Investigation and Evaluation of Potential Blanding’s Turtle Nesting Habitat and Results of Blanding’s Turtle Nesting Activity Surveys

at the Cape Vincent Wind Farm Project
Draft Report Prepared for: Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. 2003 Central Avenue Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001 Prepared by: Riveredge Associates, LLC 58 Old River Road Massena, New York 13662 September 25, 2010

Riveredge Associates (Riveredge) is pleased to submit this report summarizing the purpose, background, methods, results and recommendations of a Blanding’s turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) potential nesting habitat and nesting activity survey investigation conducted on the site of the proposed Cape Vincent Wind Farm, Town of Cape Vincent, Jefferson County, New York, in June 2010 (Figure 1). Riveredge Associates was contracted by Western EcoSystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) to complete work reported herein as part of pre-construction wildlife surveys conducted for the project.

PURPOSE

Riveredge performed site visits to the Study area to identify and evaluate areas within the Cape Vincent Wind Farm Project’s zone of potential impact as potentially suitable Blanding’s turtle nesting habitat. In areas with potential nesting habitat, Riveredge performed surveys for Blanding’s turtle nesting activity, following the protocol developed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) (Ross 2009).

1

Riveredge Associates

The primary purpose of Riveredge’s investigation were to 1) identify potential Blanding’s turtle nesting habitats in areas surrounding wetlands with the potential to support Blanding’s turtles by examining the soil substrate, vegetative characteristics, and other habitat parameters required for Blanding’s turtle nesting, and 2) perform daily surveys for nesting Blanding’s turtles in areas identified above.

STUDY AREA

The study area for the proposed Cape Vincent Wind Farm Project is located within the Town of Cape Vincent, Jefferson County, New York (Figure 1). The study area is situated in the Eastern Ontario Plain ecozone (Will et al., 1982). The Eastern Ontario Plain ecozone consists of nearly level plains ranging in elevation from 76 to 152 m (250 to 500 feet) and averaging 91 m (300 feet). The bedrock consists of Trenton limestone. The soils are of medium productivity and are primarily glacial lake sediments belong to either the Chaumont-Galoo-Wilpoint-Guffin series (moderately deep to shallow, clay or loam soils) or the Kingsbury-Covington-Livingston series (very deep, poorly drained clay soils) (USDA 1989). Annual snowfall is 152 to 203 cm (60 to 80 inches), and the growing season is 150 to 165 days. Agriculture is the predominant land use of the Eastern Ontario ecozone. Due to the moderating climatological effects of Lake Ontario, this zone is favorable to dairy farming and hay crops. All water bodies (Kent’s Creek, Fox Creek, Shaver Creek, and several large wetlands) within the study area flow generally southwest and drain into Lake Ontario.

2

Riveredge Associates

Figure 1. Location of the Cape Vincent Wind Farm. Turbine locations illustrated as proposed May 27, 2010.

3

Riveredge Associates

BACKGROUND

The Blanding’s turtle is listed by the NYSDEC as Threatened in New York State (NYSDEC 1999). The Blanding’s turtle is documented to occur in the region of the Study area (Petokas and Alexander 1981, Gibbs et al. 2007, New York Natural Heritage Program database), but detailed survey information within the immediate vicinity is limited.

Existing records for the area include a known breeding population of Blanding’s turtles in a large shrub/scrub, emergent wetland complex above the causeway at Wilson Bay (A. Breisch, NYSDEC, personal communication; Johnson and Crockett 2009). In addition, several other sightings have been made in the area in recent years. Two Blanding’s turtles were observed on County Route 9 where it crosses Kent’s Creek in 2005 and 2007. A juvenile Blanding’s turtle was observed on County Route 4 (Rosiere Road) approximately 1.5 km north of County Route 8 in 2007. Finally, a breeding Blanding’s turtle population, discovered in 2008, is known to exist northeast of Cemetery Road near the northeastern edge of the Study area (Johnson and Crockett 2009). These records stem from the field work of Glenn Johnson (Johnson and Crockett 2009) and were submitted for inclusion in the database of the New York Natural Heritage Program (NYNHP). The Blanding’s turtle records of Johnson are more current and inclusive than the database of NYNHP.

Primary wetland habitats occupied by Blanding’s turtle usually include productive, eutrophic inland and deep freshwater wetlands (Ernst et al. 1994), especially shrub swamps with alder, willow, cattail, and sedges, as well as emergent wetlands with shallow water composed of reeds, grasses, and cattail (Peipgras and Lang 2000), with a soft but firm organic bottom and abundant aquatic vegetation (Kofron and Schreiber 1985, Ernst et al. 1994). Specifically, Blanding’s turtles use areas with the following characteristics (Kiviat 1997):

1) both shallow (30 cm) and deep (120 cm) pools connected by channels; 2) open or absent tree canopy; 3) tree species often along the wetland perimeter;

4

Riveredge Associates

4) a dense cover of shrubs, particularly willow (Salix spp.) and buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), with components of forbs and graminoids dispersed as hummocks and tussocks throughout the wetland; and, 5) coarse and fine organic debris.

In addition, high quality Blanding’s turtle habitat consists of a “habitat complex” that provides all of the wetland and upland habitat types used during springtime, breeding, nesting, summer, and hibernation activities in close proximity to one another (Kiviat 1993). Springtime foraging and basking habitat, consisting of deep, fluctuating pools, represents crucial habitat for Blanding’s turtles (Kiviat 1993).

Blanding’s turtles nest in open upland areas and are known to utilize human-disturbed areas such as plowed fields, road side berms, active agricultural row crop fields, and sand and gravel pits for nesting (Linck et al. 1989, Johnson and Crockett 2006). Natural nesting sites have been observed in grasslands characterized by sandy loam or sandy soils (Ross and Anderson 1990) and areas with sparse herbaceous vegetation interspersed with bare mineral soil (Kiviat et al. 2000). In the vicinity of the Cape Vincent Wind Project, Blanding’s turtles are known to nest in piles of topsoil and along dirt roads (G. Johnson, unpublished data).

Blanding’s turtles may move more than 1.0 km from wetland habitats to upland habitats for nesting. The distance of potential nest sites from water varies from 2.0 m to greater than 1.0 km (Congdon et al. 1983), and nest observations in areas adjacent to wetlands where they are not considered residents have been recorded (Congdon et al. 1983, Ross and Anderson 1990). The nesting season in northern New York occurs primarily during the month of June (Johnson and Crockett 2006, G. Johnson, unpublished data). Both sexes of Blanding’s turtles occasionally make significant overland movements outside of the nesting season, often staying in retreats in forested uplands or vernal pools (Joyal et al. 2001, Johnson and Crockett 2006).

5

Riveredge Associates

METHODS

Prior to the field investigation, Dr. Glenn Johnson, Professor of Biology at SUNY Potsdam and Riveredge Senior Ecologist, reviewed available maps and aerial photography to identify areas of potentially suitable Blanding’s turtle nesting habitat. National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and State wetlands identified as consisting completely or partially of shrub/scrub vegetation were noted.

Nesting activity surveys for Blanding’s turtles were conducted in suitable areas such as grasslands characterized by sandy loam or sandy soils, areas with sparse herbaceous vegetation interspersed with bare mineral soil and human-disturbed areas such as plowed fields, cornfields, road side berms and shoulders, active agricultural lands and gravel pits. All field surveys for Blanding’s turtles and their habitats were conducted in accordance with protocols designed by NYSEC (e.g. Ross 2009).

Nesting activity surveys were conducted by direct observations from 1800-0000 hours (6 PM to midnight) daily each day from 7 June through 27 June 2010 when air temperatures were > 10 o C (50 oF). Observers walked potential nesting areas using binoculars, headlamps, and spotlights fitted with red filters. Care was taken to avoid disturbing nesting turtles.

Surveys focused on locating 1) nesting female turtles, 2) evidence of digging, 3) turtle tracks, and 4) nests destroyed by predators. Searches focused on habitat edges between potentially occupied wetlands and potentially suitable nesting areas. All turtles and turtle nests were noted and recorded, regardless of species. A WAAS-enabled global positioning system (GPS) was used to record the location of all turtles or turtle nests encountered.

General weather conditions (% cloud cover, temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, etc.) and precipitation were recorded at the beginning of each survey and after any significant change in weather conditions occurred. If the air temperature fell below 10 o C (50 o F) surveys were concluded for that night.

6

Riveredge Associates

Observers recorded the date, time, turtle species encountered, GPS coordinates of each individual (all turtle species) and any nests encountered (intact or depredated), and turtle behavior. No Blanding’s turtle was handled for any reason until after it moved out of a potential nesting area. After it has moved out of a potential nesting area, turtles were examined to determine sex and whether or not a female Blanding’s turtle was gravid.

Surveys were designed to determine if suitable habitat was occupied by Blanding’s turtles. Habitat would be considered occupied when a turtle was encountered.

Dr. Johnson previously performed a Blanding’s turtle habitat investigation over the period 7 – 9 November 2007, in and around portions of the study area, and all wetlands identified during that survey were visited to determine if suitable nesting habitat was available. That field work was not part of pre-construction surveys for this Project.

7

Riveredge Associates

FIELD INVESTIGATION AND RESULTS

Potential Blanding’s Turtle Nesting Habitat Investigation

On 3 June 2010, Dr. Johnson arrived at the Study area. After a period of orientation and review of property access, Dr. Johnson visited all wetlands and surrounding potential nesting habitat on the Study area where access was granted by property owners over the period 3 - 4 June 2010. Wetlands and potential nesting habitat were characterized as potentially supporting Blanding’s turtles if suitable habitat conditions were present (as outlined above).

Based upon the field investigation, four (4) sites in the Study area associated with potential Blanding’s turtle habitat were determined to possess potential nesting habitat features and were selected for Nesting Activity Surveys. The relative position of these four sites in the Study area is depicted in Figure 2.

8

Riveredge Associates

Figure 2. Locations of Blanding’s turtle nesting survey sites on the Cape Vincent Wind Farm. Turbine locations illustrated as proposed May 27, 2010.

9

Riveredge Associates

Sites 1 and 2

Site 1 (Figure 3) consisted of 1) the road shoulder and berms associated with Wilson Road, 2) a field planted in corn bounded by an abandoned railroad grade, Wilson Road and a wooded swamp bordering Kent’s Creek, 3) a portion of a cornfield adjacent to Wilson Road north of the abandoned railroad grade, and 4) the roadway and bare substrate around the Cape Vincent Transfer Station. The Transfer Station was not accessed directly, but was surveyed from Wilson Road with binoculars. The surveyable area of Site 1 was approximately 23.3 acres. Photographs of the site are included below (Photos 1, 2, 3, and 4).

Site 2 (Figure 4) consisted of the shoulder and roadside berms of Hell Street, and portions of a cornfield adjacent to Hell Street. The surveyable area of Site 2 was approximately 6.9 acres. Photographs of the site are included below (Photos 5, 6, and 7).

Potential Blanding’s turtle habitat associated with both Site 1 and Site 2 is a large forested wetland complex located southwest of Wilson Road. This wetland is primarily a seasonallysaturated palustrine forested wetland composed mostly of deciduous trees dominated by American elm (Ulmus americana), ash (Fraxinus spp.), and maples (Acer rubrum and A. saccharinum). It drains eastward into Kent’s Creek near Hell Street. Within this wetland, an extensive emergent marsh and shrub/scrub swamp is found near the intersection of Wilson Road and the Study area boundary. This area has some marginal potential to support Blanding’s turtles, although little surface water was observed at the time of the survey. Additional potential Blanding’s turtle habitat is located along the riparian margins of Kent’s Creek and a small (less than 0.25 acre) shrub/scrub wetland dominated by buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) located along the railroad grade just west of Kent’s Creek. At the time of the survey, no surface water was present, however, it likely floods each spring from overflow from the adjacent Kent’s Creek. Buttonbush is an indicator species for Blanding’s turtle in some parts of its range (Kiviat 1993). This wetland is likely too small to support a population of Blanding’s turtles, however Kent’s Creek may serve as a movement corridor for this species and it may be occasionally occupied. Other open habitat areas within the Study area that are adjacent to or near these

10

Riveredge Associates

wetlands were judged unsuitable as Blanding’s turtle nesting habitat primarily because they were largely agricultural fields in active hay production and the substrate was not exposed to the sun.

11

Riveredge Associates

Figure 3. Survey Site 1.

12

Riveredge Associates

Figure 4. Survey Site 2.

13

Riveredge Associates

Photographs of Site 1

Photo 1. View across large agricultural field at Site 1 bordered by Wilson Road in background.

Photo 2. Close view of substrate in the field described in Photo 1, Site 1.

14

Riveredge Associates

Photo 3. Depredated snapping turtle nest near shoulder of Wilson Road at Site 1.

Photo 4. View across fields bordering Wilson Road at the northern end of Site 1.

15

Riveredge Associates

Photographs of Site 2

Photo 5. View of road (Hell Street) crossing culvert on Kent’s Creek in Site 2.

Photo 6. Depredated snapping turtle nest at edge of Hell Street at Site 2.

16

Riveredge Associates

Photo 7. Open area and dirt roadway leading away from hell Street at Site 2.

17

Riveredge Associates

Site 3

Site 3 (Figure 5) consisted of the linear corridor of an abandoned railroad grade between Burnt Rock Road and County Route 4 , an adjacent horse pasture consisting of a mix of exposed substrate and a raised earthen berm, and open areas along the intersection of the abandoned railroad grade and Burnt Rock Road. The surveyable area of Site 3 was approximately 16.2 acres. Photographs of the site are included below (Photos 8, 9, 10, and 11).

Potential Blanding’s turtle habitat associated with Site 3 is located to the southwest of the abandoned railroad grade approximately 0.75 km northwest of Burnt Rock Road and consists of seasonally-saturated shrub/scrub and emergent marsh. Water flows northeast through a small (45 cm diameter) culvert under the railroad grade. This wetland has been impacted by beaver activity creating numerous channels, however, water levels were low (greatest pool depth approximately 30 cm) at the time of the survey. Shrubs consisted of 90% willow (Salix spp.) species. This wetland has potential to support Blanding’s turtles, showing essential habitat features such as shallow and deep pools and channels, shrub hummocks for overwintering, numerous elevated basking areas, a soft organic substrate and potential nesting areas nearby. Limitations to Blanding’s turtle occupancy include its relatively small size linked to its distance from a known colonizing source, limited submerged and floating aquatic vegetation, and low water levels.

18

Riveredge Associates

Figure 5. Survey Site 3.

19

Riveredge Associates

Photographs of Site 3

Photo 8. Potential nesting habitat in horse pasture along abandoned railroad bed at Site 3.

Photo 9. View north of large field and horse pasture at Site 3.

20

Riveredge Associates

Photo 10. View south of horse pasture and woodlot at east side of Site 3.

Photo 11. Area where painted turtle nested at south end of horse pasture at Site 3.

21

Riveredge Associates

Site 4

Site 4 (Figure 6) consists of open areas and dirt tracks associated with a residence on the southwest side of Cemetery Road and a large open field with some wetland features interspersed with drier areas and exposed substrates west of the residence. The surveyable area of Site 4 was approximately 21.2 acres. Photographs of the site are included below (Photos 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18).

Approximately 250 m on the opposite (northeast) side of Cemetery Road from Site 4 is a shrub/scrub wetland known to support a population of Blanding’s turtles.

22

Riveredge Associates

Figure 6. Survey Site 4.
Riveredge Associates

23

Photographs of Site 4

Photo 12. Disturbed substrate in field behind residence at Site 4. This area would likely be attractive to turtles for nesting.

Photo 13. Another view of field, bare substrate and debris at Site 4.

24

Riveredge Associates

Photo 14. View of construction debris and other materials piled along a dirt track in field at Site 4. Open character would be attractive to turtles for nesting.

Photo 15. View of edge of large unused field at Site 4. Note relatively open substrate.

25

Riveredge Associates

Photo 16. View of open field at western edge of Site 4.

Photo 17. Small open-canopy pool at field edge in Site 4. Boreal chorus frogs were observed in this pool.

26

Riveredge Associates

Photo 18. Area of exposed and lightly vegetated substrate in one of the field at Site 4.

27

Riveredge Associates

Results of Blanding’s Turtle Nesting Activity Surveys A total of 224.5 investigator-hours were logged on-site actively searching for turtles over 21 nights from 7 June to 27 June 2010. One survey (June 8) was shortened because temperature fell below the 10 o C (50 o F) lower limit to conduct surveys.

No Blanding’s turtles were observed in any of the four survey sites over the period 7 June – 27 June 2010. Additionally, no depredated nests or other sign of Blanding’s turtles were observed.

One painted turtle (Chrysemys picta) was observed nesting on 8 June and another gravid female painted turtle was found on 13 June, both in Survey Site 3. Two depredated snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) nests were found (9 and 10 June) along Wilson Road in Site 1. Ten (10) individual snapping turtle nests were found along the edge of Hell Street on 9 June in Site 2 and an additional two depredated snapping turtle nests were encountered on the edge of Hell Street on 14 June at Site 2. Photos 3 and 6 depict depredated snapping turtle nests found during the nesting activity survey. A summary of weather and daily field notes, by site, is provided in Attachment A.

CONCLUSIONS Blanding’s turtle habitat surveys determined that the vegetative structure, vegetative species composition, and other habitat parameters present in and around four sites within the Study area represented suitable nesting habitat for Blanding’s turtles. Nightly surveys conducted during peak nesting times (6:00 PM to midnight) for 21 consecutive nights from 7 June through 27 June 2010 recorded no Blanding’s turtles at the four sites with suitable nesting habitat.

28

Riveredge Associates

REFERENCES

Congdon, J.D., D.W. Tinkle, G.L. Breitenbach, and R.C. van Loren Sels. 1983. Nesting ecology and hatchling success in the turtle Emydoidea blandingii. Herpetologica 39(4):417-429. Dowling, Z., T. Hartwig, E. Kiviat, and F. Keesing. 2010. Experimental management of nesting habitat for the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii). Ecological Restoration Vol. 28 (2):154-159. Ernst, C.H., J.E. Lovich, and R.W. Barbour. 1994. Turtles of the United States and Canada. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington, D.C. Gibbs, J.P., A.R. Breisch, P.K. Ducey, G. Johnson, J. Behler, and R. Bothner. 2007. Amphibians and reptiles of New York. Identification, natural history, and conservation. Oxford University Press, Oxford UK Kiviat, E. 1993. Tale of two turtles: Conservation of the Blanding’s turtle and Bog turtle. News from Hudsonia 9:1-7. Kiviat, E. 1997. Blanding’s turtle habitat requirements and implications for conservation in Dutchess County, New York. Proceedings: Conservation, Restoration, and Management of Tortoises and Turtles – An International Conference. pp. 377– 382. Kiviat, E.G., G. Stevens, R. Brauman, S. Hoeger, P.J. Petokas, and G.G. Hollands. 2000. Restoration of wetland and upland habitat for the Blanding’s Turtle, Emydoidea blandingii. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3(4):650-657. Kofron, C.P., and A.A. Schreiber. 1985. Ecology of two endangered aquatic turtles in Missouri: Kinosteron flavescens and Emydoidea blandingii. Journal of Herpetology 19:27-40.

29

Riveredge Associates

Johnson, G. and T. Crockett. 2006. Distribution, population structure, habitat relationships and nesting ecology of Blanding’s turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) populations in northern New York: Final Report to Biodiversity Research Institute. 30 p. Johnson, G. and T. Crockett. 2009. Distribution, population structure and habitat relationships of Blanding’s turtle populations in northern New York. Final Report AMO5122, Grant T-2-1. New York State Dept. of Environ. Cons. 144 pp. Joyal, L.A., M. McCollough and M.L. Hunter. 2001. A landscape ecology approaches to wetland species conservation: A case study of two species in southern Maine. Conservation Biology 15:1755-1762. Linck, M.H., J.A. DePari, B.O. Butler, and T.E. Graham. 1989. Nesting behavior of Emydoidea blandingii, in Massachusetts. Journal of Herpetology 23:442-444. Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program. 2009 (Draft). Advisory Guidelines for Creating Turtle Nesting Habitat. http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/conservation/pdf/creating_turtle_nesting_ sites.pdf New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). 1999. List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Fish & Wildlife Species of New York State. Available: http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7494.html (Accessed June 10, 2007.) Peipgras, S.A., and J.W. Lang. 2000. Spatial ecology of Blanding’s turtle in central Minnesota. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3(4):589-601. Petokas, P.J. and M.M. Aleaxander. 1981. Occurrence of the Blanding’s turtle in northern New York. New York Fish and Game Journal 28:119-120.

30

Riveredge Associates

Riveredge Associates. 2010. Blanding’s turtle habitat improvement project: 2009 nesting habitat monitoring activities. Draft Final Report prepared for the New York Power Authority, White Plains, New York. January 2010. 38 pp. Ross, A. 2009. Nesting activity survey protocol for Blanding’s turtles (Emydoidea blandingii). Version 1: May 6, 2009, drafted by Angelena M. Ross, Region 6 Wildlife Biologist. 2 pp. Ross, D.A., and R.K. Anderson. 1990. Habitat use, movements, and nesting of Emydoidea blandingii in central Wisconsin. Journal of Herpetology 24:6-12. USDA. 1989 (McDowell, W.E.). Soil survey of Jefferson County, New York. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station. Will, G.B., R.D. Stumvoll, R.F. Gotie, and E.S. Smith. 1982. The ecological zones of northern New York. New York Fish and Game Journal, Vol. 29, Number 1, Jan. 1982. 25 pp.

31

Riveredge Associates

ATTACHMENT A DAILY FIELD NOTES SUMMARY

32

Riveredge Associates

Weather data for daily Blanding’s turtle nesting surveys (June 7-27, 2010). Air Temperature 0 C 19.6 17.9 13.1 19.1 24.5 21.2 23.8 20.1 22.3 23.1 20.5 25.0 23.5 24.4 24.1 21.3 24.0 25.5 22.1 16.8 25.3 Water Temperature* 0 C 19.0 27.0 15.0 21.0 25.0 22.0 25.0 22.0 24.0 23.0 21.5 26.0 25.0 18.0 16.9 28.8 24.9 19.5 24.5 % Relative Humidity 59 58 90 83 59 88 62 69 46 85 77 55 78 83 52 100 80 74 80 93 86 % Cloud Cover 75 5 100 95 Light rain 10 90 20 70 5 50 5 40 5 50 5 100 Rain 95 5 5 100 Light rain 100 Wind speed (m/sec) 0.5 1.4 0.9 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.7 2.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 1.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 1.1 0.4 0.0

Date/Time 7 June / 1917 hours 8 June/ 1800 hours 9 June/ 1800 hours 10 June/ 1800 hours 11 June/ 1800 hours 12 June/ 1800 hours 13 June/ 1800 hours 14 June/ 1800 hours 15 June/ 1800 hours 16 June/ 1800 hours 17 June/ 1800 hours 18 June/ 1800 hours 19 June/ 1800 hours 20 June/ 1800 hours 21 June/ 1800 hours 22 June/ 1800 hours 23 June/ 1800 hours 24 June/ 1800 hours 25 June/ 1800 hours 26 June/ 1800 hours 27 June/ 1800 hours

* Water temperature was measured in a wetland south of survey site 1

33

Riveredge Associates

Summary of effort, staff and field observations at Survey Site 1

Date 7 June 8 June 9 June 10 June 11 June 12 June 13 June 14 June 15 June 16 June 17 June 18 June 19 June 20 June 21 June 22 June 23 June 24 June 25 June 26 June 27 June Total

Person Hours 2.6 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 43.6

Field Team Leader
J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty J. Flaherty B. Hill B. Hill B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty J. Flaherty

Number of Observers 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Notes/Observations No turtles observed No turtles observed
Depredated snapping turtle nest on Wilson Rd D. Tidhar, G. Johnson and L. Harper present Depredated snapping turtle nest on Wilson Rd No turtles observed American toads calling No turtles observed American toads and boreal chorus frog calling

No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed

Hours per site indicate time actually spent searching for turtles; travel time and time spent walking from vehicles to the survey site are not included in these values.

34

Riveredge Associates

Summary of effort, staff and field observations at Survey Site 2

Date 7 June 8 June 9 June 10 June 11 June 12 June 13 June 14 June 15 June 16 June 17 June 18 June 19 June 20 June 21 June 22 June 23 June 24 June 25 June 26 June 27 June Total

Person Hours 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 48.6

Field Team Leader
J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty J. Flaherty B. Hill B. Hill B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty J. Flaherty

Number of Observers 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Notes/Observations No turtles observed No turtles observed
10 depredated snapping turtle nests on shoulder of Hell St

No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed
Two depredated snapping turtle nests on shoulder of Hell St

No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed

Hours per site indicate time actually spent searching for turtles; travel time and time spent walking from vehicles to the survey site are not included in these values.

35

Riveredge Associates

Summary of effort, staff and field observations at Survey Site 3

Date 7 June 8 June 9 June 10 June 11 June 12 June 13 June 14 June 15 June 16 June 17 June 18 June 19 June 20 June 21 June 22 June 23 June 24 June 25 June 26 June 27 June Total

Person Hours 2.6 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 44.6

Field Team Leader
J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty J. Flaherty B. Hill B. Hill B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty J. Flaherty

Number of Observers 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Notes/Observations Gray fox observed No turtles observed
Painted turtle observed nesting (UTM E401053,N4885681; NAD 83) Two painted turtle eggs found above nest from previous day

No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed Gravid painted turtle observed
No turtles observed

No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed

Hours per site indicate time actually spent searching for turtles; travel time and time spent walking from vehicles to the survey site are not included in these values.

36

Riveredge Associates

Summary of effort, staff and field observations at Survey Site 4

Date

Person Hours 2.6 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 87.6

Field Team Leader
J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill J. Flaherty B. Hill B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty J. Flaherty B. Hill B. Hill B. Hill J. Flaherty J. Flaherty J. Flaherty

Number of Observers 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Notes/Observations
Northern leopard frogs and American toad tadpoles; No turtles observed No turtles observed Temperature dropped to 9.4 0C by end of survey

7 June 8 June 9 June 10 June 11 June 12 June 13 June 14 June 15 June 16 June 17 June 18 June 19 June 20 June 21 June 22 June 23 June 24 June 25 June 26 June 27 June Total

No turtles observed No turtles observed
No turtles observed Gray treefrogs calling No turtles observed Gray treefrogs and American toad calling Boreal chorus frog observed

No turtles observed
No turtles observed; common garter snake observed

No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed No turtles observed
No turtles observed; common garter snake observed

No turtles observed No turtles observed

Hours per site indicate time actually spent searching for turtles; travel time and time spent walking from vehicles to the survey site are not included in these values.

37

Riveredge Associates

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful