus, the northern caddisfly (Limnephilus) was collected. Tricoptera is a large order of
insects that have aquatic larvae. Many of the species that inhabit temporary pools lay
gelatinous egg masses in the fall. The larvae remain within the gelatinous mass until the
pools flood. After they break out of the egg masses they construct cases of sticks, leaves,
and sand. Larvae consume vegetation and detritus and play an important role processing
large particulate organic matter. Larvae seal off the ends of their cases and pupate within
them. After 2-3 weeks, pupa chew out of their cases and the adults emerge (Peckarsky
et al. 1990, Thorp and Covich 1991).
A few fishflies and alderflies (Megaloptera) were collected from vernal pools. Fishflies
larvae, known as hellgrammites, commonly occur in well-oxygenated streams but are
occasionally found in pools. Alderfly larvae require muddy or silty bottoms and
accumulated detritus. Some species utilize temporary steams and pools by burrowing
SECTION in - 2-34
-------
into the substrate during dry periods. Larvae of both families are predaceous, feeding on
a variety of small aquatic invertebrates.
Springtails (Collembola) were traditionally placed in the insect class, but recent
taxonomy treats springtails as a separate class. Springtails were uncommon, with only
three individuals being collected, each from different pools. Springtails are found on the
waters surface, relying on their small body size (0.5 - 2.2 mm) and hydrophobic body
surface to keep them from breaking through the surface (Peckarsky et al. 1990). They
feed on particulate organic matter, algae, and bacteria found on the water's surface.
Springtails inhabiting vernal pools are only semi-aquatic and are found in the soil and
leaf litter when the pools dry. Springtails do not metamorphose, but rather undergo a
series of molts that continue after the adult stage has been reached. The adult stage is
reached within a few weeks of hatching and adults only live for a few weeks to a few
months.
Arachnids were the final class of arthropods found in the PSA vernal pools. Mites were
the only arachnids collected during aquatic funnel trapping; however, several aquatic
spider species can typically be found in vernal pools. Fisher spiders (Dolomedes spp.)
were commonly seen in many of the study area vernal pools. They are commonly found
on the water surface or among emergent vegetation, but they will dive underwater for
prey and can remain submerged for long periods of time. This spider feeds on a variety
of aquatic insects, amphibian larvae, and small fish (Reid 2001).
Mites were commonly collected from nearly half of the vernal pools surveyed, but they
were not abundant in any of the pools. The majority of water mites belong to the order
Acari, commonly call acariforms. Eggs are laid in gelatinous masses attached to plants,
wood, or stones. One family, Hydranchnidae, uses an elongated ovipositor to deposit
eggs singularly in the stems of aquatic plants (Thorp and Covich 1991). Larvae emerge
from the eggs masses one to three weeks later. Larval water mites are parasitic, with
each genus preferring different hosts. Common hosts of the four genera present in the
PSA are beetles, true bugs, mosquitoes, midges, dragonflies, and caddisflies. The
engorged larvae usually drop off the host and metamorphose into nymphs. Some species,
especially those that use long-lived hosts, undergo this metamorphosis while still attached
SECTION in - 2-35
-------
to the host. This allows the larvae to remain on the host for longer periods of time and to
utilize temporary habitats by avoiding pools during the dry period. The nymph stage may
last from several weeks to several months depending upon the species. Nymphs are
predaceous often feeding on the eggs and larvae of their host species. After reaching an
adult size, the nymphs become inactive and prepare to transform into adults. Many of the
species utilizing temporary pools, particularly Pionidea, have a long nymph stage
surviving the dry period burrowed into the pool bottom in the inactive stage. Adult males
typically live for a few days to a few weeks and die soon after mating. Mating occurs in
the fall, but fertilization is delayed until the following spring. Females live longer,
typically overwintering and laying eggs the following spring. In contrast, species
inhabiting vernal pools lay their eggs soon after mating to ensure that offspring will reach
a life-history stage capable of surviving the dry period.
Mollusks
Two major classes of mollusks were collected from the PSA vernal pools. They are
snails and clams. Clams collected from the vernal pools were fingernail clams, pill
clams, and sphere clams, all of which are small (less than 1.2 cm in diameter) (Reid
2001). Clams made up approximately 2.5 percent of the total invertebrate population,
with fingernail clams being the most abundant. Clams are filter feeders, consuming
detritus, plankton, and microscopic invertebrates. All of the clam species collected
during this survey are hermaphroditic and self fertilize. Young are contained within the
gills until they are fully formed. An adult can contain anywhere from 1-60 young in
various stages of development. These clams survive dry periods by burrowing into the
substrate and remaining inactive until the habitat floods again.
Snails made up just over four percent of the relative abundance of aquatic invertebrates
collected during this survey. Snails were observed in nearly all of the 68 vernal pools,
and their abundance is likely greater than suggested by funnel trapping surveys because
they are not free swimming and, thus, are less likely to be captured in funnel traps than
other invertebrates. All of the snails collected had spiral shell architecture except for the
orb snails. Snails within the vernal pools were found on submerged and emergent
SECTION in - 2-36
-------
vegetation, on woody debris, rocks, or floating on the surface. Snails feed mainly on
detritus, periphyton, and algae; some will also consume carrion.
Annelids
Annelids are segmented worms including aquatic earthworms, sludge worms, tubifex,
and leeches, and make up less than two percent of the total invertebrate abundance
collected in the aquatic funnel traps. Leeches were the most common annelid found in
the vernal pools. Leeches are considered to be aquatic, but some, such as Haemopis,
commonly crawl across land, feeding on living and dead invertebrates, especially
earthworms. Leeches have a wide variety of hosts including waterfowl, reptiles,
amphibians, and other invertebrates. Many leeches will also consume decaying carrion.
Aquatic earthworms, sludge worms, and tubifex are similar in structure and life histories
to terrestrial worms. They are commonly found burrowing in the substrate and among
dense mats of filamentous algae. These species feed by ingesting the substrate and
extracting the organic component, or on filamentous algae, diatoms, and detritus.
Nematodes
Nematodes, or roundworms, are abundant in aquatic systems, but they were not
commonly collected during the funnal trap survey. Most nematodes are parasites,
although some are free-living. Most of the free-living species feed on decaying matter
and some may be herbivorous, carnivorous, or omnivorous. Parasitic species can be
found in nearly all animals, with individual species having specific hosts.
Flatworms
Flatworms are mainly free-living, but some, such as tapeworms and flukes, are parasitic.
Freshwater flatworms can be found in nearly every aquatic habitat, usually associated
with the substrate. Planarians were the genera found during the funnel trapping surveys
and were abundant in many of the vernal pools. Planarians are common laboratory
specimens and are studied in many science classrooms. Planarians consume dead and
decomposing animal matter and small invertebrates. Flatworms can reproduce sexually
SECTION IE - 2-37
-------
or asexually through budding, and utilize both methods depending upon ecological
conditions.
Hydra
Hydras belong to the same phylum as jellyfish and have a similar body structure. Only
one hydra was collected during funnel trapping surveys. Hydras can be found clinging to
the stems of submerged aquatic plants, sticks, and stones. Hydras consume a wide
variety of invertebrates. They capture prey by grasping them with their tentacles,
stunning them by stinging, and then engulfing them alive. The tentacles move the prey to
the mouth and into the coelenteron, a sack-like internal space, where digestive juices
break it down. Food particles are carried by vacuoles through the endodermal cells and
into body tissues. After the digestion process, the indigestible remains are returned to the
coelenteron and regurgitated. Hydra reproduce by budding and by gametes produced
from the ectoderm.
3.2 Terrestrial Macroinvertebrates
3.2.1 Earthworms
Three species of earthworms were collected during earthworm sampling at three of the
small mammal trap sites: Aporrectodea longa, Aporrectodea trapezoids, and Eisenoides
carolinensis. A. longa and A. trapezoids were collected from Site 13 (see Map 6-7). A.
trapezoids and E. carolinensis were collected from Sites 14 and 15. Because the
earthworm survey was designed to target species that would likely be consumed by
American robins, woodcocks, and other birds, collection was done only within the first
15 cm of the soil. It is also likely that some Lumbicus species are present; however, these
species dwell deeper than 15 cm below the surface (McKeegan per. comm.).
3.2.2 Litter Invertebrates
Litter invertebrates were collected from the litter and woody debris on the forest floor
during the earthworm collection work. Table 2-8 identifies the Orders collected and the
percentage of total mass for each. Slugs and snails made up the greatest amount of mass.
SECTION in - 2-38
-------
Sow bugs were the most abundant group, but due to their smaller size, they did not make
the greatest mass. A cicada from Site 15 made up the greatest amount of mass due to it
large size. Beetles, spiders, harvestman spiders ("daddy long legs"), centipedes, and
millipedes were all common. Earwigs and caterpillars were also collected.
SECTION in - 2-39
-------
Table 2-8 2000 terrestrial litter invertebrate collection results.
Common name
Class
Order
Percent of total mass
Site 13
Site 14
Site 15
Millipede
Diplopoda
N/D1
1
6
< 1
Centipede
Chilopoda
N/D
< 1
1
5
Sow bug
Crustacea
Isopoda
5
16
12
Spider (general)
Arachnida
Araneida
< 1
1
1
Harvestman spider
Arachnida
Phalangida
1
1
Earwig
Insecta
Dermaptera
5
Cicada
Insecta
Homoptera
40
Beetle
Insecta
Coleoptera
2
3
5
Caterpillar
Insecta
Lepidoptera
1
Snail
Gastropoda
N/D
30
3
Slug
Gastropoda
Opisthobrachia
61
68
25
Unknown Larvae
N/D
< 1
5
1 Order not determined.
SECTION HI - 2-40
-------
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Macroinvertebrates
Seven species of freshwater mussels historically known from the Housatonic River
drainage are currently species of conservation concern in Massachusetts (Table 2-2).
Five of these species, however, were only ever known from Connecticut and four of them
have not been seen since they were first documented in the mid-1800s and early 1900s.
Two species of concern, the triangle floater and the creeper, were observed in the PSA or
at reference sites.
A small population of triangle floater, a species of Special Concern in Massachusetts,
was found in the PSA (Map 2-6). and many relic shells were found at the most
downstream reference site in Great Barrington, MA (Map 2-7). The triangle floater is
found in most Atlantic Coast drainages from North Carolina to Nova Scotia, west to the
tributaries of the lower St. Lawrence River. It occurs in every New England state and is
also listed as Special Concern in Maine (Nedeau et al. 2000). The triangle floater has
relatively broad habitat requirements and can occur in slow to fast rivers, in lakes, and on
substrates ranging from fine shifting sands to mixed aggregates of boulders, cobble, and
gravel (Clarke 1981, Fichtel and Smith 1995, Strayer and Jirka 1997). In the PSA,
triangle floaters were found on packed, algae-covered gravel in the eastern half of the
channel, but they were not found on fine, shifting sands in the western half of the
channel. Water depths in the area ranged from 8 - 50 cm. At the downstream reference
site, the substrate was mostly packed gravel. Only relic shells were found in shallow
water (i.e., less than 50 cm) deep. No live aniamls were observed, as most areas were too
deep to survey with viewing buckets.
Eight creeper shells were found at a downstream reference site near the mouth of the
Green River in Great Barrington, MA. Though listed as a species of Special Concern in
Massachusetts, the creeper is the most widely distributed species in the United States,
occurring throughout the Mississippi, Great Lakes, and St. Lawrence drainages and all
major Atlantic Coast drainages. It occurs in every New England state and is listed as
Special Concern in Maine (Nedeau et al. 2000). The creeper typically occurs in streams
and rivers but also occasionally in lakes. It occurs in variable substrates, although it is
SECTION HI - 2-41
-------
usually most common in aggregates of gravel and sand (Clarke 1981, Fichtel and Smith
1995, Strayer and Jirka 1997). At the reference site where it was found, the substrate was
mostly packed gravel with moderate flows.
Dragonflies
Six state-listed dragonfly species were historically known from Berkshire County,
including one Endangered and five Special Concern species (MNHESP 2000). The
species of Special Concern are the skillet clubtail, brook snaketail, ringed emerald,
slender emerald, and beaverpond clubtail. The Endangered species is the harpoon
clubtail. While none of the six species were collected during the surveys, three additional
state-listed species, arrow clubtail, zebra clubtail, and riffle snaketail, were found. All
three species have not been recorded as occurring in Berkshire County by the MNHESP
(2000). Literature searches, however, revealed that individual observers have recorded
these species in the county (Leahy et al. 2000).
The arrow clubtail (Figure 2-2) is a moderate-sized dragonfly of eastern North America
that normally measures 57-68 mm in length (Needham et al. 2000). It prefers high-order
rivers, usually with sandy bottoms, although it is rarely found in streams or. It is found
along the Atlantic Seaboard as far south as Tennessee, and occurs in the north from
Quebec and New England west to the Great Lakes States (Dunkle 2000). This species
has been recorded in all New England states except Maine and Rhode Island (Needham et
al. 2000). In New England, the arrow clubtail is also a species of conservation concern in
Connecticut (The Natural Heritage Network 2000).
Emergence periods for the arrow clubtail have been recorded from 23 June to 15
September in Connecticut (Wagner and Thomas 2000), and as late as 18 October in
Virginia (Needham et al. 2000). Adults perch on grass, shrubs, and treetops while away
from the water (Dunkle 2000). Males are most active from late afternoon to dark, and
males can be seen patrolling low over the river late in the day during August and
September (Nikula 1998, Dunkle 2000).
SECTION in - 2-42
-------
Figure 2-2 Adult female arrow cluhtail.
Arrow clubtail exuviae were collected from Transects 3-8 along the Housatonic River
(Maps 2-2, 2-3, 2-4, and 228). These transects contain slow-flowing water with sand or
soft muck substrate. This dragonfly was also collected from the Threemile Pond SWMA
reference area (Map 2-9). This species was ubiquitous during our surveys. Associated
dragonfly species are presented in Table 2-4 and Table 2-5. This species has been
recorded in six counties in Massachusetts (four in western Massachusetts), including
Berkshire County (Leahy et id. 2000). In western Massachusetts, the arrow clubtail has
been observed along the Connecticut River in Sunderland and Northfield (Nikula and
Sones 1998).
The zebra clubtail (Figure 2-3) is a moderate-sized dragonfly that usually measures 57-
58 mm in length (Needham et ill. 2000). It prefers forest streams with slight to moderate
current, intermittent rapids, a sand or muck bottom and also, occasionally, lakes (Walker
1958, Dunkle 2000). This species occurs in eastern North America from Nova Scotia to
South Carolina, and in the north it occurs west to the Great Lakes States (Dunkle 2000).
In the southern part of its range, it occurs inland along the Appalachian Mountains
(Dunkle 2000). In Massachusetts, the zebra clubtail is apparently the most widespread of
SECTION in - 2-43
-------
its genus (Nikula 1998). This species has been recorded in all the states of New England
(Needham et af. 2000).
Figure 2-3 Adult male zebra clubtail.
Emergence periods for the zebra clubtail have been recorded from late July through
August in Maine (Brunelle 1999), 10 August to 11 September in Connecticut (Wagner
and Thomas 2000), and as early as 11 June in New York (Needham et al. 2000). Unlike
most dragonflies, the zebra clubtail may transform from larva to adult during daylight
(Legler et al. 1998, Needham 1901). The zebra clubtail forages along forest edges and
clearings. Males perch on sand, logs, and hanging leaves (Dunkle 2000).
Zebra clubtail were collected from Transects 1-8 along the Housatonic River (Map 2-8).
These transects contain fast- and slow-flowing water with sand, cobble, or soft muck
substrate. This species was ubiquitous during our surveys; associated species are
presented in Table 2-4 and Table 2-5. No collections were made in the reference areas.
This species has been recorded in four counties in Massachusetts (three in western
Massachusetts), including Berkshire County (Leahy et al. 2000). In western
Massachusetts, this species has also been found along Hop Brook in Tyringham, the
Connecticut River in Sunderland, and the Fort River in Amherst (Nikula and Sones 1998,
1999).
The riffle snaketail (Figure 2-4) is a small-sized dragonfly that usually measures 40-45
mm in length (Needham et al. 2000). It inhabits shallow, stony riffles in low order
woodland streams (Needham and Westfall 1954), and clear, rapid, sandy, streams and
SECTION in - 2-44
-------
rivers (Walker 1958, Dunkle 2000). Since the larvae burrow shallowly into the substrate
in streams and rivers, they are vulnerable to flood scouring (Dunkle 2000). This species
occurs in eastern North America (Dunkle 2000). It is found along the Atlantic Seaboard
as far south as Virginia and in the north as far west as the Great Lakes States (Dunkle
2000, Bick and Mauffray 2001). In New England, it is known from all states except
Connecticut and Rhode Island (Needham et al. 2000).
Emergence periods for riffle snaketails have been recorded for mid-June to mid-July in
Maine and as early as 1 May in New York (Brunelle 1999, Needham et ml 2000). In
Wisconsin, emergence of exuviae occurs on rocks from mid-May to mid-August (Legler
et al. 1998). Nymphs burrow in silt beds and basins, and upon transformation, they leave
their cast exoskeletons flat on sloping banks at the edge of the water (Needham and
Westfall 1955). Males perch on exposed tops of boulders (Needham et al. 2000) and
vegetation along the shore (Legler et al. 1998). Away from water, they perch on the tips
of plants, broad leaves in clearings and tree crowns, or if the air is cool, on the ground
(Dunkle 2000).
i. iphKiiiiJiriptai.-: .W&i-.
Jfr' t
^ I
IM r
Nt ' '
* J
V' ' • V*' 4
iSSflS « mnii nijir Nik il.i
Figure 2-4 Adult female riffle snaketail.
Riffle snaketails were collected from Transects 1 and 2 (Map 2-8). No collections were
made at any reference areas. Both transects contain riffle and run habitats with sand and
cobble substrate. Associated species collected along Transect 1 include the fawn darner
and zebra clubtail. Associated species collected along Transect 2 include the fawn
SECTION in - 2-45
-------
darner, rusty snaketail, and zebra clubtail. In Massachusetts, the riffle snaketail has been
observed in three counties in the western part of the state, including Berkshire County
(Leahy et al. 2000). This species has been found in recent years in Massachusetts on the
Green, Westfield, and Farmington Rivers (Nikula 1998).
SECTION in - 2-46
-------
5.0 Literature Cited
Bick, G.H., and B. Mauffray. 2001. Distribution Summary of North American Anisoptera.
URL http://www.afn.0rg/~i0ri/nalist.html#G0mphidae.
Brunelle, P.M. 1999. Distribution of damselflies and dragonflies (Odonata) of Maine,
United States. Northeastern Naturalist 6(2):95-l 18. (N)
Clarke, A.H. 1981. The Freshwater Mollusks of Canada. National Museum of Natural
Sciences/National Museums of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Di Maio, J., and L. Corkum. 1995. Relationship between the spatial distribution of
freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae) and the hydrological variability of rivers.
Canadian Journal of Zoology 73:663-671.
Dindal, D.L. 1990. Soil Biology Guide. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, USA.
Dunkle, S.W. 2000. Dragonflies Through Binoculars: A Field Guide to Dragonflies of
North America. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA.
Fichtel, C., and D.G. Smith. 1995. The Freshwater Mussels of Vermont. Technical Report
8. Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department. Nongame and Natural Heritage
Program.
Goodreau, S.E., R.J. Neves, and R.J. Sheehan. 1993. Effects of wastewater treatment plant
effluents on freshwater mollusks in the upper Clinch River, Virginia, USA.
Hydrobiologia 252:211-230.
Holder, M. 1996. The Dragonflies and Damselflies of Algonquin Provincial Park.
Algonquin Park Technical Bulletin Number 11. The Friends of Algonquin Park,
Whitney, Ontario, Canada.
Kenney, L.P. 1995. Wicked Big Puddles: A Guide to the Study and Certification of Vernal
Pools. 2nd ed. Reading Memorial High School and the Vernal Pool Association,
Reading, MA, USA.
SECTION HI - 2-47
-------
Leahy, C., R. Forster, B. Nikula, J. Sones, and J. Trimble. 2000. Massachusetts Odonata
County List. URL http://www.capecod.net/~bnikxila/Countyl.htm.
Legler, K., D. Legler, and D. Westover. 1998. A Color Guide to Common Dragonflies of
Wisconsin. Copyright K. Legler, Sauk City, WI, USA.
Mackie, G.L., and J.M. Topping. 1988. Historical changes in the unionid fauna of the
Sydenham River watershed and downstream changes in shell morphometries of
three common species. Canadian Field Naturalist 102:617-626.
Martin, S.M. 1997. Freshwater mussels (Bivalvia:Unionoida) of Maine. Northeastern
Naturalist 4(1): 1-34.
MNHESP (Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program). 1999.
Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas: 2000-2001 Edition. Division of Fisheries
and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
McMahon, R.F. 1991. Mollusca: Bivalvia. p. 315-399. In J.H Thorp and A.P. Covich (ed.)
Ecology and Classification of North American Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic
Press, Boston, MA, USA.
Merritt, R.W., and K.W. Cummins. 1978. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North
America. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, IA, USA.
Metcalfe, J.L., and M.N. Charlton. 1990. Freshwater mussels as biomonitors for organic
industrial contaminants and pesticides in the St. Lawrence River. The Science of
the Total Environment 97/98(1990):595-615.
The Natural Heritage Network. 2000. U.S. Natural Heritage Programs. URL
http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/usmap.html.
Nedeau, E.J., M.A. McCollough, and B.I. Swartz. 2000. The Freshwater Mussels of Maine.
Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Augusta, ME, USA.
Needham, J.G. 1901. Odonata. In Aquatic Insects in the Adirondacks. New York State
Museum Bulletin 47:429-540.
SECTION in - 2-48
-------
Needham, J.G., and M.J. Westfall Jr. 1954. A Manual of the Dragonflies of North America
(Anisoptera). University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Needham, J.G., M.J. Westfall Jr., and M.L. May. 2000. Dragonflies of North America.
Scientific Publishers, Inc., Gainesville, FL, USA.
Neves, R.J., and M.C. Odom. 1989. Muskrat predation on endangered freshwater mussels
in Virginia. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:934-941.
Neves, R.J., and J.C. Widlak. 1987. Habitat and ecology of juvenile freshwater mussels
(Bivalvia:Unionidae) in a headwater stream in Virginia. American Malacological
Bulletin 5(1): 1-7.
Nikula, B. 1998. In focus: The Clubtails (Family Gomphidae) - Part 2. Ode News 5(1).
Harwich Port, MA, USA.
Nikula, B., and J. Sones ed. 1998. 1998 Massachusetts Highlights. Ode News 5(2).
Harwich Port, MA, USA.
1999. 1999 Massachusetts Highlights. Ode News 6(2): 1-5. Harwich Port, MA, USA.
Peckarsky, B.L., P.R. Fraissinet, M.A. Penton, and D.J. Conklin Jr. 1990. Freshwater
Macroinvertebrates of Northeastern North America. Comstock Publishing, Cornell
University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Pennak, R.W. 1978. Freshwater Invertebrates of the United States. John Wilesy & Sons,
New York, NY, USA.
Reid, G.K. 2001. Pond Life. St. Martin's Press, New York, NY, USA.
Smith, D.G. 1982. The zoogeography of the freshwater mussels of the Taconic and
southern Green Mountain regions of northeastern North America (Mollusca:
Pelecypoda: Unionacea). Canadian Journal of Zoology 60:261-267.
1995. Keys to the Freshwater Macroinvertebrates of Massachusetts. Privately
published by D.G. Smith, Sunderland, MA, USA.
SECTION in - 2-49
-------
1999. A brief history of the freshwater mussels (Unionidae) of the Housatonic River
System. Unpublished report submitted to Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Strayer, D.L. 1983. The effects of surface geology and stream size on freshwater mussel
(Bivalvia, Unionidae) distribution in southeastern Michigan, USA. Freshwater
Biology 13:253-264.
1990. Freshwater Mollusca. p. 335-372. In B.L. Peckarsky, P.R. Fraissinet, M.A.
Penton and D.J. Conklin (ed.) Freshwater Macroinvertebrates of Northeastern
North America. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.
1993. Macrohabitats of freshwater mussels (Bivalvia:Unionacea) in streams of the
northern Atlantic Slope. Journal of the North American Benthological Society
12(3):236-246.
Strayer, D.L., and K.J. Jirka. 1997. The Pearly Mussels of New York State. New York
State Museum, Albany, NY, USA.
Strayer, D.L., D.C. Hunter, L.C. Smith, and C.K. Borg. 1994. Distribution, abundance, and
roles of freshwater clams (Bivalvia, Unionidae) in the freshwater tidal Hudson
River. Freshwater Biology 31:239-248.
Thorp, J.H., and A.P. Covich. 1991. Ecology and Classification of North American
Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA.
Wagner, D.L., and M.C. Thomas. 2000. County and Flight Records for Odonata of
Connecticut. Unpublished data. Storrs, CT, USA.
Walker, E.M. 1953. The Odonata of Canada and Alaska. Vol. 1. University of Toronto
Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
1958. The Odonata of Canada and Alaska. Vol. 2. University of Toronto Press,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Walker, E.M., and P.S. Corbet. 1975. The Odonata of Canada and Alaska. Vol. 3.
University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
SECTION IE - 2-50
-------
Chapter 3 Fish
1.0 Introduction
Fish are found at the upper trophic levels of the aquatic food web, functioning as
predators, foragers, and bottom feeders. Given this trophic status, as well as their role as
prey for certain mammals and birds, fish are an important component of the modeling
study of PCB contamination in the Housatonic River (Beach et al. 2000).
Fish populations were qualitatively and quantitatively sampled within the PSA during
1998-2000. Additional surveys (see McCabe 1943, Bergin 1971, Stewart Laboratories
1982, Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1991, and Chadwick & Associates 1993,
1994) have also included areas within the PSA. The results of these surveys will be
summarized and used to describe the composition of the fish community in the PSA.
2.0 Methods
The fish community within the PSA has been characterized using several methods,
including:
¦ Developing a species:habitat association matrix
¦ Review of existing fisheries data
¦ Site-specific electrofishing, trot-line, and netting data from 1998-2000
The PSA has been broken down into reaches, which are described by Beach et al. (2000).
Using the methods described below, the fish community in the PSA was characterized,
with specific reference to reaches. Species-specific biomass estimates are being
developed for each reach as part of ongoing investigations in the PSA (Woodlot
Alternatives, Inc. in prep).
2.1 Species:Habitat Association
Natural communities have been identified and mapped as part of ongoing investigations
of the PSA. There are three major communities, or habitat types, in the riverine portions
SECTION III - 3-1
-------
of the PSA: medium-gradient stream; low-gradient stream; and moderately alkaline
lake/pond. Medium-gradient streams can be generally described as moderate-flowing
water with sand and gravel substrate and sparse aquatic vegetation, while low-gradient
streams can be generally described as slow-moving water with silt and muck substrate,
often with abundant aquatic vegetation. Moderately alkaline lake/pond communities
include open water, lacustrine habitat with water pH ranging from 7.0 - 9.0 occuring in
calcareous bedrock regions. Submergent floating leaved vegetation may be abundant in
this community (see Section in, Chapter 1, Natural Communities). Additionally, high-
gradient streams, characterized by steep slopes, high water velocity, and course
substrates, flow into the river and Woods Pond on the lower slopes of October Mountain
in Lee. The fish species known or expected to occur within each of these communities
are identified in Attachment C. a species:habitat matrix that also includes a list of special
habitat requirements for each species.
2.2 Existing Fisheries Data
Hartel el al. (1996) have annotated a working list of the inland fishes of Massachusetts
that references both historic and recent scientific investigations of the distribution of fish
in the state and within the Housatonic drainage. Some studies (e.g., McCabe 1943,
Bergin 1971) have included the Housatonic River. Other fisheries investigations in the
PSA have been conducted for the General Electric Company (see Stewart Laboratories
1982; Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1991; and Chadwick & Associates 1993,
1994). These existing fisheries data were reviewed as part of the effort to characterize
the fish community in the PSA.
2.3 Electrofishing and Netting
Four separate fish collection events occurred within the PSA during 1998-2000. The
principle method employed to collect fish was electro-shocking fish (electrofishing) from
one or two boats operated by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
Limited use of trot-lines and gill nets also occurred in areas inaccessible to the shock
boats. Sample sites for these studies are shown on Maps 3-1. 3-2. 3-3. and 3-4.
SECTION in - 3-2
-------
In September and October 1998, electrofishing was conducted to collect fish community
characterization data and fish tissue. Timed (30-minute) surveys to collect community
composition data were conducted between river miles 3 and 4 and between river miles 8
and 11. During each timed event the total number of all fish per species observed was
estimated and recorded. In addition, target species within different taxonomic fish groups
(e.g., largemouth bass, yellow perch, brown bullhead, common carp) were collected for
tissue analysis. These collections occurred along river miles 3 and 7-11, and at Woods
Pond. Each fish was weighed and measured prior to processing for analysis. A sample
of otoliths and scales were collected from largemouth bass to estimate ages of specimens
(USFWS 1999).
In May 1999, largemouth bass and bluegill were collected to support fish toxicology
studies. The collection locations for this survey included Woods Pond and the "deep
reach" upstream of Woods Pond (modeling Reaches 5C and 5B, in part), to New Lenox
Road bridge. Morphometric data collected from specimens included total weight and
total length. In addition, otoliths were collected to estimate ages of largemouth bass.
In October 1999, common carp, goldfish, and white suckers were collected from Woods
Pond and one backwater north of Woods Pond to support a mink reproductive study.
Morphometric data collected from specimens included total weight and total length.
Most recently, sampling efforts to obtain fish biomass data from the PSA were conducted
during August and October of 2000 (Woodlot Alternatives, Inc. in prep). The objective
of this study was to estimate biomass for largemouth bass, goldfish, common carp,
bluegill sunfish, pumpkinseed sunfish, cyprinids (golden shiner, common shiner, spottail
shiner, or others from family Cyprinidae), brown bullhead, yellow perch, and white
sucker in each modeling reach of the Housatonic River (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000).
3.0 Fish Community Description
There are 32 families, encompassing 98 species, of native and introduced inland fishes
known to currently occur in Massachusetts (Hartel el al. 1996). Since the early 1940s, 41
species of fish have been reported from the Housatonic River in Massachusetts (Table
SECTION in - 3-3
-------
3-1). These surveys have included portions of the PSA, as well as upstream and
downstream reaches.
SECTION in - 3-4
-------
Table 3-1
Fishes of the Housatonic River system.
Species
McCabe
Bergin
Stewart
Chadwick
1998-2000
Surveys
Brook trout
•
•
Brown trout
•
•
•
Rainbow trout
•
•
Bluegill*
•
•
#+
Black crappie
•
#+
White crappie
•
Green sunfish
•
Largemouth bass
•
•
•
#+
•
Smallmouth bass
•
•
•
•
Pumpkinseed sunfish
•
•
•
#+
•
Redbreast sunfish
•
Redear sunfish
•
Rock bass
•
•
•
+
Chain pickerel
•
•
•
+
Redfin pickerel
•
Northern pike
+
Muskellunge
•
Tessellated darter
•
fellow perch
•
•
+
Trout perch1
Brown bullhead
•
•
+
fellow bullhead
Longnose sucker
•
White sucker
•
+
Creek chubsucker
•
Blacknose dace
•
+
Bluntnose minnow
+
Bridle shiner
Common carp
+
•
Common shiner
+
•
Creek chub
+
Fallfish
+
•
Fathead minnow
Golden shiner
+
•
Goldfish*
+
•
Longnose dace
+
•
Spottail shiner
+
•
Killifish sp.
Banded killifish
•
Burbot
Slimy sculpin
•
Species Richness
25
27
14
28
25
References: Bergin (1971) McCabe (1943)
Chadwick & Associates (1993 and 1994) Stewart Laboratories (1982)
Species introduced to Massachusetts; +Chadwick & Associates collections from primary study area (20 species)
1 The trout-perch (.Percopsis omisomaycus) was collected at the mouth of the Green River in the Housatonic River
drainage (Great Barrington) by Britton McCabe in 1940-42. Surveys between 1978-1990 failed to locate this
species and it is presumed extirpated from Massachusetts (Hartel et al. 1996).
section in - 3-5
-------
Surveys in the PSA have generally been conducted for specific purposes, such as
obtaining biomass estimates or tissue samples, and were not intended to be exhaustive
taxonomic inventories. The most recent surveys by Chadwick & Associates (1993, 1994)
and the present study resulted in the collection of 28 and 25 species, respectively. The
Chadwick & Associates collections from within the PSA, however, included only 20
species. The results of the Chadwick & Associates collections from within the PSA and
the present study were combined to develop a list of the 27 fish species recently
confirmed to occur in the PSA. An additional 10 species potentially occur based on the
range of the species and the habitat in the PSA. These 37 species are indicated in the
species:habitat matrix in Attachment C.
The lake chub (Couesius plumbeus) is an endangered species (state-listed) that could
hypothetically occur in the upper reaches of the PSA. The likelihood of this occurrence,
however, is so low that the species is not included on the species:habitat matrix. It is not
known at this time if the American eel (Anguilla rostratd) historically occurred in the
PSA or if the American brook lamprey (Lampetra appendix) currently exists in the
Housatonic River watershed. Considering this, these two species are not included on the
species:habitat matrix.
Surveys conducted in 2000 illustrate the composition of the fish communities within each
reach of the PSA. Table 3-2 documents the composition of the fish community based on
biomass (total grams of fish caught) and is summarized by feeding strategy (i.e.,
predators, forage fish, and bottom feeders).
Pooling all sample reaches, the five dominant fish species were white sucker, largemouth
bass, yellow perch, bluegill, and common carp. Largemouth bass and yellow perch can
be classified primarily as predators, bluegills are forage fish, and white suckers and
common carp are bottom feeders. The dominant five species, therefore, encompass all
three major feeding strategies.
White suckers are clearly the dominant fish species in Reaches 5A and 5B. They still
represent the greatest component of the sample biomass in Reach 5C, but decline to a
smaller component of the fish community in the Backwaters and Woods Pond (Figure
SECTION in - 3-6
-------
3-1). In Reach 5C, as well as in the Backwaters and Woods Pond, common carp become
a more common member of the bottom-feeding guild. Goldfish and brown bullhead also
represent significant proportions of the bottom-feeding guild in the Backwaters and
Woods Pond.
Bluegills, pumpkinseed, cyprinids, and rock bass share dominance of the forage fish
group, which comprised 11-24 percent of the overall fish community (based on
biomass) in Reaches 5A - 5C and the Backwaters. Bluegills, however, were abundant in
Woods Pond, where they represented 30 percent of the total biomass sample, and where
forage fish as a group comprised 40 percent of the overall fish community. Largemouth
bass and yellow perch were the predominant predators in all reaches.
SECTION in - 3-7
-------
Table 3-2 2000 fish biomass sampling results.
Feeding Strategy and
Species
Reach
5A
5B
5C
Backwaters
Woods Pond
Total Weight
(g)
% of Total
Sample
Total Weight
(g)
% of Total
Sample
Total Weight
(g)
% of Total
Sample
Total Weight
(g)
% of Total
Sample
Total Weight (g)
% of Total
Sample
Predators
Largemouth Bass
24,701.5
11.1
33,471.5
11.6
48,302.7
21.0
9,558.1
9.2
14,899.2
11.2
Smallmouth Bass
894.8
0.4
458.5
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Yellow Perch
12,070.0
5.4
40,048.3
13.9
29,683.2
12.9
16,405.7
15.7
18,576.9
14.0
Northern Pike
6,268.0
2.8
8,038.0
2.8
6,526.5
2.8
3,401.2
3.3
6,671.6
5.0
Chain Pickerel
492.0
0.2
701.5
0.2
2,315.1
1.0
371.5
0.4
134.5
0.1
Redfin Pickerel
633.5
0.3
1,130.5
0.4
667.6
0.3
0.0
0.0
26.6
0.0
ChainxRedfin Hybrid
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
432.5
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Brown Trout
225.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Rainbow Trout
1,006.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Predator Subtotal
46,290.8
20.8
83,848.3
29.0
87,927.6
38.2
29,736.5
28.5
40,308.8
30.4
Forage Fish
Bluegill
5,764.5
2.6
11,665.2
4.0
23,642.4
10.3
12,874.9
12.4
39,783.8
30.0
SECTION in - 3-8
-------
Feeding Strategy and
Species
Reach
5A
5B
5C
Backwaters
Woods Pond
Total Weight
(g)
% Of Total
Sample
Total Weight
(g)
% Of Total
Sample
Total Weight
(g)
% Of Total
Sample
Total Weight
(g)
% Of Total
Sample
Total Weight (g)
% Of Total
Sample
Bluegill Hybrid
45.0
0.0
356.0
0.1
14.0
0.0
25.8
0.0
137.0
0.1
Pumpkinseed
709.1
0.3
5,014.5
1.7
8,213.2
3.6
6,132.5
5.9
7,632.9
5.8
Cyprinids
11,611.3
5.2
3,609.6
1.2
1,582.1
0.7
110.9
0.1
259.0
0.2
Black Crappie
301.5
0.1
1,110.5
0.4
2,629.6
1.1
3,574.7
3.4
712.0
0.5
Rock Bass
12,533.0
5.6
11,432.8
4.0
18,776.0
8.2
0.0
0.0
3,974.1
3.0
Forage Fish Subtotal
30,964.4
13.9
33,188.6
11.5
54,857.3
23.9
22,718.8
21.8
52,498.8
39.6
Bottom Feeders
White Sucker
144,843.8
65.2
155,596.2
53.8
57,845.0
25.2
1,557.0
1.5
9,205.8
6.9
Brown Bullhead
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4,234.1
1.8
9,582.5
9.2
17,866.3
13.5
Yellow Bullhead
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
113.5
0.1
Common Carp
0.0
0.0
15,649.2
5.4
24,172.1
10.5
25,079.0
24.1
10.0
0.0
Goldfish
0.0
0.0
827.0
0.3
897.5
0.4
15,505.0
14.9
12,523.0
9.4
Bottom Feeder Subtotal
144,843.8
65.2
172,072.4
59.5
87,148.7
37.9
51,723.5
49.6
39,718.6
30.0
Total
222,099.0
100.0
289,109.3
100.0
229,933.6
100.0
104,178.8
100.0
132,526.2
100.0
Note: Sample sizes in each reach were roughly equal.
SECTION in - 3-9
-------
Figure 3-1 Weight of dominant fish captured during 2000 biomass sampling.
180000
160000
140000
120000
"3 100000
U)
5 80000
60000
40000
20000
—¦ ¦
1 n
¦
n ril
~White Sucker
¦ Largemouth Bass
~Yellow Perch
~ Bluegill
¦ Common Carp
5A
5B
5C
Reach
Backwaters
Woods Pond
SECTION in-3-10
-------
3.1 Reach 5A and 5B Fish Community - Confluence to Roaring Brook
Reach 5 includes the area from the confluence of the East and West Branches of the
Housatonic to the backwaters of Woods Pond. In this 13-km (8.0-mile) reach the channel
slope is very shallow (0.31 m/km), and the riverbed elevation drops 3.96 m to the
confluence of Woods Pond. Reach 5 is characterized by two flow regimes; one is
relatively free flowing (Reaches 5A and 5B) and the other (Reach 5C) is subject to the
backwater influences of Woods Pond Dam.
Reach 5A, downstream of the confluence of the East and West Branches to the WWTF,
and Reach 5B, downstream from the WWTF to the confluence with Roaring Brook, are
characterized as a free-flowing river that is oriented roughly NNW-SSE. These reaches
include a wide floodplain, numerous meanders and remnant oxbows, and riverbanks that
are generally scoured and eroded. The width of the meandering river in the free-flowing
section is about 15 - 36 m with depths up to 3 m. Reflecting the generally slow current
velocity of this flat reach, the sediment bed consists of coarse to fine sands with
approximately ten percent silts and clay.
Fourteen species of fish were captured in Reach 5A during the 2000 biomass sampling
events. Fifteen were collected in Reach 5B. White suckers, a bottom feeder, and
largemouth bass, a predator, accounted for over 75 percent of the biomass in the samples
from Reach 5A (Table 3-2). In Reach 5B, white suckers, yellow perch (a predator), and
largemouth bass represented greater than 75 percent of the biomass. These reaches,
which are dominated by two or three species, are less structurally balanced when
compared to the downstream sub-reaches (i.e., 5C, the Backwaters, and Woods Pond),
which are dominated by five or six species that include predators, forage fish, and bottom
feeders.
3.2 Reach 5C Fish Community - Roaring Brook to Backwaters
Reach 5C, downstream of the confluence with Roaring Brook, is the section of Reach 5
where flows begin to be influenced by a backwater effect from the Woods Pond Dam.
The river, oriented approximately N-S, is characterized by a broad wetland floodplain
SECTION HI-3-11
-------
(approximately 243 - 915 m wide) on the west bank with numerous backwater areas,
channels and meanders. The inundated remnant floodplain is easily visible in this section
of the river as broad and shallow backwater "embayments" with stands of emergent
vegetation, submerged aquatic vegetation, and surface algal mats. The steep slopes of
October Mountain confine the narrow floodplain on the east bank of the river, and the
width of the river channel ranges approximately 18 - 48 m with depths of 1.2 - 2.4 m.
Under high flow conditions, the numerous backwater areas are hydrologically connected
to flow in the main river channel; under low flow conditions, however, the backwater
areas are largely isolated from the influence of flows in the main river channel. The
depositional sediment bed (in the river channel) is characterized by fine sands and silt.
Sixteen species of fish were captured in Reach 5C during the 2000 biomass sampling
events. Five species, however, accounted for more than 75 percent of the biomass in the
2000 sampling in Reach 5C: white sucker (bottom feeder), largemouth bass (predator),
yellow perch (predator), common carp (bottom feeder), and bluegill (forage fish).
3.3 Reach 6 Fish Community - Woods Pond and Backwaters
Woods Pond is a broad, shallow 24-ha impoundment of the Housatonic River formed by
the construction of the Woods Pond Dam in the late 1800s. The adjacent upstream deep
channel (Reach 6A) and backwater areas (Reach 6B) account for an additional 25 ha.
The remnant river channel on the eastern and southern shores of Woods Pond is
considerably deeper (maximum depth approximately 5 m) than the shallower depths
(approximately 0.3 - 0.9 m) of the remnant floodplain that is characterized by stands of
submerged and emergent macrophytes and dense surface algal mats. A deep hole,
characterized by a depth of 4.8 m, is located in the southeastern area of the remnant
stream channel (Reach 6C). The hole is further characterized by a thick deposit
(approximately 4.9 m) of soft silt-clay sediments that has accumulated over the past +/-
100 years or so since construction of the Woods Pond Dam. In the shallow remnant
floodplain areas of Woods Pond (Reach 6D), the sediments are characterized as silt with
a high organic content. Although the broad, shallow areas of Woods Pond are well
mixed, the region defined by the hole exhibits thermal stratification during the summer.
SECTION in-3-12
-------
Fourteen species of fish were captured in the Backwater Reach during the 2000 biomass
sampling events. Sixteen were collected from Woods Pond. Six species accounted for
more than 75 percent of the biomass in the Backwaters: common carp (bottom feeder),
yellow perch (predator), goldfish (bottom feeder), bluegill (forage fish), brown bullhead
(bottom feeder), and largemouth bass (predator). In Woods Pond, five species accounted
for more than 75 percent of the biomass, including bluegill (forage fish), yellow perch
(predator), brown bullhead (bottom feeder), largemouth bass (predator), and goldfish
(bottom feeder).
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Fish
No rare, threatened, or endangered fish species listed by MNHESP (1999) have been
confirmed to exist in the PSA by recent investigations. Two species—bridle shiner and
longnose sucker—hypothetically could occur in the PSA. The trout-perch has recently
been declared extirpated from Massachusetts, but it was last found at the confluence of
the Green River and the Housatonic in Great Barrington, downstream of the PSA (Hartel
etal. 1996).
The bridle shiner is a small warm-water minnow of creeks, ponds, rivers, and lakes with
clear to moderately stained water. In Massachusetts it is listed as a species of Special
Concern (MNHESP 1999). The bridle shiner is discontinuously distributed along the
middle Atlantic coastline, from Virginia to southern Maine and inland through New
York, where its range extends to Lake Ontario and the upper St. Lawrence River (Page
and Burr 1991). Much of Massachusetts is within a large gap in this range, although this
species can be found in extreme southwestern portions of the state. McCabe (1943)
documented the bridle shiner in the Housatonic, Westfield, Chicopee, and southern
Connecticut Rivers. It has not been found in subsequent fisheries surveys in the
Housatonic River in the vicinity of the PSA (Bergin 1971, Stewart Laboratories 1982,
Chadwick & Associates 1993, 1994). Whitworth (1996), however, states that it is found
in all major drainages of Connecticut, including the Housatonic River. It should
therefore be considered to potentially occur in the PSA.
SECTION in-3-13
-------
The longnose sucker is listed as a species of Special Concern in the State of
Massachusetts. They are similar to the white sucker, but extensive surveys during 1998 -
2000 in the PSA failed to locate this species. Longnose suckers in Massachusetts are
found in cool upper sections of streams and rivers in the western part of the state,
specifically in the main channels and tributaries of the Hoosic River, Housatonic River,
and sections of the Connecticut River (MNHESP 1994a).
The trout-perch was known from two sites in western Massachusetts: (1) the Hoosic
drainage in Williamstown; and (2) the Housatonic River at the mouth of the Green River
in Great Barrington. The last time they were captured on the Housatonic was in the early
1940s, and surveys from 1978 - 1990 have failed to locate this species (Hartel el al.
1996).
SECTION in-3-14
-------
5.0 Literature Cited
Beach, R.B., P.M. Craig, R. DiNitto, A.S. Donigian, G. Lawrence, R.A. McGrath, R.A.
Park, A. Stoddard, S.C. Svirsky, W.D. Tate, and C.M. Wallen. 2000. Modeling
Framework Design: Modeling Study of PCB Contamination in the Housatonic
River. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, and
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1.
Bergin, J. 1971. Coldwater Fisheries Investigations - Surveys and Inventories of Streams.
Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game.
Blasland and Bouck Engineers, P.C. 1991. MCP Interim Phase II Report/Current
Assessment Summary for Housatonic River. Syracuse, NY, USA.
Chadwick & Associates. 1993. Fisheries Investigation of the Housatonic River,
Massachusetts. Prepared for General Electric Company by Chadwick & Associates,
Littleton, CO, USA.
1994. Aquatic Ecology Assessment of the Housatonic River, Massachusetts.
Prepared for General Electric Company, Pittsfield, MA, USA.
Hartel, K.E., D.B. Halliwell, and A.E. Launer. 1996. An Annotated Working List of the
Inland Fishes of Massachusetts. Comparative Museum of Zoology, Harvard
University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
MNHESP (Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program). 1994a.
Massachusetts Species of Special Concern - Longnose Sucker (Catostomus
catostomus). Fact sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Division
of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
1994b. Endangered Species of Massachusetts - Lake Chub (Couesis plumbeus). Fact
sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Division of Fisheries and
Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
SECTION HI- 3-15
-------
1994c. Threatened Species of Massachusetts - American Brook Lamprey (Lampetra
appendix). Fact sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Division
of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
1999. Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas: 2000-2001 Edition. Division of
Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
McCabe, B.C. 1943. An analysis of the distribution of fishes in the streams of western
Massachusetts. Copeia 1943:85-89.
Page, L.M., and B.M. Burr. 1991. A Field Guide to Freshwater Fishes. Houghton Mifflin
Company, Boston, MA, USA.
Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000. Supplemental Investigation Work Plan for the Lower
Housatonic River, General Electric (GE) Housatonic River Project, Pittsfield,
Massachusetts. Volumes 1 and 2. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
North Atlantic Division, New England District, Concord, MA, USA.
Stewart Laboratories. 1982. Housatonic River Study - 1980 and 1982 Investigations, Final
Report, Volumes I and n. Prepared for General Electric Company by Stewart
Laboratories, Knoxville, TN, USA.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. Age Determination of Largemouth Bass
(Micropterus salmoides) from the Housatonic River Watershed. Prepared by the
Office of Fishery Assistance, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Laconia, NH, USA.
Whitworth, W.R. 1996. Freshwater Fishes of Connecticut. Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection. State Geological and Natural History Survey of
Connecticut Bulletin 114.
Woodlot Alternatives Inc. in prep. Housatonic River Fish Biomass Estimates. Prepared for
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, and U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 1, by Woodlot Alternatives, Topsham, ME, USA.
SECTION in-3-16
-------
Chapter 4 Reptiles and Amphibians
1.0 Introduction
The reptiles and amphibians (hereafter called herptiles) in the PSA were studied over a
three-year period, from 1998 to 2000. To conduct this work, several work plans were
prepared that either targeted specific species or the herptile community as a whole (Roy
F. Weston, Inc. 2000). A community-wide assessment, culminating in this report, was
designed to characterize the herptile community in the PSA by mapping available
habitats, assessing the quality of those habitats, and conducting surveys to document the
presence of herptiles and their use of the available habitats. Some of the targeted surveys
were conducted to collect specific species for tissue analysis or for off-site reproduction
assessments (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). Another study investigated reproductive indices
of amphibians breeding in pools within the PSA (Woodlot Alternatives, Inc. in prep).
To characterize the community, a literature review of local species and populations was
conducted along with the collection of field data. Field data collected as part of the
targeted species surveys were used to supplement data collected for community-wide
characterization purposes.
2.0 Methods
2.1 Species:Habitat Association
The goal for the characterization of the study area herptile community was to identify all
species that could reasonably be expected to occur, the habitats they would use, and the
timing of that use. The foundation of this work included a review of relevant literature
on the reptile and amphibian populations in western Massachusetts. Local and regional
references on herptile communities in the PSA were first used to identify the species
whose range encompassed the study area (DeGraaf and Rudis 1983, Conant 1986,
Klemens 1993, DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). General and technical references on the
habitat requirements and use, seasonality of occurrence, and relative abundance in the
region were then used to refine the list and build a matrix to include only those species
SECTION m - 4-1
-------
whose preferred habitats occur within the PSA (Wright and Wright 1949, Bishop 1943,
Pfingsten and Downs 1989, Ernst et al. 1994, Petranka 1998, Hunter el al. 1999, DeGraaf
and Yamasaki 2001).
As part of this effort, local and regional experts were consulted to obtain unpublished
records regarding the historic occurrence of some species in the area. For example, the
Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program and the Massachusetts
Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (MDFW) were contacted to identify historic or recent
occurrences of rare reptiles and amphibians in the vicinity of the PSA.
Field surveys were then conducted to compliment the information compiled on the
species matrix (Attachment C). Field surveys largely focused on determining species'
presence, although several methods were used to more quantitatively document species
and their relative abundance or to sample animal tissues, and are described below.
Observations recorded in the field were used to refine the matrix to accurately depict
habitat use and seasonality of occurrence for all herptiles species expected to occur in the
primary and reference study areas.
2.2 Incidental Observations
Herptile presence in the PSA was documented during year-round field investigations in
1998, 1999, and 2000. Many of those field investigations supported ecological risk
assessment surveys. Those investigations provided an opportunity to confirm the
presence of reptiles and amphibians within the PSA by recording incidental observations
of any species seen. During the course of those other investigations, herptiles observed
within the PSA and reference areas were recorded, along with the habitat that they
occurred in. When appropriate, other notes were recorded, including activity,
interactions with other species, and general health.
SECTION HI - 4-2
-------
2.3 Visual and Acoustic Surveys
General, reconnaissance-level surveys of the herptile community were conducted using a
method often referred to as visual encounter surveys (Crump and Scott 1994). These
types of surveys consist of traveling through a site and searching for herptiles. The exact
search method used varied with the habitat and species. For example, the shoreline and
shallow water of backwater habitats were searched in spring for basking frogs and turtles
and frog and salamander egg masses. In wooded areas, rocks and logs were overturned
to located terrestrial salamanders and snakes. When animals were observed, notes on
location, species, habitat, and activity were recorded and used to modify the species
matrix.
2.4 Breeding Pool Surveys
More detailed surveys were also conducted to document the occurrence of spring
breeding habitats (i.e., vernal pools) and to document use of those habitats by various
herptiles. Aerial photographs and topographic maps of the PSA were reviewed to
identify areas that could potentially provide spring breeding habitat for herptiles. Efforts
were made to identify isolated, temporary pools (vernal pools) in well-vegetated habitats
(Figure 4-1). These types of temporary aquatic areas can be important breeding habitat
for a number of frogs and salamanders, and some species may require these habitats
exclusively (Kenney 1995). However, other breeding habitats, including open backwater
areas associated with Woods Pond, were also identified.
Sixty-eight potential breeding areas were visited (Map 4-1) and MNHESP Vernal Pool
Data Sheets, defining the site conditions and species use, were filled out for each area
(Attachment E). Not all pools met the definition of a vernal pool as defined by Kenney
(1995). For example, spotted salamander egg masses were observed in some backwaters
of the river. Because these areas, while not meeting the strict vernal pool definition,
represented suitable breeding habitats for some amphibians, including vernal pool
species, data sheets were completed. To document species occurring in the pools, the
shoreline of each area was searched and species observed were recorded, as was the type
of observation such as adult, larvae, or egg mass. In some areas, dip nets were used to
SECTION HI - 4-3
-------
capture individuals for positive identification. Dip nets were also used to identify aquatic
invertebrates, potential predators and food sources for larval amphibians, in each pool.
Finally, data on the location, size, and habitat within and around each pool surveyed were
recorded.
Figure 4-1 Typical floodplain vernal pool in mid-April and mid-June.
This pool, 38-VP-2, is on the west shore of the river, upstream of New
Lenox Road.
2.5 Aquatic Funnel Trap Surveys
Aquatic funnel traps (AFTs) were used to sample larval amphibians and aquatic
invertebrates in 17 pools during 1998 (Map 2-5). Ten AFTs (Figure 4-2) were randomly
placed in each of the pools selected for sampling. AFTs were placed in the pools either
in the evening, and collected the following morning, or in the early morning, and
collected several hours later. Pools were trapped three times from mid-May to mid-June
1998. The time and date when traps were placed in and removed from the pool were
recorded on data sheets. Water temperature, pH, conductivity, and dissolved oxygen
were also recorded on data sheets.
SECTION HI - 4-4
-------
Figure 4-2 An aquatic funnel trap being removed from pool.
Contents were then filtered to collect larval amphibians and aquatic
invertebrates.
When traps were collected, the total number of larval amphibians, by species, was
recorded and a sample of 25 individuals per species were measured (total and tail length
for tadpoles, total and snout-vent length for salamander larvae) from each trap (Figure
4-3). Specimens were checked for gross external deformities, and returned to pools.
Figure 4-3 Wood frog tadpoles.
Tadpoles were counted after being caught in aquatic funnel traps.
SECTION HI - 4-5
-------
2.6 Pitfall Trap Surveys
Pitfall traps were constructed around four pools (8-VP-l, 8-VP-2, 38-VP-2, and 46-VP-5)
in 1999 (see Map 4-1) (Woodlot Alternatives, Inc. in prep). Traps were placed along
plastic drift fencing (Figure 4-4) and all individuals entering and exiting the pools were
captured, identified to species, sexed, weighed, measured for total length, tail length, hind
leg length, and foreleg length. During 2000, drift fences and pitfall traps were used to
capture metamorphosed wood frog juveniles emerging from the pools at 8-VP-l, 18-VP-
1, 23B-VP-1, 23B-VP-2, 38-VP-l, 38-VP-2, 46-VP-l, 46-VP-5 (Map 4-1). and three
pools in the October Mountain State Forest reference area designated as WML-1, WML-
2 and WML-3. Pit traps were also installed throughout the PSA to capture breeding
leopard frogs during 1999 and 2000. Incidental species captured in pit traps were
recorded.
Figure 4-4 Drift fencing and pit traps encircling a vernal pool.
3.0 Reptile and Amphibian Community Descriptions
3.1 Herptiles
Herptile populations in the PSA are diverse. Sixteen reptile and 19 amphibian species
could potentially occur in the PSA, based on range, habitat requirements, and habitat
availability. Only four (25 percent) of the potentially occurring reptiles were documented
in the PSA, whereas 14 (75 percent) of the amphibians were documented. This
discrepancy may be due to the different reproductive strategies these species exhibit that
make them more, or less, observable. Frogs and salamanders, for example, tend to
SECTION HI - 4-6
-------
congregate during the breeding season, with the frogs vocalizing to attract mates. This
makes theses species quite obvious and simple to document using even the most general
survey methods. Even among the reptiles, the turtles have reproductive strategies and
daily habits that make them more observable, such as overland travel to nesting sites and
basking on rocks and logs, and three of the possible seven species were documented in
these situations. Snakes, by contrast, live largely solitary lives, have cryptic coloration,
and usually utilize structurally complex microhabitats that make them difficult to
observe. Consequently, only two of the nine species potentially occurring in the PSA
were observed.
3.2 Reptiles
The potential reptile community within the PSA consists of 13 snake species and 7 turtle
species (Attachment C). Only two species of snake, the garter snake and northern water
snake, were observed in the study area. Three turtle species were observed: common
snapping turtle, painted turtle, and wood turtle. The snapping turtle and painted turtle
were common and seen in most riverine and wetland habitats. The wood turtle, a species
of Special Concern, was rarely observed (see Section 4.0).
3.2.1 Snakes
The northern water snake, northern brown snake, northern redbelly snake, common garter
snake, ribbon snake, northern ringneck snake, northern black racer, eastern smooth green
snake, and eastern milk snake could potentially occur in the PSA. Only the common
garter snake and northern water snake were observed. The garter snake is ubiquitous and
was found in a variety of wetland and terrestrial habitats. It was observed at the edges of
isolated pools, in transitional floodplain forest red maple swamp, shrub swamp, and in
most of the terrestrial community types. Garter snakes were also observed swimming
across the river. During pitfall trapping efforts, garter snakes were routinely observed
traveling along the drift fencing and occasionally seen swallowing wood frogs (Figure
4-5).
SECTION HI - 4-7
-------
Figure 4-5 Common garter snake.
Common garter snakes were commonly seen near pit trap areas in
transitional floodplain forests where they preyed on wood frogs (look
closely to see the wood frog in this snake's mouth).
A single northern water snake was observed swimming in Woods Pond near the
footbridge during the summer of 2000. This was the only sighting of this species despite
the presence of suitable habitat.
Of the remaining snake species expected to occur in the PSA, many tend to favor upland
rather than wetland habitats. Since investigations focused largely on wetland habitats, it
is not surprising that fewer species of snakes were observed. One species, however, the
ribbon snake, routinely uses wetland habitats but was not observed in the PSA. It is a
semi-aquatic species, inhabiting grassy and shrubby stream edges, ponds, bogs, vernal
pools, and wet woodlands.
3.2.2 Turtles
Seven turtle species potentially occur in the study area: common snapping, common
musk (or stinkpot), spotted, wood, bog, eastern box, and painted turtle. Of these,
snapping and painted turtles are common and were routinely observed in the Housatonic
River, adjacent backwaters, and pools. Wood turtles, a species of conservation concern
in Massachusetts, were recorded at several PSA locations (Section 4.0).
Snapping and painted turtles were largely associated with aquatic communities, being
observed most often in backwaters of deep emergent marsh, although both species were
seen in the river channel itself. Snapping turtles were more uniformly
SECTION HI - 4-8
-------
distributed through the PSA, being commonly found in backwaters, shallow and deep
emergent marshes, and vernal pools. Painted turtles, however, appeared to utilize deep
emergent marshes over other habitats.
Snapping turtles were also observed in more terrestrial habitats, presumably while
traveling to temporary feeding or nesting areas. Several small snapping turtles were
caught in pitfall traps placed in transitional floodplain forests near the confluence of the
East and West Branch Housatonic River and just north of New Lenox Road.
Additionally, adults were observed in a large number of vernal pools. The seasonal
abundance of invertebrates and, perhaps more importantly, amphibian larvae likely attract
snapping turtles to these areas. Turtles were also observed nesting in the PSA. Several
snapping turtles nests were found along the Springfield Terminal Railroad tracks along
the west side of the river. Painted turtles were seen nesting along road shoulders, and
hatchlings were observed in the gravel pits, which provide excellent nesting habitat, north
of the Pittsfield WWTF (Figure 4-6).
Figure 4-6 Female painted turtle laying eggs.
The wood turtle (Figure 4-7) is a Special Concern species in nearly every state of its
range, which extends from Nova Scotia, southern Quebec and Ontario, south into
northernmost Virginia, and west to northern Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota (see
section 4.0). Wood turtles prefer slow moving streams with sandy bottoms and heavily
vegetated banks and were observed in this type of habitat along the West Branch and
northern East Branch of the Housatonic River during 1998 and 1999. During the spring
and summer wood turtles make long daily movements, through both upland and wetland
SECTION HI - 4-9
-------
habitats, searching for mates, traveling to nesting sites, and foraging. Wood turtles are
omnivorous, feeding in water or on land. They consume a variety of vegetation, grass,
moss, mushrooms, berries, insects (aquatic and terrestrial), tadpoles, fish, and carrion.
Wood turtles can often be found in vernal pools during the spring, where they take
advantage of the abundant food items. Several wood turtle observations in the PSA
occurred in or near vernal pools (Map 4-2).
Figure 4-7 Adult wood turtle.
The spotted turtle and common musk turtle would be expected to occur in similar habitat
as the painted turtle in the PSA. However, neither was observed during any of our
surveys. The spotted turtle is uncommon in New England and listed as a species of
Special Concern in Massachusetts (see Section 4.0). The small size and secretive habits
of the common musk turtle makes observation of this species difficult; it is nocturnal and
highly aquatic, emerging from the water only to nest. The bog turtle occurs in open
sphagnum bogs, wet meadows, and clear meadow streams. It is Endangered in
Massachusetts, having been documented in only three locations in the state. The eastern
box turtle is also Special Concern species and is the most terrestrial turtle potentially
occurring in or near the PSA. Even though the PSA is within the known ranges and
contains suitable habitats for these turtles, none of these species were found during the
extensive field investigations from 1998 - 2000.
SECTION III -4-10
-------
3.3 Amphibians
Due to life history characteristics that make them more visible, 14 of the 19 amphibians
identified as potentially occurring in the PSA were confirmed (Attachment C). Breeding
populations within the PSA were recorded for most of these species. Of the 68 breeding
pools that were originally surveyed in 1998, temporary pools supported an average of 4.4
species per pool, while semi-permanent to permanent pools supported an average of 6.0
species per pool (Table 4-1). Wood frogs and spotted salamanders were the most
common species breeding in temporary vernal pools. Leopard frogs, green frogs,
bullfrogs, and red-spotted newts were more common in the semi-permanent pools and
backwaters connected to the Housatonic River.
SECTION HI-4-11
-------
Table 4-1 Species use of 68 vernal pools in the PSA.
Pool
Designation
Pool
Habitat*
Permanency
Snapping turtle
Wood turtle
Painted turtle
Garter snake ||
Red-spotted newt
Spotted salamander
Jefferson salamander
Red-backed salamander
Four-toed salamander
American toad
Spring peeper
Gray treefrog
Northern leopard frog
Pickerel frog
Wood frog |
Green frog ||
Bullfrog |
Fairy shrimp ||
Total No. Species ||
5-VP-l
SEM
T
A
i
5-VP-2
SEM
T
0
5-VP-3
SS
P
A
A
T
A
A
A
A
7
8-VP-l
DEM
T
A
A
A
A, J
A,E,L
A
A
A
A
A
A,E,T
A
A
A
14
8-VP-2
SEM/SS
T
A
A
A
A
A
A
A,E,T
A
A
A
10
8-VP-3
SS
T
A
1
8-VP-4
DEM
P
E
E
A
3
8-VP-5
SS
T
E,T
A
2
8-VP-6
SS
T
A
1
12-VP-l
SS
P
E
A
A
E,T
4
18-VP-l
DEM/SS
T
A
A
A,E
A
A
A
6
18-VP-2
DEM/SS
T
A
A
E
A
A, T
A, T
A
A,E,T
A
A
10
19-VP-l
SEM
T
A,E,T
A
2
19-VP-2
SEM
T
A
1
19-VP-3
SEM
T
A
1
19-VP-4
SEM
T
A
1
19-VP-5
SEM
T
A
A
A
A
A
A
6
19-VP-6
DEM
P
A
A
A
A
A
A
6
19-VP-7
SEM
T
A
A,E,T
A
A
4
19-VP-8
SEM
P
A
A
A
A
A
5
23-VP-l
SS
T
0
23-VP-2
SEM
T
0
23-VP-3
DEM
P
A
A
A
A
4
23 A-VP-1
DEM/SS
P
A
A
E
E
A
A,E
T
T
8
23B-VP-1
SS
T
A
A , J
A
A
A
A, T
A,E,T
A
A
A
10
23B-VP-2
SS
T
A , J
A
A
A
A, T
A,E,T
A
A
A
9
26-VP-l
(A+B)
SS
T
A
E
A
A
E
5
SECTION m - 4-12
-------
Pool
Designation
Pool
Habitat*
Permanency
Snapping turtle
Wood turtle
Painted turtle
Garter snake ||
Red-spotted newt
Spotted salamander
Jefferson salamander
Red-backed salamander
Four-toed salamander
American toad
Spring peeper
Gray treefrog
Northern leopard frog
Pickerel frog
Wood frog |
Green frog ||
Bullfrog |
Fairy shrimp ||
Total No. Species ||
27-VP-l
DEM
P
A
A
E,T
A
4
27-VP-2
DEM
P
A
A
A
A
A
5
27 A-VP-1
SEM
T
E
A
A
3
27B-VP-1
IFF
T
E
A
A
A
4
27B-VP-2
IFF
T
E,T
A
A
3
27B-VP-3
IFF
T
E,T
A
A
3
33-VP-l
IFF
T
A
1
33-VP-2
SS
T
A
A
2
38-VP-l
SEM
T
A
A
J
E , L
A
A
A
A,E,T
A
A
A
11
3 8 A-VP-1
SS
T
E
E
A
3
38-VP-2
SEM
T
A
A
A
A, J
A,E,L
A, T
A
A
A,E,T
A
A
A
12
38-VP-3
SEM
T
E
E
A
3
39-VP-l
DEM
P
A
A
E
A
E,T
5
40-VP-l
SEM
T
E
A
A
A
A
A
6
40-VP-2
DEM/SS
P
A
A
A
A
A
A
6
40-VP-3
DEM/SE
M
T
A
T
A
A
A
A
A,E
7
40 A-VP-1
SEM
T
0
42-VP-l
DEM
T
A
A,E
A,E,T
A,T
A
5
42-VP-2
SEM
T
A
A
A,E,T
A
A
5
42-VP-3
DEM
T
A
A
E,T
A
A
5
42-VP-4
DEM
T
E
A
A
3
42-VP-5
SEM
T
E,T
1
42 A-VP-1
DEM
P
A
A
A
3
46-VP-l
SS
T
A
A
A
E , L
A, T
A
A
A,E,T
A
A
A
11
46-VP-2
DEM/SS
P
A
A
E
A
4
46-VP-3
DEM
P
A
E
A
3
46-VP-4
RMS
T
E
1
46-VP-5
RMS
T
A
A
A
A, J
A,E,L
A, E
A
A
A
A
A
A,E,T
A
A
A
15
49-VP-l
DEM
P
A
A,T
2
SECTION HI- 4-13
-------
Pool
Designation
Pool
Habitat*
Permanency
Snapping turtle
Wood turtle
Painted turtle
Garter snake ||
Red-spotted newt
Spotted salamander
Jefferson salamander
Red-backed salamander
Four-toed salamander
American toad
Spring peeper
Gray treefrog
Northern leopard frog
Pickerel frog
Wood frog |
Green frog ||
Bullfrog |
Fairy shrimp ||
Total No. Species
49 A-VP-1
SS
T
A
E
E
A
4
49B-VP-1
TFF
T
E
A
A
A
A
5
54-VP-l
DEM
P
A
A
A
A
A
E
A
A
A
A
A,T
11
55-VP-l
DEM
P
A
A
A
A
4
5 5 A-VP-1
DEM
P
A
A, J
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
9
56A-VP-1
DEM
P
A
E
A
A
4
5 8 A-VP-1
DEM
P
A
A
E
A
A
A
A,E
A
A,E
A
A
11
61A-VP-1
DEM
P
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A,T
A
11
61A-VP-2
DEM
P
A
A
A
E
A
A
A
A,E
A
A,T
A
A,T
12
66 A-VP-1
RMS/SS
T
E , L
T
T
3
67A-VP-1
DEM/SS
T
E
1
69-VP-l
SEM/SS
T
E
1
Number of Pools Species
Occurred in:
16
1
19
ii
17
28
2
6
1
16
30
7
34
7
42
43
29
24
Percent Frequency of
Occurrences***:
24
1
28
16
25
41
3
9
1
24
44
10
50
10
62
63
43
35
* Habitats
SEM = Shallow Emereent Marsh
DEM = Deep Emereent Marsh
Average Number of Species in Temporary Pools: 4.4
Average Number of Species in Permanent Pools: 6.0
as - anruD swamo
TFF = Transitional Floodolain Forest
RMS = Red Marie Swamp
Includes species captured in Aquatic Funnel Traps.
T = Temporary
P = Permanent
** Letter indicates Life Stage Observed, as Follows:
A = Adult
E = Egg mass
T = Tadpole(s)
L = Larvae
*** Percent Frequency of Occurrence =
(No. of Pools Species Observed In/Total No. of Pools)*100
SECTION m - 4-14
-------
3.3.1 Toads and Frogs
Frogs were the most commonly observed group of herptile species and eight of the nine
potentially occurring species were observed in the PSA. Wood frogs and American toads
were common in nearly all the terrestrial and wetland habitat types. Spring peepers and
gray treefrogs, although rarely seen, were heard in a variety of habitats, predominately
floodplain forest vernal pools and shallow emergent marshes. Northern leopard frogs and
pickerel frogs are semi-terrestrial and were observed in most of the wetland habitats,
predominately emergent marsh communities during the breeding season and wet
meadows during the summer. Northern leopard frogs were the most common of these
two species, being found throughout the PSA, while the distribution of pickerel frog was
somewhat limited. Green frogs were abundant in backwaters and pools throughout the
entire PSA. Bullfrogs were also common throughout the PSA, but they were most
abundant during the long summer breeding period in large open wetlands, particularly the
backwaters near Woods Pond. Individual bullfrogs, however, were observed in
transitional floodplain forests, red maple swamps, and vernal pools.
Wood frogs were the most abundant species in the PSA and were a target of two detailed
studies. In 1999, a large number of adults and recently metamorphosed juveniles were
trapped as part of a study on the reproductive success of amphibians in four vernal pools
of the PSA (Figure 4-8 and Figure 4-9) (Woodlot Alternatives, Inc. in prep). Wood frogs
are terrestrial except during the breeding season, when they congregate in small, usually
temporary pools. During the 1998 vernal pool survey, 81 percent of the pools containing
wood frog eggs or tadpoles were temporary pools.
SECTION HI- 4-15
-------
Figure 4-8 Adult wood frogs captured in pit traps.
Captured during the 1999 vernal pool amphibian reproductive study.
Note the spotted salamander barely visible among the frogs along the
right hand side of the pit.
Figure 4-9 Wood frogs in amplexus.
Amplexus is the mating position in which the male tightly grips the
female, signaling her to begin laying eggs.
Wood frogs are explosive breeders, arriving at breeding pools in mass, mating, laying
eggs, and returning to their terrestrial habitat within a matter of days. This explosive
breeding occurred during the last week of March or first week of April during the three
years of investigation. Petranka and Thomas (1995) noted that 80 percent of adult wood
frogs breed within a three-day period. Wood frogs lay 2,000 - 3,000 eggs surrounded by
a globular, gelatinous mass, attached to submerged twigs (Knox 1999a) (Figure 4-10).
SECTION III - 4-16
-------
Figure 4-10 Wood frog egg masses.
These egg masses are attached to dogwood branches at the edge of a
vernal pool. Female wood frogs often lay their egg masses in a
communal aggregation such as this.
After hatching, tadpole metamorphosis occurs in 6 - 15 weeks depending upon site
conditions. In 1999, metamorphs began leaving their pools in mid-June, but in 2000,
they did not leave until early July, despite the fact that breeding occurred on very similar
dates during both years (Figure 4-11). This difference could be in response to the drier
pool conditions observed in 1999, which has been suggested to stimulate an earlier, faster
metamorphosis by tadpoles (Wilbur and Collins 1973, Duellman and Trueb 1986).
Figure 4-11 Wood frog metamorph.
Recently metamorphed wood frog with remnant tail.
Spring peepers were also common in nearly all the habitat types in the PSA (Figure
4-12). Though they were not seen or captured as often as other larger species, their
chorusing revealed that they were abundant. Breeding populations were densest in a
series of semi-permanent shallow emergent marshes and temporary pools immediately
SECTION III - 4-17
-------
north of New Lenox Road, along the shallow backwater edges north of Woods Pond, the
extensive marshes of Yokum Brook and Willow Creek, at Washington Mountain Lake, in
a reference permanent pool in October Mountain State Forest, and in the calcareous wet
meadows north of Threemile Pond.
Figure 4-12 Spring peeper
The characteristic dark cross or "X" pattern on the back, gives the
spring peeper its specific epithet of crucifer.
Spring peepers forage among the leaf litter, woody debri s, tree bark, and vegetation near
the forest floor. Small spiders are the common prey item, making up more than 48
percent of the diet (Knox 1999b). Mites, ants, beetles, ticks, leafhoppers, nematode
worms, and caterpillars are also commonly eaten.
The gray treefrog is a treefrog found in the PSA. They were less common than spring
peepers, being heard at only a few locations and never captured or seen. Lack of
observations is likely due to their arboreal habits and their ability to climb over drift
fences and out of pits. Except for their breeding season, gray treefrogs spend all their
time hidden beneath the bark and cavities of trees. In the PSA, they were commonly
heard calling from the same pools as spring peepers. Both sexes reach sexual maturity
after their second winter.
American toads were the only toads observed in the PSA (Figure 4-13). Fowler's toads
could potentially occur, but none were observed during the three years of study.
American toads were relatively uncommon in the open and forested wetland communities
SECTION HI-4-18
-------
of the PSA, but they were more common in terrestrial habitats. American toad eggs and
tadpoles were found in many vernal pools, semi-permanent pools, shallow riverine
backwaters, and marshes. American toad egg masses were most common in warm,
shallow roadside ditches and ruts of seldom used dirt roads in the October Mountain State
Forest reference area.
Figure 4-13 Male American toad vocalizing during breeding season.
The northern leopard frog and pickerel frog are two closely related semi-terrestrial frogs
found in the PSA. Leopard frogs are the more abundant of the two in the PSA; however,
in some localized areas such as Threemile Pond and Muddy Pond in the Hinsdale Flats
SWMA, pickerel frogs outnumbered leopard frogs.
Two taxa of leopard frogs were formally recognized: northern and southern. Within New
England the northern leopard frog is found from Maine south into Massachusetts and
Connecticut along the Housatonic and Connecticut River valleys. Southern leopard frogs
occur immediately south of New England and to the west in eastern New York. Within
this region, northern and southern leopard frogs are difficult to distinguish by visual
observation alone and populations may overlap. Klemens (1993) reports that these
species can be separated based on dissection and presence or absence of vestigial oviduct
in the males. He found that leopard frogs collected from the Housatonic watershed more
closely resembled southern leopard frogs (that former taxon is now a species called Rcina
utricularia) collected in northern New Jersey and southeastern New York than other
northern leopard frogs in New England. Individuals from the Housatonic River might be
SECTION III - 4-19
-------
more accurately placed within the southern leopard frog taxon, they might belong to a
unique taxon, or they might be a hybrid population. Either way, further research is
needed to accurately identify this population. For the purposes of this investigation, the
common consensus of available literature suggests the population within the PSA to be
northern leopard frogs.
Leopard frogs breed in ponds, marshes, shallow slow moving streams, bogs, semi-
permanent and temporary pools in April and May (Figure 4-14). In the PSA, leopard
frogs were heard calling and egg masses were seen most commonly in shallow, vegetated
backwaters associated with the Housatonic River and the marsh systems of Yokum Brook
and Willow Creek. Metamorphs were common in September of 1998 and 1999 and were
observed crossing a variety of riparian habitats. A large number of leopard frogs and egg
masses were collected in 1999 and 2000 as part of a leopard frog reproduction laboratory
study (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). A number of leopard frogs were also caught in pitfall
traps during the 1999, vernal pool amphibian reproduction study. Adult and juvenile
leopard frogs were caught throughout the study period, which extended from early April
to mid-July. Individual animals were caught entering and leaving the vernal pools,
presumably during typical feeding and movement habits.
Figure 4-14 Northern leopard frog.
Round spots with halos and white dorsolateral lines are characteristic
of northern leopard frogs.
SECTION III - 4-20
-------
The pickerel frog is closely related to the leopard frog and these two species generally
have similar habits and life history (Figure 4-15). Like the leopard frog, pickerel frogs
were found in open wet meadows, marshes, and wet woodlands during the summer
months. However, far fewer pickerel frogs were observed compared to leopard frogs,
with less than a dozen documented during the three years of field investigations. The
preponderance of emergent wetlands and wet meadow habitats in close proximity to the
river likely make the PSA slightly more suitable for leopard frog populations than
pickerel frogs (Mairs 1999). Conversely, pickerel frogs were more common at the
Threemile Pond SWMA reference area, where few leopard frogs were observed.
Figure 4-15 Pickerel frog.
Pickerel frog showing bright yellow-orange coloration on
undersurface of hind legs and squared off blotches on back.
Green frogs (Figure 4-16) were abundant in the more aquatic habitats in the PSA. They
were also commonly caught in pitfall traps at vernal pools in transitional floodplain
forests and red maple swamps. Those areas are used as summer foraging grounds
because some of the common prey of green frogs—beetles, flies, grasshopper, and
caterpillars (Hamilton 1948)—are found at vernal pools then.
SECTION III - 4-21
-------
Figure 4-16 Male green frog.
The sex of a male green frog can be determined by the diameter of
the tympanum (eardrum), which is larger than the eye in males.
Green frogs were documented breeding within the PSA. Egg masses (Figure 4-17) were
found at two locations, both of which were semi-permanent pools and ponds filled with
deep and shallow emergent marsh vegetation. Characteristic egg mass locations for
green frogs consist of shallow water in permanent water bodies, likely because the larval
period, in the northern parts of its range, lasts for at least one full year (Stockwell 1999).
Efforts did not focus on locating their egg masses in permanent water bodies and,
consequently, none were found. However, based on calls heard at those habitats, green
frogs breed in these areas within the PSA.
Figure 4-17 Green frog egg mass.
Green frog egg mass containing up to 5,000 eggs in a large flat mass
floating on the water surface among aquatic vegetation.
SECTION III - 4-22
-------
Bullfrogs are closely related to green frogs and share many similar traits. They are the
largest North American frog, with adults commonly exceeding eight inches in length
(snout to vent length). Bullfrogs are highly aquatic and rarely found away from water.
They were most common in the backwaters north of Woods Pond, where they were heard
calling throughout the summer months. However, they commonly traveled from the river
to nearby vernal pools in transitional floodplain forests and red maple swamps, where
they took advantage of the high densities of prey items.
Breeding occurs in deep permanent water with emergent vegetation, and less commonly
in semi-permanent pools, from late May to July. The calling heard from many of the
backwaters indicates that bullfrogs are indeed breeding in the PSA. Bullfrogs were
captured from the PSA in 1999 for tissue analysis (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). During
that time period 29 individuals were captured in upper and lower portions of the PSA.
Bullfrogs were also captured at the Threemile Pond (12 individuals) and Hinsdale Flats
(11 individuals) SWMA reference areas. This work was conducted as part of ecological
risk assessment, but also for the assessment of human health risks, as some people eat
bullfrogs.
3.3.2 Salamanders
Ten species of newts and salamanders may occur in the PSA. Of these, seven were
recorded in the PSA.
Red-spotted newts (Figure 4-18) are common throughout the eastern United States and
were abundant in the backwaters near Woods Pond, in oxbows, backwater channels, and
permanent pools associated with the river throughout the PSA, as well as in the river
itself. Only in the upper two miles, where the river travels between steep banks, were
newts noticeably absent. Red efts, the juvenile, terrestrial stage of the red-spotted newt,
were also observed throughout the PSA (Figure 4-19). Red-spotted newts were common
in Threemile Pond, Washington Mountain Lake, and a semi-permanent pool in October
Mountain State Forest.
SECTION HI - 4-23
-------
Figure 4-18 Red-spotted newt adult.
Figure 4-19 Red eft.
Red eft is the terrestrial juvenile stage of the red-spotted newt.
Newts are unique in that they are the only eastern salamander that has three distinct
stages in their life cycle. Breeding occurs in the spring in shallow bodies of water with
soft bottoms and vegetation. The larvae spend 5-7 months in aquatic habitats during
which time they have a keeled tail and external gills. The gills shrink throughout the
summer, until they disappear completely during fall metamorphosis, when the newts take
on the color and body shape of the terrestrial juvenile stage, known as the red eft stage.
The efts leave the water for terrestrial woodland habitats, where they spend the next 3-7
years. A second metamorphosis then occurs when the red efts become sexually mature,
at which time they migrate back to aquatic habitats, where they take on the characteristics
of the adult form, and spend the remainder of their life in the water.
SECTION III - 4-24
-------
Four of the salamanders potentially occurring in the PSA—spotted, Jefferson, blue-
spotted, and marbled salamanders—are known as the mole salamanders because of their
burrowing habits. These relatively large, robust salamanders (Figure 4-20) occur in
forested habitats throughout the eastern United States. All of these species breed in
temporary vernal pools, but they show slightly different trends in breeding. Spotted
salamander is the only member of the group that is common in Massachusetts, with the
remainder being species of conservation concern.
Figure 4-20 Spotted (upper two) and Jefferson salamanders.
The spotted and Jefferson salamanders are two of the four mole
salamanders in western Massachusetts.
Spotted salamander adults, eggs (Figure 4-21), and larvae were common in many of the
vernal pools throughout the PSA. They were found in 28 of the 68 vernal pools
originally surveyed in 1998 (Table 4-1). Spotted salamanders are usually identified as an
obligate vernal pool species (i.e., species that presumably breed only in the absence of
fish in temporary pools). Klemens (1993), however, identifies a number of other habitats
used for breeding, including floodplain swamps, marshes, bogs, margins of lakes and
reservoirs, and beaver ponds, among others. Similar, varied habitat use was documented
in the PSA and reference areas. While spotted salamanders were routinely documented
in vernal pools, breeding activity and egg masses were also in shallow backwater
habitats. Adults were also captured in pit-fall traps along the shoreline of the river.
SECTION III - 4-25
-------
These pitfall traps were on the opposite shore from the nearest suitable non-breeding
habitat (i.e., upland hardwood forest), indicating that these salamanders do, in fact, cross
and use these more permanent water bodies.
Figure 4-21 Spotted salamander egg masses.
Spotted salamander egg masses are often characterized by a milky
opaque jelly capsule, with 50 to 150 eggs.
During the breeding period, male spotted salamanders migrate to breeding pools first,
followed by females a few days later. This usually occurs at the very beginning of April
in the PSA. Both sexes may travel as far as 120 m (400 feet) from nonbreeding territory
to a breeding pool (Madison 1997). Spotted salamanders tend to congregate in large
numbers after the first warm spring rain, and breed in mass. Males deposit
spermatophores on the bottom of the pools during an elaborate courtship of nudging,
intertwining, and tail fanning. The females then pick up the spermatophores and store
them in their cloaca for egg fertilization. These spermatophores can be seen littering the
bottom of pools immediately following breeding events. Spotted salamanders show a
high degree of fidelity to breeding pools, returning to the same location year after year.
Whitford and Vinegar (1966) reported that 86 percent of marked spotted salamanders
returned to the same pool after one year and 77 percent returned the second year, with an
estimated annual mortality of 10.5 percent.
Interestingly, an un-spotted spotted salamander was found in the PSA (Figure 4-22).
While this animal was originally thought to be a hybrid between a spotted and Jefferson
salamander, because of the lack of spots and a thinner, more streamlined body form,
SECTION III - 4-26
-------
further investigation has found that adults lacking spots do occur in low frequencies in
certain populations and that this individual was most likely a spotted salamander (Husting
1965, Easterla 1968, Petranka 1998).
Figure 4-22 Spotted salamander without its usual markings.
Note faint pigment spots located on the side of the neck, just in front
of the right foreleg, and on base of tail.
Jefferson salamanders were less common than spotted, occurring only at vernal pool 46-
VP-5 in the red maple swamp south of New Lenox Road and at a semi-permanent pool in
October Mountain State Forest (Maps 4-2 and 4-3). The timing of breeding and breeding
habitat requirements for Jefferson salamanders is very similar to spotted salamanders,
although Jefferson salamanders usually show up a few days before spotted salamanders.
Jefferson salamander egg masses are deposited a few days after courtship, in small
masses contained within a gelatinous coating that adhere to aquatic vegetation or
submerged branches (Figure 4-23).
SECTION III - 4-27
-------
Figure 4-23 Jefferson salamander egg mass.
Masses are smaller, sausage-shaped, and contain fewer eggs than
spotted salamander egg masses - usually around 30 (Klemens 1993).
The Jefferson salamander, blue-spotted salamander, and their hybrids form a group
known as the Jefferson complex (see Section 4.0). Visually, these species and hybrids
are difficult to distinguish and often electrophoretic evidence is the only method to
identifiy an individual with certainty. However, in general, Jefferson salamanders are
uniformly grayish brown and have larger egg masses. Blue-spotted salamanders and the
hybrids usually have varying amounts blue flecks and deposit their eggs singularly or in
small groups of 2 to 4 (Knox 1999b). The hybrids, which usually have varying amounts
of faint blue fl ecks or undertones, tend to produce intermediate-sized egg masses.
Marbled salamanders are unique among the mole salamanders found in the PSA in that
they breed in the fall (September to October). Marbled salamanders congregate in dry
vernal pools and courtship takes place under the leaf litter. The eggs are then deposited
individually in a nest, usually in a small cavity under a log or leaf litter. The female
remains to guard her eggs until fall rainwater floods the pools, inundating the eggs.
Hatching is triggered by inundation and occurs a few days after the pool fills with water.
Marbled salamander eggs are able to withstand extended desiccation without mortality
and in some cases when the pool fails to flood in the autumn, eggs may be able to
overwinter and hatch in the spring (Klemens 1993).
All adult mole salamanders are terrestrial when not breeding, spending their lives
predominately underground in burrows or beneath large decaying logs and rocks. They
SECTION III - 4-28
-------
often utilize small mammal tunnels and burrows but will excavate their own if necessary.
A study in New York found that 80 percent of the small mammal tunnels utilized by
spotted salamanders during the summer were short-tailed shrew burrows, but
overwintering sites were either white-footed mice burrows or rock recesses (Madison
1997). Their home ranges are small, but largely unreported. One tracking study found
spotted salamanders using an area of only 0.03 m2 (0.3 square feet) around their burrows
(DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). Burrows are located within the proximity of breeding
pools, usually within 213 m (700 feet) (Kleeberger and Werner 1983, Madison 1997,
Semlitsch 1998). Mole salamanders spend most of the year within their burrows,
foraging nocturnally for earthworms, snails, slugs, and larval and adult insects,
particularly beetles. Mole salamanders may occasionally forage aboveground, under the
leaf litter during rainy periods, but stay within close proximity to their burrows. The only
above-ground travel done by mole salamanders is during the spring or fall migration to
and from breeding pools and by newly metamorphosed juveniles dispersing from the
pools.
The remaining salamanders expected to occur in the vicinity of the PSA, which include
northern dusky, northern two-lined, spring, four-toed, and redback salamander, are all
members of the plethodontid family. These salamanders have no lungs and absorb
oxygen through their moist skin and membranes in their throat. Their physiology
requires these salamanders to inhabit cool, moist habitats. They mostly use terrestrial
habitats, such as mesic upland forests or small high-gradient streams on rocky slopes, so
they would not be expected to be common in the PSA because of the presence of forests
that are flooded one or more times annually.
The northern redback salamander, the only entirely terrestrial salamander in New
England, was the most commonly observed of these species, although sightings were
infrequent. In many forested communities these small salamanders make up a large
percentage of the total vertebrate biomass. In the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest in
New Hampshire, red-backed salamanders have been estimated to have a biomass of 1,770
g/ha (Burton and Likens 1975) and densities of approximately one per square yard have
been reported from southern Maine (Witham 1999). They are most abundant in well-
SECTION HI - 4-29
-------
drained upland habitats and typically avoid extremely wet bottomland areas. Within the
PSA they were most common near the upland edges of transitional floodplain forests.
The northern dusky salamander, northern two-lined salamander, and northern spring
salamander require undisturbed high-gradient stream or spring communities such as those
found on October Mountain. They are not likely to occur in the PSA in any significant
numbers, with the possible exception of Roaring Brook and no effort was made to
specifically target these species during our survey effort. The only observations of these
species were one sighting of a northern spring salamander crossing Woodland Road in
the vicinity of Roaring Brook on a rainy night in the summer of 1999, and one northern
two-lined salamander captured in a pit trap near Yokum Brook in 2000.
Finally, one four-toed salamander was captured in a pitfall trap in a red maple swamp
(Figure 4-24). This species is typically found in wet forests and bogs. It breeds in small
pools or slow moving streams in boggy, mossy areas, where it lays its eggs, sometimes
communally. The pool where this individual was caught, 46-VP-5, is surrounded by
suitable habitat (red maple swamp and black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage
swamp) that is infrequently flooded.
Figure 4-24 Northern four-toed salamander captured in PSA.
Note the four toes and slight constriction, or narrowing, at the base of
the tail. This individual dropped its tail soon after, a habit
characteristic of this species as predator defense.
SECTION III - 4-30
-------
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Reptiles and Amphibians
Nine species listed by the MNHESP potentially occur in the PSA, including one
Endangered, one Threatened, and seven Special Concern species. Turtles represent four
of these while salamanders make up the remaining five.
4.1 Reptiles
The wood turtle was the only reptile of conservation concern in the PSA that was actually
observed. Wood turtles were once common throughout New England but are currently
rare. They are listed as Special Concern in Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont, and
Connecticut. In Massachusetts only 153 sightings were recorded in 97 locations from
1978 to 1994 (MNHESP 1994a). Since 1998, eight wood turtles were documented in the
PSA. Over two days in May 1998, two males and a female were observed in the vicinity
of the confluence. Another nearby occurrence (less than a quarter mile away) not long
afterwards included a female with eggs that was struck and killed by a car in Pittsfield.
While the death of one breeding-age female may be significant to small populations, the
discovery of that particular female indicated that wood turtles are indeed attempting to
breed and nest in the PSA.
The remaining listed turtles include the spotted, eastern box (both Special Concern), and
bog turtle (state Endangered). The bog turtle, while extremely unlikely to occur in the
PSA due to its affinity for fens, has a known range from Berkshire County south into
Connecticut. Furthermore, the wet meadows and shrub swamps of the PSA could
provide marginal habitat for them. Box turtles are highly terrestrial and would therefore
not be expected to use the PSA. Suitable adjacent habitat along October Mountain,
however, would allow for infrequent use of the PSA by box turtles, if they occur there.
They are known from the Hinsdale Flats SWMA reference area (T. Gulo, MDFW,
personal communication).
While several state listed snakes (such as black rat, northern copperhead, and timber
rattler) have historically occurred in western Massachusetts, no recent occurrences are
known from the PSA. Additionally, since these species would not typically use the
wetland habitats here, none are expected to occur.
SECTION HI- 4-31
-------
4.2 Amphibians
Five salamanders of conservation concern potentially occur within or next to the PSA:
Jefferson, blue-spotted, spring, and four-toed salamanders (all Special Concern), and the
marbled salamander (Threatened). Three of these species, Jefferson, spring, and four-
toed salamanders, were observed in the PSA during 1998 - 2000 field studies.
The Jefferson salamander, blue-spotted salamander, and their hybrids compose the
Jefferson complex. Members of this complex form a continuum in appearance from the
grayish-brown coloration, pale blue flecks, and wide snout of the Jefferson salamander to
the bluish-black coloration, prominent blue spots, and narrow snout of the blue-spotted
salamander. It is believed that these two species originated from a common ancestor
during the last Ice Age when glaciers separated the two populations. After the glacier
retreated, the two populations met in New England and the Great Lakes Region, where
they now commonly interbreed (Klemens 1993). The parent species normally have two
sets of chromosomes and are known as diploid. Their hybrids, however, have three sets
of chromosomes (triploid) and are almost always females (Petranka 1998). The hybrids
having two sets of Jefferson genes and one set of blue-spotted genes are called the silvery
salamander, while those hybrids having two sets of blue-spotted genes and one set of
Jefferson genes are called the Tremblay salamander. These hybrids are not easily
identified based on morphological characteristics, and laboratory tests are needed to
positively identity them. One study conducted in Maine found that 70 percent of blue-
spotted salamanders were hybrids (Knox 1999b). In areas where hybrids occur they
usually outnumber the parent species two to one, resulting in females being twice as
common as males. Hybrids are also commonly found in populations where only one of
the parent species is known to occur.
The Jefferson salamander and its hybrids are listed as a species of Special Concern in
Massachusetts. Forty-four populations are currently known in Massachusetts, primarily
in the western part of the state in the Connecticut and Housatonic River valleys
(MNHESP 1994b). This species occurs from southern New Hampshire south through
Massachusetts and Connecticut west of the Connecticut River, into southern New York,
Pennsylvania, south into West Virginia, and west into Kentucky and southern Indiana
SECTION HI - 4-32
-------
(Petranka 1998). Jefferson salamanders range from locally common to rare in New
England. Jefferson salamanders were documented breeding in one pool in the PSA (Map
4-2). Males and females were captured at this pool in 1999 and egg masses were
observed. Jefferson salamander egg masses were also observed in one pool on October
Mountain State Forest, near the access road to Washington Mountain Lake (Map 4-3).
The blue-spotted salamander is also listed as a species of Special Concern in
Massachusetts. Ninety-nine populations have currently been documented in
Massachusetts, predominately from east of the Connecticut River Valley. These
populations are comprised of blue-spotted salamanders and their hybrids. Blue-spotted
salamanders can be found discontinuously from the Gulf of Saint Lawrence across
southern Canada to Lake Winnipeg and south throughout New England, New York, and
northern Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois (Petranka 1998). The only known populations of
genetically pure blue-spotteds in the northeast occurs on Prince Edward Island, Canada,
and on Long Island, New York. Though widely distributed, blue-spotted salamanders are
locally uncommon and threatened in much of their southern range. Blue-spotted
salamanders prefer moist, shaded northern hardwood and hemlock forests, with shallow
vernal pools for breeding. They were not found in the PSA.
The Marbled salamander is currently listed as a Threatened species in Massachusetts.
Forty-three current populations are known to exist in Massachusetts (MNHESP 1994c).
Populations in Massachusetts occur primarily east of the Connecticut River and in the
Berkshire hills of western Massachusetts. This species occurs from southern New
Hampshire and Massachusetts, west across southern New York and Pennsylvania to
Missouri, south into eastern Texas, the Mississippi basin, and the panhandle of Florida
(Petranka 1998). The marbled salamander is uncommon throughout New England,
primarily because it is at its northernmost limit here. This species is found in well-
drained sandy and gravelly soil in mixed deciduous woodlands, especially oak-maple and
oak-hickory. Populations are small and localized in New England, occurring in forested
uplands within a 213-m (700-foot) radius of breeding pools (DeGraaf and Yamasaki
2001).
SECTION HI - 4-33
-------
The northern spring salamander is a species of Special Concern in Massachusetts and
Maine and is listed as Threatened in Connecticut. This species is uncommon through
most of its range. It occurs from south-central Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont,
south through the Appalachian Mountains and foothills to northern Georgia and
northeastern Mississippi, west to eastern Tennessee, Kentucky, and Ohio, with the
exception of the Atlantic costal plain (Petranka 1998). Within Massachusetts 37
populations have been verified from the western two thirds of the state (MNHESP
1994d). Northern spring salamanders are locally common in northwestern Berkshire
County and southern Vermont. These salamanders have no lungs and must absorb
oxygen through their skin and membranes in their throat (Markowsky 1999). They are
large salamanders and have a small surface area, relative to their mass, through which to
absorb oxygen. This restricts northern spring salamanders to cold (<12° C) water bodies
with a high degree of dissolved oxygen. Northern spring salamanders are found only in
undisturbed areas, as they are especially susceptible to stream degradation. One spring
salamander was found crossing the Woodland Road in the vicinity of Roaring Brook, at
the southern end of the PSA.
The four-toed salamander is listed as a species of Special Concern in Massachusetts,
Vermont, and Maine (The Natural Heritage Network 2000). This species is widespread
in Massachusetts with records from over 40 locations throughout the state, but it is still
considered relatively rare (MNHESP 1994). The four-toed salamander occurs from
southern Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont west through New York, around the
Great Lakes into Wisconsin, and south through the Appalachian Mountains to Georgia
and Mississippi. The main habitat requirement for this species is wet moss within the
vicinity of open water. In Massachusetts, four-toed salamanders are most commonly
found in swamps dominated by red maple and white cedar. Due to the four-toed
salamanders diminutive size, retiring habits, and nocturnal behavior, it is seldom
observed and may therefore be more common than believed, especially considering the
abundance of suitable habitat in New England (Burgason 1999). Two four-toed
salamanders were captured in pitfall traps surrounding vernal pool 46-VP-5 during the
1999 vernal pool amphibian reproduction study (Woodlot Alternatives, Inc. in prep).
SECTION HI - 4-34
-------
5.0 Literature Cited
Bishop, S.C. 1943. Handbook of Salamanders: The Salamanders of the United States, of
Canada, and of Lower California. Comstock Publ. Co., Ithaca, NY, USA.
Burgason, B.N. 1999. Four-Toed Salamander (Hemidactylium scutatum). p. 62-65. In M.L.
Hunter Jr., A.J.K. Calhoun and M. McCollough (ed.) Maine Amphibians and
Reptiles. University of Maine Press, Orono, ME, USA.
Burton, T.M., and G.E. Likens. 1975. Salamander populations and biomass in the Hubbard
Brook Experimental Forest, New Hampshire. Copeia 3:541-546.
Conant, R. 1986. The Peterson Field Guide Series: A Field Guide to Reptiles and
Amphibians of Eastern/Central North America. Houghton Mifflin Company,
Boston, MA, USA.
Crump, M.L., and N.J. Scott Jr. 1994. Visual Encounter Surveys, p. 84-92. In R.H. Heyer
(ed.) Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity, Standard Methods for
Amphibians. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Davis, S.L. 1999. Spring Peeper (Pseudacris crucifer). p. 85-89. In M.L. Hunter Jr., A.J.K.
Calhoun and McCollough (ed.) Maine Amphibians and Reptiles. Univeristy of
Maine Press, Orono, ME, USA.
DeGraaf, R.M., and D.D. Rudis. 1983. Amphibians and Reptiles of New England: Habitats
and Natural History. University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst, MA, USA.
DeGraaf, R.M., and M. Yamasaki. 2001. New England Wildlife: Habitat, Natural History,
and Distribution. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH, USA.
Duellman, W.E., and L. Trueb. 1986. Biology of Amphibians. John Hopkins University
Press, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Easterla, D.A. 1968. Melanistic spotted salamanders in northeast Arkansas. Herpetologica
24:330-331.
SECTION HI - 4-35
-------
Ernst, C.H., R.W. Barbour, and J.E. Lovich. 1994. Turtles of the United States and Canada.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Hamilton, W.J. 1948. The food and feeding behavior of the green frog, Rana clamitans
(Latreille), in New York state. Copeia 1948(3):203-207.
Hunter, M.L., A. Calhoun, and M. McCollough. 1999. Maine Amphibians and Reptiles.
The University of Maine Press, Orono, ME, USA.
Husting, E.L. 1965. Survival and breeding structure in a population of Ambystoma
maculatum. Copeia 1965:352-362.
Kenney, L.P. 1995. Wicked Big Puddles: A Guide to the Study and Certification of Vernal
Pools. 2nd ed. Reading Memorial High School and the Vernal Pool Association,
Reading, MA, USA.
Kleeberger, S.R., and J.K. Werner. 1983. Post-breeding migration and summer movement
of Ambystoma maculatum. Journal of Herpetology 17(2): 176-177.
Klemens, M.W. 1993. The amphibians and reptiles of Connecticut and adjacent regions.
State Geol. Nat. Hist. Surv. Conn. Bull. 112. 318pp.
Knox, C.B. 1999a. Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica). p. 111-118. In M.L. Hunter Jr., A.J.K.
Calhoun and M. McCollough (ed.) Maine Amphibians and Reptiles. University of
Maine Press, Orono, ME, USA.
1999b. Blue-Spotted Salamander (Ambystoma laterale). p. 37-43. In M.L. Hunter
Jr., A.J.K. Calhoun and M. McCollough (ed.) Maine Amphibians and Reptiles.
University of Maine Press, Orono, ME, USA.
Madison, D.M. 1997. The emigration of radio-implanted spotted salamanders, Ambystoma
maculatum. Journal of Herpetology 31(4): 542-551.
Mairs, D.F. 1999. Pickerel Frog (Rana palustris). p. 98-100. In M.L. Hunter Jr., A.J.K.
Calhoun and M. McCollough (ed.) Maine Amphibians and Reptiles. University of
Maine Pres, Orono, ME, USA.
SECTION HI - 4-36
-------
Markowsky, J.K. 1999. Spring Salamander {Gyrinophilusporphyriticus). p. 59-61. In M L.
Hunter Jr., A.J.K. Calhoun and M. McCollough (ed.) Maine Amphibians and
Reptiles. University of Maine Press, Orono, ME, USA.
MNHESP (Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program). 1994a.
Endangered Species of Massachusetts - Wood Turtle (Clemmys insculpta). Fact
sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Division of Fisheries and
Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
1994b. Massachusetts Species of Special Concern - Jefferson Salamander
{Ambystoma jeffersonianum). Fact sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
1994c. Threatened Species of Massachusetts - Marbled Salamander (,Ambystoma
opacum). Fact sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Division of
Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
1994d. Massachusetts Species of Special Concern - Spring Salamander
{Gyrinophilus porphyriticus). Fact sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
1994e. Massachusetts Species of Special Concern - Four-Toed Salamander
{Hemidactylium scutatum). Fact sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
The Natural Heritage Network. 2000. U.S. Natural Heritage Programs. URL
http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/usmap.html.
Petranka, J.W. 1998. Salamanders of the United States and Canada. Smithsonian Institution
Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Petranka, J.W., and D.A.G. Thomas. 1995. Explosive breeding reduces egg and tadpole
cannibalism in the wood frog, Rana sylvatica. Animal Behavior 50:731-739.
Pfingston, R.A., and F.L. Downs. 1989. Salamanders of Ohio. Vol. 7, No. 2. Ohio Bilo.
Surv. Bull. New Series, Columbus, OH, USA.
SECTION HI - 4-37
-------
Semlitsch, R.D. 1998. Biological delineation of terrestrial buffer zones for pond-breeding
amphibians. Conservation Biology 12:1113-1119.
Stockwell, S.S. 1999. Green Frog (Rana clamitans). p. 94-97. In M.L. Hunter Jr., A.J.K.
Calhoun and M. McCollough (ed.) Maine Amphibians and Reptiles. University of
Maine Press, Orono, ME, USA.
Whitford, W.G., and A. Vinegar. 1966. Homing, survivorship, and overwintering of larvae
in spotted salamanders, Ambystoma maculatum. Copeia 3:515-519.
Wilbur, H.M., and J.P. Collins. 1973. Ecological aspects of amphibian metamorphosis.
Science 182:1305-1314.
Witham, J.W. 1999. Northern Redback Salamander (Plethodon cinereus). p. 66-70. In M.L.
Hunter Jr., A.J.K. Calhoun and M. McCollough (ed.) Maine Amphibians and
Reptiles. University of Maine Press, Orono, ME, USA.
Wright, A.H., and A.A. Wright. 1949. Handbook of Frogs and Toads of the United States
and Canada. 3rd ed. Cornell Universtiy Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.
SECTION HI - 4-38
-------
Chapter 5 Birds
1.0 Introduction
The avian community in the PSA was studied over a three-year period, from 1998 to
2000. To characterize the community, a literature review of local bird species and
populations was conducted along with the collection of field data. Field data included
methods targeted at specific species, as well as more general, reconnaissance-level
investigations of species' presence, relative abundance, and habitat use.
2.0 Methods
2.1 Species:Habitat Association
A major goal for characterization of the bird community in the PSA was to identify all
species that could reasonably be expected to occur, the habitats they would use, and when
they would use them. The foundation of this work included a review of relevant
literature on bird populations in western Massachusetts. An array of local and regional
references on bird communities in the PSA was first used to identify the species whose
range encompassed the study area (Andrle and Carroll 1984, Veit and Petersen 1993,
Bevier 1994, DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). General and technical references on the
habitat requirements and use, seasonality of occurrence, and relative abundance in the
region were then used to refine the list and build a matrix to include only those species
whose preferred habitats occur within the PSA (Bellrose 1980, Ehrlich el al. 1988, Sauer
et al. 2000, DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001).
As part of this effort, local and regional experts were consulted to obtain unpublished
records regarding the historic occurrence of some species in the area. For example, the
MNHESP, the MDFW, and the USFWS were contacted to determine present or historical
occurrences of species of conservation concern, and the Berkshire Museum and the
Massachusetts Audubon Society were consulted to determine if any records of raptors
from the Housatonic River drainage were available from surveys sponsored or conducted
SECTION HI - 5-1
-------
by these agencies. Any information received from these agencies, organizations, and
individuals was then incorporated into the species matrix.
Field surveys were conducted to compliment the information compiled in the species
matrix. These surveys focused on determining species' presence, although several
methods were used to quantitatively document relative species and their abundance, or to
sample animal tissues, as described below. Observations that were recorded in the field
were used to refine the matrix to accurately depict the habitat use and seasonality of
occurrence for all bird species expected to occur in the primary and reference study areas.
2.2 Incidental Observations
The presence of birds within the PSA was documented during field investigations in
1998, 1999, and 2000. Many field investigations were detailed studies in support of
ecological risk assessment surveys and consisted of specific methods targeted at
collecting animals from a variety of taxonomic groups to sample their tissues. Those
investigations, however, provided an opportunity to confirm the presence of birds within
the PSA by recording incidental observations of birds seen. During the course of those
other investigations, birds observed within the PSA and reference areas were recorded,
along with the habitat that they occurred in. When appropriate, other notes were
recorded, including activity, interactions with other species, and general health.
2.3 Waterfowl Trapping
Waterfowl were trapped and collected in 1998 to provide tissue samples to USEPA as
part of a human and ecological risk assessment. Two floating traps and one clover-leaf
walk-in trap were used to capture waterfowl in backwaters near Woods Pond from 27
August to 16 September, 1998 (Map 5-1) (Figure 5-1). Trapping was conducted to
supplement a sample of wood ducks and mallards captured by the MDFW in Woods
Pond and adjacent backwaters. Three traps were also placed at the Threemile Pond
SWMA reference area.
SECTION HI - 5-2
-------
Figure 5-1 Clover-leaf walk-in type trap.
2.4 Wading and Marshbird Surveys
Marsh and wading bird surveys were conducted in 1998 using playback point counts to
identify species utilizing the PSA wetlands. Forty-seven survey stations were established
on seven general survey routes (Map 5-2). Survey routes were selected based on the
location of suitable deep and shallow emergent habitat. Individual survey stations were
established at a density of approximately one point per 4.9 ha of wetland.
Wading bird use was assessed using the methods described by Gibbs and Melvin (1993).
The survey routes were visited three times from 8 June to 9 July 1998. Visits occurred
between 30 minutes before, to approximately four hours after, sunrise. All marsh and
wading birds seen or heard during a 15-minute period prior to the start of a survey were
also recorded. Playbacks from a portable cassette player (Figure 5-2) were broadcast at
each station for Virginia rail, sora, green heron, American bittern, least bittern, American
coot, common moorhen, pied-billed grebe, and king rail. Approximately 50 seconds of
calls per species were broadcast, interspersed with 10 seconds of silence. Additional
information recorded at each survey location included wetland name, start- and end-time,
observer, date, visit number, wind speed, cloud cover, precipitation, responses per
species, and all other wildlife sightings.
SECTION HI - 5-3
-------
Figure 5-2 Wading bird survey in PSA.
2.5 Hawk and Owl Surveys
Playback point counts (Kennedy and Stahlecker 1993) were used to survey hawks and
owls (i.e., raptors) within the PSA and in three reference areas in 1999. Owls were
surveyed on five occasions from February to June, and hawks were surveyed on three
occasions from May to August. Within the PSA, hawk transects were positioned along
the Housatonic River, from the confluence of the East and West Branches to Woods
Pond. Owl transects were positioned along the Woodland Road in October Mountain
State Forest near Woods Pond, and along the railroad tracks north of Lenox Station (Map
5-3). Hawk surveys were conducted at all reference areas (Maps 5-4. 5-5. and 5-6). while
owl surveys were conducted only at Threemile Pond (Map 5-6). Point count locations
were set at intervals of approximately 305 m (1,000 feet). At each survey point, playback
calls were broadcast at 60°, 180°, and 300° for 10 seconds followed by 30 seconds of
silence between each call This was repeated with calls for the eight species of hawks or
five species of owls expected to occur in the PSA and reference areas (Fuller and Mosher
1981, Veit and Petersen 1993).
SECTION HI - 5-4
-------
Playbacks began with smaller-sized species and proceeded to larger species to avoid
suppressing the responses of smaller species with the initial playbacks of the larger
species. Approximately 10 minutes were spent at each point, during which time all
hawks and owls observed or heard were identified and recorded. Additional data
recorded included type of observation (e.g., call, visualization) and behavior. Hawk
surveys were conducted between one half-hour before sunrise to sunset, while owl
surveys were conducted one half-hour after sunset to sunrise. Raptor transects were
visited a minimum of three times during the breeding and post-breeding seasons (Fuller
and Mosher 1981). Surveys were not performed when weather conditions were
considered detrimental to nesting raptors with eggs or young (i.e., temperature or
precipitation stress).
2.6 Belted Kingfisher Nest Surveys
In 1998, surveys for belted kingfisher nest sites were conducted to assist the USEPA in
determining if this species would be a suitable candidate for a more detailed study.
Surveys were conducted by canoe in the PSA. During the surveys, kingfisher activity
and observation locations were recorded and riverbanks were inspected for potential
kingfisher nest sites. Nest sites were identified based on the size of the excavated hole
according to measurements from Bent (1940). Potential nest sites were photographed
and mapped. Additional data including bank height, bank soil type, and top-of-slope
vegetation were recorded.
2.7 Forest Bird Surveys
Point counts with unlimited distance were conducted in 1998 to identify the forest birds
within the PSA (Blondel et al. 1981) (Map 5-7). Sixteen survey sites were selected to
sample the forested habitat types and were distributed, or stratified, according to the
abundance of each habitat type. Sample points were separated by a minimum distance of
approximately 488 m (1,600 feet) to reduce the chance of overlap of bird observations
(Ralph et al. 1993). Each point was visited once in late June 1998 during the early
morning hours (i.e., one half-hour before sunrise to four hours after sunrise). At each
point, all birds seen or heard during a 20-minute sampling period were recorded.
SECTION HI - 5-5
-------
Additional information recorded at each survey location included date, start- and end-
time, percent cloud cover, degree of precipitation, wind speed and direction, temperature,
natural community type, dominant species of overstory, sapling, shrub, herb, and woody
vine stratums, and mean and maximum tree height. Five photographs were taken at the
survey points: one in each of the four cardinal directions and one vertically to document
canopy composition. Results of point counts were used to revise the bird species matrix.
3.0 Bird Community Description
Birds represent the most diverse assemblage of vertebrate species in the PSA. A total of
173 species were identified as potentially occurring in the vicinity of the PSA
(Attachment C). Of these, 122 are passerines (songbirds and forest birds), 19 are raptors
(hawks and owls), and 32 are water birds (wading, marsh, and shore birds, waterfowl,
and gulls). The list of species expected to occur was based on the review of scientific
literature, historical surveys, and local and regional references on species distribution. Of
those species expected to occur, 101 occur only during the breeding period, 50 occur
year-round, 12 only during migration, and 10 only in winter. Nearly 80 percent of these,
or 139 species, were confirmed to occur in or near the PSA during the three years of field
investigations.
The diversity of the bird community is largely due to the diverse nature of the habitats
available within the PSA. The preponderance of large, open aquatic communities
surrounded by forested and scrub-shrub habitats in the lower part of the PSA (i.e., Woods
Pond and its backwaters) allows for use by waterbirds as well as many of the forest and
shrub-associated landbirds. Ducks and geese were common in this area, as were green
and great blue herons. The emergent and shrub swamp borders of these areas provide
nesting habitat for a number of wetland-dependent species such as red-winged blackbirds
and swamp sparrows. Swallows, cedar waxwings, and nighthawks feed over these
habitats. Kingfishers also commonly use these areas, as well as the river, while hunting.
The almost daily observations of kingfisher throughout the growing season indicates that
they are likely nesting in the study area. Surveys for nest sites in 1998 indicated that
there are suitable nesting locations, some of which appear to be used.
SECTION HI - 5-6
-------
The middle and upper sections of the PSA are composed of a mixture of forested
communities adjacent to open, largely agricultural lands or wet meadow habitat. These
areas are suitable for a different assemblage of birds than those using Woods Pond and
the adjacent backwaters. For example, far fewer waterfowl and marshbirds were
observed north of Yokum Brook than south of it, but many of the forest songbirds
observed during point counts occurred from Woods Pond to the Holmes Road. Species
common to these areas included habitat specialists that require forested habitats, such as
the thrushes and wood warblers, and habitat generalists that are found in a variety of
habitats, such as the American robin, black-capped chickadee, and blue jay.
The forested wetland communities of the PSA generally provide habitat for the most
number of bird species, from 88 species in red maple swamps to 96 species in transitional
floodplain forests. The higher number of species in these areas is in response to the
diverse vertical structure available from the ground to the forest canopy in these
communities, as well as their adjacency to an abundant food supply. The upland forests,
while having larger trees, often have less developed shrubs, saplings, and subcanopy
trees, which reduces the structural diversity in these forests.
Open habitats tend to have fewer birds associated with them, again because of reduced
structural diversity. An exception to this is the cultural grasslands, with 88 species
potentially occurring. While this community receives high bird use, relatively few birds
nest in these areas. Birds that do nest include killdeer, some sparrows, bobolinks, and,
where shrubs are invading, some shrub nesters. Most of the bird use of this community is
for feeding during the growing season; a wide range of species can be observed feeding
in these areas, from the game birds (ring-necked pheasant, bobwhite, turkey) and
songbirds (American robin, Northern cardinal, sparrows) that feed on plant matter and
terrestrial invertebrates, to swallows, hawks, and nightjars that feed on flying insects and
larger animal prey. The remainder of the open habitats, such as wet meadows,
agricultural fields, and residential areas, tend to have fewer birds associated with them
because of periodic or constant disturbances.
SECTION HI - 5-7
-------
3.1 Carnivorous Birds
Carnivorous birds, those feeding almost exclusively on animal tissue, are represented by
a wide range of species. The smallest avian carnivores, such as the swallows, flycatchers,
and warblers, tend to feed on small insect prey while larger carnivores, such as hawks
and owls, feed on larger vertebrate prey. Exceptions to this occur, however. For
example, waterfowl, despite their larger size, feed primarily on small aquatic
invertebrates and plants. Conversely, the northern shrike, a robin-sized songbird, preys
on small mammals that can be up to half its size. Regardless of the target prey species,
most tend to be opportunistic while feeding and may take a wide range of animals. The
great blue heron, for example, feeds mostly on fish but also invertebrates, amphibians,
reptiles, birds, and mammals (Butler 1992).
3.1.1 Hawks and Owls
No historic hawk and owl (raptor) surveys had been conducted in the Housatonic River
valley by any of the agencies or groups contacted over the course of these investigations.
However, the North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) is a large-scale avian survey
program initiated in 1966 and coordinated by the USGS. The BBS is a roadside survey
program, with more than 4,100 45-km (24.5-mile) long survey routes that are surveyed
annually. Three survey routes occur in Berkshire County: in Pittsfield, Cheshire, and
Sheffield. Since 1966, observers on these three routes have documented eight raptor
species: turkey vulture, bald eagle, sharp-shinned hawk, Cooper's hawk, broad-winged
hawk, red-tailed hawk, American kestrel, and barred owl (Sauer et al. 2000). Data for the
red-tailed hawk were not available, but all of the other documented species were seen
infrequently over that time period. In fact, bald eagles and sharp-shinned hawks were
only observed once and Cooper's hawks were only observed twice on all three of these
routes, combined. The turkey vulture, broad-winged hawk, and American kestrel were
observed only slightly more often. Barred owls occurred very infrequently on the
Cheshire and Pittsfield BBS routes (although two were recorded on the Pittsfield route in
1999), but they were more common on the Sheffield route, with three of the last four
years having five or six owls recorded (Sauer et al. 2000).
SECTION HI - 5-8
-------
Initial, reconnaissance-level observations of hawks and owls in the PSA in 1998
documented 10 raptor species. These included all species recorded on the BBS routes
except Cooper's hawk, with the addition of osprey, northern harrier, and northern
goshawk. Some species were observed during the nesting season, but most observations
occurred largely in late summer and early fall, when these species migrate. Turkey
vultures were common throughout the summer and were usually observed soaring over
agricultural lands adjacent to the Housatonic River. Osprey and bald eagles were
observed during the fall migration periods and were most commonly observed flying,
feeding, or perching in the vicinity of Woods Pond and, in the case of the osprey, seen
feeding on goldfish. Broad-winged and red-tailed hawks were commonly observed,
along with American kestrels. These three species were most common in upland habitats
adjacent to the Housatonic River, but they were also observed hunting over wet meadow
and shallow emergent habitats in the PSA. Sharp-shinned hawks, northern goshawks,
and barred owls were also seen, but observations were very infrequent. Despite the
confirmation of nearly one-half of the species expected to occur, the lack of breeding
season observations prompted playback surveys in 1999.
The playback surveys documented 11 raptor species during the nesting season (Table
5-1), including four species that had not previously been observed. Seven species
responded to calls played in the PSA and a total of seven species responded from the
reference areas. Northern harrier and red-shouldered hawk responses were documented in
the PSA but not at the reference areas. Conversely, the sharp-shinned hawk, Cooper's
hawk, and northern goshawk (all woodland accipiter hawks) responses were documented
only in the reference areas. Great horned, barred, and northern saw-whet owls were
documented in the PSA during playback surveys. Only the great horned and barred owls
responded to playback surveys at the Threemile Pond SWMA reference area.
Differences in the results of the hawk surveys are attributable to habitat differences
between the PSA and the reference areas. Northern harriers and American kestrels breed
in open habitats, particularly open wetlands, wet, lightly grazed pastures, old fields,
freshwater marshes, dry uplands, and mesic grasslands and many of the other species
hunt in and near these areas (MacWhirter and Bildstein 1996, DeGraaf and Yamasaki
SECTION HI - 5-9
-------
2001). The PSA has an abundance of this type of habitat. The PSA also contains a large
amount of floodplain forest dominated by silver maple, one of the preferred habitats of
the red-shouldered hawk (Crocoll 1994). This species generally requires extensive forest
stands consisting of mature trees and an open, park-like appearance to the subcanopy and
understory (Crocoll 1994). However, no red-shouldered hawk nests were found in the
PSA.
The reference areas differed from the PSA in that they generally consisted of isolated
aquatic communities surrounded by relatively intact upland deciduous and mixed forest.
The three accipiters (sharp-shinned hawk, Cooper's hawk, and northern goshawk) that
responded to playback calls only in the reference areas are species of extensive mixed
and deciduous forest (Rosenfield and Bielefeldt 1993, Squiers and Reynolds 1997,
Bildstein and Meyer 2000) and would, therefore, prefer the forests surrounding the
reference areas and the lower half of the PSA, which is also part of a large contiguous
forest (i.e., October Mountain State Forest).
Most species documented through incidental observations likely do not breed within the
PSA. These individuals (such as osprey and bald eagles) were simply migrating through
the area. Other species that breed nearby likely use the PSA only infrequently and,
therefore, were not documented during playback surveys.
SECTION HI - 5-10
-------
Table 5-1 1999 raptor survey results.
Species Name
PSA
Threemile
Pond
SWMA
October
Mountain
State Forest
Hinsdale
Flats
SWMA
Turkey vulture
Osprey
Bald eagle
northern harrier
CR
10
sharp-shinned hawk
10
CR
Cooper's hawk
10
CR
CR
northern goshawk
10
CR
red-shouldered hawk
CR
broad-winged hawk
CR
CR
10
CR
red-tailed hawk
CR
CR
10
CR
Rough-legged hawk
yes
American kestrel
CR
Peregrine falcon
Common barn owl
great horned owl
CR
CR
barred owl
CR
CR
10
northern saw-whet owl
CR
bald eagle
10
10
osprev
10
10
turkey vulture
10
10
10
10
SECTION HI - 5-11
-------
CR = Call response during playback surveys.
10 = Incidental observation, not observed during playback surveys.
SECTION HI - 5-12
-------
During the playback point counts and throughout the 1998-2000 field seasons, efforts
were made to identify and locate nests of breeding hawks and owls within the PSA and
reference areas. Only one confirmed nest was found, that of an American kestrel on the
west side of the Housatonic River, just north of New Lenox Road. The nest cavity was
located near the top of an approximately 20-m telephone pole, positioned in the middle of
a cleared field, adjacent to forested upland habitat. Two adult kestrels, one of which was
confirmed as male, were observed entering the cavity, and what sounded like begging
cries were heard originating from the cavity. Young were not observed fledging from the
cavity, but four or five juvenile kestrels (aged according to Palmer 1988a) were observed
perching along power lines located approximately 300 m from the cavity. The response
of raptors to playback calls represents a territorial behavior attributable to nesting
activities. Therefore, while only one raptor nest was found, it is likely that other raptors,
such as red-shouldered hawks, do nest in the vicinity of the PSA.
3.1.2 Wading Birds
Four wading bird species were observed in the PSA: American bittern, great blue heron,
green heron, and black-crowned night heron. Only one species, the green heron, was
documented during playback surveys in 1998 (see Section 3.2.2). However, these
observations were of birds flying along the river near the survey points but not directly
responding to the calls. Great blue herons were by far the most abundant wading bird
observed. They occurred in a variety of shoreline habitats, particularly around Woods
Pond and the nearby backwaters. Great blue herons were frequently observed hunting for
fish and other aquatic prey in low-gradient stream, deep emergent marsh, and shallow
emergent marsh communities. The green heron was the next most commonly seen
wading bird. Observations of this species were distributed throughout the entire PSA and
usually occurred in or near shrub swamp, the species' preferred habitat (DeGraaf and
Yamasaki 2001). American bitterns were observed throughout the PSA on several
occasions, mainly during spring and fall migration. One individual, however, was heard
calling from within the PSA in July of 1999, indicating an intent to breed in the area.
This species was most commonly observed in shallow emergent marsh communities.
SECTION HI - 5-13
-------
Finally, only one black-crowned night heron was observed. One dead individual was
found in a parking lot adjacent to the East Branch Housatonic River in Pittsfield.
3.1.3 Belted Kingfishers
During the 1998 surveys, three potential belted kingfisher nest sites were located in the
PSA (Map 5-8). All three sites, along with a fourth found upstream of the PSA on East
Branch Housatonic River, were located on sloping to steep eroded banks, which are
typical nest sites for this species. The kingfisher nest sites were distributed largely in the
northern half of the PSA. Despite the sparse distribution of nest sites, use of the river by
kingfishers is much more widespread, with observations occurring from the confluence to
Woods Pond.
3.1.4 Tree Swallows
Tree swallows, along with the other northeastern swallows, are highly insectivorous birds
that were commonly observed feeding over the river. The tree swallow is the focus of a
detailed reproductive study in the PSA by the USGS. As part of that study, a large
number of nesting boxes were erected along the river to provide subject animals for the
study. The USGS has provided the results of that study, including nest box occupancy
(Custer 2002). Anecdotal observations suggest that the nest boxes were frequently used
by tree swallows. Other birds that used the boxes in the PSA included house wrens and
black-capped chickadees.
3.1.5 Other Species
The wildlife species matrix (Attachment C) identifies a large number of additional
species with carnivorous feeding habits. Most of these species are insectivorous forest
songbirds. These species take predominantly flying insects using a variety of methods,
including active aerial pursuit by swallows and nightjars, sallying by flycatchers, and
rapid capture and gleaning off leaves by vireos and warblers. Additionally, terrestrial
invertebrates are caught by a number of species that actively probe the soil or search the
stems, branches, foliage, and forest leaf litter.
SECTION HI - 5-14
-------
The forest bird surveys conducted in 1998 documented 47 species, most of which were
passerines, or perching songbirds (Table 5-2). The surveys were conducted largely in
forested wetland communities, with red maple swamps and ash-maple-tamarack swamps
being sampled the most. Consequently, a greater number of species were documented in
these communities (32 and 35 species, respectively) than in the less-sampled floodplain
forests and shrub swamps (7 and 26 species, respectively).
The veery was the most common songbird, seen at all 16 point count survey sites. The
American robin, common yellowthroat, and black-capped chickadee were also common,
occurring at 13, 11, and 9 survey sites, respectively. Other commonly observed species
included the American goldfinch, northern waterthrush, red-winged blackbird, and
yellow warbler, all of which occurred at half of the survey sites. Incidental observations
of the avian community documented similar results with respect to the relative abundance
of birds in the PSA.
SECTION HI - 5-15
-------
Table 5-2 1998 forest bird survey results.
Spedes
Ecoeystern GonminityTypei and Survey Bint Nunber
Ffereent
Frequency
Forested \^Wands
Shrub \^Wands
Red IVfeple Swamp
Hackj^h-RedlVfeple-TanBrack Calcareous
Seepage Swamp
Transitional
Floodplain
Forest
Shrub Swamp
2
3
4
5
7
6
9b
10
11
12
13
14
1
8
9a.
Ydim
Veery
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
100%
American robin
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
81%
Gommai jellowthroat
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
69%
Hack-capped chickadee
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
56%
American goldfinch
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
50%
Nathan waterthrush
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
50%
Red-winged blackbird
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
50%
YellowwarUer
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
50%
American crow
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
44%
Chestnut-sicbd warbler
X
X
X
X
X
X
38%
Great crested flycatcher
X
X
X
X
X
X
38%
Sorg sparrow
X
X
X
X
X
X
38%
Cfedarwaxwirg
X
X
X
X
X
31%
Rose-treated grosbeak
X
X
X
X
X
31%
Etown-headed cowbird
X
X
X
X
25%
Eastern wood pewee
X
X
X
X
25%
Nathan flicker
X
X
X
X
25%
Red-breasted nuthatch
X
X
X
X
25%
Redejedvireo
X
X
X
X
25%
\^&rHirgvireo
X
X
X
X
25%
Gommai grackle
X
X
X
19%
Gray catbird
X
X
X
19%
Efeiry woodpecker
X
X
X
19%
Least flycatcher
X
X
X
19%
IVburningdove
X
X
X
19%
Nathan cardinal
X
X
X
19%
Ctenbud
X
X
X
19%
Wite-1hroated sparrow
X
X
X
19%
Belted kirgfisher
X
X
13%
Hie jay
X
X
13%
ESaltimoeoricle
X
X
13%
Swamp sparrow
X
X
13%
Tree swallow
X
X
13%
Wxdlhrush
X
X
13%
American redstart
X
6%
Hackand white warbler
X
6%
Hack-throated blue warbler
X
6%
Cbnada warbler
X
6%
Qrimney swift
X
6%
Giippirg sparrow
X
6%
Eastern pheobe
X
6%
Gdchtcrowned kirgjet
X
6%
Ebusewren
X
6%
Tufled titmouse
X
6%
Turkey vulture
X
6%
Wllowflyatcher
X
6%
Wjodcbek
X
6%
unknown warbler
X
6%
No. Species per Ste
15
13
15
12
9
16
9
11
11
11
11
6
7
14
17
13
No. Species per Efabitat
32
35
7
26
*PPD=MustrineFcrested PSS=Mustrine Scrub-Shrub^ FEM=MustrineEmergert wetland habitats
Ffereent Frequency=The nunber of plots at which a species was observed divided by the total nunber of plots (16) mltiplied by 100.
SECTION HI - 5-16
-------
3.2 Omnivorous Birds
Relatively fewer birds have diets equally mixed of animal and plant materials. Of the
birds that have an omnivorous feeding strategy, most utilize peaks of food abundance as
they are available. For example, in order to meet the nutritional demands of egg laying,
many species of waterfowl time their migrations to arrive on breeding grounds when
aquatic invertebrates, rich in protein, can form a high proportion of the diet of nesting
hens and developing young (Krapu and Reinecke 1992). They then switch their feeding
to the fruits, seeds, and tubers of aquatic and emergent plants as invertebrate populations
decline and plant materials ripen or become available in late summer and fall.
3.2.1 Waterfowl
Nine species of ducks and geese potentially occur within the PSA and all but one, the
ring-necked duck, have been observed. Three of these species, Canada geese, wood
duck, and mallard, readily breed and broods of each species were routinely observed
during the three years of study. Broods were observed most commonly in the backwater
channels and wetlands between New Lenox Road and Woods Pond. Wood duck broods
were also observed in the main channel of the river between Holmes Road and New
Lenox Road. Similarly, Canada geese broods were observed in the river channel,
backwaters, Woods Pond, and on residential lawns.
Trapping efforts in 1998 resulted in the collection of 15 wood ducks and one mallard in
the backwaters of Woods Pond during 14 - 15 September 1998. Eight wood ducks and
one mallard were retained for tissue analysis, along with 12 wood ducks and three
mallards provided by MDFW. In addition, 20 wood ducks were captured from the
Threemile Pond SWMA reference area and retained for tissue analysis. Many of the
wood ducks caught in the PSA exhibited juvenile plumage characteristics, indicating that
they were hatched and reared from within or very near the PSA.
Several waterfowl species were observed only during migration, including green-winged
teal, common goldeneye, common merganser, and snow goose. Interestingly, American
black ducks were only commonly observed in winter. Small groups of black ducks were
SECTION HI - 5-17
-------
usually observed from November to April and often formed mixed flocks with mallards.
No black duck broods were observed in the PSA and very few individual black ducks
were observed during the nesting season.
3.2.2 Marsh Birds
Marsh bird surveys conducted in 1998 documented four of the nine species potentially
occurring in the PSA (Table 5-3). The Virginia rail (Figure 5-3) was the most common
species observed, with 11 individuals documented from eight survey sites between the
Pittsfield WYVTF and Woods Pond. Incidental observations of Virginia rails also
occurred at the confluence of the East and West Branches and at a site north of New
Lenox Road. Common moorhen responses were documented from four playback survey
sites in downstream portions of the PSA and several additional individuals were
repeatedly seen there in 1998. One sora was recorded adjacent to the Pittsfield WWTF.
American coots were observed in the PSA during migration, but they were not
documented during the playback surveys.
Figure 5-3 Virgina rail.
Rails were the most common marsh bird responding to playback
surveys. This individual was displaced by a July 1998 storm event that
flooded their typical shallow and deep emergent marsh habitats.
SECTION III - 5-18
-------
Table 5-3 1998 marsh and wading bird survey results.
Species
West
Branch
Canoe
Meadows
WWTF
Canoe
Launch
Yokum
Brook
Cul-de-sac
North
Woods
Pond
Total
3 sites
4 sites
8 sites
9 sites
3 sites
10 sites
10 sites
47 sites
Virginia rail
0
0
3
4
0
1
3
11
Sora
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
Green heron
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
American bittern
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Least bittern
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
American coot
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Common moorhen
0
0
0
0
0
2
4
6
Pied-billed grebe
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
King rail
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
0
1
4
4
0
3
8
20
Refer to Mao 5-2
Numbers indicate total number of each species that responded during playback surveys.
Numbers are combined for all three visits at each site.
SECTION HI - 5-19
-------
3.2.3 Other Species
Very few other species or species groups are categorized as omnivorous birds. Included
are the jays and crows, which have a varied diet of insects, bird eggs and young, carrion,
and trash. Blue jays and American crows are common in the PSA and have been
documented using most of the available habitats.
3.3 Herbivorous Birds
Very few (only 11 species) species are solely herbivorous and, in the PSA, include geese,
doves, ruby-throated hummingbird, and the finches (Attachment C). Most of these
species occur within the PSA, except for the pine grosbeak and pine siskin. One snow
goose was observed in an agricultural field I the fall. This species is expected to only
occasionally occur, during spring and fall migration. Similarly, pine grosbeaks could
occur seasonally, mostly in winter. Pine siskins may breed in the hills surrounding the
Housatonic River (Veit and Petersen 1993). Bobwhite quail are also primarily
herbivorous and, while not known from the PSA, could potentially occur, as they were
heard in adjacent habitat.
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Birds
Several state- and federally-listed birds were observed within the PSA and reference
areas during the 1998, 1999, and 2000 field investigations (MNHESP 1999). Following
are brief descriptions on the nature of these observations.
American Bittern
The American bittern is listed as Endangered by the MNHESP. American bitterns breed
in eastern North America from Newfoundland to North Carolina, west to central
Oklahoma and Manitoba, and they winter in coastal marshes from Massachusetts to the
Gulf Coast (Gibbs et al. 1992). In Massachusetts, breeding populations of American
bitterns have been declining since the 1960s. Between 1976 and 1980, the Massachusetts
Breeding Bird Atlas project confirmed only 17 breeding pairs in the state (Veit and
SECTION HI - 5-20
-------
Petersen 1993). This decline is due in a large part to the disappearance of extensive
cattail marshes, their primary breeding habitat.
Nests are constructed from sticks, grass, and sedges in tall emergent vegetation (Ehrlich
et al. 1988). The PSA provides suitable nesting habitat for American bitterns, and they
were documented from 1998 to 2000 (Map 5-9) and in the October Mountain State Forest
reference area in 2000 (Map 5-10). Observations during the three years ranged from May
to September, with the most occurring in August and September. Bitterns were usually
observed in wet meadow, shallow emergent marsh, and deep emergent marsh habitats.
Only one of the bitterns, observed in early July 1999, was heard calling from within the
PSA, indicating an intent to breed in the area. No bitterns responded to marshbird
playback calls in 1998. MNHESP Rare Animal Forms for American bitterns are included
in Attachment H.
Bald Eagle
The bald eagle is listed as Threatened by the USFWS and Endangered by MNHESP. The
bald eagle historically nested throughout the United States and Canada in deciduous and
coniferous forests, especially along bodies of water. Eagle populations have experienced
significant declines, due to egg shell thinning from DDT poisoning, habitat loss, and
shooting, to the point that the species was formerly listed as Endangered nation-wide.
Bald eagle populations are currently recovering due to habitat protection and other
recovery efforts such as hacking. Hacking at artificial nest platforms on Quabbin
Reservoir, for example, has led to the first successful Massachusetts breeding record in
recent years, when two pair produced a total of three young (Veit and Petersen 1993).
Bald eagles are closely associated with aquatic habitats, usually nesting in large trees
along shorelines and feeding on fish. The PSA does provide nesting and foraging habitat
for bald eagles. In the mid-1990's, a pair of bald eagles were reported to have constructed
a nest at Woods Pond (T. Gulo, MDFW personal communication). The nest was
reportedly destroyed during an April snowstorm and the pair did not attempt to re-nest.
Bald eagles were documented in the PSA and reference areas eight times during the
course of field investigations, although some of those observations may be of the same
SECTION HI - 5-21
-------
individuals (Map 5-9). Most observations occurred near Woods Pond and the adjacent
backwaters and many of the eagles observed were apparently hunting over these shallow
water habitats. MNHESP Rare Animal Forms for bald eagles observed in 1998 are
included in Attachment H.
Northern Harrier
Breeding populations of northern harriers in Massachusetts have declined since 1955
(Veit and Petersen 1993) and they are currently listed as Endangered by MNHESP. Their
range extends across the United States and Canada. They typically nest on elevated
ground in dense herbaceous vegetation of wet meadows, old fields, and shrublands
(Ehrlich et al. 1988).
The PSA and reference areas provide suitable habitat for northern harriers. Nesting and
foraging habitat is available in many of the larger emergent wetlands, and in the wet
meadow habitats south of New Lenox Road. Old fields in uplands adjacent to the study
area also provide suitable nesting and foraging areas. Prey items consist mainly of small
vertebrates such as voles, birds, snakes, frogs, and also invertebrates such as grasshoppers
(Ehrlich et al. 1988). Prey is captured while the harrier is in flight, as it hovers low to the
ground searching fields and agricultural areas for food items.
Thirteen northern harriers were observed in the PSA and near Washington Mountain
Lake in the October Mountain State Forest reference area on 12 occasions (Maps 5-9 and
5-10). Most observations occurred either early (May) or late (September and October) in
the season and were of individuals displaying migratory behavior (i.e., high, rapid, non-
hunting flight) (Attachment H). One observation in July of 1999 occurred in the nesting
season for this species although no breeding behavior (e.g., displays, territoriality) was
observed by this individual.
Sharp-shinned Hawk
The sharp-shinned hawk is presently listed as a species of Special Concern by MNHESP.
This hawk ranges across the United States and the southern half of Canada and is
common throughout Massachusetts during migration (Veit and Petersen 1993).
SECTION HI - 5-22
-------
However, while historically abundant, there have only been a few confirmed instances of
breeding sharp-shinned hawks in Massachusetts since the 1950's. A Massachusetts State
biologist described a sharp-shinned hawk in Lee, MA, during the summer of 1999 as a
potential breeder, but no confirmed account was reported (T. Gulo, MDFW, personal
communication). In winter, sharp-shinned hawks can occur throughout the state
(Bildstein and Meyer 2000).
Sharp-shinned hawks nest in coniferous, deciduous, and mixed woodlands where they
constructs stick nests at heights of3-18m(10-60 feet) in deciduous and coniferous
trees (Ehrlich et al. 1988, Palmer 1988b). Palmer (1988b) notes that the nest is typically
in a stand of dense young conifers near a forest opening. Prey items include mainly
birds, and occasionally small mammals, frogs, lizards, and insects (Ehrlich et al. 1988,
Palmer 1988b, Peterson and Peterson 1980).
Sharp-shinned hawks were seen in the PSA and the Hinsdale Flats SWMA reference area
during the field investigations (Maps 5-9 and 5-11). Most observations occurred from
early fall to early winter. Two observations, however, occurred during the 1999 hawk
playback surveys at the Hinsdale Flats SWMA reference area. These occurred
approximately a week apart and included an aggressive response from the birds. Due to
the similarity in response, it is likely that the two observations were of the same
individual and that it is likely nesting in the vicinity. No behavior indicative of nesting
was displayed by any of the sharp-shinned hawks observed in the PSA. Data sheets for
these observations are provided in Attachment H.
Cooper's Hawk
The Cooper's hawk is a species of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Its range extends
throughout most of the United States and extreme southern Canada. In Massachusetts,
the Cooper's hawk is a rare and local breeder, with breeding records located in the central
and eastern portion of the state (Veit and Petersen 1993). Like the other species in this
genus, Cooper's hawks nest in forested habitats, particularly deciduous, riparian forest
stands (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). Cooper's hawks nest on a platform of sticks
positioned in deciduous and coniferous trees at heights of 7 - 15 m (25 - 50 feet) (Ehrlich
SECTION HI - 5-23
-------
et al. 1988, Palmer 1988b). Prey items include medium-sized birds, small mammals, and
occasionally reptiles, amphibians, and insects (Ehrlich et al. 1988, Palmer 1988b).
Both the PSA and the reference areas provide suitable nesting habitat for Cooper's
hawks. They were seen on seven occasions in 1999 and 2000: three times in the PSA,
once at the Threemile Pond SWMA reference area, and three times near Washington
Mountain Lake in the October Mountain State Forest reference area (Maps 5-9. 5-10. and
5-12). The PSA observations occurred in the vicinity of New Lenox Road and
southward. These observations were outside the nesting season. At the Threemile Pond
SWMA reference area, one adult responded to playback surveys in the middle of June
1999, and was presumed to be nesting in the area. At the October Mountain State Forest
reference area, a Cooper's hawk was observed chasing a broad-winged hawk. This
territorial display is indicative of nesting activity. In addition, a single bird and a pair of
adults were observed near Washington Mountain Lake in early May 2000, well within the
nesting season for this species. Data sheets for these observations are provided in
Attachment H.
Common Moorhen
Common moorhens occur across the eastern and southwestern United States. In
Massachusetts, they are listed as a species of Special Concern. Scattered localized
breeding has been confirmed throughout Massachusetts, including Pittsfield (Veit and
Petersen 1993; T. Gulo, MDFW personal communication).
Common Moorhens breed in freshwater marshes, lakes, and ponds with emergent
vegetation and grassy edges. Moorhens typically nest over water, where they form a
rimmed-cup nest of aquatic plants, which is lined with grass (Ehrlich et al. 1988).
Common Moorhens were repeatedly observed in the PSA in 1998 and 1999. Some
individuals responded to playback surveys in June and July, 1998, while others were
observed during the course of concurrent investigations. Moorhen sightings were
generally limited to the lower one mile of the PSA, typically at the north end of Woods
Pond and the adjacent upstream backwaters (Map 5-9). and one individual was observed
at Washington Mountain Lake (Map 5-10). The responses elicited by moorhens during
SECTION HI - 5-24
-------
the playback survey indicate that moorhens were territorial and likely nesting within the
PSA. However, no moorhen broods were observed in either year. Rare animal data
sheets documenting moorhen sightings are located in Attachment H.
Northern Parula Warbler
The northern parula is listed as a Threatened species in Massachusetts (MNHESP 2000).
Northern parulas are common during migration, but a slow and steady decline of
breeding populations has prompted this listing (MNHESP 1994a). Breeding populations
are restricted to the eastern part of the state, north of Boston and along the southern shore
of Cape Cod. Three observations of northern parula were recorded in two locations in the
PSA during May 1999. These observations occurred during the migration period and do
not represent a breeding population.
Blackpoll Warbler
The blackpoll warblers is a species of special concern in Massachusetts due to its rarity
during the breeding period (MNHESP 1994b, 2000), although it is common during the
migration period. The preferred habitat of the blackpoll warbler, stunted spruce fir forest,
is very limited in Massachusetts and restricted largely to the summit of Mt. Greylock,
north of the PSA (MNHESP 1994b). Six observations of blackpoll warblers were
recorded from five locations within the PSA during May in 1999 and 2000. These
observations were during the migration period and do not represent a breeding
population.
SECTION HI - 5-25
-------
5.0 Literature Cited
Andrle, R.F., and J.R. Carroll. 1984. The Atlas of Breeding Birds in New York State.
Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Bellrose, F.C. 1980. Ducks, Geese and Swans of North America. Stackpole Books,
Harrisburg, PA, USA.
Bent, A.C. 1940. Life Histories of North American cuckoos, goatsuckers, hummingbirds,
and their allies. United States National Museum Bulletin No. 176. Washington, DC,
USA.
Bevier, L.R. ed. 1994. The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Connecticut. Connecticut
Department of Environmental Protection. State Geological and Natural History
Survey of Connecticut. Bulletin 113. Hartford, CT, USA.
Bildstein, K.L., and K. Meyer. 2000. Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus). p. 1-28. In
A. Poole and F. Gill (ed.) The Birds of North America, No. 482. The Birds of North
America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Blondel, J., C. Ferry, and B. Frochot. 1981. Point Counts with Unlimited Distance, p. 414-
420. In C.J. Ralph and J.M. Scott (ed.) Studies in Avian Biology No. 6. The Cooper
Ornithological Society, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Butler, R.W. 1992. Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias). p. 1-19. In A. Poole, P.
Stettenheim and F. Gill (ed.) The Birds of North America, No. 25. The Birds of
North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Crocoll, S.T. 1994. Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus). p. 1-20. In A. Poole and F. Gill
(ed.) The Birds of North America, No. 107. The Birds of North America, Inc.,
Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Custer, C.M. 2002. Exposure and effects of chemical contaminants on tree swallow
nesting along the Housatonic River, Berkshire Co., Massachusetts, 1998 - 2000.
Prepared for USEPA. USGS, La Crosse, WI, USA.
SECTION HI - 5-26
-------
DeGraaf, R.M., and D.D. Rudis. 1986. New England Wildlife: Habitat, Natural History,
and Distribution. General Technical Report NE-108, U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Forest
Service, Northeast Forest Experiment Station, 491 pp. (N)
DeGraaf, R.M., and M. Yamasaki. 2001. New England Wildlife: Habitat, Natural History,
and Distribution. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH, USA.
Ehrlich, P.R., D.S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1988. The Birder's Handbook: A Field Guide to
the Natural History of North American Birds. Simon and Schuster, New York, NY,
USA.
Fuller, M.R., and J.A. Mosher. 1981. Methods of Detecting and Counting Raptors: A
Review, p. 235-246. In C.J. Ralph and J.M. Scott (ed.) Studies in Avian Biology
No. 6. Cooper Ornithological Society, Sacramento, CA, USA.
Gibbs, J.P., S.M. Melvin, and F.A. Ried. 1992. American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus).
p. 1-11. In A. Poole, P. Stettenheim and F. Gill (ed.) The Birds of North America,
No. 18. The Birds of North America, Inc, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Gibbs, J.P., and S.M. Melvin. 1993. Call-response surveys for monitoring breeding
waterbirds. Journal of Wildlife Management 57(l):27-34.
Kennedy, P.L., and D.W. Stahlecker. 1993. Responsiveness of nesting northern goshawks
to taped broadcasts of three conspecific calls. Journal of Wildlife Management
57(2):249-257.
Krapu, G.L., and K.J. Reinecke. 1992. Chapter 1 - Foraging Ecology and Nutrition, p. 1-29.
In B.D.J. Batt, A.D. Afton, M.G. Anderson, C.D. Ankney, D.H. Johnson, J.A.
Kadlec and G.L. Krapu (ed.) Ecology and Management of Breeding Waterfowl.
University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
MacWhirter, R.B., and K.L. Bildstein. 1996. Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus). p. 1-32. In
A. Poole and F. Gill (ed.) The Birds of North America, No. 210. The Birds of North
America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA.
SECTION HI - 5-27
-------
MNHESP (Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program). 1994a.
Threatened Species of Massachusetts - Northern Parula (Parula americana). Fact
sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Division of Fisheries and
Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
1994b. Massachusetts Species of Special Concern - Blackpoll Warbler (Dendroica
striata). Fact sheet prepared by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Division of
Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
1999. Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas: 2000-2001 Edition. Division of
Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA, USA.
2000. Massachusetts List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species.
Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. Westborough, MA. URL
http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/nhdat.htm.
Palmer, R.S. 1988a. Handbook of North American Birds. Vol. 5. Yale University Press,
New Haven, CT, USA.
1988b. Handbook of North American Birds. Vol. 4. Yale University Press, New
Haven, CT, USA.
Peterson, R.T., and V.M. Peterson. 1980. A Field Guide to the Birds of Eastern and Central
North America. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, NY, USA.
Ralph, C.J., G.R. Geupel, P. Pyle, T.E. Martin, and D.F. DeSante. 1993. Handbook of Field
Methods for Monitoring Landbirds. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-144.
Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, United States Department of
Agriculture, Albany, CA, USA.
Rosenfield, R.N., and J. Bielefeldt. 1993. Cooper's Hawk (.Accipiter cooperii). p. 1-24. In
A. Poole and F. Gill (ed.) The Birds of North America, No. 75. The Birds of North
America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA.
SECTION HI - 5-28
-------
Sauer, J.R., J.E. Hines, I. Thomas, J. Fallon, and G. Gough. 2000. The North American
Breeding Bird Atlas, Results and Analysis 1966-1999. Version 98.1. United States
Geological Service. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. Laurel, MD, USA.
Squiers, J.R, and R.T. Reynolds. 1997. Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis). p. 1-32. In
A. Poole and F. Gill (ed.) The Birds of North America, No. 298. The Birds of North
America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Veit, R.R., and W.R. Petersen. 1993. Birds of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Audubon
Society, Lincoln, MA, USA.
SECTION HI - 5-29
-------
Chapter 6 Mammals
1.0 Introduction
The mammalian community in the PSA was studied over the three-year period, from
1998 to 2000. To characterize the community, a literature review of local species and
populations was conducted along with the collection of field data. Field efforts included
methods targeted at specific species, as well as more general, reconnaissance-level
investigations of species presence, relative abundance, and habitat use.
2.0 Methods
2.1 Species:Habitat Association
The principle goal for the characterization of the mammal community was to identify all
species that could reasonably be expected to occur in the PSA, the habitats they would
use, and when they would use them. The foundation of this work included a review of
relevant literature on the mammal populations in western Massachusetts. Local and
regional references on bird communities were first used to identify the species whose
range encompassed the PSA (Burt and Grossenheider 1976, Godin 1977, DeGraaf and
Yamasaki 2001). General and technical references on the habitat requirements and use,
seasonality of occurrence, and relative abundance in the region were then used to refine
the list and build a matrix (Attachment C) to include only those species whose preferred
habitats are within the study area (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998, DeGraaf and Yamasaki
2001).
As part of this effort, local and regional experts were consulted to obtain unpublished
records regarding the historic occurrence of some species in the area. For example, the
Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, the MDFW, and the
USFWS were contacted to identify any historic mammal occurrences and to review
historic trapping records from the area. Information received from these agencies,
organizations, and individuals was then incorporated into the species matrix.
SECTION m - 6-1
-------
Field surveys were then conducted to complement the information compiled in the
species matrix. Field surveys largely focused on determining species' presence, although
several methods were used to more quantitatively document species and their relative
abundance or to sample animal tissues, as described below. The observations that were
recorded in the field were used to refine the matrix to accurately depict the habitat use
and seasonality of occurrence for all mammal species expected to occur in the PSA.
2.2 Incidental Observations
The presence of mammals within the PSA was documented during year-round field
investigations in 1998, 1999, and 2000 (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). Several of the other
investigations were detailed studies in support of ecological risk assessment surveys, and
consisted of specific methods targeted at documenting or collecting animals from a
variety of taxonomic groups to sample their tissues. Those investigations provided an
excellent opportunity to confirm the presence of all mammals within the PSA by
recording incidental observations of any mammals or mammal sign seen (e.g., tracks,
scat, browsing). During the course of those investigations, mammals observed within the
PSA and reference areas were recorded, along with the habitat in which they occurred.
When appropriate, other notes were recorded, including activity, interactions with other
species, and general health.
2.3 Mink and Otter Surveys
2.3.1 Snow Tracking
Mammal snow track counts (Halpin 1984, Halpin and Bissonette 1988) were conducted
during the winters of 1998-1999 (hereafter 1999) and 1999-2000 (hereafter 2000) in the
riparian habitats of the PSA as well as in four reference areas (Threemile Pond SWMA,
Washington Mountain Lake in October Mountain State Forest, Muddy Pond in Hinsdale
Flats SWMA, and Ashley Lake). During the 1999 survey, six 500-m (1,650-ft) transects
were established in the PSA so that many of the habitat types (e.g., low-gradient stream,
black ash-red maple-tamarack calcareous seepage swamp, shrub swamp, deep emergent
marsh, shallow emergent marsh, and wet meadow) could be sampled (Map 6-1).
SECTION HI - 6-2
-------
Transects were surveyed after a fresh snowfall for a minimum of two or three snow
events each winter. Mammal tracks were recorded according to species (or lowest
identifiable taxonomic level), and photographs were taken of notable tracks (e.g., large
carnivores, otter, mink). Transect locations were recorded and plotted on a map of the
study site. Ashley Lake and Washington Mountain Lake in the October Mountain State
Forest were surveyed as reference areas during the 1999 winter. The entire shorelines of
these lakes were surveyed rather than establishing transects.
During the 2000 surveys, three transects were established in the PSA and were sampled
in a similar fashion as the 1999 transects (Map 6-1). During that winter, however, mink
and otter scents were placed every 60 m (200 feet) along the transects in an effort to
attract these animals to the actual transects and determine whether or not those species
were present in the PSA (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). In addition, three transects were
established at each of the four reference areas (Maps 6-2, 6-3, 6-4, and 6-5).
Identification of tracks followed Murie (1974), Halfpenny and Biesiot (1986), Forrest
(1988), and Rezendes (1999).
2.3.2 Scent Post Surveys
Scent post station surveys (Conner et al. 1983) were used during the autumns of 1998 and
1999 and concurrent with the winter 2000 snow tracking surveys to determine the
presence of mink and river otter in the PSA (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000). Three transects
were established during the autumn surveys, one each in the upper, middle, and lower
portions of the PSA (Map 6-6). Each transect ran parallel to the shoreline for 500 m
(1650 feet) and consisted of 10 scent post stations placed at 60-m (200-foot) intervals and
0.3 - 1.5 m (1 - 5 feet) from the shoreline. Each scent station consisted of a 1-m (3.3-
foot) diameter circle of moist sand sifted into place, with a wooden dowel smeared with a
commercial lure (Leon Lures® Mink #1 Super All Call and Otter Super All Call) placed
in the center of the circle (Linhart and Knowlton 1975, Phillips 1982). Lures were
alternated between stations so that half of the stations on each transect were baited with
mink lure and half with otter lure (Humphrey and Zinn 1982).
SECTION HI - 6-3
-------
During the winter 2000 surveys, scent posts were placed along the snow tracking
transects in the PSA (Map 6-1) and in each of the four reference areas (Maps 6-2, 6-3, 6z
4, and 6.5). The methods of applying, spacing, and alternating the scents were the same
as the autumn surveys, except that, rather than using sand as a track medium, the snow
surrounding each scent post was examined.
2.3.3 Otter Scat Analysis
River otter scats discovered during the scent post and snow tracking surveys were
collected to analyze prey species. After collection, scats were measured, photographed,
and analyzed for prey composition. Fish scales were removed and placed in envelopes to
dry. The scales were shipped to the Laconia, New Hampshire Office of Fishery
Assistance, USFWS, where they were identified to lowest possible taxonomic group and
aged. Identifications were based upon voucher scales taken during previous fish
sampling events from the Housatonic River, or from other areas. That information was
summarized by the USFWS (Smithwood 2002).
2.4 Small Mammal Surveys
2.4.1 Small Mammal Trapping
Small mammal trapping was conducted in September 1998 and August to September
1999 to verify the occurrence of some small mammal species within the PSA and to
provide tissue samples to the USEPA for PCB analysis (Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000).
Sixteen potential small mammal trapping array sites were flagged in the PSA. Soils at
these sites were then analyzed for PCB concentrations. Three of the sites (IB, 3, and 8)
were chosen as actual trapping locations in 1998 and three (13, 14, and 15) in 1999 (Map
6-7). At each trap site, 100 small mammal traps baited with peanut butter were placed in
an "+" pattern (when possible), with each axis being approximately 150 m (490 feet) in
length (Clough 1987, Lortie and Pelletier 1987). Fifty trap stations spaced at 3-m (10-
foot) intervals were placed on each axis. One trap was placed at each trapping station on
the line and every tenth trapping station was a pit trap, which is more effective for
SECTION HI - 6-4
-------
capturing shrews (Kirkland 1982). Where small mammal runways were apparent, traps
were placed on the runways to increase capture efficiency.
Because pit traps tend to be more efficient at capturing shrews, pit trap arrays were also
used at each trapping site. These arrays consisted of four plastic drift fences 7.6 m (25
feet) long and 0.6 m (2 feet) high, arranged in an "+" formation with a 15-m (50-foot)
gap in the center of the "+". Individual pit traps were installed on both sides and at either
end of each of the four drift fences, for a total of 16 pits per array. The pit trap arrays
were situated near one of the axes of the larger snap trap arrays.
All trap arrays were set on one day and run for five consecutive nights for a total of 580
trap nights (116 traps times 5 nights equals 580 TN) per trap site. Captured individuals
were placed in plastic bags, labeled, and placed on wet ice for transport to the central
processing area.
2.4.2 Placental Scar Analysis
Species, sex, weight (g), total length (mm), tail length (mm), hind foot length (mm), and
ear length (mm) were recorded for each individual small mammal collected. Each
individual was also aged (adult versus juvenile) and inspected for abnormalities or
deformities, which were described on data forms. Length (mm) and width (mm) of the
testes were measured for all males. Each female was checked for milk production and the
uterus was removed for placental scar analysis.
During placental scar analysis, the uterus was placed on a microscope slide and the
number of placental scars and embryos were counted with the aid of a dissecting
microscope. Placental scars were grouped and counted based on the size, shape, and
opacity (Harder and Kirkpatrick 1994). Finally a sketch was prepared and a photograph
was taken of each sample (Figure 6-1 and Figure 6-2).
SECTION HI - 6-5
-------
Figure 6-1 Small mammal uterus.
Uterus showing placental scars and, at left, the ovaries.
Figure 6-2 White-footed mice fetuses.
2.5 Bat Surveys
2.5.1 Field Sampling
Bat species were surveyed by recording their echolocation calls (de Oliveira 1998,
Fenton and Bell 1981). Three transects were established along the riverbank at the
upstream (Reach 5A), central (interface of Reaches 5B and 5C), and downstream (Reach
5C, 6A, 6B, and 6C) sections of the PSA (Map 6-8 through 6-11). Transects ran parallel
to the river for approximately 1 km. Each transect was visited for three consecutive
nights during either late July or August 1999. Surveys began at dusk (ca. 21:30) and
continued for two hours to take advantage of the period of highest bat activity (Crampton
and Barclay 1998). Transects were either surveyed by foot or canoe, depending on water
levels.
During each survey the echolocation noise of bats was recorded using an Anabat n® Bat
Detector (Titley Electronics, Ballina N.S.W., Australia), which transforms ultrasound to
an audible output capable of being recorded by normal-speed tape recorders (de Oliveira
SECTION HI - 6-6
-------
1998). The Anabat detector was set at a division ratio of 16 and microphone sensitivity
of 8-9. A calibration tone of 40 KHz was recorded between each bat call or at 15-second
intervals. Recorded calls were analyzed to identify species using Analook®, a PC sound
analysis software program to determine the number of flyover passes for each species.
2.5.2 Computer Analysis
The recorded bat calls were downloaded into the Anabat V computer software program
using the Anabat V Zero Crossing Analysis Interface Module (ZCAIM®, Titley
Electronics). Each bat call is composed of a rapid series of short pulses, which are
displayed as a string of points. The monitor mode, which uses established criteria to
determine if recordings should be saved as a bat call, was used to download files (Corben
1999). When these criteria were met, the program saved the calls in 15-second
sequences. After the calls were downloaded, they were processed to eliminate
background noise and to separate individual calls, when possible.
The calls were then loaded into Analook® (Titley Electronics), a software program that
extracts call parameters that are used to identify the calls to species. The parameters
examined by Analook® include maximum frequency, minimum frequency, average
frequency, duration of pulse, time between pulses, average slope of plotted pulse, and the
knee of the pulse (the point at which the slope of the pulse changes from sloping to flat).
These call parameters were then compared to known reference calls of northeastern bat
species to determine species. Reference calls were primarily obtained from recordings of
Maine bats, although some call parameters (e.g., call length and minimum, maximum and
characteristic frequencies) from bats recorded in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New
York, and Kentucky were also used.
3.0 Mammal Community Description
Forty-two mammal species were documented in the PSA during the three years of field
surveys. An additional 10 species are likely to occur but were not verified, for a total of
52 species potentially occurring (Attachment C). Many species were quite common and
were observed throughout the PSA in a variety of habitats. These common species tend
SECTION HI - 6-7
-------
to be ones with more cosmopolitan habitat requirements, such as white-footed mice,
meadow voles, short-tailed shrews, little brown bats, cottontails, gray squirrels, raccoons,
red fox, coyotes, and white-tailed deer, all of which were observed in forested and non-
forested habitats as well as riverine, shoreline, wetland, upland, and residential habitats.
Other species that utilize primarily riverine and wetland habitats, such as muskrat and
beaver, were also commonly seen.
Forested communities, such as red maple swamp, black ash-red maple-tamarack
calcareous seepage swamp, transitional floodplain forest, and high-terrace floodplain
forest, supported the greatest number of species. Agricultural and residential habitats had
few recorded species, which is reflective of survey effort but also of the reduced habitat
value associated with periodically disturbed habitats. No surveys were conducted in
these habitat types; all records were incidental observations that occurred during travel to
and from other locations. Several of the species not observed in the PSA, such as the
snowshoe hare and short-tailed weasel, were common in nearby reference areas. Other
species not recorded, such as the Indiana bat and southern bog lemming, are state listed
and considered rare throughout the region (see Section 4.0).
3.1 Piscivorous Mammals
Two piscivorous mammals, river otter and mink, occur very infrequently in the PSA.
Mink were observed during 1999 and 2000 surveys. River otter sign was recorded in the
PSA only during February and March 2000. River otters, however, were much more
common in reference areas, having been recorded during all three years of study.
Piscivorous mammals are of special interest because of their diet and habitat usage. The
aquatic nature of these mammals, river otters being almost entirely aquatic and mink
being semi-aquatic, results in these species having greater exposure to water-borne
contaminants than most other mammals. The diets of mink and river otters consist
largely of aquatic organisms (fish, crayfish, amphibians, muskrat, and waterfowl),
making them some of the highest trophic level aquatic predators in the PSA and thus
increasing the potential of these species to bioaccumulate high levels of environmental
contaminants. PCB concentrations in fish tissue have been shown to be positively
SECTION HI - 6-8
-------
correlated with levels of PCBs in mustelid species (Foley et al. 1988). Many studies
have shown that the concentrations of PCBs in wild mink accumulate to levels that are
harmful in experimental animals (Auerlich et al. 1971, Bleavins et al. 1980, Foley et al.
1988, Heaton et al. 1995, Wren et al. 1987). Less is known about the accumulation of
PCBs and their effects in river otters. Concentrations of PCBs have been reported to be
higher in river otters than in mink when these animals were collected from the same
location (Foley et al. 1988); however, mink are thought to be more sensitive to PCBs
(Heaton et al. 1995). Organ (1989) found that otters from the Housatonic River
watershed had the highest level of PCBs of any otters in Massachusetts.
3.1.1 River Otter
Trapping data from the MDFW show that river otters have been present in the
Housatonic River watershed for nearly every year with available data (1977-1999) (S.
Langlois, MDFW, personal communication). However, it is not known if these
individuals were captured from the Housatonic River or other bodies of water within the
watershed. River otters were not recorded in the PSA during 1998 or 1999 snow tracking
or scent post surveys.
River otter tracks, slides, and scats were observed in the PSA during February 2000
winter track and scent post surveys. One set of slides, tracks, and scat occurred
approximately 485 km south of the confluence of the East and West Branches of the
Housatonic River. Scats were observed one month later and appeared old, having likely
been buried under the snow during earlier visits. They consisted primarily of fish scales
and bones, with some containing small amounts of crayfish exoskeletons. Another set of
slides, tracks, and scat was observed further downstream, just north of New Lenox Road
during the winter 2000 snow tracking and scent post surveys (Figure 6-3 and Figure 6-4).
The individual appeared to have been attracted by the lure and deposited its scat and
scent markings.
SECTION HI - 6-9
-------
Figure 6-3 River otter forefoot track.
J
Figure 6-4 River otter tracks.
River otter tracks are characterized by having five toes on both front
and hind feet, prominent claw marks, circular front feet, hind feet 1.5-
2.5 times as long as wide, and generally large size.
An additional river otter scat was collected adjacent to Woodland Road, approximately
800 m (0.5 mile) downstream of the Yokum Brook confluence. This scat was fresh at the
time of collection on 22 March 2000, and consisted of fish scales and crayfish fragments.
This was an incidental observation, not the direct result of snow tracking or scent post
surveys.
River otters were commonly observed at all four of the reference areas. In 1998, a group
of three otters were observed at Threemile Pond. In 1999, river otter sign was seen at
Ashley Lake and Washington Mountain Lake. In 2000, they were present at all four
reference areas.
SECTION III -6-10
-------
Ten otter scat samples were collected, seven from the PSA and three from Muddy Pond
at the Hinsdale Flats SWMA reference area. Scats were composed of primarily fish
scales and bones (Figure 6-5). Five of these scats contained small amounts of crayfish
exoskeleton as well; total crayfish composition never exceeded 20 percent of the scat
volume. These results are similar to what was expected, based on available literature.
Figure 6-5 River otter scat.
Composed of crayfish exoskeleton and fish scales
Though river otter diet consists primarily of fish, other prey, including crayfish,
amphibians, turtles, and insects are also taken. Birds, especially young waterfowl, and
small mammals are occasionally taken, and small amounts of plant material, such as
blueberries and rose hips, are eaten (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Liers (1951)
observed free-ranging captive river otters digging into the mud to remove frogs and
turtles from hibernacula. River otters have been shown to prefer foraging in shallow
water and eating primarily slow-moving, shallow-dwelling fish, such as chubs, suckers,
catfish, daces, darters, and schooling fish such as bluegill and other sunfish (Whitaker
and Hamilton 1998, Sheldon and Toll 1964). When studying river otters in the
Adirondacks, Hamilton (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998) found fish in 70 percent of their
stomachs but found only 5 percent were trout.
River otter habitat is often associated with beaver activity; beaver ponds provide an
abundant supply of prey, stable water levels, den sites, and escape cover (Newman and
Griffin 1994). Along with beaver activity, vertical banks, rock formations, and
SECTION III -6-11
-------
backwater sloughs have been shown to be associated with denning sites for river otters.
Points of land, tributary streams, fallen logs, logjams, conifer trees, and pools have all
been correlated with river otter latrines (Sheldon and Toll 1964, Dubuc et al. 1990,
Newman 1990, Swimleye^a/. 1998).
The Housatonic River in the PSA offers an abundance of habitats that fit these
characteristics. However, otter sign was very infrequent, much lower occurrence than
what would be expected considering the available habitats and food resources. For
example, despite hundreds of hours conducting track and scent post surveys for otters and
thousands of hours of field time spent characterizing the ecological communities in the
PSA, very few otter or signs of otter were observed. Conversely, despite substantially
fewer hours spent at these areas, otters were observed at each reference area. River otters
are highly mobile and maintain territories within their home ranges. Home ranges may
be quite large, up to 8.5 km2 (22 sq mi), and extend along nearly 80 km (50 mi) of
waterway shoreline (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). Considering this, it is possible that
the PSA lies within a river otter home range but is not a highly used portion of it (i.e., not
within a maintained territory inside the home range).
3.1.2 Mink
Mink occur in a variety of wetland habitats, but their populations are greatest in marshes
(Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Mink typically forage within sight of open water,
although when waterbodies are iced over, mink will often forage further inland (Kurta
1995). This is consistent with mink observation in the PSA, which occurred either in
emergent marsh habitat or forested communities adjacent to the river and lake shorelines.
Mink tracks (Figure 6-6) and scat were observed at several locations in the PSA during
snow tracking surveys. Tracks were distributed at each end of the PSA, occurring near
the confluence of the East and West Branch Housatonic River and near Willow Creek; no
observations occurred in the middle portions. One set of tracks near the confluence
crossed tracks several times before blood-stained snow suggested that the mink had killed
a cottontail. Tracks near Willow Creek were associated with a hole in the ice that
accessed the impounded portion of the creek.
SECTION m - 6-12
-------
Figure 6-6 Mink tracks.
Side by side placement, five toes, and inter-digital, asymmetrical V-
shaped pad are characteristic of the mustelid family.
During the fall 1999 scent post survey, an additional set of mustelid tracks and scat were
observed south of the confluence of the East and West Branch Housatonic River. Due to
sexual dimorphism among mustelid species, male long-tailed weasel and female mink
overlap in size. Therefore, tracks alone cannot always distinguish between these species.
The size of the observed tracks fell within the overlap of these two species and could not
be positively identified. Scat found at this location was composed of fragments of bones
and fur from a small mammal (Figure 6-7).
¦M :
Figure 6-7 Mustelid scat.
Narrow, looped cords with tapered ends and dark brown coloration is
characteristic of scats from the mustelid family.
Other mink observations consisted of tracks recorded at the October Mountain State
Forest and Ashley Lake reference areas during 1999 and 2000 surveys. Mink tracks were
SECTION III - 6-13
-------
observed traversing the northwest cove of Ashley Lake on 11 March 1999. On 23
February 2000, mink tracks were observed on the western shoreline of Washington
Mountain Lake near where a small brook emerges from the lake and meanders through
shallow emergent marsh and wet meadow habitat.
Mink diet varies considerably with prey availability, but it consists largely of fish,
crayfish, frogs, small mammals, and birds. Melquist et al. (1981) found that fish, mostly
cyprinids 7 - 12 cm (2.8 - 4.7 inches) long, made up 59 percent of the mink's diet in
Idaho. In prairie marshes of North Dakota, birds (mostly waterfowl), mammals,
amphibians, and reptiles accounted for 78, 19, 2, and 1 percent of the mink's diet
respectively, with the amount of prey taken closely paralleling prey availability
(Eberhardt and Sargeant 1977). Other studies have also found waterfowl to be an
important component of the mink's diet during the spring and early summer when young
waterfowl are abundant (Melquist et al. 1981, Talent et al. 1983). Crayfish have been
found to be a large component of the mink's diet in areas where they are abundant
(Burgess 1978, Melquist et al. 1981, Allen 1986). During the winter, mammals are the
primary food source for mink. In areas where muskrat are abundant, male mink may feed
heavily on them (Allen 1986). Female mink are smaller and thus tend to take smaller
mammals such as mice, voles, and young rabbits (Kurta 1995, and Whitaker and
Hamilton 1998).
Mink have variable home range sizes, often with an average of 3.2 - 4.8 km (2-3 mi) in
diameter (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). Linear distances along shorelines have been
reported to be from 1.6 - 3.6 mink per mile of shoreline (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001).
This is greater than what was observed within the PSA. It appears that mink densities
within the PSA are low, and that the observations that did occur may have been the result
of individuals passing through the area from adjacent sites.
3.2 Omnivorous and Carnivorous Mammals
A wide variety of omnivorous and carnivorous mammals occur in the PSA. Coyote and
fox were the most common carnivores, being recorded in nearly every habitat type in the
PSA. Other carnivorous mammals observed in the PSA include bobcats, fishers, and
SECTION m - 6-14
-------
long-tailed weasels. Omnivorous mammals were one of the most abundant groups of
mammals found in the PSA. Common omnivores observed include mice, raccoons,
striped skunks, Virginia opossums, and black bears.
3.2.1 Large
Coyotes were the most common large carnivore found in the PSA. Coyotes have very
broad habitat requirements and occupy a variety of habitats from open fields and
agricultural lands to forested communities. Within the PSA coyotes were observed in
every habitat type except for those consisting of open or deep water and spruce fir-
northern hardwood forests. Lack of coyote observations inspruce fir-northern hardwood
forests is likely due to the rarity of this habitat type within the PSA rather than lack of use
by coyotes. In winter, coyotes more readily used the river and marsh communities for
travel and hunting. Coyotes prey upon a variety of mammals, birds, herpetiles, and
insects, with small mammals and rabbits being the most important food sources.
Seasonally, their diet can be quite omnivorous, as they often eat berries in summer and
early fall. Larger game, such as deer, is occasionally taken when coyotes are hunting
cooperatively in packs. Coyote scats were commonly observed in the PSA, and they
consisted of small mammals, squirrel, cottontail, and white-tailed deer fur and bones.
Scats collected near the Pittsfield WWTF contained large amounts of crow feathers and
pieces of plastic and other trash.
Coyotes were also common at all four reference areas. Coyotes were especially abundant
at Washington Mountain Lake in the October Mountain State Forest and Threemile Pond
SWMA reference areas, where their tracks were often seen intermingled with those of
white-tailed deer.
Red foxes were the next most common carnivore observed in the PSA. Both red foxes
and gray foxes can occupy a variety of habitats, but the red fox prefers open areas such as
agricultural land and forest edges while the gray fox is more common in forested areas.
Within the PSA, red foxes were recorded in many habitat types (Attachment C). While
being largely carnivorous, their diet may be more omnivorous based upon the seasonal
availability of insects, fruits, and nuts. Fox scat collected from the PSA contained small
SECTION HI-6-15
-------
mammal bones and fur and bird feathers. Foxes form small family units during breeding
season but, unlike coyotes, remain solitary for the majority of the year. They vigorously
defend small territories averaging 100 ha. Young foxes are taken by a variety of other
carnivores and coyotes will kill adults, but otherwise they have few natural enemies.
Bobcats were observed in the PSA but were not common. Tracks and two possible dens
were observed, in the vicinity of the Pittsfield WWTF. Both den sites were located near
the WWTF sludge dump: one den in an open field that appeared to be abandoned and the
other in the side of a dirt mound at the WWTF sludge dump. This second den appeared
to have several entrances and there were recent tracks leading from the den and
throughout the vicinity. Bobcat tracks were also observed on the river's edge in this area
during early spring 1999 (Figure 6-8). A bobcat was sighted in Great Barrington on the
Baish Hill Road Bridge in the spring of 1999, near the Threemile Pond SWMA reference
area.
Figure 6-8 Bobcat tracks.
Four toes, round shape, two anterior and three posterior lobes on heel
pad, and large size characterize bobcat tracks.
Terrestrial mustelid species, including the short-tailed weasel, long-tailed weasel, and
fisher, were found in the PSA and, more commonly, in the reference areas. Fisher signs
were found in the southern section of the PSA during both winters of snow tracking
surveys. Long-tailed weasels were found near the confluence of the East and West
Branch Housatonic River and six (an adult female and five young) were inadvertently
caught in pit traps placed along a spit shallow emergent marsh vegetation in June 1999.
SECTION III - 6-16
-------
In addition, a female long-tailed weasel was captured at 46-VP-5 in June 1999. Short-
tailed weasels were not recorded in the PSA, but they were common at the Ashley Lake,
Threemile Pond SWMA, and Hinsdale Flats SWMA reference areas.
These mustelid species are all carnivores, preying upon a variety of small mammals. The
smaller weasel species rely primarily upon mice, voles, shrews, squirrels, rabbits, and
occasionally insects, birds, and amphibians. Fishers also take small mammals, but their
diet also contains larger prey items such as snowshoe hares, porcupines, raccoons, and
even deer. Fishers will also consume nuts, seeds, and fruits. Hawks, owls, and other
carnivorous mammals will prey upon the weasels, but fishers have few natural enemies.
Populations of these mustelids have been reduced due to human trapping for the fur trade,
but habitat protection and stricter trapping laws have allowed populations to increase in
recent years (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998).
Black bears are the largest omnivore found in the study area, typically weighing 50 - 227
kg (110 - 500 pounds), with males being larger than females (Whitaker and Hamilton
1998). Black bears use a variety of habitat types, but they were observed predominately
in forested habitats in the PSA (Attachment C). They were most common in the southern
part of the PSA, although one individual was observed near the confluence of the East
and West Branch Housatonic River. Other observations occurred near Yokum Brook, in
a shallow emergent marsh and shrub swamp community south of New Lenox Road, in
the shrub swamp and rich mesic forest adjacent to Woodland Road, crossing East New
Lenox Road into an open field scattered with apple trees, and on the railroad tracks just
south of the New Lenox Sportsman Club. A number of black bears (Figure 6-9),
including a mother and three cubs, were seen crossing Woodland Road. Tracks of an
additional adult and cub were seen in the October Mountain State Forest reference area.
SECTION HI-6-17
-------
Figure 6-9 Black bear.
Black bears once occurred throughout the eastern United States but are now limited
primarily to secluded northern forests of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and New
York, and south along the Appalachian Mountains into Georgia. Though carnivorous,
bears are largely omnivorous, with their diet depending upon seasonal and regional food
availability. They feed on buds, grasses, and forbs in the spring, and fruit and mast
during the summer and fall. Insects—such as ants, wasps, bees, beetles, and their
larvae—make up the largest portion of animal matter in the black bear's diet. Small
mammals and fish are occasionally eaten and carrion is readily consumed (Whitaker and
Hamilton 1998).
3.2.2 Small
The Virginia opossum, raccoon, and striped skunk are all common in the PSA. While all
three have teeth designed for carnivory, the feeding habits of these species is
opportunistic and consists of a wide range of plant and animal material.
The raccoon was the most abundant of these omnivores observed in the PSA. Raccoons
occur throughout the United States, with the exception of the desert communities of the
southwest, and are common to abundant throughout their range. They are found in forest
communities interspersed with open fields and watercourses. Populations are often high
in wetland communities, near streams, pools, and lakeshores, where they forage for
crayfish, amphibians, and fish. Densities vary depending upon suitability of available
SECTION III - 6-18
-------
habitat ranging from one raccoon per 1.8 ha (4.4 acres) in suburban woodlands to one per
28 ha (68.4 acres) in agricultural areas (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001).
Within the study area, raccoons were found in most of the wetland habitats, as well as
agricultural and residential areas. Their tracks were common on the point bars and mud
flats along the river and near many of the vernal pools. Raccoons are opportunistic
feeders, consuming a wide variety of animal matter, vegetation, seeds, and berries
depending upon availability. Crayfish, earthworms, amphibians, turtle eggs and young,
bird eggs (especially those of cavity nesting waterfowl such as wood ducks) and carrion
are common animal food types (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). In agricultural areas,
large amounts of corn, wheat, and other grains are consumed. Raccoons have adapted
well to humans and are common in urban parks and residential areas, where they often
become nuisances feeding on garbage. Raccoon are dormant throughout the winter but
do not enter true hibernation. They rely mainly on fat stores throughout the winter, but
they will emerge to forage during periods of mild weather.
Striped skunks are less common in the PSA, being observed primarily in terrestrial
habitats and high-terrace floodplain forest communities. Striped skunks are common
throughout the eastern United States (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). They can occur in a
variety of habitats but prefer woodlands, meadows, and agricultural areas. Like the
raccoon, striped skunks have adapted well to human presence and are often found in
residential areas and trash dumps. Stripped skunks are omnivorous, their diet typically
containing insects, rodents, bird eggs, carrion, garbage, seeds, fruits, and nuts. During
the spring and summer, insects are the most important prey items, making up as much as
43 percent of the diet (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). Fruits, grains, and nuts become
more important food items in the fall and winter. Skunks are mostly inactive during
winter, relying on fat stores to meet their energy needs, which are reduced by communal
denning, lowered body temperatures, and decreased activity. The striped skunk's defense
of spraying predators with a mephitic musk deters most attacks. However, great horn
owls commonly feed on skunks, and other predators such as coyotes, bobcats, and foxes
will take skunks when under food stress.
SECTION HI- 6-19
-------
Virginia opossums were the least common of the small omnivores observed in the PSA.
They were recorded in only two habitats: transitional floodplain forests and residential
areas. Virginia opossums are somewhat uncommon in the New England region, as they
reach their northern limit here. Virginia opossums can occur in a variety of habitats from
forests to urban areas, and are often common in wet woods and swamps. Like raccoons
and skunks, Virginia opossums are opportunistic feeders, eating a wide variety of plant
and animal matter. They are also common in urban and residential areas, where they feed
on garbage and are often killed by dogs and automobiles. Natural enemies include
raptors, especially great horned owls, snakes, coyotes, bobcats, foxes, and raccoons.
3.3 Insectivorous Mammals
3.3.1 Bats
The big brown bat, silver-haired bat, red bat, hoary bat, eastern pipistrelle, and northern
myotis occur within the PSA and were recorded during bat surveys. The little brown bat
also occurs, but its echolocation calls are difficult to distinguish from small-footed myotis
and Indiana bat. It was assumed, however, that most calls exhibiting characteristics of
these three species were from little brown bats (see discussion below).
Echolocation recordings cannot give an exact number of individuals of each species
present, as it is possible that one individual could be recorded multiple times. They can,
however, give an estimation of relative abundance.
Table 6-1 identifies the total and relative abundance of each species recorded during
surveys. As noted above, there is a large amount of overlap between the call
characteristics of the little brown bat, small-footed myotis, and Indiana bat, making it
extremely difficult to distinguish between these Myotis species using echolocation.
When recording the results, these three species were all labeled as Myotis sp. In light of
the fact that the little brown bat is typically the most abundant component of the bat
community in the Northeast (Krusic et al. 1996, Zimmerman and Glanz 2000), it is likely
that the majority of these calls in the PSA were of little brown bat. Additionally, the
flight and feeding behavior of most of the bats observed during the field survey was
SECTION HI - 6-20
-------
typical of the little brown bat. A small number of Myotis sp. calls, however, had
parameters that suggested small-footed myotis rather than little brown bats or Indiana
bats. Small-footed myotis, a species of Special Concern in Massachusetts (see Section
4.0), cannot be confirmed without having animals in hand for visual identification.
Table 6-1 1999 bat survey results.
Common Name
Transect 1
Transect 2
Transect 3
Total # of
calls
Relative
Abundance
Night 1
Night 2
Night 3
Night 1
Night 2
Night 3
Night 1
Night 2
Night 3
Big Brown bat
41
0
0
14
12
9
2
26
8
112
6%
Eastern Red bat
1
3
6
2
9
2
25
13
0
61
3%
Hoary bat
4
0
0
11
8
0
1
2
1
27
1%
Silver-haired bat
4
4
0
35
23
23
19
20
30
158
9%
Myotis sp. *
38
134
125
155
257
241
250
108
113
1421
79%
Northern myotis
0
1
1
0
3
1
12
0
0
18
1%
Eastern pipistrelle
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
3
0
10
1%
Total # of calls
88
143
132
217
312
276
315
172
152
1807
Mean # of calls
121
268
213
*May include little brown bat, small-footed myotis, or Indiana bat
Unknown Myotis sp. bats accounted for 79 percent of all echolocations recorded, and it is
likely that the little brown bat made up the majority of those recordings. This may be due
in part to their general abundance in the New England region and their preference to feed
over and close to the water surface (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Both of these
characteristics made them more likely to be recorded during the survey. During bat
SECTION HI - 6-21
-------
surveys, these small bat were often seen feeding in large swarms directly above the river
channel. They were most common near New Lenox Road, where the river is surrounded
by open wet meadows, and over open backwaters and pools throughout the PSA. Little
brown bats feed on a variety of small insects, with midges (Diptera, Chironomidea) being
the staple food source. Males consume about 1.22 grams of food a day and females
consume 0.93 grams (Coutts et al. 1973). After evening feeding, these bats return to
communal roost sites where elevated temperatures aid in digestion and energy
conservation. Roost sites are typically in man-made structures such as houses, barns and
bridges, but tree cavities and caves are also used when available.
Little brown bats are active from April to October, after which they migrate to their
hibernacula, traveling as mush as 300 km from their summer habitat. These bats
hibernate in small clusters in caves, abandoned mines, and less commonly man-made
structures. Most bat species have seen rapid declines in their number in recent years due
to insecticide poisoning, control measures in buildings, disturbance in wintering colonies,
and general habitat loss. Little brown bats and big brown bats, however, have remained
abundant and even increased their populations in some areas. The success of these two
species is likely due to their adaptability to human presence and their reliance upon man-
made structures for roosting sites. Other studies conducted in Maine, New Hampshire,
and Massachusetts found little brown bats to be the most abundant species present
(Krusic et al. 1996, Buresch 1999, Zimmerman and Glanz 2000).
The silver-haired bat was the next most abundant species recorded. They also tend to fly
near the ground and feed primarily over water. Silver-haired bats are generally
uncommon in New England. Recent studies have recorded their presence, especially
during fall migration when they travel from their summer habitat of northern hardwood
and mixedwood forests to winter hibernacula in the southern United States, but generally
report low numbers of individuals (Krusic et al. 1996, Buresch 1999). The PSA offers
prime habitat for these bats, as they prefer to feed over watercourses on emerging aquatic
insects (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). Silver-haired bats roost in tree cavities, under
loose bark, and in furrowed bark folds, preferring willow, maple, and ash (Kurta 1995).
The abundance of large silver maples with optimal roost sites in close proximity to
SECTION HI - 6-22
-------
preferred feeding habitat may explain why silver-haired bats are relatively common in the
PSA.
The big brown bat was the third most commonly recorded bat during this survey. Big
brown bats are most abundant in agricultural and residential areas, where they feed over
open fields, among scattered trees, along tree-lined streets, and around city street lights
(DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). Since the bat survey was restricted to the river course,
the true abundance of this species in the area may be higher. Big brown bats were most
commonly recorded near the upstream-end of the PSA, where the river flows close to
residential areas. Big brown bats are beetle specialists but will consume a wide variety of
insects. Big brown bats, like the little brown bats, roost in man-made structures but are
seldom found with little brown bats, as they prefer cooler roost sites. These bats, unlike
most species, do not migrate south to hibernate. Big brown bats seldom travel more than
80 km to reach winter hibernacula and will often hibernate in buildings within close
proximity to their summer roost sites (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001, Kurta 1995). Big
brown bats are active for more of the year (March to November) than any other bat in the
study area and are occasionally seen during mild periods throughout the winter.
Although the red bat is typically uncommon in the state, it was routinely detected during
this survey. The PSA provides optimal habitat for both feeding and roosting locations.
Red bats establish feeding territories, preferably over still water or along forest edges,
within 1.2 km (.75 mi) from roost sites (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). They feed on a
wide variety of insects but prefer moths. Roost sites are selected in dense foliage of
hardwood trees or large shrubs, such as elm, maple, cherry, and walnut, with shade above
and to the side, but open below. Roost sites will differ day to day but are often in close
proximity to one another. In the fall, red bats migrate south in small groups to winter
hibernacula.
The hoary bat, eastern pipistrelle, and northern myotis were each recorded in low
numbers in the survey. Low numbers of the hoary bat and eastern pipistrelle were
expected, as they are considered uncommon in northeastern United States. Hoary bats
are forest-dwelling bats with life histories similar to the red bat, except that they more
commonly roost in coniferous trees. The echolocation calls of northern myotis have low
SECTION HI - 6-23
-------
amplitude, making this species less detectable with the Anabat system (Krusic el al.
1996). This may account to some extent for the low number of recordings.
Bats in general have few predators, owls and hawks being the most common predators.
Bats are most vulnerable in their roosts where snakes, predaceous birds (especially blue
jays), and mammals (especially cats and raccoons) will prey upon them. Highest
mortality rates are among the young, and falling from maternity sites is the greatest cause
of death for young. Poisoning from insecticide ingestion is a common cause of mortality
(Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Bats are also at risk of bioaccumulating environmental
contaminants, such as PCB and DDE, which reduce reproductive success and cause
tremoring and mortality (Clark and Lamont 1976, Clark and Stafford 1981, Clark 1978).
Prolonged tremoring, which is characteristic of organochlorine poisoning, can be
especially lethal to bats because it can reduce fat stores needed to survive hibernation
(Clark and Stafford 1981). Any disturbance during hibernation uses fat stores and
reduces survival. Many bat populations have been reduced due to repeated disturbances
from human recreation in caves, and some species (i.e., Indiana bat) that have large
percentages of their entire population hibernating in only a few caves are at greatest risk
due to this type of disturbance (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998).
3.3.2 Shrews
Masked shrews, smoky shrews, northern short-tailed shrews, and northern water shrews
all occur in the PSA (Attachment C). Short-tailed shrews were the most abundant shrew
in the PSA and made up 14 percent and 26 percent of small mammal captures in 1998
and 1999, respectively (see Table 6-2 in Section 3.4.2 below). They were also routinely
captured in pit traps during wood frog and leopard frog studies. Masked shrews were
also common but in smaller numbers than the short-tailed shrews. Smoky shrews were
less common than the masked and short-tailed shrews; only a few were captured in pit
traps during wood frog and leopard frog studies. The northern water shrew is rare,
having been observed only once in the PSA.
The northern short-tail shrew is a large shrew commonly found in a wide variety of
habitat types from open meadows to forests throughout the northeastern United States,
SECTION HI - 6-24
-------
although its primary habitat requirement is cool, moist soil (Whitaker and Hamilton
1998). Within the PSA they can be found in most forested, shrub swamp, and wet
meadows communities. Short-tailed shrews feed primarily on invertebrates, with
earthworms as the most important food, followed by slugs and snails (DeGraaf and
Yamasaki 2001). Amphibians, mice, and birds are occasionally eaten. The short-tailed
shrew consumes some plant material—such as roots, nuts, berries, and fungi—especially
during the winter when caches of such food help to conserve energy. Populations of this
shrew show high annual variation, with densities ranging from 1.6 to 121 individuals per
hectare but averaging 2.5 (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998, DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001).
Northern short-tailed shrews typically breed after their first year and have three litters a
year ranging in size from one to seven young (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Adult
northern short-tailed shrews captured in the PSA had lengths ranging from 114 - 137 mm
and weights from 18.3 - 32.9 grams. Seventeen females were captured during trapping
efforts, but only seven of these showed signs of breeding (i.e., placental scars, embryos,
lactation).
The masked shrew was commonly encountered during trapping events but in low
numbers. This tiny shrew is the smallest mammal occurring in the PSA. Individuals
captured during small mammal surveys ranged from 92 - 107 mm long and weighted
only 3.4 - 3.7 grams. The masked shrew occupies habitats ranging from moist, grassy
fields to dense boreal forests. It can be found in most of the wetland and terrestrial
habitat types within the PSA. Masked shrews feed on small insects, mollusks, annelids,
and the carrion of larger animals. Ants often make up a large portion of their diet, as do
beetle larvae, slugs, snails, and spiders (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Masked shrews
have home ranges of 405 m2 (0.10 acres) per individual and densities of 22 individuals
per hectare with large annual variation (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). Masked shrews
reach sexual maturity at four months, after which they have up to three liters, averaging
seven in size, each year. Two breeding female masked shrews were captured in the PSA.
One individual had two fetuses and the other displayed uterine vascularization indicative
of early pregnancy, but fetuses were not yet visible.
SECTION HI - 6-25
-------
Smokey shrews were uncommon in the PSA, although they are generally common
throughout New England. This species prefers shady, damp northern forests with dense
ground cover and an abundance of moss-covered logs and boulders. It can, however, be
found in a variety of habitats such as bogs, swamps, talus slopes, and stream banks.
Within the PSA, smoky shrews were found only in red maple swamp communities.
Smoky shrews feed on small leaf litter invertebrates, earthworms, and small salamanders.
Population densities of 12 - 35 per hectare are most common, but densities as high as 143
per hectare have been reported (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998).
Only one northern water shrew was observed in the PSA. This was a dead individual
observed washed up on the shoreline of the river in the southern part of the PSA. The
northern water shrew is a species of conservation concern in Massachusetts and is
uncommon throughout New England (see Section 4.0). The northern water shrew occurs
in wet habitats, especially grass-sedge marshes and shrub communities along streams. It
is most common in swift-flowing, coldwater mountain streams with boulders, woody
debris, and tree roots to provide cover. Like all shrews, the northern water shrew is
insectivorous, with stonefly, mayfly, and caddisfly larvae making up the largest part of its
diet. It also consumes a variety of other invertebrates, small fish, and amphibians.
3.3.3 Moles
Two moles, eastern and star-nosed moles, were documented in the PSA, and an
additional species, the hairy-tailed mole, potentially occurs there. The star-nosed mole
was the most common mole species found in the PSA. This mole prefers wet areas and is
an adept swimmer, with its burrows often leading directly into a stream or pool. Within
the PSA, star-nosed moles were commonly found utilizing woodland vernal pools.
The eastern mole is common throughout the Atlantic coastal plain and central United
States in well-drained, open grasslands. Within the PSA, an individual was recorded in
the transitional floodplain forest community north of New Lenox Road. This mole may
be more common in the PSA, but it is expected to occur mostly in upland, agricultural,
and residential areas that were not surveyed. The hairy-tailed mole prefers well-drained
soils and can be found primarily in forests but also in open grasslands that support some
SECTION HI - 6-26
-------
shrubs. It was not observed in the PSA, although one was observed just north of the
Hinsdale Flats SWMA reference area.
Earthworms are the most important food source for all of the moles. Other insects such
as beetles, their larvae, snails, slugs, centipedes, millipedes, ants, and spiders are taken in
smaller quantities. Plant matter will occasionally be consumed, and the eastern mole in
particular may feed heavily on vegetable matter at times. The star-nosed mole will also
forage under water and take aquatic insects, mollusks, crustaceans, and occasional fish.
3.4 Herbivorous Mammals
3.4.1 Large Herbivores
White-tailed deer and moose are the only large herbivores found in the PSA. White-
tailed deer were found to be abundant throughout the PSA. Deer are browsers that feed
on grasses, forbs, and new leaves of woody plants during the summer. They feed heavily
on acorns, beechnuts, and other mast as these foods become available. During the winter
they feed on buds and twigs of woody plants.
Moose were found primarily in the October Mountain State Forest reference area. Moose
are uncommon in Berkshire County, but recent trends indicate an increasing population
(Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Moose are also browsers, although they tend to rely
more upon trees and shrubs during the spring and summer than do deer. They are
commonly found in lakes and ponds during the spring and early summer, where they feed
on the aquatic vegetation.
3.4.2 Small Herbivores
Small terrestrial herbivores occurring in the PSA include snowshoe hares, cottontails,
squirrels, eastern chipmunks, woodchucks, porcupines, mice, voles, and southern bog
lemmings. A total of 221 small mammals representing 5 species and 121 small mammals
representing 6 species were captured during 1998 and 1999, respectively (Table 6-2).
White-footed mice were by far the most abundant, making up 64 percent and 62 percent
of all captures. In addition to small mammal trapping, numerous small mammals were
SECTION HI - 6-27
-------
captured in pitfall traps installed for amphibian studies, and tracks of many of these
species were commonly observed during snow tracking and scent post station surveys.
Table 6-2 1998 and 1999 small mammal trapping results.
Common Name
1998 Locations
1999 Locations
IB
3
8
Totals
%
13
14
15
Totals
%
white-footed mouse
45
82
14
141
63.80
23
41
12
76
62.30
northern short-tailed
shrew
24
5
3
32
14.48
10
18
4
32
26.23
meadow jumping mouse
0
0
0
0
0.00
1
6
0
7
5.74
meadow vole
13
24
2
39
17.65
1
0
0
1
0.82
southern red-backed vole
0
0
6
6
2.71
0
1
0
1
0.82
masked shrew
0
1
2
3
1.36
0
0
5
5
4.10
Totals
82
112
27
221
35
66
21
122
White-footed mice inhabit a wide variety of habitats, including forest edges, brushy
areas, hedgerows, and they occasionally venture into open grassland (DeGraaf and
Yamasaki 2001). They were captured at all of the small mammal trapping locations and
at numerous vernal pools, and were observed at all locations during snow tracking
surveys. Woodland jumping mice typically occur in variety of forest habitats from
spruce/fir to northern hardwoods. They are most commonly found in open, moist forests
and are often found near streams (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Within the PSA,
woodland jumping mice were observed in red maple swamp, black ash-red maple-
tamarack calcareous seepage swamp, transitional floodplain forest, and high-terrace
SECTION HI - 6-28
-------
floodplain forest communities. Meadow jumping mice typically occur in cultural
grassland communities. Grassy clearings in forested regions may support small numbers
of these species and they are often found in early successional forests (Whitaker and
Hamilton 1998). Within the PSA they were observed in red maple swamp and
transitional floodplain forest communities. Norway rats, first introduced to the United
States in the late 1700's, are now abundant in residential and agricultural areas
throughout the country. This species was captured during amphibian pit-trapping in red
maple swamp and transitional floodplain forest communities, primarily at locations in
proximity to residential areas.
While traditionally believed to be herbivores, the diets of mice vary greatly depending
upon seasonal and regional availability of food sources and can include a high percentage
of animal matter. Large amounts of insects (primarily ground beetles, caterpillars,
cutworms, snails, and centipedes) are taken during the spring and summer. As the season
progresses, the diet of these mammals shifts more towards seeds, nuts, berries, and
fungus. White-footed mice are active year-round and often cache large amounts of seeds
and nuts to last throughout the winter.
Meadow voles were also found to be abundant in the PSA and were routinely captured
during small mammal trapping events as well as during wood frog and leopard frog
studies. Adult meadow voles captured in the PSA ranged in length from 112 - 137 mm
and in weight from 16.4 - 26.7 grams. Meadow voles inhabit wet meadows, regenerating
pastures with shrub colonies, and wet forest openings. Within the PSA they were found
in a variety of emergent and forested wetland communities (Attachment C). Meadow
voles eat large quantities of green vegetation—predominately grasses, sedges, and their
seeds, fleshy rootstocks, and bark—with amounts often exceeding the animal's weight in
a 24-hour period. They also re-ingest their feces to extract the vitamins and nutrients
broken down in the later stages of digestion (i.e., they are coprophagic). Meadow voles
are among the most prolific small mammals in the eastern United States. A single female
can produce as many as 17 litters in a year, with each litter containing 1-11 young
(Whitaker and Hamilton 1998).
SECTION HI - 6-29
-------
Southern red-backed voles are less common than the meadow voles in the PSA, having
been captured only in the red maple and shrub swamp at Trapsite 8 (Map 6-7). Southern
red-backed voles are a forest species and are seldom found in open areas. These voles
feed on a variety of nuts, seeds, berries, green vegetation, roots, and fungi, depending
upon seasonal availability. They store large amount of seeds and nuts to provide food in
the winter, as they are active year-round.
All five members of the squirrel family—eastern chipmunks, red squirrels, gray squirrels,
northern flying squirrels, and southern flying squirrels—that could potentially occur in
the PSA were observed there. The eastern gray squirrel (Figure 6-10) was the most
abundant squirrel, being seen in almost every forested habitat in the PSA. These squirrels
are abundant in the eastern United States in a variety of forested and residential habitats.
Some melanistic gray squirrels were occasionally observed in the PSA. These
individuals have black fur on their sides and backs, with dark brown fur on their
undersides. All five of the squirrels are forest-dwelling species, as trees are needed for
nesting and food. The chipmunk is an exception to this, requiring burrows in the ground,
under rocks, or in rotting stumps and logs. Of the squirrels, the red and southern flying
squirrel are more carnivorous and are known to eat bird eggs, insects, and young
vertebrates.
J/
Figure 6-10 Eastern gray squirrel.
The eastern gray squirrel was the most common member of the
squirrel family observed in the PSA.
SECTION III - 6-30
-------
The porcupine (Figure 6-11) is another common species of the northern forests. Within
the PSA they were observed on October Mountain and along Woodland Road.
Porcupines spend the majority of their time in trees, where they forage for leaves, buds,
mast, and young twigs. Their diet is seasonal, with buds and young leaves being
consumed in the spring and summer, mast in the fall, and the inner bark and young twigs
in the winter. American beech, ash, basswood, apple, and aspen are favored species, as
they build up less tannin in their leaves than other species such as maple and oak.
Spruce, pine, and eastern hemlock are also consumed in the winter. Porcupines have
relatively small home ranges for its size with summer ranges between 30 - 150 ha (75 -
370 acres) and a winter range of only 2.4 ha (6 acres) (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998).
Porcupines have few natural enemies except fisher.
Figure 6-11 Porcupine.
Porcupines were most common in the PSA along the lower slopes of
October Mountain State Forest.
Three lagomorph species—snowshoe hare, eastern cottontail, and New England
cottontail—could potentially occur within the PSA. Snowshoe hares are a northern
species that prefer dense coniferous forests and regenerating shrubs in mixedwood
forests, and were found only at the Ashley Lake reference area. The eastern cottontail
was the most abundant rabbit species found in the PSA. This species was commonly
observed in all of the terrestrial habitats, floodplain forests, swamps, and wet meadows.
Colonization of the eastern cottontail throughout the northeast has lead to the decline of
SECTION III- 6-31
-------
New England cottontails in much of their range. New England cottontails are now
considered rare except in southern Maine, New Hampshire, and most of Massachusetts
(Litvaitis and Litvaitis 1996). New England cottontails and eastern cottontails cannot be
distinguished by their tracks or scat. Therefore all snowtracking sightings were labeled
only as cottontail. Visually these two species can sometimes be separated based upon the
presence of a black patch between the ears of New England cottontail and the presence of
a white patch on the forehead of eastern cottontail. These characteristics, however, may
be missing on approximately 50 percent of eastern cottontails (Godin 1977). Because no
individuals within the PSA were observed to have the black patch, it is assumed that
rabbits observed were eastern cottontails, even when the white patch was not observed.
All three of these species feed heavily on grasses and clover in the summer, and seeds
and berries as they become available in the late summer and fall. Cottontails were
commonly seen foraging on residential lawns and in agricultural pastureland in the PSA.
Buds and twigs of shrubs, stems of blackberries, and sapling sprouts are the primary food
sources in winter. During winter snow tracking rabbits were observed foraging on
buckthorn, sumac, dogwood, and river grape. Rabbit species are preyed upon in large
numbers by nearly all the predators occurring in the PSA, including bobcats, coyotes,
foxes, fishers, minks, hawks, and owls.
The two aquatic, herbivorous mammals, American beavers and common muskrats, were
both abundant throughout the PSA. American beavers can be found throughout North
America in any area where suitable rivers, streams, ponds, or lakes exist. Their primary
requirement is water deep enough to prevent ice from freezing to the bottom, which they
often create by damming streams and seepages. They den by constructing large floating
lodges, excavating bank dens or combining these methods (Figure 6-12). Beaver dens
were common throughout the PSA.
Beavers are generalist feeders, consuming whatever plants are available. During the
summer, aquatic plants such as pond-lilies, bur-reed, cattails, pondweed, and algae make
up their diet. Bark, primarily from hardwoods, makes up the winter diet of beavers.
Trees and shrubs are cut during the late summer and fall months to be cached for the
winter. Food is stored underwater by anchoring it in mud near the lodge. Beavers are
SECTION HI - 6-32
-------
communal animals, sharing lodges, workloads, and food caches. A typical colony
consists of six individuals made up of a pair of adults, their recent young, and
occasionally yearlings. Typical colony densities are 0.20 - .69 individuals per kilometer
of stream (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998).
Figure 6-12 Beaver lodge.
Beaver lodges like this one are common along the Housatonic River
and its backwaters.
Muskrats were found to be abundant throughout the PSA, occurring primarily in deep
emergent marshes such as those found adjacent to the river and backwaters north of
Woods Pond. Roots and stalks of cattails, three-square grass, and rushes are favorite
food sources, although they will eat a wide variety of aquatic plants and may invade
nearby fields to feed on herbaceous vegetation. They often build an extensive system of
channels to allow for easy winter access between food sources and lodges. Lodges are
built of aquatic vegetation with underwater access holes. Muskrats are territorial with a
pair of muskrats defending a territory roughly 60 m (200 feet) in diameter around their
lodge.
4.0 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Mammals
Four mammal species of conservation concern could potentially occur in the PSA, only
one of which was directly observed. The water shrew, small-footed myotis, and southern
bog lemming are of species of Special Concern in Massachusetts, and the Indiana bat is
consdidered Endangered by the State of Massachusetts and the Federal Government
SECTION III - 6-33
-------
(MNHESP 1999). Rare species report forms for rare mammals are provided in
Attachment H.
Indiana Bat
The Indiana bat is a Federal- and State-listed Endangered species. Its status is due
primarily to the limited number of winter hibernating sites. Eighty-five percent of
Indiana bats hibernate in seven caves located in Missouri, southern Indiana, and
Kentucky, with 50 percent in just two of those (Kurta 1995). In addition, range-wide
population levels of this species have decreased drastically since 1960 (Whitaker and
Hamilton, 1998). In summer, Indiana bats range throughout much of the eastern United
States, from southern New Hampshire south along the Appalachian Mountains to the
panhandle of Florida and west into northeastern Oklahoma.
Historically, Indiana bats may have used much of Massachusetts during the summer
breeding period. The floodplain forests of the PSA are suitable foraging habitat, and
large silver maples with exfoliating bark could provide suitable maternity sites. Indiana
bats forage in upland and bottomland forests, although they prefer dense hillside and
ridge forests. The Indiana bat spends 68 percent of its time foraging among trees, rather
than over water (LaVal et al. 1977). A variety of small insects are consumed, with moths
taken most often, followed by Coleoptera and Diptera (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998).
Indiana bats were historically recorded in Berkshire, Hampden, and Worcester Counties;
however, they are extremely rare in the northeast and have not been reported from
Massachusetts since 1939 (MNHESP 1984).
Small-footed myotis
The small-footed myotis is listed as a species of Special Concern by the MNHESP
(1999). It ranges from Ontario and southern Quebec, down the Appalachian Mountains
to northern Georgia, and west into Arkansas and Oklahoma. These bats usually occur in
mountainous regions. Small-footed myotis utilize buildings, overhanging rocks, and
caves as summer roost and maternity sites. Suitable summer habitat is present in and
adjacent to the PSA and it is likely that the small-footed myotis occurs there. Little is
known about its feeding habits, although they are believed to be similar to other Myotis
SECTION HI - 6-34
-------
species. Flies, beetles, bugs, leafhoppers, and flying ants have been found in their
stomachs (Kurta 1995). They hibernate in caves and mines from November to March
usually in the foothills of mountains, up to 610 m (2,000 feet) in elevation, in coniferous
woodlands (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001).
Small-footed myotis have been recorded in western Massachusetts and documented twice
since 1978 in Hampden County, MA (MNHESP 1984, Godin 1977), making their
presence in the PSA possible. Other studies conducted in the region have reported small-
footed myotis observations (Zimmerman and Glanz 2000, Krusic el al. 1996). Given this,
it is believed that some, albeit likely only a few, of the bat echolocations recorded as
Myotis sp. during bat surveys were of small-footed myotis (Map 6-12). However, as
previously mentioned, limitations of echolocation technology prevent this species from
being positively identified.
Water Shrew
The water shrew is listed as a species of Special Concern by MNHESP. It occurs
throughout much of Canada and the northeastern United States, from Maine to
Connecticut, west to eastern New York and north-central Pennsylvania, extending south
in the Appalachian Mountains. This species is also common in mountainous regions of
western United States (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998).
Water shrews are usually found near open water. Their optimal habitats are small fast-
flowing mountain streams with abundant cover provided by undercut banks, rocks,
downed trees, and debris. However, they can also less commonly be found in slow-
moving streams, graminoid meadows, beaver impoundments, and temporary pools.
Water shrews have historically been collected in Berkshire County (Godin 1977) and the
PSA contains habitat for this species. One dead individual was found in the downstream
half of the PSA, adjacent to transitional floodplain forests (Map 6-12).
Southern Bog Lemming
The southern bog lemming is a species of Special Concern in Massachusetts. This
species' range extends from Quebec, south through the Appalachians to the western
SECTION HI - 6-35
-------
Carolinas, west throughout the Great Lakes region and into Kansas and Arkansas
(Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). They are most abundant in the Great Lakes region.
Southern bog lemmings can be found in a variety of habitats ranging from forests to
grasslands, although their primary habitats are sphagnum bogs and areas supporting thick
mosses and deep leaf mold (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001, Kurta 1995). The chief
requirement for southern bog lemmings is green succulent monocots, primarily sedges
and grasses, which almost entirely make up their diet. Some berries may be eaten when
in season, as well as fungi and mosses.
The shrub swamp, wet meadow, and floodplain forests of the PSA offer potential habitat
for the southern bog lemming, as do the mesic forest slopes of October Mountain, just
east of the PSA. However, this species was not observed during any field investigations.
SECTION HI - 6-36
-------
5.0 Literature Cited
Allen, A.W. 1986. Habitat suitability index models: Mink. USFWS Biological Report
82(10.127).
Auerlich, R.J., R.K. Ringer, H.L. Seagran, and W.G. Youatt. 1971. Effects of feeding coho
salmon and other Great Lakes fish on mink reproduction. Canadian Journal of
Zoology 5:611-616.
Bleavins, M.R., R.J. Auerlich, and R.K. Ringer. 1980. Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors
1016 and 1242): effects on survival and reproduction in mink and ferrets. Archives
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 9:627-635.
Buresch, K. 1999. Seasonal pattern of abundance and habitat use by bats on Martha's
Vineyard, Massachusetts. M.S. Thesis. University of New Hampshire, Durham,
NH, USA.
Burgess, S.A. 1978. Aspects of mink (Mustela vison) ecology in the Southern Laurentains
of Quebec. MS Thesis. MacDonald College of McGill University, Montreal,
Quebec, Canada.
Burt, W.H., and R.P. Grossenheider. 1976. The Peterson Field Guide Series - A Field
Guide to the Mammals of America North of Mexico. Houghton Mifflin Company,
Boston, MA, USA.
Clark, D.R.J. 1978. Uptake of dietary PCB by pregnant big brown bats and their fetuses.
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 19:707-714.
Clark, D.R.J., and T.G. Lamont. 1976. Organochlorine residues in females and nursing
young of big brown bat. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
15(1): 1-8.
Clark, D.R.J., and C.J. Stafford. 1981. Effects of DDE and PCB (Aroclor 1260) on
experimentally poisoned female little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus)'. lethal brain
concentrations. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health 7:925-934.
SECTION HI - 6-37
-------
Clough, G. 1987. Relations of small mammals to forest management in northern Maine.
Canadian Field Naturalist 101:40-48.
Conner, M.C., R.F. Labiski, and D.R.J. Progulske. 1983. Scent-station indices as measures
of population abundance of bobcats, raccoons, gray foxes, and opossums. Wildlife
Society Bulletin 11:146-152.
Corben, C. 1999. AnabatV Operating Instructions and Software Installation and Usage.
Titley Electronics, Ballina, Australia.
Coutts, R.A., M.B. Fenton, and E. Glen. 1973. Food intake by captive Myolis lucifugus and
Eptesicus fuscus. Journal of Mammalogy 54:985-990.
Crampton, L.H., and R.M.R. Barclay. 1998. Selection of roosting and foraging habitat by
bats in different-aged aspen mixedwood stands. Conservation Biology 12(6): 1347-
1358.
DeGraaf, R.M., and D.D. Rudis. 1986. New England Wildlife: Habitat, Natural History,
and Distribution. General Technical Report NE-108, U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Forest
Service, Northeast Forest Experiment Station, 491 pp. (N)
DeGraaf, R.M., and M. Yamasaki. 2001. New England Wildlife: Habitat, Natural History,
and Distribution. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH, USA.
de Oliveira, M.C. 1998. Anabat Systems Practical Guide. Dept. of Natural Resources, State
of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD. 60 pp.
Dubuc, L.J., W.B. Krohn, and R.B. Owen. 1990. Predicting occurrence of river otters by
habitat on Mount Desert Island, Maine. Journal of Wildlife Management 54:594-
599.
Eberhardt, L.E., and A.B. Sargeant. 1977. Mink predation on prairie marshes during the
waterfowl breeding season, p. 37-43. In R.L. Phillips and C. Jonkel (ed.) The 1975
Predator Symposium. Montana Forest Conservation Experiment Station, University
of Montana Press, Missoula, MT, USA.
SECTION HI - 6-38
-------
Fenton, M.B., and G.P. Bell. 1981. Recognition of species of insectivorous bats by their
echolocation calls. Journal of Mammalogy 62(2):233-243.
Foley, R.E., S.J. Jackling, R.J. Sloan, and M.K. Brown. 1988. Organochlorine and mercury
residues in wild mink and otter: a comparison with fish. Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry 7:363-374.
Forrest, L.R. 1988. Field Guide to Tracking Animals in Snow. Stackpole Books,
Harrisburg, PA.
Godin, A.J. 1977. Wild Mammals of New England. The John Hopkins University Press,
Baltimore, MD, USA, and London, UK.
Halfpenny, J., and E. Biesiot. 1986. A Field Guide to Mammal Tracking in North America.
Johnson Books, Boulder, CO, USA.
Hal pin, M.A. 1984. Winter habitat use and ecology of red fox in eastern Maine and the
history of red fox in Maine. M.S. Thesis. University of Maine, Orono, USA.
Halpin, M.A., and J.A. Bissonette. 1988. Influence of snow depth on prey availability and
habitat use by red fox. Canadian Journal of Zoology 66:587-592.
Harder, J.D., and R.L. Kirkpatrick. 1994. Physiological Methods for Wildlife Research, p.
275-306. In T.A. Bookhout (ed.) Research and Management Techniques for
Wildlife and Habitats. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Heaton, S.N., S.J. Bursian, J.P. Giesy, D.E. Tillitt, J.A. Render, P.D. Jones, D.A.
Verbrugge, T.J. Kubiak, and R.J. Aulerich. 1995. Dietary exposure of mink to carp
from Saginaw Bay, Michigan. 1. Effects on reproduction and survival, and the
potential risk to wild mink populations. Archives of Environmental Contamination
and Toxicology 28:334-343.
Humphrey, S.R, and T.L. Zinn. 1982. Seasonal habitat use by river otters and everglades
mink in Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 46:375-381.
SECTION HI - 6-39
-------
Kirkland, G.L. 1982. Clearcuts - small mammals, p. 397. In D.E. Davis (ed.) CRC
Handbook of Census Methods for Terrestrial Vertebrates. CRC Press, Boca Ratan,
FL, USA.
Krusic, R.A., Y. Mariko, C.D. Neefus, and P.J. Pekins. 1996. Bat habitat use in the White
Mountain National Forest. Journal of Wildlife Management 60(3):625-631.
Kurta, A. 1995. Mammals of the Great Lakes Region. University of Michigan Press, Ann
Arbor, MI, USA.
LaVal, R.K., RL. Clawson, M.L. LaVal, and W. Caire. 1977. Foraging behavior and
nocturnal activity patterns of Missouri bats, with emphasis on the endangered
species Myotis grisescens and Myolis sodalis. Journal of Mammalogy 58:592-599.
Litvaitis, M.K. and J.A. Litvaitis. 1996. Using mitochondrial DNA to inventory the
distribution of remnant populations of New England cottontails. Wildlife Society
Bulletin. 24:725-730.
Liers, E.E. 1951. Notes on the river otter (Lutra canadensis). Journal of Mammalogy
32:1-9.
Linhart, S.B., and F.F. Knowlton. 1975. Determining the relative abundance of coyotes by
scent station lines. Wildlife Society Bulletin 3:119-124.
Lortie, J.P., and S.K. Pelletier. 1987. Distribution and abundance of breeding birds and
small mammals in the high salt marsh and adjacent upland critical edge in southern
Maine. Proceeding of the Maine Biological and Medical Science Symposium,
Brunswick, ME, USA.
MNHP (Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program). 1984. Massachusetts Rare and
Endangered Wildlife. Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Boston, MA, USA.
Melquist, W.E., J.S. Whitman, and M.G. Hornocker. 1981. Resource partitioning and
coexistence of sympatic mink and river otter populations, p. 187-200 In J.A.
Chapman and D. Pursley (eds). Worldwide Furbearer Conference Proceedings, Vol
I. Frostberg, MD, USA.
SECTION HI - 6-40
-------
Murie, O.J. 1974. Animal Tracks. Second ed. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, MA, USA.
Newman, D.G. 1990. Habitat ecology of river otters in central Massachusetts. M.S. Thesis.
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA.
Newman, D.G., and C.R. Griffin. 1994. Wetland use by river otters in central
Massachusetts. Journal of Wildlife Management 58(1): 18-23.
Organ, J. 1989. Mercury and PCB residues in Massachusetts river otters: comparisons on a
watershed basis. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA,
USA.
Phillips, R.L. 1982. Red Fox (U.S.). p. 229-230. In D.E. Davis (ed.) CRC Handbook of
Census Methods for Terrestrial Vertebrates. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
Rezendes, P. 1999. Tracking and the Art of Seeing - How to Read Animal Tracks and
Signs. Second ed. HarperCollin Publishers, New York, NY, USA.
Roy F. Weston, Inc. 2000. Supplemental Investigation Work Plan for the Lower
Housatonic River, General Electric (GE) Housatonic River Project, Pittsfield,
Massachusetts. Volumes 1 and 2. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
North Atlantic Division, New England District, Concord, MA, USA.
Sheldon, W.G., and W.G. Toll. 1964. Feeding habits of the river otter in a reservoir in
central Massachusetts. Journal of Mammalogy 45:449-454.
Smithwood, D.A. 2002. Taxonomic and Age Determination of Fish Scales Extracted from
River Otter (Lutra canadensis) Scat Specimens Collcted in the Housatonic River
Watershed, Massachusetts, February through March 2000. Office of Fisher
Assistance, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Laconia, NH, USA.
Swimley, T.J., T.L. Serfass, R.P. Brooks, and W.M. Tzilkowski. 1998. Predicting river
otter latrine sites in Pennsylvania. Wildlife Society Bulletin 26(4):836-845.
Talent, L.G., R.L. Jarvis, and G.L. Krapu. 1983. Survival of mallard broods in south-
central North Dakota. Condor 85(l):74-78.
SECTION HI - 6-41
-------
Whitaker, J.O., Jr., and W.J. Hamilton Jr. 1998. Mammals of the Eastern United States. 3rd
ed. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Wren, C.D., D.B. Hunter, J.F. Leatherland, and P.M. Stoakes. 1987. The effects of
polychlorinated biphenyls and methylmercury, singularly and in combination on
mink. II: reproduction and kit development. Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 16:449-454.
Zimmerman, G.S., and W.E. Glanz. 2000. Habitat use by bats in eastern Maine. Journal of
Wildlife Management 64(4): 1032-1040.
SECTION HI - 6-42
-------
SECTION IV ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A Natural Community Profiles
Attachment B Animal Profiles
Attachment C Species:Habitat Matrix
Attachment D Amendment to Supplemental Investigation Work Plan
Attachment E Natural Community Data Forms
Attachment F List of Plant Names
Attachment G Rare Plant Forms
Attachment H Rare Animal Forms
Attachment I Photographs
Attachment J Maps
Attachment J Representative Cross Sections
SECTION IV-0
------- |