Documents

This spreadsheet explains all the tables in the import spreadsheet, fields that we need to collect and what values are accepted.  These tables include SGCN, Action, Threat, and Associated Habitats.  In the actual import spreadsheet the Associated Habitats are split into their own tabs and listed by their Habitat Class name.  The spreadsheet also includes helper tabs for the accepted Action Class, Threat Class, Habitat Classes/Types, and Taxons and Subtaxons.

Link to File: https://northeastwildlifediversity.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/swap-import-instructions-and-metadata-v18.xlsx

Revision Notes

• 9/3/2024 (version 18)
  • Move Tidal Wetlands & Flats under the Estuarine Habitat Class
  • Move Tidal Rivers & Streams under the Estuarine Habitat Class
• 5/20/2024 (version 17)
  • Added Genesee and Lake Erie to the Habitat Modifier for Major River Basin
  • Fixed the naming of the Location Region to be Ridge and Valley.  It was previously Valley and Ridge.
• 4/29/2024 (version 16)
  • Added Freshwater beach pool as an option for Feature and Formations
• 12/22/2023
  • Action and Threat classification updates
• 12/5/2023
  • Added optional field "State Location" to Action and Threat
  • Added optional fields "State Listed" and "State Legal Status" to SGCN
  • Changed several fields on Action and Threat to Not Required
  • Added "Continental Shelf and Marine" as an option for action location
  • Changed Threat Class 12 to "Other Options" and added 6 sub classes for other threat classification needs
• 11/6/2023
  • Added State Habitat Name to Associated Habitats
  • Added State Threat Name to Threats
  • Added State Action Name to Actions

The SWAP Import Templates contains each of the tables that need to be filled out for importing.  The SWAP Import Templates spreadsheet has blank sheets with the column names labeled for you.

Link to File: https://northeastwildlifediversity.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/swap-import-templates-v18.xlsx

• 9/3/2024
  • Remove the Salinity modifier from Palustrine
  • Add the following modifiers to Estuarine (note that they are all optional)
    • Salinity
    • Hydroperiod
    • Grass/Forb Density 
    • Grass/Forb Height
    • Shrub Density
    • Tree Density
    • River Size
    • Temperature Class
    • Oxygen Level
    • pH
• 6/25/2024
  • Added Salinity to Palustrine and Riverine based on decision made in Steering Committee meetting.
• 12/5/2023
  • Added optional field "State Location" to Action and Threat
  • Added optional fields "State Listed" and "State Legal Status" to SGCN
  • Changed several fields on Action and Threat to Not Required
  • Added "Continental Shelf and Marine" as an option for action location
  • Changed Threat Class 12 to "Other Options" and added 6 sub classes for other threat classification needs
• 11/6/2023
  • Added State Habitat Name to Associated Habitats
  • Added State Threat Name to Threats
  • Added State Action Name to Actions

A nine-page summary report of the Northeast Regional Conservation Synthesis for 2025 State Wildlife Action Plans.

Anderson, M.G., Clark, M. and A. Olivero. 2023. Conservation Status of Natural Habitats in the Northeast. The Nature Conservancy, Center for Resilient Conservation Science. Newburyport, MA.

The Status Assessment for the Eastern Box Turtle in the Northeastern United States provides information that will allow the reader to build a solid understanding of the ecology of the eastern box turtle (subspecies woodland box turtle, Terrapene carolina carolina) in the northeast, understand the threats to the species, and relevant research conducted to date. This is meant to be a complimentary document to the Conservation Plan for the Eastern Box Turtles in the Northeastern United States, which provides recommendations to address and reduce the threats and a framework to increase the potential for the long-term persistence of the eastern box turtle.

The Northeast Xeric Habitats for Pollinators project involved 20 sites from Maryland to Maine in a joint effort to measure the response of vegetation and bee communities to different habitat treatments. Bee and moth communities were also surveyed to correlate diversity and community composition with site conditions and characteristics. Although xeric sites in the region differ due to environmental factors, all sites share the habitat objective of maintaining lower percent cover of woody plants than most habitats in the northeast. A high-quality xeric habitat in the northeast U.S. typically has well-drained soils and fire-adapted vegetation with open tree canopies, abundant floral resources, and patches of bare soil. Depending on the vegetation, these habitats are referred to as sandplains, barrens, woodlands, and grasslands.

Based on the contributed information from all 20 sites, 279 plant species were identified, 262 species of bees and 1447 species of moths were collected, and we learned several important things about xeric habitats in the Northeastern U.S.:

1. Even among sites that are self-described barrens or woodlands, environmental characteristics were important determinates of vegetation community and structure, and bee and moth communities.
2. Habitat management is effective at restoring and/or maintaining the rare obligate species that were the target of this study. Management treatments including canopy thinning, mowing, and fire resulted in decreases in total, tree, shrub, and woody vegetation and increases in early successional flowering plants, pollinator host plant taxa, and overall plant diversity.
3. Bees and Moths were more diverse in colder, drier sites, but moths were more diverse at sites with higher % cover, while bees were more diverse at sites that were managed for more open conditions.
4. Bees and moths showed a slight increase in species diversity during the timeframe of this project. Reflecting longer term benefits, sites with a history of habitat management and objectives that align with maintaining quality barrens conditions had higher plant and bee species diversity and management was successful in increasing the abundance of plants that are known to be important to pollinators. In contrast long-term management was associated with lower moth richness and abundance.
    

The Conservation Plan for the Eastern Box Turtle in the Northeastern United States aims to facilitate collaborative conservation at the regional level that addresses the numerous challenges facing the eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina) that were identified within the Status Assessment for the Eastern Box Turtle in the Northeastern United States (Erb and Roberts 2023). The fundamental goal of this Conservation Plan is to support the persistence and adaptive capacity of the eastern box turtle in the northeastern United States from Maine to Virginia.

State Wildlife Action Plans (SWAPs) are comprehensive conservation blueprints that guide diverse partners to restore Species of Greatest Conservation Need and their habitats. To fulfill this role at a regional scale, SWAPs must provide consistent terminology to support comprehensive multi-state information compilation and assessments. This need was recognized prior to the 2015 federally required 10-year revision, when the Northeast Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies’ Fish & Wildlife Diversity Technical Committee (NEFWDTC) pioneered The Northeast Lexicon: Terminology Conventions and Data Framework for State Wildlife Action Plans in the Northeast Region. The resulting consistency in terminology among SWAPs served as a gateway to regional coordination and tool development such as the Northeast SWAP Database. Subsequently, this database has been used by the NEFWDTC to derive multistate priorities for landscape-level collaboration. In 2022, the NEFWDTC SWAP Subcommittee updated the Northeast Lexicon, incorporating current best practices and considering new opportunities for collaboration prior to 2025 SWAP updates. The 2022 Lexicon provides a data framework for the first five federally required Elements (i.e., species, habitats, threats, actions, monitoring), meets U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service expectations for SWAPs, aligns with national voluntary SWAP best practices, and prioritizes data fields needed for the Northeast SWAP Database and regional conservation planning analyses. While maximizing consistency, the Lexicon provides flexibility to realize the value of innovation and the need for SWAPs to be state-driven.

Terminology Conventions and Data Framework for State Wildlife Action Plans

The primary objectives of this project were to advance conservation efforts for Blanding’s Turtles in the northeast by working with state biologists to:

1. Identify and facilitate action on site-specific conservation needs at select sites within the Blanding’s Turtle Conservation Area Network,
2. Develop and distribute outreach materials about Blanding’s Turtle Best Management Practices (BMPs),
3. Help format and contribute to a site action tracking database,
4. Develop or update site-specific conservation plans for selected sites, and
5. Participate in monthly conference calls with the Northeast Blanding’s Turtle Working Group and other discussions with state biologists, conservation groups, and other stakeholders.
    

The objectives of the Wood Turtle (WT) project were to advance conservation efforts for the Wood Turtle by identifying, prioritizing, and facilitating the implementation of high-priority actions within Focal Core Areas in the Northeast, tracking the progress of these actions by all partners, revising and distributing Best Management Practices, conducting technical assistance trainings, seeking additional funding, and performing surveys in data deficient geographic locations.

Between January and March 2019 (Quarter 1 of the grant period), six spotted turtle sampling sites were identified using data from the NJ Division of Fish and Wildlife, land managers, and local biologists. The sites (abbreviated for data sensitivity reasons) included: WR (Sussex County), BC (Warren County), DR (Somerset County), AC (Monmouth County), CW (Burlington County), and BN (Ocean County). Permission to conduct spotted turtle surveys was sought and obtained for all the sites. Reconnaissance surveys were conducted to identify key habitat areas and delineate/map 400 m diameter sampling plots as per the regional sampling protocols.

A standardized pollinator protocol was developed for the 2018 season of the Xeric Grassland, Barren, and Woodland Pollinator Conservation Project anticipated to improve the ability of Northeast states to implement cost-effective habitat management to benefit native pollinators and Regional Species of Greatest Conservation Need that depend on these priority habitats. A network of twelve organizations (state, federal, and not-for-profit), representing eight states (VA, MD, NJ, NY, MA, NH, VT, ME) enrolled to participate in the first year of this project. The sites were located in seven ecoregions within the eastern United States. All participants received the necessary equipment to collect and mail bee specimens to a central lab at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst to be processed and identified. Through a webinar, all participating sites were provided training on how collect bees using bee bowls (pan traps) and hand netting. Each site received a copy of the RCN pollinator protocol to assist in their collection efforts. An undergraduate student was hired as a summer intern to help process bees in the lab. Over the course of the season a total of 3237 bees representing 5 families, 25 genera, and 125 species have been identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible. Three species listed on State Wildlife Action Plans (SWAP) were collected. Baseline bee datasets developed from these surveys will help guide future treatment and management activities to create and restore xeric grasslands, barrens, and woodland communities.

In the spring of 2014, the CT DEEP opened the final of three fishway on Mill Brook allowing anadromous alewife (river herring) access to historic spawning grounds in Rogers Lake. In Rogers Lake there was already a resident landlocked population. A decade of research on alewife in Rogers Lake and other lakes in the region has shown that anadromous and landlocked alewife differ in traits that strongly affect the ecology of lakes, including the duration in freshwater, gape width, gillraker spacing, prey size‐selectivity, diet composition, habitat usage, and whole‐body morphology (Palkovacs et al. 2008, Palkovacs and Post 2008, Schielke et al. 2011, Jones et al. 2013, Palkovacs et al. 2014). The fishway allowed for anadromous and landlocked alewife to come into "secondary contact," a process in which previously isolated and potentially divergent linages come back into contact. At the start of this project, the outcome of secondary contact between landlocked and anadromous alewife was uncertain. Landlocked alewife could outcompete and prevent establishment of anadromous alewife, anadromous alewife could establish a population that coexists with the landlocked population, or landlocked and anadromous alewife could hybridize in the lake. These potential outcomes would have important implications for anadromous alewife restoration efforts in CT and across the range of anadromous alewife. For example, a large locally adapted resident landlocked population might outcompete a small colonizing anadromous population, in which case additional management activities would be needed to facilitate anadromous alewife restoration. The outcomes of restoration and secondary contact could also have implications for the food webs and water quality of lake with existing landlocked populations and restored anadromous populations.

Fourteen species of wetland-inhabiting butterfly Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) status were surveyed in 2016 and 2017 at multiple sites across four states – Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Survey data was used to evaluate the status of each species in all states where they occurred as well as refine the distribution data for each species across the region. All data points were mapped in ArcGIS and used to model species distribution in terms of both habitat and climate. Data collected prior to 2016 was also evaluated and added to the models, as was data from Delaware that was provided by DE NHP. The results are presented for each species and several examples are explored in greater depth. Best Management Practices (BMPs) were developed for both modeling procedures. A final goal of the project was to initiate habitat enhancement projects in a small number of survey areas in Maryland and Pennsylvania. The results of these projects are discussed as well as the BMPs that were developed for site selection and management.

In 2015, eight Northeastern States began a cooperative project for Conservation Planning for the Wood Turtle (Glyptemys insculpta) under a Competitive State Wildlife Grant (CSWG). This portion of the study uses genetic data to identify genetic diversity across the study area (Maine to Virginia), identify the number of populations in the study area, and determine the success of genetic assignment of individuals to sites of origin. Tissue samples were collected as blood, tail tips, toenails and shell shavings or scutes from 1,895 Wood Turtles. Most tissue samples were collected in 2015 and 2016; however, some collectors submitted tissue samples from tissue archived from previous collections with the earliest collection dated 2005. Tissue samples were genotyped at 16 microsatellite markers for 1,244 individuals. Genetic data were analyzed for genetic diversity (using HP-RARE, GENEPOP and GENALEX), allele frequency exact test (using GENEPOP), genetic clustering (using STRUCTURE), full siblings (using COLONY), and genetic assignment (using GENECLASS). Samples sizes ranged from 5 to 50 individuals (average n=17.4) collected from 62 sites. Unbiased allelic richness ranged from 3.4 to 6.2 (average 5.1), private alleles ranged from 0 to 0.3 (average 0.05), unbiased expected heterozygosity ranged from 0.5 to 0.7 (average = 0.6) and FIS ranged from -0.21 to 0.14 (average =0). FST ranged from 0 to 0.23 (average 0.07). Allele frequency exact tests identified significant pairwise differences between 91% of the sites. The Bayesian genetic clustering analysis indicated that there are likely 3 to 5 clusters with 4 clusters providing the most optimal clustering pattern in the data set. The major population groups identified were northern ME, Potomac, coastal MA and NJ/NY. Sites in PA and NH showed admixture with the neighboring clusters. The results indicate that clear genetic differences among populations (or subpopulations) are detectable across the study area. The Bayesian clustering analysis indicate that an island stepping-stone model describes the population genetic structure where sites are exchanging individuals with neighboring sites creating a gradation of genetic structure over the study area. Isolation by distance was significant for 2 of 3 clusters tested in Potomac and Maine/NH (p<0.01). The northern Maine cluster showed a similar pattern but was not significant for isolation by distance (p=0.17). Tests for full sibling families indicated a maximum distance between family members of 50 km. Genetic assignments indicated that 52% of individuals in the data set assigned correctly to the collection site. The genetic assignment was moderately successful with some sites providing relatively high (>75%) correct genetic assignment; however, assignment success using these markers varied across the sites/populations and, at some sites, correct assignment was relatively low (<50%) limiting the application of this method for management and enforcement for Wood Turtles confiscated from illegal harvest.

The brook floater (Alasmidonta varicosa) occurs along the Atlantic slope from the Canadian Maritimes to Georgia. In Canada it is designated as a Schedule 1 Special Concern Species that is confined to 15 watersheds in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick where it is considered “never abundant, representing between 1-5% of the total mussels present” (Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2016). In the United States it is listed as critically imperiled (S1) in 10 states: New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, and Maryland; imperiled (S1S2) in Pennsylvania; imperiled (S2) in Georgia; imperiled (S3) in Maine (in 2007 Maine amended the status of A. varicosa to threated from special concern); extirpated (SX) in two states (Rhode Island and Delaware), and unranked (SNR) in South Carolina. However, the South Carolina State Wildlife Action Plan 2015, lists A. varicosa as highly imperiled. Here we report on: (1) the biology and life history of A. varicosa, (2) the distribution and condition of all known populations from Maine to Georgia, (3) the human impacts on populations (4) the results of models using environmental factors at both the HUC 12 level and stream level as predictors of population condition, and (5) the results of a survey sent to mussel biologists from Maine to Georgia concerning threats to this species. Alasmidonta varicosa is a strict riverine species that favors low productivity streams and appears to have a low tolerance to eutrophication. It is a small mussel with a moderate life span, moderate age of reproductive maturity and low fecundity. Because it is a host fish generalist, A. varicosa populations are unlikely to be limited by the availability of a particular host fish. Our model results show a strong relationship between the rapid replacement of riparian forests with residential, commercial, agricultural and industrial development and the condition of A. varicosa populations. Protecting and restoring riparian forestlands may be our most practical tool for conserving this species. Survey respondents scored the loss of riparian forests, habitat fragmentation, agricultural runoff of nutrients and toxins, urbanization and development as the most spatially extensive and the most severe threats to A. varicosa populations. Captive propagation, reintroduction and population augmentation may be needed in order to maintain or rescue A. varicosa populations. We document a dramatic contraction in the distribution range of this species. Surveys show that many populations consist of declining numbers of older animals and show little or no evidence of recruitment. Sharp declines in the size and spatial extent of populations as well as population extirpations have occurred throughout the range, however important populations persist in multiple states including Maine, which appears to hold the largest selfsustaining populations range-wide. Dams, impoundments and waters that are heavily polluted isolate many populations throughout the range. We note that current and projected increases in extreme precipitation and drought will seriously impact remaining A. varicosa populations.

Biological inventories aimed at enumerating a region’s species, combined with detailed natural history observation, can reveal evidence of cryptic species: overlooked species incorrectly grouped under a single taxonomic name. The identification of cryptic species raises fundamental questions about each species’ distribution, identification, and conservation status. Leopard frogs in the northeastern United States have faced this situation since the recent discovery of Rana (= Lithobates) kauffeldi, the Atlantic Coast leopard frog, as distinct from R. sphenocephala (southern leopard frog) and R. pipiens (northern leopard frog). Following on this discovery, the objectives of our study were to 1) Determine conclusively which leopard frog species occur presently and occurred historically in ten eastern U.S. states; 2) Refine the range of R. kauffeldi relative to the two other leopard frog species; 3) Map new, potentially reduced, ranges for the two congeners; 4) Assess the species’ conservation status, particularly in areas where R. kauffeldi is already known to be of concern; 5) Contrast multi-level habitat associations among the three species; and 6) Improve upon the separation of species using acoustic and morphological field characters to facilitate future inventory, monitoring, and status assessments of the new species.

Original protocol by J. Greathouse

• Following collection of eggs, the eggs should be transported in a covered container with oxygenated water back to the Hellbender Conservation Center.
• Upon arrival at the Hellbender Conservation Center, each egg should be separated from the clutch by cutting the gelatinous membrane between each egg with scissors while a plastic spoon is under the egg to be separated.
• Create hellbender water/methylene blue mix by adding 0.5 cc of methylene blue to a new gallon of spring water and shake well. (Methylene blue is a color indicator of oxygen level. Water will turn green/yellow if oxygen levels drop.)
• Once the egg has been separated from the clutch, place it into a specimen cup with 60 mL of spring water and methylene blue mix.
• Label the cup with the site name, treatment (shaker, incubator, or room temperature), and its individual ID number.
• While in the cup, inspect the egg for any signs of white cottony fungus and abnormalities in the texture or color of the yolk or yolk sac.
• Using the Harrison chart of larval salamander development, determine the approximate stage of the egg and record this on the appropriate form.
• Place as many cups of eggs that will fit on one half of the shaker platform in the shaker. Set the shaker temperature at 14°C and at 40 revolutions per minute.
• Place the remainder of the cups on the top shelf of the incubator with the temperature also set at 14°C. If space in the shaker and the incubator becomes filled, then specimen cups will be stored in cabinets or in empty aquaria that are covered to prevent light disruption. 
• Each day, the egg should be gently removed from the cup with a plastic spoon, and the water and methylene blue should be changed at the same volume as listed above.
• Following water changes, eggs should be staged and the data should be recorded on the appropriate form. Any information such as the presence of fungus or abnormalities in the texture or color of the yolk or yolk sac should be recorded as well.
• Upon hatching of the larvae, the individual should still be removed by spoon until it is too large to handle appropriately with the spoon. At that point, the individual should be placed in the specimen cup lid or a coffee cup lid during water changes.
• Developmental staging of the larvae and inspection for yolk sac abnormalities should continue at this point and should continue to be documented.
• One blackworm per individual will be introduced as prey approximately 3 weeks following hatching, dependent upon yolk sac absorption.

The black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis) is the most secretive of the secretive marsh birds and one of the least understood species in North America. The eastern black rail (L. j. jamaicensis) is listed as endangered in six eastern states and is a candidate for federal listing. Nearly all of what we know about the population exists in bits and pieces scattered throughout more than 100 years of literature, museum specimens and unpublished observations. The objective of this project is to identify, collect and compile all information pertaining to the breeding population along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts with the intention of developing the historical context needed to inform future conservation efforts.

The historic breeding range of the eastern black rail appears to have included coastal areas from south Texas north to the Newbury Marshes in Massachusetts and interior areas west to the eastern slope of the Appalachian Mountains. A total of 1,937 occurrence records were found within this area between 1836 and 2016. Credible evidence of occurrence was found for 21 of the 23 states including 174 counties, parishes and independent cities and 308 named properties. Based on breeding evidence and seasonality of occurrence 34 (19%) counties were classified as confirmed, 97 (56%) as probable breeding and 43 (25%) as possible breeding. Many of the named properties are well-known conservation lands including 46 (15%) national wildlife refuges, 44 (14%) state wildlife management areas, 26 (8%) state and municipal parks and many named lands managed by non-governmental conservation organizations.

A relatively soft estimate of current population size for black rails within the study area is 455 to 1,315 breeding pairs including ranges of 55 to 115 and 400 to 1,200 for the Northeast and Southeast regions respectively. More than 75% of the overall estimate is accounted for by South Carolina, Florida and Texas with the latter two having high uncertainty ratings due to extensive areas of potential habitat that have yet to be assessed. This collective estimate is approximately 40-50% lower than the estimate derived during the Southeast and Northeast black rail workshops held in 2014. The difference reflects ongoing declines, an increase in survey coverage of geographic gaps and a more thorough assessment of available information.

Black rails within northern areas have experienced a catastrophic decline including a contraction of the northern range limit from Massachusetts to New Jersey a distance of approximately 450 km. Study areas in New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and North Carolina that were surveyed in the late 1980s and early 1990s and again over the past two years have documented a 64% decline in occupancy and an 89% decline in birds detected equating to a 9.2% annual rate of decline. Maryland has experienced a 13.8% annual rate of decline. South Carolina has experienced a 4.7% rate of decline over the same time period. No information is available to assess trends for areas south of South Carolina.

Black rails within the study area have primarily been documented within sites with tidal salt marsh as the primary habitat. Of the 308 properties with documented use, 186 (60%) were salt marshes, 49 (16%) were impoundments, 36 (12%) were freshwater wetlands, 20 (6%) were coastal prairies and 17 (6%) were grassy fields. Of the sites documented within salt marshes, 65 (35%) were along the lee side of barrier islands with the remaining in estuaries or along unprotected coastlines. Impoundments included waterfowl management units, rice fields, wetland restoration or mitigation sites, spoil deposition sites, abandoned mines and farm ponds.

The black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis) is the most secretive of the secretive marsh birds and one of the least understood bird species in North America. The eastern subspecies (L. J. jamaicensis) has undergone a southward range contraction over the past one hundred years and populations in the mid-Atlantic appear to have declined by as much as 90% over the past thirty years. Recent changes have led to concerns within the conservation community and urgency to learn as much as possible about the requirements of the form and its historic status and distribution. Much of the collective knowledge of the eastern black rail along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts is scattered in bits and pieces throughout more than 100 years of literature. An identified need has been to gather available literature together to compile what is known and to identify information gaps moving forward.

The objective of this effort is to compile a bibliography of published and unpublished literature focused on the eastern black rail along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of North America. This effort follows previous projects that have compiled working bibliographies for the closely related California black rail (L. J. coturniculus) in 1980 and the mid-western or inland population of the eastern black rail in 2012.

In order to better understand the extent to which Ranavirus is impacting amphibian and reptile populations in the Northeast region of the U.S. and to develop and test a sampling protocol that could be used throughout the region, we conducted a survey of amphibian larvae at 122 randomly-selected wood frog (Lithobates sylvaticus) breeding ponds in a 142,286 km2 study area encompassing parts of Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. In 2013 and 2014, a total of 4,306 individual wood frog larvae (30 larvae per pond) were collected for quantitative PCR (qPCR) analysis by Montclair State University (New Jersey). Additionally, 158 individuals of seven amphibian species potentially involved in active die-offs were collected for analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Wildlife Health Center (NWHC). This study represents both the largest geographic area and the greatest sample size ever screened for Ranavirus.

The eastern hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis alleganiensis) is declining in many parts of its range [1] and has been identified as a Species of Greatest Conservation Need by the Northeast Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (NAFWA). The species’ historic range in the northeast includes New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia and Virginia. Despite a significant amount of research effort, substantial gaps remain in our knowledge of the hellbender’s current distribution, particularly in NY, PA and VA. Given the broad distribution and cryptic nature of this species, generating a comprehensive distribution map is challenging using traditional approaches. Conventional hellbender surveys rely on rock-turning, which is time-intensive, physically demanding, and potentially destructive to the species’ microhabitat. In contrast, environmental DNA (eDNA) surveys can provide information about species occurrence (and potentially abundance) without disturbing sensitive habitat [2]. Such information is urgently needed to guide ongoing efforts to protect and restore wild hellbender populations.

Northern diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin terrapin) (terrapin) populations have declined due to a number of factors since the early 1900’s. Historic commercial fisheries, loss of habitat, drowning in commercial and recreational crab pots, increased nest failure due to predation from raccoons and other subsidized predators, and road mortality have been the primary causations for population decline (Brennessel n.d.). Illegal harvest and trade in the Asian food markets, both domestic and abroad may also be a major threat.

The terrapin has been identified as a Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) in the NE SWAPs. The terrapin is found in eight states of the Northeast /mid-Atlantic regions and is considered Threatened in MA, Endangered in RI, and Special Concern in CT. In DE’s SWAP, the species is considered a Tier I species, which is most in need of conservation action in order to sustain or restore their populations. In VA’s SWAP, the species is considered a Tier II Species of Greatest Conservation Need. In NY and MD, the species is identified in their respected SWAP, but with no priority ranking given. In NY and CT, the terrapin is identified as an S3 - Vulnerable species and in MD it’s an S4 – Apparently Secure species. NatureServe lists the Global Status of the terrapin as T4-Apparently Secure. In NJ, the terrapin is a commercial marine species and identified in the SWAP as species of greatest conservation need [SGCN].

The species has been identified by the NE Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation (NEPARC) as a species of regional conservation concern in the NE Amphibian and Reptile Species of Regional Responsibility and Conservation Concern Report as it found in ≥ 75 % of states listed in the SWAP and > 50% of NDBT distribution is within the NE Region of North America (NEPARC 2010). Therres (1999) also suggested that the terrapin merits a federal listing assessment. There is no specific federal program/policy for the terrapin and state programs rarely coordinate regional efforts in the absence of a federal mandate (Hackney 2010).

A regional Conservation Strategy is needed at this time to identify steps that can be taken regionally and by state to reduce further decline of this species and to help achieve long-term sustainability of the terrapin population in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic regions. To pursue a regional Conservation Strategy, existing data must be compiled and evaluated by state and regionally from a number of partners and organizations. This proposal represents the first major effort of the DTWG to take a comprehensive view of the status of the terrapin in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic regions. In 2008, the (mid-Atlantic) DTWG meeting identified the development of a conservation plan as a priority action item. Despite its importance, no plan has been developed to date due to limited resources. The development of a Conservation Strategy will help guide and coordinate multiple-state laws and policies to protect the terrapin and its habitat and may reduce the need for a Federal listing assessment (as was also suggested by Hackney [2010]).

This report provides an overall summary of the project as it was executed and the results of the sampling of 98 timber rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus) performed during 2013 and 2014.

White-nose Syndrome (WNS), an emerging infectious disease caused by the novel fungus Pseudogymnoascus destructans (Pd), has devastated North American bat populations since its discovery in 2006. The little brown myotis, Myotis lucifugus, once the most common bat in North America, has been especially affected. The goal of this study was to address bat declines by developing and optimizing treatments for WNS. We report the results of two in vitro studies of pharmaceutical/organic compounds and the results of two studies of treatments in control and Pd infected little brown myotis in vivo, performed at the bat research facilities in the Reeder lab at Bucknell University. As has been found by other laboratories, a number of chemical agents, including, from this study 5,7-hexadecadiynoic acid and heptadecanoic acid, are effective at killing or inhibiting the growth of Pseudogymnoascus (but Pichia spent medium (PSM) was not effective). Unfortunately, both systemic and dermatophyte (superficial) fungal infections in humans and animals are notoriously difficult to treat, and often require prolonged chemical application to achieve a cure. Traditional antifungal agents are also known to have relatively high side effect profiles and the use of these drugs in hibernating animals is novel. While treatment with the strong antifungal agent voriconazole was very clearly harmful to bats, trials with subcutaneously terbinafine implants were more promising. We can make no specific treatment recommendations at this time, but rather urge the research community to continue to pursue mitigation options for WNS. Clearly the WNS problem is complex, especially when one considers any sort of treatment option – which will affect the entire cave ecosystem.

We present the first regional trends in anuran occupancy from North American Amphibian Monitoring Program (NAAMP) data from 11 northeastern states using 11 years of data. NAAMP is a long-term monitoring program where observers collect data at assigned random roadside routes using a calling survey technique. We assessed occupancy trends for 17 species. Eight species had regional trends whose 95% posterior interval did not include zero; of these seven were negative (Anaxyrus fowleri, Acris crepitans, Pseudacris brachyphona, Pseudacris feriarum-kalmi complex, Lithobates palustris, Lithobates pipiens, and Lithobates sphenocephalus) and one was positive (Hyla versicolor-chrysoscelis complex). We also assessed state level trends for 103 species/state combinations; of these, 29 showed a decline and nine showed an increase in occupancy.

This document summarizes the innovative and strategic approaches to conservation that have been developed collaboratively with Northeast Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies’ Fish and Wildlife Diversity Technical Committee and its key partners. Together, the Northeast states have created a regional conservation planning framework enabling the systematic development of common terrestrial and aquatic habitat classifications, identification of Regional Species of Greatest Conservation Need, integrated monitoring framework for species and their habitats and regional assessments of species and habitat condition. Recent conservation efforts for Regional Species of Greatest Conservation Need (such as New England cottontail and Blanding’s turtle) highlight how the states are applying this regional conservation planning framework across state lines to preempt federal listing by implementing on-the-ground conservation.

Streamflow information is critical for addressing any number of hydrologic problems. Often, streamflow information is needed at locations that are ungauged and, therefore, have no observations on which to base water management decisions. Furthermore, there has been increasing need for daily streamflow time series to manage rivers for both human and ecological functions. To facilitate negotiation between human and ecological demands for water, this paper presents the first publicly available, map-based, regional software tool to estimate historical, unregulated, daily streamflow time series (streamflow not affected by human alteration such as dams or water withdrawals) at any user-selected ungauged river location. The map interface allows users to locate and click on a river location, which then links to a spreadsheet-based program that computes estimates of daily streamflow for the river location selected. For a demonstration region in the northeast United States, daily streamflow was, in general, shown to be reliably estimated by the software tool. Estimating the highest and lowest streamflows that occurred in the demonstration region over the period from 1960 through 2004 also was accomplished but with more difficulty and limitations. The software tool provides a general framework that can be applied to other regions for which daily streamflow estimates are needed.

White-nose syndrome (WNS), an emerging infectious disease that has killed over 5.5 million hibernating bats, is named for the causative agent, a white fungus (Geomyces destructans (Gd)) that invades the skin of torpid bats. During hibernation, arousals to warm (euthermic) body temperatures are normal but deplete fat stores. Temperature-sensitive dataloggers were attached to the backs of 504 free-ranging little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus) in hibernacula located throughout the northeastern USA. Dataloggers were retrieved at the end of the hibernation season and complete profiles of skin temperature data were available from 83 bats, which were categorized as: (1) unaffected, (2) WNS-affected but alive at time of datalogger removal, or (3) WNS-affected but found dead at time of datalogger removal. Histological confirmation of WNS severity (as indexed by degree of fungal infection) as well as confirmation of presence/absence of DNA from Gd by PCR was determined for 26 animals. We demonstrated that WNS-affected bats aroused to euthermic body temperatures more frequently than unaffected bats, likely contributing to subsequent mortality. Within the subset of WNS-affected bats that were found dead at the time of datalogger removal, the number of arousal bouts since datalogger attachment significantly predicted date of death. Additionally, the severity of cutaneous Gd infection correlated with the number of arousal episodes from torpor during hibernation. Thus, increased frequency of arousal from torpor likely contributes to WNS-associated mortality, but the question of how Gd infection induces increased arousals remains unanswered.

While this project is now officially completed (grant period ended 03/31/2010). However, because of the importance of these findings, and the continued rapid spread of WNS, we will continue to monitor hibernation patterns in WNS affected bats using the supplies purchased with this grant supplemented by those purchased with other funds. Approximately 150 dataloggers are available for studies next winter, during which bats in several sites will be surveyed for their third. This will provide for longitudinal analysis of the influence of WNS on a given hibernaculum over time (e.g., in an unaffected year, during the first year of infection, when mortality is high but some survivorship occurs, and in the second year of infection, in which nearly all remaining bats will perish).

Land use planning is a complex and challenging, continuously evolving endeavor. Effective planners must be able to rapidly integrate a vast amount of information in the face of competing priorities of businesses, developers, politicians, private individuals.  As conservationists, how do we ensure that protection of wildlife and habitat are also a priority in planning? In order to address wildlife conservation, decision-makers must be able to readily address not only questions such as:  “what wildlife species and habitat is of concern in my jurisdiction?” and “where it is located?”, but also “how can we ensure that wildlife and habitat are conserved?” within this very challenging context.

Exotic invasive species pose a significant threat to species of greatest conservation need (SGCN) throughout the Northeast in a number of ways. Impacts may be direct (affecting individual health or productivity) or indirect (affecting habitat and/or ecosystem processes) or both.

State wildlife action plans (SWAP) have identified wildlife species within each state that warrant some level of management concern. Causes for concern vary by species and typically loss of habitat, pollution, and other stressors are listed as contributors to population decreases. In some cases, invasive species have been specifically identified as impacting subsets of SGCNs within states but to date, there has been no assessment of the invasive species posing the greatest potential threat to SGCNs at the regional level.

The original goal of this project was to produce a list of invasive species that posed the most significant threat to SGCNs in the Northeast Region. However, during the process of completing the project it became evident that the true value in this effort lies in the data assembled and the ability for future users to customize it for their specific needs. Therefore, the goal of this project was amended to focus on the provision of these data tables and a process for modifying them to allow users to modify them and generate lists reflecting their own importance criterion.

This report will provide background information on how these data tables were developed and how they should be interpreted for prioritizing and ranking invasive species threats to SGCNs. This report will provide background information on how the lists of SGCNs and invasive species were compiled and attributed. We will also provide an example of how this information can be used to generate specific ranked lists of invasive species.

This example is supplied to illustrate how to use the invasive species and species of greatest conservation need (SGCN) tables to produce a ranking for the invasive species posing the greatest threat to SGCNs in Pennsylvania. This stepwise process can be used for any subset of the data provided.

We will draw upon the information provided in the final report and tables accompanying this exercise. The terms and background used in this example are explained in detail in the final report, and we will assume users are familiar with this document before using this example. If terms or processes are unclear, please refer back to the final report.

All operations used will be completed using Microsoft Excel and the tools and functions included in it with the exception of one custom macro contained in the file supplied (Note: in order to use this macro, macros must be enabled upon opening the file when prompted) entitled “Appendix C – Interaction Tables.xls”. Wherever possible, specific formulas and steps will be provided in detail. Some functions such as “Copy/Paste Special” will not be explained in detail. These are simple functions to master in Excel.

In all cases, we recommend making changes to copies of the original data when completing custom analyses. This is good practice and will ensure the integrity of the original dataset for subsequent analyses.

Ecological Systems of the United States - a working classification of U.S. terrestrial systems.

• Appendix 1: Indicators for Forest Target
• Appendix 2: Indicators for Freshwater Streams and River Systems Target
• Appendix 3: Indicators for Freshwater Wetlands Target
• Appendix 4: Indicators for Highly Migratory Species Target
• Appendix 5: Indicators for Lakes and Ponds Target
• Appendix 7: Indicators for Regionally Significant Species of Greatest Conservation Need Target
• Appendix 8: Indicators for Unique Habitats of the Northeast Target
• Appendix 9: Examples of Results Chains
• Appendix 10: Proposed Data Fields for Strategy Effectiveness Database

Development of avian indicators and measures for monitoring threats and effectiveness of conservation actions – Grassland Birds

Implementation of the Northeast Monitoring Framework

Implementation of the Northeast Monitoring Framework

Ten Steps to Successful Bird Conservation through Improved Monitoring

Salt marsh breeding bird populations (rails, bitterns, sparrows, etc.) in eastern North America are high conservation priorities in need of site specific and regional monitoring designed to detect population changes over time. The present status and trends of these species are unknown but are thought to be declining and the majority of these species are listed as conservation priorities on Comprehensive Wildlife Plans throughout the eastern United States. National Wildlife Refuges and National Park Service units, as well as other wildlife conservation areas, provide important salt marsh habitat, but little is known about the abundance, population trends, or management needs of these breeding bird species. The entire breeding range of Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed and Coastal Plain Swamp sparrows are within BCR 30, providing an opportunity for designing surveys to estimate abundance and detect population trends through repeated surveys within the entire breeding ranges of two priority species. The primary purpose of this project is to develop a hierarchical sampling frame and monitoring protocol for salt marsh birds in Bird Conservation Region (BCR) 30 that will provide sample designs that could be implemented to detect species-specific estimates of abundance at several scales, including 1) specific sites (i.e. National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges), 2) within states or regions, and 3) within BCR 30.

This protocol represents an effort to strengthen monitoring of high-elevation landbirds from the Catskill Mountains of New York to the Cape Breton Highlands of Nova Scotia through improved coordination, statistical design, and data management. It builds on knowledge and experience gained by several institutions over sixteen years of mountain bird research and monitoring in the region. A standardized international protocol, aligned with the information needs of land stewards and policy-makers, will promote conservation of a vulnerable bird community. A unified approach will also achieve efficiencies necessary to sustain high-elevation landbird monitoring over the long term.

The Secured Lands dataset is a cooperative project led by The Nature Conservancy’s (TNC) Regional office, involving all the Conservancy’s eastern state offices and relying on data from 14 state agencies and many private organizations. We began building this dataset in 2005 and are now on our third revision (2007 version). In scope it includes all public and private lands that are permanently secured against conversion to development. The land may be owned in fee or held with an easement but the protection must be permanent. Our geographic area includes Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, District of Columbia and Ohio.

The Framework itself provides details on what needs to be monitored, what data exist, and how that data should be collected, analyzed, and reported. This document, however, does not present actual data about the health of Northeastern fish, wildlife, and ecosystems. Nor does it present data that illustrate the effectiveness of conservation actions. Rather, it provides the means for NEAFWA members to work together to collect, analyze, and communicate that data. 

A Report on the Process to Develop a  Monitoring and Performance Reporting Framework for the Northeast Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 

The framework is a set of principles, tools, and procedures to help biologists, biometricians, data managers, and wildlife administrators achieve five overarching goals:

1. integrate monitoring into bird management and conservation decision-making; 
2. broaden the scope of current monitoring for species that are most at risk;
3. coordinate monitoring programs among organizations and integrate them across spatial scales;
4. increase the value of monitoring information by improving survey design, field methods, and data analysis; and 5. maintain bird population monitoring data in modern data management systems.

• June 2007 Workshop Introductory Presentation
• June 2007 Workshop Products
• September 2007 Workshop Products

Northeast Wildlife, Vol 54, 1999.