* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Small River Communities - North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Survey
Document related concepts
Theoretical ecology wikipedia , lookup
Human impact on the nitrogen cycle wikipedia , lookup
Overexploitation wikipedia , lookup
Occupancy–abundance relationship wikipedia , lookup
Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project wikipedia , lookup
Introduced species wikipedia , lookup
Latitudinal gradients in species diversity wikipedia , lookup
Island restoration wikipedia , lookup
Biodiversity action plan wikipedia , lookup
Reconciliation ecology wikipedia , lookup
Lake ecosystem wikipedia , lookup
River ecosystem wikipedia , lookup
Assisted colonization wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
DRAFT - Small River Communities CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT COMMENTS A comment form will open in a new window Ecosystem Description These river communities represent the next stream order above Piedmont Headwater Streams community. Typically, this community consists of 3rd and 4th order perennial streams and small rivers. They may have fragmented habitats due to mill dams and other similar structures, but are generally too small to have major hydroelectric dams operating on them. Faunal diversity increases significantly in these systems and larger and more diverse fish and mussel assemblage are found as compared to the headwater stream community. Examples of this habitat include the Little River, Eno River, Swift Creek, Uwharrie River, Deep River, Upper Tar River, and Dan River. The 2005 Wildlife Action Plan described Piedmont Riverine Aquatic Communities and adjacent terrestrial Small Wetland Communities and Floodplain Forests, which are components of this community, as priority habitats (see Chapter 5A) (NCWRC 2005). Table 1 at the end of this report provides of summary of expected climate change impacts to these natural communities. Predicted Effects to Wildlife Species Tables 2 through 7 at the end of this report identify the species of conservation concern and priority species that use habitats in this ecosystem. Piedmont riverine aquatic communities provide a number of important habitats, life cycle, or prey components to a vast assemblage of terrestrial, semi-aquatic, and aquatic wildlife. Wetlands associated with riverine systems can be important breeding sites for some amphibian and crayfish species. Birds may use riverine and adjacent terrestrial communities for nesting and feeding areas. Rivers and streams also provide habitat for many prey species that terrestrial animals rely upon. Because of the link between freshwater mussels and fish, phenological disruptions are a possibility, but exact mechanisms or effects are unknown at this time. Freshwater mussel larvae, called glochidia, are dependent on a host fish for transformation into juveniles. Host fish species are known for some mussel species, yet unknown for others. Temperature cues play a large role in the release of glochidia from female mussels and also in the movement and migrations of fish. Therefore, with changing temperatures predicted with climate change, there could be phenological disruptions affecting the reproductive capacity of freshwater mussels. Aquatic species could experience shifts in their range or distribution and sensitive species may experience decline or extirpation due to changes in water quality and habitat. Recent studies DRAFT 1 of 16 have shown that endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC) in treated wastewater can inhibit reproduction and cause feminization of mussels and fish. Aquatic species are particularly sensitive to temperature cues and recent research has shown that many species of freshwater mussels may already be living at the upper thermal tolerances of their early life stages (glochidia and juveniles) (Pandolfo et al. 2010). Extreme temperature events could be especially harmful. These systems may experience a change in species composition due to various changes in habitat and water quality. The introduction of any invasive species is cause for concern and the prevalence of warmer water temperatures may increase the likelihood of additional exotic species that were previously thought to be non-threatening because the winters were too cold for survival. Exotic species invasion is a concern, yet effects to this community are largely unknown. While Asian clam (Corbicula fluminea) is found in aquatic systems throughout the state, its effects on native mussels are largely unknown. Flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris) are a concern because of direct predation on native species. Nutria (Myocastor coypus) is considered a serious pest species in the U.S. because they eat a variety of wetland and agricultural plants and their burrowing damages stream banks, impoundments, and drainage systems. Climate Change Compared to Other Threats Aquatic systems have been under threat from a variety of perturbations in the past and many of those continue today. Problems affecting species and habitats include fragmentation and direct habitat loss, altered hydrology, and lack of old growth dynamics. Water quality deterioration and changes in river morphology and hydrology are the most serious problems affecting wildlife that utilize riverine habitat. Table 8 summarizes the comparison of climate change with other existing threats. Table 8. Comparison Of Climate Change With Other Threats Rank Threat Order Comments Development 1 Development causes direct, secondary, and cumulative effects. Residential development can increase erosion during the construction process, but also as a secondary result of increased impervious surfaces in the watershed. Growth and development increase water supply demands and streamflow patterns are being altered due to rapid urbanization. An increase in impervious surfaces due to roads, parking lots, homes, and businesses increases the amount and speed of runoff being delivered into aquatic systems. Decreased groundwater recharge between storms due to impervious surfaces contributes to reductions in stream baseflow. Pollution 2 Erosion and the resultant sedimentation are the largest sources of nonpoint source pollution in most all aquatic systems. Runoff from urban areas often contains higher concentrations of nutrients, such as 2 of 16 DRAFT Small River Communities Table 8. Comparison Of Climate Change With Other Threats Rank Threat Order Comments nitrogen and phosphorus, sediment, metals, hydrocarbons, and microbes. Point and nonpoint sources of runoff, endocrine disrupting chemicals – are threats. Water Withdrawals 2 Irrigation and water supply withdrawals pose a threat to flow regime. Flood Regime Alteration 2 High and low flow extremes pose a threat. Livestock 3 Livestock access to streams contributes heavily to bank erosion, sedimentation, and nutrient input. Logging/Exploitation 3 Clearing of riparian areas is problematic. Timber harvesting can increase erosion if proper erosion controls are not used and maintained, in addition to installing poorly constructed and maintained timber roads. Lack of riparian 3 Loss of riparian vegetation contributes to streambank erosion and vegetation sedimentation. Riparian vegetation serves as a food/nutrient input to the stream community and helps regulate stream temperature by providing shade. Climate Change 4 Challenges to water quality and water quantity as related to climate change are similar to those being confronted to accommodate growth and development. Climate change effects will likely amplify other threats to increase their severity to aquatic systems. Conversion to 4 Loss of forest cover can cause increased erosion and sedimentation agriculture/silviculture and negatively impact aquatic systems. Invasive Species 5 Invasive plants in the riparian area can have negative impacts on stream systems by often times creating a monoculture with poor nutrient inputs, reducing bank stability, and allowing too much sunlight and therefore warmer stream temperatures. Invasive aquatic species, like Asian clam, may have negative effects on native species, such as competition for space and resources. Specific interactions are unknown. Impoundments 6 Water supply needs could increase number of impoundments; disruptions to flow regime and aquatic habitat. Summary and Recommendations Climate change is likely to have a synergistic effect with other, more impending threats to these systems, such as development and lack of/removal of riparian vegetation. Piedmont small river systems will probably persist. Very few specific climate change-related impacts have been identified, and the rare species and their habitats are expected to persist. Small River Communities DRAFT 3 of 16 Recommended Actions Surveys Determine the distribution and abundance of aquatic species, especially gulf coast spiny softshell, striped mud turtle, eastern mudsnake. Freshwater snails and crayfish in particular have not received the attention needed (they are under-studied taxa). Conduct surveys in areas poised for development (edge of urban expansion) to establish baseline populations and identify problems before development expands. Gather better information about the status and distribution of common species associated with riverine habitats (e.g., three-lined salamander, common ribbonsnake). Expand research, survey, and monitoring efforts beyond collecting presenceabsence data, to look at long-term trends across species groups, habitats, and the effects of management actions. Monitoring Monitor population trends to determine if species are adapting to changing habitats and apply what is learned to future management decisions (Bakke 2008). Monitor aquatic non-native invasive species, analyze population trends and assesses their effect on native priority species populations. When we have a better understanding of the current distribution of these species, survey efforts should be re-directed into development of long-term monitoring strategies to document population trends, from which conservation strategies can be specifically designed to target those species. Monitor the effect of base flow impacts on priority species. Develop climate change monitoring protocols or methods for monitor base flows where priority species occur outside projects related to regulated water use (FERC licensing). Research Studies are needed to document the levels of EDC’s in wastewater discharges and measures need to be identified that will reduce or eliminate EDC’s from wastewater prior to discharge. Gain information regarding the specific microhabitat needs of priority species to develop long term conservation strategies. Study the extent and impact of exotic species introductions, as well as effective control measures for the most problematic exotics. Determine the impacts of “snagging” (removing woody debris after storms) on wildlife populations. Research is needed to investigate nutria population densities, population growth rates, dispersal range, and extent of property damage from burrowing and herbivory. 4 of 16 DRAFT Small River Communities Determine the effect beaver ponds have on downstream movement of pollutants (toxins and sediments). Management Practices Prevent livestock from having direct access to streams as a measure to protect riparian vegetation, maintain bank stability, and reduce nutrient inputs. In managed rivers, restore stream flows that promote controlled overbank flows and hydrological connectivity between the river and the floodplain. Opportunities to restore cane break communities should be sought, through controlled burning or other management. Large trees should be maintained around reservoirs for potential eagle nests, and forest cover should be maintained in the tailrace below dams for eagle foraging. Participate in mutual planning with adjacent states for regional species concerns, especially since some priority species are likely to expand their range due to climate change impacts. Plant riparian areas with vegetation with a broad elevational range within a particular watershed and also to plant vegetation with broad hydrologic tolerance to promote resiliency from climate change Land Protection Preservation or restoration of riparian vegetation is crucial to the maintenance of stable streambanks, in addition to the role that riparian vegetation serves to dissipate water runoff energy and allow for sediment deposition. Land use planning and zoning laws are needed to limit development, land clearing, and hydrology alterations within floodplains (e.g., route highways and other corridors that cross floodplains as closely as possible to existing corridors to avoid fragmenting an extensive corridor of forest; try to avoid routing sewerlines through high quality floodplain). Promote stormwater management regulations and efforts to control point source pollution. CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT COMMENTS A comment form will open in a new window References Bailey, M. A., J. N. Holmes, and K. A. Buhlmann. 2004. Habitat management guidelines for amphibians and reptiles of the southeastern United States (DRAFT). Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation. Small River Communities DRAFT 5 of 16 Bakke, P. 2008. Physical Processes and Climate Change: A guide for biologists. Department of Interior, US Fish and Wildlife Service. Unpublished report. 28pp. Band, L. and D. Salvensen. 2009. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Climate Change Committee Report. UNC Institute for the Environment. Boorman, L.A. And R.M. Fuller. 1981. The changing status of reed swamp in the Norfolk broads. Journal of Applied Ecology 18:241-269. Conn, K.E., L.B. Barber, G.K. Brown, and R.L. Siegrist. 2006. Occurrence and Fate of Organic Contaminants during onsite wastewater treatment. Environmental Science & Technology. 40 (23): 7359-7366. Cumberlandian Region Mollusk Restoration Committee. 2010. Plan for the population restoration and conservation of freshwater mollusks of the Cumberlandian Region. V + 145 pp. DeWan, A., N. Dubois, K. Theoharides, and J. Boshoven. 2010. Understanding the impacts of climate change on fish and wildlife in North Carolina. Defenders of Wildlife, Washington, DC. Gaff, H., DeAngelis, D.L., Gross, L.J., Salinas, R., and M. Shorrash. 2000. Ecological Modeling 127:3352. Gosling, L. M. and S. J. Baker. 1991. Rodents: order Rodentia, family Myocastoridae coypu Myocastor coypus. Blackwell Scientific Publications Ltd., Osney Mead, Oxford. Guichon, M.L., C.P. Doncaster, and M.H. Cassini. 2003. Population structure of coypus (Myocastor coypus) in their region of origin and comparison with introduced populations. Journal of Zoology 261: 265-272. The Zoological Society of London. Printed in the United Kingdom. Joss, A., S. Zabczynski, A. Gobel, B. Hoffmann, D. Loffler, C.S. McArdell, T.A. Ternes, A. Thomsen, H. Siegrist. 2006. Biological degradation of pharmaceuticals in municipal wastewater treatment: Proposing a classification scheme. Water Research 40(2006): 1686-1696. Karl, T.R; Melillo, J.M. and Peterson, T.C. 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States. Cambridge University Press Kasprzyk-Hordern, B., R.M. Dinsdale, A.J. Guwy. 2008. The occurrence of pharmaceuticals, personal care products, endocrine disruptors and illicit drugs in surface water in South Wales, UK. Water Research 42(2008):3498-3518. 6 of 16 DRAFT Small River Communities Kim, S.D., J. Cho, I.S. Kim, B.J. Vanderford, S.A. Snyder. 2007. Occurrence and removal of pharmaceuticals and endocrine disruptors in South Korean surface, drinking, and waste waters. Water Research. 41 (2007):1013-1021. Kolpin, D.W., E.T. Furlong, M.T. Meyer, E.M. Thurman, S.D. Zaugg, L.B.Barber, and H.T. Buxton. 2002. Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999-2000: A national reconnaissance. Environmental Science and Technology 36(6): 1202-1211. Low Impact Development (LID) Practices for Storm Water Management. Retrieved August 23, 2010, from http://www.toolbase.org/TechInventory/TechDetails.aspx?ContentDetailID=909. Maryland Department of Natural Resources. 2004. Invasive and exotic species. Habitat Conservation, Wildlife and Heritage Service. Available http://www.dnr.state.md.us/wildlife/invnutriafaq.asp. (Accessed 4/16/10). Maryland Department of Natural Resources. 2004. Invasive and exotic species. Micol, T., C. P. Doncaster, and P. Jouventin. 1996. Biologie du ragondin (Ch. 1); Demographie du ragondin (Ch. 2). In Le ragondin: 11-41. P. Jouventin, T. Micol, C. Verheyden, and G. Guedon, eds. Paris: Acta. Miltner, R.J., D. White, and C. Yoder. 2004. The biotic integrity of streams in urban and suburbanizing landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning. 69:87-100. Moore, A.A., and M.A. Palmer. 2005. Invertibrate biodiversity in agricultural and urban headwater streams: implications for conservation and management. Ecological Applications 15(4):1169-1177. NC Wildlife Resources Commission. 2002. Guidance Memorandum to address and mitigate secondary and cumulative impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources and water quality. NCWRC, Raleigh, NC. NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). 2001. Descriptions of the biological themes of North Carolina, 2nd edition. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC. NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC). 2005. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC. Nowotny, N. B. Epp, C. Von Sonntag, and H. Fahlenkamp. 2007. Quantification and modeling of the elimination behavior of ecologically problematic wastewater micro-pollutants by adsorption on powdered and granulated activated carbon. Environmental Science and Technology 41(6): 2050-2055. Small River Communities DRAFT 7 of 16 Pandolfo, T.J., W.G. Cope, C. Arellano, R.B. Bringolf, M.C. Barnhart, and E.Hammer. 2010. Upper thermal tolerances of early life stages of freshwater mussels. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 29(3): 959-969. Panzacchi, M., S. Bertolino, R. Cocchi, and P. Genovesi. 2007. Population control of coypu Myocastor coypus in Italy compared to eradication in UK: a cost-benefit analysis. Wildlife Biology 13(2):159-171. Reggiani, G., L. Boitani, S. D'Antoni, and R. De Stefano. 1993. Biology and control of the coypu in the Mediterranean area. Supplemento alle Ricerche di Biologia della Selvaggina 21, 67-100. Seavy, N.E., T. Gardali, G.Golet, F.Thomas Griggs, C.A. Howell, R. Kelsey, S. Small, J. Viers, and J. Weigand. (2009) why Climate Change Makes Riparian Restoration more important than ever: Recommendations for practice and research. Ecological Restoration. 27:3 Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina, third approximation. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC. Shuford, S., S. Rynne, and J. Mueller. 2010. Planning for a New Energy and Climate Future. American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service, Report Number 558. Transportation Research Board, Committee on Climate Change and U.S. Transportation. 2008. Potential impacts of climate change on U.S. Transportation. Transportation Research Board Special Report 290. Washington, D.C. U.S. EPA. 2010. Overview of Climate Change Adaptation in the Southeastern U.S. with a Focus on Water and Coastal Resources – Draft Discussion Paper (1/26/2010). Stratus Consulting, Boulder CO. Wang, L. J. Lyons, P. Kanehl, and R. Bannerman. 2001. Impacts of urbanization on stream habitat and fish across multiple spatial scales. Environmental Management 28(2): 255-266. Wenger, S. 1999. A review of scientific literature on riparian buffer width, extent, and vegetation. Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia. Athens, GA. Wilson, L.A. 1995. Land manager’s guide to the amphibians and reptiles of the south. The Nature Conservancy, Chapel Hill, NC. 8 of 16 DRAFT Small River Communities Table 1. Predicted Impacts of Climate Change Climate Change Factor Comments Increased Temperature/ Potential increased air temperatures and therefore increased water Hot Spells temperatures can lead to algal blooms in aquatic systems, which diminishes stream oxygen availability. Chronically warmer temperatures and lower dissolved oxygen levels may increase stress on organisms. Low dissolved oxygen associated with hot spells may increase fish kills. Higher air and water temperatures can also lead to increased evaporation, which results in less flowing water available for aquatic species use. Flooding Increased severity and frequency of storm events, similar to hurricanes, will have impacts. With a change in intensity and variability of rainfall, there are potential changes to streamflow patterns, channel hydrodynamics, lake or pond levels, and the volume of groundwater from aquifers (Band and Salvensen, 2009; U.S. EPA, 2010; Bakke 2009). Flooding also contributes to increased sediments and contaminants in aquatic systems, major disruption to channel design and hydrodynamics, and changes to chemical and biological structure of streams (Band and Salvensen, 2009). Drought Lower water levels during dry times will increase stress to the system. Severe and prolonged droughts may decrease streamflow, decrease groundwater recharge, and increase evaporation, resulting in impacts to streams. Nutrients may become concentrated and flush out of systems more slowly during seasonal droughts because of low-flow periods (DeWan et al., 2010; Karl et al., 2009; Band and Salvensen, 2009; U.S. EPA, 2010). Phenological Disruption Uncertain if disruptions in organismal interactions (mussel-fish host relationship) will be affected. Compositional Change Changes in species composition a possibility. Channel Hydrodynamics Changes in flow regime, sediment transport, and overall channel design can alter the pattern of riffles, runs, and pools, therefore creating changes in aquatic species' habitats. Increased woody debris from storm damage to riparian areas will also change channel hydrodynamics and available habitat. Flow Regime Flashiness of the system may increase with more storm events, thus changing overall habitat composition. Sediment Transport Changes in streamflow could change overall sediment transport dynamics, leading to altered habitat composition. Exotic species invasion Uncertain how exotic species will affect these systems. Small River Communities DRAFT 9 of 16 Table 2. Fish Species Utilizing Species FISH Ambloplites cavifrons Carpiodes cyprinus Clinostomus funduloides Cottus caeruleomentum Cyprinella labrosa Cyprinella zanema Etheostoma collis Etheostoma collis pop. 1 Common Name Extinction/ Element Major Extirpation US/ NC/ Rank Endemic Disjunct Prone WAP* Roanoke bass G3/S2 FSC/E/P Quillback /SR/P G5/S1 Rosyside dace G5/S5 / /P Blue Ridge G4/S1 sculpin Thicklip chub G4/S3 /SC/P Santee chub G4/S3 /SR/P Carolina darter Carolina darter G3/S3 YES FSC/SC/P G3T3Q/ S3 YES FSC/SC/ Etheostoma collis pop. 2 Carolina darter G3T3Q/ S2 YES FSC/SC/ Etheostoma nigrum Etheostoma podostemone Etheostoma thalassinum Etheostoma vitreum Exoglossum maxillingua Hypentelium roanokense Lythrurus matutinus Moxostoma ariommum Moxostoma collapsum Johnny darter G5/S4 / /P Riverweed G4/S3 darter Seagreen G4/S3 darter Glassy darter G4G5/ S3 /SC/P Cutlip minnow Roanoke hog sucker Pinewoods shiner Bigeye jumprock Notchlip redhorse G5/S1 /SC/P G4/S3 /SC/P G3/S3 FSC/W2/P G4/S1 /T/P G5/S5 / /P 10 of 16 Comments /W5/ Central Piedmont population Eastern Piedmont population /W5/ /W5/P DRAFT Small River Communities Table 2. Fish Species Utilizing Species FISH Moxostoma macrolepidotum Moxostoma pappillosum Moxostoma sp. 3 Nocomis micropogon Nocomis raneyi Notropis amoenus Notropis chalybaeus Notropis mekistocholas Noturus furiosus Noturus gilberti Percina rex Petromyzon marinus Common Name Extinction/ Element Major Extirpation US/ NC/ Rank Endemic Disjunct Prone WAP* Shorthead G5/S4 redhorse V-lip redhorse G4/S4 Carolina redhorse River chub / /P / /P G1G2Q/S1 YES G5/S3? FSC/T/P /W5/ Bull chub G4/S3 Comely shiner G5/S4 /W1/ / /P Ironcolor shiner Cape Fear shiner Carolina madtom Orange madtom Roanoke logperch Sea lamprey /W5/P Small River Communities Comments G4/S3 G1/S1 YES G1Q/SX YES E/E/P YES G2/S1 FSC/T/P FSC/E/P G1G2/ S1 YES G5/S3 E/E/ //P DRAFT 11 of 16 Table 3. Bird Species Utilizing Species BIRDS Aix sponsa Coccyzus americanus Haliaeetus leucocephalus Nyctanassa violacea Common Name Wood Duck Yellow-billed Cuckoo Bald Eagle Element Rank Endemic Extinction/ US/ Major Extirpation NC/ Disjunct Prone WAP* G5/S5B, S4N G5/S5B // G5/S3B, S3N / /P Comments / /P YellowG5/S3B crowned Nightheron / /P Table 4. Mammal Species Utilizing Species MAMMALS Corynorhinus rafinesquii Lasiurus seminolus Myotis austroriparius 12 of 16 Element Common Name Rank: Extinction/ US/ Major Extirpation NC/ Endemic Disjunct Prone WAP* Rafinesque’s Big-eared bat Seminole bat G3G4 TNR/S3 G5/S3?B /SC/P Southeastern myotis G3G4/S2 FSC/SC /P Comments / /P DRAFT Small River Communities Table 5. Reptile Species Utilizing Species REPTILES Apalone spinifera aspera Clemmys guttata Farancia abacura abacura Kinosternon baurii Thamnophis sauritus Common Name Gulf Coast Spiny Softshell Spotted Turtle Eastern Mudsnake Striped Mud Turtle Eastern Ribbonsnake Element Rank Extinction/ US/ Major Extirpation NC/ Endemic Disjunct Prone WAP* G5T5/S3 /W2/P G5/S3 G5/S4 /W1/P / /P G5/S3 / /P G5/S4 / /P Comments Table 6. Amphibian Species Utilizing Species AMPHIBIANS Element Common Name Rank: Extinction/ US/ Major Extirpation NC/ Endemic Disjunct Prone WAP* Ambystoma maculatum Ambystoma opacum Ambystoma talpoideum Eurycea guttolineata Hyla versicolor Spotted salamander Marbled salamander Mole salamander G5/S2 / /P G5/S5 / /P G5/S2? /SR/P Necturus lewisi Three-lined Salamander Northern gray tree frog Neuse River waterdog G3/S3 Small River Communities Comments / /P /SC/P Yes DRAFT /SC/P 13 of 16 Table 7. Invertebrate Species Utilizing Species INVERTEBRATES Alasmidonta heterodon Alasmidonta robusta Alasmidonta sp. 2 Alasmidonta undulata Alasmidonta varicosa Ameiurus brunneus Ceraclea mentiea Ceraclea slossonae Choroterpes basalis Dibusa angata Elliptio cistellaeformis Elliptio congaraea Elliptio fisheriana Elliptio icterina Elliptio lanceolata Elliptio roanokensis Elliptio steinstansana Ephemerella berneri Fusconaia masoni Gomphus septima 14 of 16 Common Name Extinction/ Element Major Extirpation US/ NC/ Rank Endemic Disjunct Prone WAP* Dwarf G1G2/S1 wedgemussel Carolina elktoe G1Q/SX Yes E/E/P Yes /EX/P A Uwharries GNR/S1? Yes region bivalve Triangle floater G4/S2 /SR/ Brook floater FSC/E/P /T/P G3/S1 Snail bullhead G4/S4 / /P A caddisfly G5/S2 /SR/ A caddisfly G4/S1 /SR/ A mayfly G5/S2 /SR/ A caddisfly Box spike G5/S2 G4/SU Carolina G3/S3 slabshell Northern lance G4/S3 /SR/ /W3, W5/P /W2, W5/P /SR/ Variable spike G5Q/S4 Yellow lance G2G3/ S1 / /P FSC/E/P Roanoke slabshell Tar River spinymussel A mayfly Yes G3/S1 G1/S1 Comments /T/P Yes Yes G4/S3 E/E/P /SR/ Atlantic pigtoe G2/S1 Yes FSC/E/P Septima’s clubtail Yes FSC/SR/ G2/ S1S2 DRAFT Small River Communities Table 7. Invertebrate Species Utilizing Species INVERTEBRATES Homoeoneuria cahabensis Lampsilis cariosa Lampsilis radiata Lampsilis sp. 2 Lasmigona decorata Lasmigona subviridis Leptoxis dilatata Macdunnoa brunnea Matrioptila jeanae Orconectes carolinensis Pleurobema collina Somatogyrus virginicus Strophitus undulatus Tortopus puella Toxolasma pullus Valvata sincera Villosa constricta Common Name Extinction/ Element Major Extirpation US/ NC/ Rank Endemic Disjunct Prone WAP* Cahaba Sand- G2G3/ S2 filtering mayfly Yellow G3G4/ S1 lampmussel Eastern G5/S1S2 lampmussel /SR/ FSC/E/P /T/ Chameleon lampmussel Carolina heelsplitter Green floater G1/S1 G3/S1 FSC/E/P Seep mudalia G3/S1 /T/P A mayfly G3G4/ S2 /SR/ A caddisfly G4/S3 /SR/ North Carolina spiny crayfish James spinymussel Panhandle pebblesnail Creeper G3/S3 G2G3/ S1? G5/S2 FSC/SR/P A mayfly Savannah lilliput A valvatid snail Notched rainbow G4/S1 G2/S1 /SR/ FSC/E/P G5/S1 G3/S3 /SR/ /SC/P Small River Communities Comments Yes L. radiata conspicua and L. radiata radiata have been removed from NHP Rare Animal list because subspecies are no longer valid. /SR/ G1/S1 Yes Yes E/E/P /SC/P G1/S1 Yes E/E/P /T/P DRAFT 15 of 16 Table 7. Invertebrate Species Utilizing Common Species Name INVERTEBRATES Villosa delumbis Eastern creekshell Villosa Carolina vaughaniana creekshell Extinction/ Element Major Extirpation US/ NC/ Rank Endemic Disjunct Prone WAP* G4/S3 /SR/P G2/S2 FSC/E/P Comments * US/ NC/ WAP Abbreviations (species are subject to reclassification by USFWS, NHP, or WRC). E T FSC T(S/A) Endangered Threatened Federal Species of Concern Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance SC SR W Special Concern Significantly Rare Watch Category P WAP Priority Species NatureServe Element Rank: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ranking.htm USFWS Endangered Species Listing Status: http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/es_tes.html NC Natural Heritage Program Status: http://www.ncnhp.org/Images/2010%20Rare%20Animal%20List.pdf CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT COMMENTS A comment form will open in a new window 16 of 16 DRAFT Small River Communities