Boardman River Dam Removal Amphibian and Reptile Inventory Report

Transcription

1 Boardman River Dam Removal Amphibian and Reptile Inventory Report September 2017 Prepared for Conservation Resource Alliance Bayview Professional Centre Traverse Highway, Suite 1111 Traverse City, MI Prepared by Herpetological Resource and Management, LLC P.O. Box 110 Chelsea, MI 48118

2 Suggested Citation: Herpetological Resource and Management Boardman River Dam Removal Amphibian and Reptile Inventory Report. Herpetological Resource and Management Chelsea, MI. 35 pp. Table of Contents Executive Summary... 1 Introduction... 2 Site Location and Description... 3 Methods... 3 Results... 4 Discussion... 4 Conclusion... 8 Tables... 9 Maps Photos References... 31

3 Acknowledgement This project was made possible through support from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act and Great Lakes Fish Basin Habitat Program, and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Sustain Our Great Lakes Program.

4 Executive Summary In 2017, Herpetological Resource and Management, LLC (HRM) was contracted by Conservation Resource Alliance to assess a portion of the Boardman River associated with a dam removal project. Objectives of this project were to document the presence, relative abundance, and distribution of amphibians and reptiles and establish baseline data for future comparison to post-restoration diversity and distribution. HRM also assessed available and potential critical habitat for herpetofauna associated with restoration activates. The study was conducted over eight days between May and August of Sampling was conducted downstream of the Sabin Dam north to Boardman Lake. Surveys included aquatic, riparian, and terrestrial habitats incorporating a variety of sampling techniques to accurately record species diversity and distribution. Important findings from this project included: A total of 12 species of herpetofauna including 6 amphibians and 6 reptiles were documented within the project area. Based on a review of historic data and current site conditions, an additional 21 species of herpetofauna may occur along the project corridor including several rare and sensitive species. A majority of amphibians and reptiles observed were generalist species capable of surviving a range of conditions. Sensitive species were also observed, however in much lower numbers. HRM identified several opportunities for restoration targeting herpetofauna including the addition and protection of nesting sites, basking structures, and woody debris. The Boardman River and adjacent habitats within the study area are fragmented by the Sabin Dam, limiting fish and wildlife to disperse through the landscape. Removing this dam will allow the river to return to a more natural state and will likely benefit herpetofauna by increasing their dispersal ability. These major restoration activities in addition to general habitat improvement measures will likely benefit the viability and genetic diversity of herpetofauna populations (and those of other wildlife) throughout the region. Portions of this assessment corridor have very high probability of supporting State and Federally protected species and management and restoration measures are warranted to preserve and improve these areas. The preliminary herpetofauna inventory conducted in 2017 provides baseline data that post-restoration species diversity and spatial distribution can be compared with. This study will provide valuable information that can be utilized for similar dam removal projects in the future. 1

5 Introduction Amphibian and reptiles (collectively known as herpetofauna) are considered key bioindicators. These animals are highly sensitive to habitat disturbances and environmental pollutants (Cooperrider, Boyd et al. 1986; Welsh and Droege 2001; Guilfoyle 2010). In Michigan, more than 60% of herpetofauna species are listed as Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) with habitat loss and degradation considered as some of the major contributing factors of population declines (Holman 2012; Harding and Mifsud 2017). Protection and restoration of critical habitats are among the key components to effective management and conservation of these species. Complex riverine systems throughout the Great Lakes region provide critical habitat to a range of herpetofauna and other wildlife species. Centuries of anthropogenic activities have resulted in the loss of approximately 50% of these and other wetland habitats in the United States (Dahl 1990). Within Michigan, there are 36,000 miles of rivers with over 2,500 dams located throughout. Most of these structures were built decades ago with many no longer functioning as originally intended and in a state of disrepair (Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality 2004). When working properly, dams provide a range of socio-economic benefits including transportation, hydroelectricity, irrigation, and recreational uses. Unfortunately, they have also been shown to disrupt important natural ecological processes and impact native wildlife and fisheries resources. Dams create physical barriers to amphibian and reptile movements and as a result serve to fragment populations, which can lead to decreased genetic diversity and overall lower population fitness (Poff 2002; Moll and Moll 2004; Bennett, Keevil et al. 2010; Mifsud 2014) The physical barriers created by dams also alter hydrologic and thermal conditions that impact breeding, nesting, basking, and hibernation opportunities of riverine herpetofauna, altering their spatial distribution (Lind, Welsh Jr et al. 1996; Ashton, Bettaso et al. 2011; Bettaso 2013). Largely due to these detrimental effects, the removal of dams from both large and small river systems has become an emerging trend in the field of restoration ecology; however studies investigating the ecological responses of a river to dam removal are still limited. A novel project was initiated in northern Michigan to remove or modify several dam structures along the Boardman River. The aging structures were determined to be no longer economically feasible for producing hydropower. This phased endeavor would remove three dams and modify an additional one to allow the hydrology to return to a more natural state as a free-flowing cold water river. Herpetological Resource and Management, LLC (HRM) was contracted by Conservation Resource and Alliance (CRA) to conduct herpetofauna surveys along portions of the stream associated with removal of the dams. Surveys associated with the initial project phase were conducted by HRM in 2016, with the Phase II assessments taking place in This report details the results and analysis from the Phase II project area extending from Sabin Dam to Airport Road just south of Boardman Lake. Information obtained from these surveys including the presence, relative abundance, and distribution of amphibians and 2

6 reptiles within the project areas will provide critical baseline data to evaluate initial changes in species composition and distribution following restoration. Site Location and Description The Boardman River is a state designated natural river located in Grand Traverse and Kalkaska Counties in Northwest Lower Michigan. It includes 160 miles of river and tributary streams. It is one of Michigan s top ten fisheries and downstream from the project area it supports several Great Lakes migratory fish species (The Boardman River Dams Project 2016). The portion of the Boardman River included in this project area extends for approximately 2 river miles (pre-restoration) and lies entirely within Grand Traverse County. The 2017 assessment area began directly downstream from the Sabin Dam and continued north until just south of Boardman Lake (Photos 1-3). The Boardman River is characterized as a cold water stream and contains a sandy bottom with rocky substrate and sandy banks with several stretches of steeply sloped banks (Photo 4). Natural communities present within the riparian and upland areas assessed include, mixed coniferous and deciduous forest, alder thicket, forested wetlands, upland grassland, emergent marsh, wet meadow, seeps, and barrens (Photos 5-9). Methods Herpetofauna surveys were conducted over eight days in May, June, and August 2017 by teams of three to four biologists trained in the identification of amphibian and reptile species. Two sampling events (spring and summer) were conducted to improve herpetofauna detection and better understand seasonal activity and spatial distribution. A historical review of species data for the project area was compiled to help guide sample locations and potential species observations. Multiple methods were employed to assess the several habitats and microhabitats occupied by herpetofauna within the project area. HRM crews performed meandering transects through both aquatic and terrestrial habitats associated with the assessment area (Photos 10-11). These areas were searched for all life stages of amphibians and reptiles and evaluated for potential habitat for these species. Aquatic surveys involved the use of watercrafts to assess open water and adjacent wetlands and ground searches were used to inventory terrestrial habitats. Various survey techniques including visual observation, aural identification of species calling, identification of potential nesting and basking spots, and turning over cover materials were utilized to assess the diversity and distribution of resident herpetofauna. No voucher samples were collected, but photographs were taken when possible. All survey activities were in accordance with HRM s Scientific Collector s and Threatened and Endangered Species permits issued by the State of Michigan. Each positively identified amphibian and reptile was recorded in the database. The following data were collected for each record: (1) species, (2) gender of each individual (when possible), (3) behavior of each individual, and (4) reproductive condition of each individual (if it can be determined). Observation locations were recorded using Trimble Juno SB GPS Units, which record the location to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 3

7 (EPA) Tier II National Geospatial Data Spatial Standards, and mapped using ArcMap software. Results A total of 12 species of herpetofauna were observed during HRM s 2017 assessments (Table 1). Six amphibian species documented include: Eastern American Toad (Bufo [Anaxyrus] americanus americanus) (Photo 12), Gray Treefrog (Hyla versicolor/chrysoscelis), Green Frog (Rana clamitans) (Photo 13), Northern Leopard Frog (Rana pipiens) (Photo 14), Northern Spring Peeper (Pseudacris crucifer crucifer) (Photo 15), and Red-backed Salamander (Plethodon cinereus) (Photo 16). Six reptile species documented include: Eastern Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis) (Photo 17), Eastern Milk Snake (Lampropeltis triangulum triangulum) (Photo 18), Northern Water Snake (Nerodia sipedon sipedon) (Photo 19), Eastern Snapping Turtle (Chelydra serpentina serpentina) (Photo 20), Midland Painted Turtle (Chrysemys picta marginata) (Photo 21), and Northern Map Turtle (Graptemys geographica) (Photo 22). Based on a review of historic data and current site conditions, an additional 21 species of herpetofauna may occur along the project corridor including eight amphibians and thirteen reptiles (Table 1). These species include: Bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), Pickerel Frog (Rana palustris), Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata), Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica), Mudpuppy (Necturus maculosus), Red-spotted Newt (Notophthalmus viridescens), Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum), Blue Racer (Coluber constrictor foxii), Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus catenatus), Eastern Smooth Green Snake (Opheodrys vernalis), Northern Brown Snake (Storeria dekayi dekayi), Northern Red-bellied Snake (Storeria occipitomaculata occipitomaculata), Northern Ribbon Snake (Thamnophis sauritus septentrionalis), Northern Ring-necked Snake (Diadophis punctatus edwardsii), Blanding s Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii), Eastern Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina), Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta elegans), Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata), Wood Turtle (Glyptemys insculpta), and Five-lined Skink (Plestiodon faciatus). Ongoing research into the genetics, physiology, behavior, and fossil history of amphibians and reptiles has led to debates about their proper classification. Some biologists have proposed the splitting of established genera like Rana (typical frogs) and Bufo ( true toads ) into the newer genera, Lithobates and Anaxyrus, respectively (Harding and Mifsud 2017) Some suggestions have included using the newly proposed groupings as subgenera, allowing recognition of the new divisions while maintaining name stability. For the purposes of this report, this system will be followed for the genus of toad Bufo (Anaxyrus). The genus of typical frogs will not include subgenera based on a recent publication which supports the placement of all North American ranid frogs in the genus Rana (Yuan, Zhou et al. 2016).This nomenclature has been accepted for use in the most revised edition of Amphibians and Reptiles of the Great Lakes Region. (Harding and Mifsud 2017). Discussion and Recommendations HRM conducted surveys during suitable field conditions in spring and summer of 2017 to assess the species diversity and spatial distribution of amphibians and reptiles within 4

8 the Boardman River project area (See Map 2). Assessments were conducted at different times to capture trends in seasonal habitat use and presence of multiple age classes. Herpetofauna commonly utilize a mosaic of different habitat types and will seasonally migrate between wetland and upland areas to meet various breeding, nesting, and foraging needs. Herpetofauna are also active at different times of the year which necessitates multiple sampling events. Conducting multiple surveys provided greater opportunity for more accurate depiction the species community composition and spatial distribution in the project area. Dry site conditions and unseasonably cool weather during surveys conducted in late summer may have affected species detection. Water draw down activities initiated upstream from the project area prior to late summer surveys resulted in a large increase in turbidity (Photo 23). These conditions likely also affected species detection as well as visibility to accurately assess habitat present. Northwestern Michigan supports a wealth of herpetofaunal biodiversity with a number of species known to occur along the Boardman River. A total of species 12 of amphibians and reptiles were recorded during 2017 pre-restoration assessments. Of the observed species several are characterized as generalists and relatively tolerant of degraded habitat conditions. The most commonly observed herpetofauna were Green Frog, Eastern Garter Snake, and Midland Painted Turtle. These species can thrive in a range of high quality habitats and persist in sub-optimal conditions. Other species that are more sensitive to disturbed environmental conditions including Northern Leopard Frogs were observed; however in much lower numbers. Species diversity and abundance was fairly low during HRM s 2017 surveys. Correspondence with a local community member however, provided valuable insight regarding the herpetofauna communities in this area. Relatively high densities of both Eastern Garter and Northern Water Snakes were reported, including locations with large hibernacula where animals have been observed overwintering as well as breeding.. A majority of this anecdotal data is from the northern portion of the project near the Boardman Lake. Additionally, it was indicated that following the increase in water turbidity which result in sub-optimal habitat conditions, a significant number of reptile (and likely amphibians) were observed moving upstream to Boardman Lake. Following the restoration activities, it is likely that animals will return to the river when conditions improve and the site reestablishes. The assessment area contains wide range of wetland and riparian habitats that support a diverse assemblage of amphibians and reptiles. The project area is hydrologically fragmented from downstream portions of the river by the Sabin Dam, which has likely limited movement of animals across the landscape (Photo 24). This limited ability for herpetofauna (particularly highly aquatic species) to disperse between habitats may be a contributing factor for the relatively low diversity of species observed by HRM during 2017 assessments. Based on habitat, known species distribution, historic data, and species natural history, at least 21 species of amphibian and reptile not observed in 2017 may occur in the project area. Twelve of these are listed as Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) by the Michigan Wildlife Action Plan (Pickerel Frog, Mudpuppy, Eastern Massasauga 5

9 Rattlesnake, Eastern Smooth Green Snake, Northern Ribbon Snake, Northern Ring-necked Snake, Five-lined Skink, Blanding s Turtle, Eastern Box Turtle, Spotted Turtle, and Wood Turtle). The removal of Sabin Dam and restoration of the site including placement of basking logs and nesting sites will benefit these rare and sensitive species, particularly Wood Turtles. This species prefers flowing, cold water streams and populations have been noted to be declining throughout their range, including in Michigan (Herpetological Resource and Management 2014; Mifsud 2014; Harding and Mifsud 2017). Based on previous correspondences with staff from the Boardman River Nature Center and a member of the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Wood Turtles are known to occur just upstream of this project area. Importantly, this species has been observed as recently as Historic records for Wood Turtles are known for the Boardman River. Restoration efforts should place emphasis on creating habitat that is suitable for supporting this longlived, declining species. In addition to the Wood Turtle, this restoration will likely benefit several rare herpetofauna associated with floodplain and riparian communities by increasing connectivity throughout the corridor. Stretches of meadow and old field habitat were observed adjacent to the river that appear suitable for supporting several sensitive reptiles including Blue Racer, Hog-nosed Snake, and Eastern Smooth Green Snake, with the former being elevated to Special Concern in 2015 (Photo 25). Additionally, high quality wet meadow and fen habitats were also observed that appear suitable for supporting declining species including Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake and Spotted Turtle. The Eastern Massasauga was elevated to Federally Threatened in September 2016 and Michigan is the species stronghold. The riparian assessments on the east side of the river north of the compost facility included particularly high quality wetland habitats with wet meadows supporting diverse sedges transitioning into fen with cold water running through (Photo 26). Several wildlife paths through the wetland were observed which provide travel corridors for several rare herpetofauna. Preserving these floodplain and riparian areas when possible will provide seasonal habitat for these rare reptiles as well as several other species of herpetofauna that use these communities. Identifying this area as critical wildlife habitat is strongly recommended and furthermore, targeted surveys should be conducted in this location. It is the opinion of HRM that herpetofauna associated with the Boardman River and surrounding landscape will greatly benefit from the reconnection of the river and other proposed restoration activities. Some riparian portions of the assessment area, contain high quality habitat that will provide more value if left undisturbed. Habitats that will benefit if left intact or enhanced include wetlands in the riparian zone directly adjacent to the Boardman (Photo 27). Following the dam removal, there will likely be an appreciable shift in habitat types and lentic wetlands with slower moving water will become more limited. When possible, these existing communities within the riparian zone should be maintained to provide habitat for wetland dependent wildlife that do not typically occupy fast moving riverine systems. During comprehensive herpetofaunal surveys, HRM identified opportunities for general habitat improvements targeting rare species as well as other reptiles and amphibians. Portions of the river within this project area have very steep banks with some sites being densely vegetated (Photo 28). These conditions are not suitable for most herpetofauna and it particularly limits turtle nesting opportunities. Wood Turtles rely on sparsely vegetated 6

10 riverine banks for nesting habitat, with sand dominated substrates and moderate slopes. As part of the proposed restoration and river channel countering, incorporating nesting beaches with shallow gradient will be beneficial to this and other reptiles. Areas that currently support appropriate conditions should also be protected to prevent future erosion and soil loss and expanded wherever possible (Photos 29-30). HRM has identified locations where potential turtle nesting sites may be created or enhanced as part of restoration (Map 3). Emergent aquatic vegetation was limited in some portions of the assessment area Herpetofauna rely on this type of vegetation for cover and refugia from predators and the elements, food sources, and amphibian breeding. Following restoration activities, encouraging the growth of native aquatic vegetation within the river will be beneficial. Enhancing and encouraging submergent aquatic vegetation in the river channel is also recommended as this provides value to aquatic invertebrates, fish, herpetofauna, and other wildlife. Several species of invasive vegetation were documented along the project area. These species have the potential to dramatically alter the landscape, degrade habitat conditions, and affect species distribution and abundance. Upland invasives observed by HRM in 2017 include Japanese Barberry (Berberis thunbergii), Honeysuckle (Lonicera spp.), Autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellate), and Multi-flora rose (Rosa multiflora) (Photo 31). These dense plants shade the ground, thus interfering with the thermoregulatory behavior of herpetofauna and reducing the suitability of these areas as basking sites for snakes or nesting sites for turtles (Mifsud 2014). Small stands of Exotic Phragmites were also observed, in habitats adjacent to the Boardman River (Photo 32). This plant establishes dense monocultures that can fragment herpetofauna habitat by creating a physical barrier to movement across the landscape (Westbrooks 1998). During other restoration activities, treatment and removal of these plants will benefit the overall landscape and help maintain optimal conditions for wildlife. Basking structures are another important habitat feature that is limited within portions in the assessment area. Logs and other material suitable for providing thermoregulation opportunities were scarce in some portions of the river. Placing additional woody debris within the riparian areas would also benefit species that typically inhabit terrestrial communities (Photo 33). Studies have shown that basking sites are a limiting factor for density and distribution of reptiles particularly turtles and can also influence surface abundance and detection (Brattstrom 1974; Cadi and Joly 2003). Increasing basking opportunities along with proposed restoration measures will likely increase the abundance and distribution of Northern Map Turtles and provide more suitable habitat for Wood Turtles and other turtle species known to occur within the project area. Given the relatively urban context of the project area, human related disturbances pose a major risk for habitat degradation and potentially altering the species richness and abundance. Near the northern portion of the project area near Boardman Lake, the river and adjacent wetlands are bisected by a frequently traveled road leading to the local YMCA. Traffic from this roadway presents a major risk to herpetofauna, particularly slow moving turtles (Photo 34). Road mortality is known to have dramatic effects on local turtle populations where nesting females are typically killed most often. Several makeshift camps are present throughout the project area and were often observed with significant amounts of 7

11 trash and debris (Photo 35). HRM received anecdotal information that trapping and consuming of turtles and their eggs has been taking place by those living in the camps. These activities have potential to negatively affect local turtle populations and may explain the lack of turtles and turtle nests (predated or intact) observed by HRM during 2017 assessments. The collection of reptile eggs is illegal in Michigan and permitted harvest of adult turtles is limited to an open season and number of turtles allowed (Michigan Department of Natural Resources 2016). Although based on the anecdotal statements received by HRM indicate that Eastern Snapping Turtles are the primary target of these activities, rare and more heavily protected species such as Blanding s Turtle or Wood Turtle may be affected as well. Other observed disturbances which have potential to alter the landscape include dumping of landscaping materials and other residential debris along riparian zones of the project area. Installing interpretative signage within the project area describing the importance of amphibians and reptiles, and conservation of their populations and habitats may be an effective tool for minimizing these human driven disturbances. Over the last several decades, the scientific community has learned much about the adverse effects dams have on the overall health of a river system. As a result, dam removal has become a new focal point of many stream restorations (Moll and Moll 2004). Dam removal studies are fairly limited and there is a wide range of potential outcomes based on the project. The Boardman River dam removal project and associated monitoring will provide valuable information that can be utilized for similar projects in the future. Additionally, this preliminary herpetofauna inventory conducted will provide baseline data for comparison to post-restoration species diversity and spatial distribution. Due to the natural history and often cryptic nature of herpetofauna, evaluating responses to habitat restoration in a short period of time can be difficult and often does not depict the true extent of a project s success. Long-term monitoring over several years of amphibians and reptiles along the Boardman River is strongly encouraged to better assess species recovery and response to dam removal and restoration. Conclusion HRM s pre-restoration surveys of the Boardman River project area resulted in the documentation of 12 species of amphibians and reptiles. Natural communities present along the project area appear suitable for supporting an even greater diversity of herpetofauna including several rare and protected species. The river and associated habitats are currently fragmented by the Sabin Dam, limiting the ability of fish and wildlife to effectively disperse through the area. Removing this dam and allowing the river to return to a natural state will likely increase the dispersal of fish and wildlife through the project area. These major restoration activities in addition to general habitat improvement measures including creating basking and nesting will likely benefit the viability and genetic diversity of herpetofauna populations throughout. 8

12 Tables Boardman River Herpetofauna Common Name Scientific Name Historic* Current (2017) Potential MI Conservation Status** Bullfrog Rana catesbeiana X Eastern American Toad Bufo [Anaxyrus] a. americanus X X Gray Treefrog Hyla versicolor/chrysoscelis X X Green Frog Rana clamitans X X Northern Leopard Frog Rana pipiens X X Northern Spring Peeper Pseudacris c. crucifer X X Pickerel Frog Rana palustris X SGCN Western Chorus Frog Pseudacris triseriata X X Wood Frog Rana sylvatica X X Mudpuppy Necturus maculosus X X SGCN Red-backed Salamander Plethodon cinereus X X Red-spotted Newt Notophthalmus viridescens X Blue Racer Coluber constrictor foxii X SGCN Eastern Garter Snake Thamnophis s. sirtalis X Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake Sistrurus c. catenatus X X SC Eastern Hog-nosed Snake Heterodon platirhinos X Eastern Milk Snake Lampropeltis t. triangulum X X Eastern Smooth Green Snake Opheodrys vernalis X X SGCN Northern Brown Snake Storeria d. dekayi X Northern Red-bellied Snake Storeria o. occipitomaculata X X Northern Ribbon Snake Thamnophis sauritus septentrionalis X Northern Ring-necked Snake Diadophis punctatus edwardsii X X SGCN Northern Water Snake Nerodia s. sipedon X Five-lined Skink Plestiodon faciatus X X Blanding s Turtle Emydoidea blandingii X SC Eastern Box Turtle Terrapene c. carolina X SC Eastern Snapping Turtle Chelydra s. serpentina X Midland Painted Turtle Chrysemys picta marginata X X Northern Map Turtle Graptemys geographica X Red-eared Slider Trachemys scripta elegans X Spotted Turtle Clemmys guttata X T Wood Turtle Glyptemys insculpta X X SC Table 1. Herpetofauna known to historically occur near the project area, observed by HRM in 2017, and that may occur based on current conditions and species natural range (Harding and Mifsud 2017). *Historic records represent observations in close proximity to the project area. **Based on 2015 Michigan Wildlife Action Plan (Derosier, Hanshue et al. 2015) (SGCN=Species Greatest Conservation Need, SC= Special Concern, T=Threatened) 9

13 Maps Map 1. Boardman River project area including adjacent public lands. 10

14 Map 2. Boardman River 2017 observed herpetofauna. 11

15 Map 3. Areas identified as potential turtle nesting sites during HRM s 2017 assessments. 12

16 Photos Photo 1. Southern end of the Boardman River assessment area just downstream from the Sabin Dam. Photo 2. Northern end of Boardman River assessment area, at the eastern fork just upstream from Boardman Lake at South Airport Road. 13

17 Photo 3. Northern end of Boardman River assessment area at the western fork just upstream from Boardman Lake at South Airport Road. Photo 4. Portion of the Boardman River assessment area within the river channel. 14

18 Photo 5. Small back water habitat adjacent to the Boardman River within the assessment area. Photo 6. Transitional forested wetland habitat within the riparian zone of the Boardman River assessment area. 15

19 Photo 7. Forested wetland habitat within the riparian zone of the Boardman River assessment area. Photo 8. Backwater pond habitat within the riparian zone of the Boardman River assessment area. 16

20 Photo 9. Emergent marsh habitat within the riparian zone of the Boardman River assessment area. Photo 10. HRM staff members conducting visual encounter surveys via watercraft. 17

21 Photo 11. HRM staff conducting terrestrial visual encounter surveys. Photo 12. Eastern American Toad observed within the Boardman River assessment area. 18

22 Photo 13. Green Frog observed within the Boardman River assessment area. Photo 14. Northern Leopard Frog observed within the Boardman River assessment area. 19

23 Photo 15. Northern Spring Peeper observed within the Boardman River assessment area. Photo 16. Red-backed Salamander observed within the Boardman River assessment area. 20

24 Photo 17. Eastern Garter Snake observed within the Boardman River assessment area. Photo 18. Eastern Milk Snake observed within the Boardman River assessment area. 21

25 Photo 19. Northern Water Snake feeding on a sculpin within the Boardman River assessment area. Photo 20. Eastern Snapping Turtle observed in a backwater pond within the Boardman River assessment area. 22

26 Photo 21. Midland Painted Turtle observed basking within the Boardman River. Photo 22. Northern Map Turtle observed basking within the Boardman River. 23

27 Photo 23. Clear water from a feeder source flowing into the turbid Boardman River during late summer surveys. Photo 24. The Sabin Dam acts as a major barrier to wildlife movement within the project area. 24

28 Photo 25. Upland meadow habitat along the Boardman River that has potential to support a diversity of herpetofauna, particularly snakes. Photo 26. Portion of high quality wet meadow and fen habitat observed in northern extent of the Boardman River assessment area. 25

29 Photo 27. Wetland habitat adjacent to the Boardman River that will provide more value if left undisturbed. Photo 28. Steep, heavily vegetated bank along the Boardman River limit turtle nesting opportunities. 26

30 Photo 29. Potential nesting site on the Boardman River that should be protected. Photo 30. Example of restored nesting site that can be replicated along sections of the Boardman River. 27

31 Photo 31. Japanese barberry present within riparian habitat of the Boardman River assessment area. Photo 32. Young, treatable stand of Phragmites observed within riparian habitat of the Boardman River assessment area. 28

32 Photo 33. Example of a restoration site utilizing felled trees on site to provide critical basking habitat. Photo 34. The roadway near the northern extent of the project area bisects large wetlands and presents a major risk of road related injury or mortality to local herpetofauna. 29

33 Photo 35. Human disturbance and degradation observed within riparian habitat of the Boardman River assessment area. 30

34 References Ashton, D. T., J. B. Bettaso, et al. (2011). Comparative Ecology of Western Pond Turtle (Actinemys marmorata) populations on the Free-flowing South Fork and Regulated Main Fork Trinity River: Demography, Size and Body Condition Comparisons, Thermal Ecology, and Spatial Dynamics, Trinity River Restoration Program Bennett, A. M., M. Keevil, et al. (2010). "Spatial ecology and population genetics of Northern Map Turtles (Graptemys geographica) in fragmented and continuous habitats in Canada." Chelonian Conservation and Biology 9(2): Bettaso, J. B. (2013). The Influence of Dam Releases on a Population of Northern California Western Pond Turtles and Foothill Yellow-Legged Frogs: Are There Any Similar Impacts from Dam Management on Michigan Herpetofauna? MIPARC, Flint, MI. Brattstrom, B. H. (1974). "The Evolution of Reptilian Social Behavior." Amer. Zool. 14: Cadi, A. and P. Joly (2003). "Competition for basking places between the endangered European pond turtle (Emys orbicularis galloitalica) and the introduced red-eared slider (Trachemys scripta elegans)." Canadian Journal of Zoology 81(8): Cooperrider, A. Y., R. J. Boyd, et al. (1986). Inventory and monitoring of wildlife habitat. Service Center, Denver, CO, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management Dahl, T. E. (1990). Wetlands losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's. Washington, D. C., U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service: 13 pp. Derosier, A. L., S. K. Hanshue, et al. (2015). Michigan's Wildlife Action Plan. Lansing, MI, Michigan Department of Natural Resources. Guilfoyle, M. P. (2010). Implementing herpetofaunal inventory and monitoring efforts on Corps of Engineers project lands. Ecosystem Management and Restoration Research Program. Washington, DC, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: 43. Harding, J. H. and D. A. Mifsud (2017). Amphibians and Reptiles of the Great Lakes Region, 2nd Ed Ann Arbor, MI Unversity of Michigan Press. Herpetological Resource and Management (2014). Amphibian and Reptile Status Review and Recommendations Michigan Amphibian and Reptile Technical Advisory Committee Holman, J. A. (2012). The amphibians and reptiles of Michigan: A quaternary and recent faunal adventure. Detroit, MI, Wayne State University Press. Lind, A. J., H. H. Welsh Jr, et al. (1996). "The effects of a dam on breeding habitat and egg survival of the foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) in Northwestern Calfifornia." Herpetological Review 27(2): Michigan Department of Natural Resources (2016). Regulations on the Take of Reptiles and Amphibians. M. D. o. N. Resources Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (2004). Dam Removal Guidelines for Owners Mifsud, D. (2014). Michigan Amphibian and Reptile Best Management Practices. Chelsea, MI, Herpetological Resource and Management, LLC:

35 Moll, D. and E. O. Moll (2004). The ecology, exploitation, and conservation of river turtles. New York, Oxford University Press, Inc.. Poff, N. L., and D.D. Hart (2002). "How Dams Vary and Why It Matters for the Emerging Science of Dam Removal." BioScience 52(8): The Boardman River Dams Project. (2016). "The Boardman: A River Reborn " Retrieved August , from Welsh, H. H. and S. Droege (2001). "A case for using Plethodontid salamanders for monitoring biodiversity and ecosystem integrity of North American forests." Conservation Biology 15(3): Westbrooks, R. G. (1998). "Invasive plants: changing the landscape of America." US Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository):