VWR — 1

The VirginiaWetlands ReportThe VirginiaWetlands Report

Summer 2001Vol. 16, No. 2

Through The Years in Virginia’s Wetlands: The 1970’sGene M. Silberhorn, Ph.D.

Editor’s Note:Professor Emeritus Gene M. Silberhorn is a nationally recognized botanist, educator, and author who came to VIMS in the

early seventies to head up the newly created Tidal Wetlands Inventory Program. His arrival at Gloucester Point coincided withthe passage of the Virginia Tidal Wetlands Act and Gene has been intimately involved with all aspects of wetlands science andpolicy as his career has direct parallels with the management of wetlands both in Virginia and nationally.

Having just retired from VIMS and the School of Marine Science of the College of William and Mary, Gene now busies him-self with cycling, fishing, gardening, a consulting business and getting used to being called “Grandpa” for the first time. Geneis taking time out of this busy schedule to write of his recollections over an outstanding career at the Institute. The VirginiaWetlands Report is pleased to print the first of his reminiscences in this issue. Look for additional articles in the future.

A s I sit down to write about my recollections of working in wet-

lands at VIMS, I can’t help but remi-nisce about fellow workers andstudents. These fond memories aresomewhat distracting to my progress incompleting this report during my firstsummer of retirement. Now, the atten-dance and participation at meetings,conferences and workshops held bothnear and far, lose importance and mean-ing to me. Incidents in the field, how-ever, are recalled as if they happenedyesterday.

I arrived at VIMS from Canada inlate June 1972, a day or two after tropi-cal storm Agnes blew through. Thecampus was nearly deserted, not fromstorm damage or summer vacations, butbecause everyone was in the field gath-ering results from the storms impactson the estuarine environment. I washired into the fledgling Wetlands Re-search Department consisting of KenMarcellus, George Dawes, and soon tofollow, Tom Barnard. Our main goal wasto inventory, classify and evaluate thetidal wetlands in the commonwealth.

The newly enacted Virginia Wet-lands Act of 1972 went into effect Julyof that year. VIMS was given the taskby the General Assembly of providing

the scientific and environmental sup-port with regard to the Wetlands Act.

One of my very first assignmentswas to work with Marcellus and Dawesto make an ecological assessment ofthe tidal marshes of the proposed YorkRiver State Park in James City County.The fieldwork began soon after theflooded conditions caused by Agnessubsided. Preliminary plans were inplace to develop a 15-acre marina nearthe mouth of Taskinas Creek, the mainestuarine tributary of the park. Theconstruction of the marina would haverequired dredging a defined acreage oftidal marsh and deepening the naturalchannel. While plotting the marsh veg-etation communities in the field, wediscovered the survey flags markingthe area of the proposed marina.

Our study revealed that TaskinasCreek offered a unique wetland estua-rine ecosystem experience with robuststands of saltmarsh cordgrass(Spartina alterniflora) and bigcordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides)along the lower reaches of the water-way. The lower reaches of this creek aretypical of saline estuarine marshes,however the waterway is pristine andgrades to tidal freshwater marshesdominated by arrow arum (Peltandra

virginica), pickerelweed (Pontideriacordata) and northern wildrice (Zizaniaaquatica).

One of the primary recommenda-tions in our study, submitted to thepark service, was to reject the marinaidea, and provide a small landing nearthe proposed visitors center as a canoelivery for public use and guided naturetours. We were very happy it workedout that way, because the park is a gemfor the nature loving public and is nowpart of the Chesapeake Bay NationalEstuarine Research Reserve of Virginia(CBNERRVA). These plant communitychanges can be seen today travelingthe narrow and sinuous natural channelof the creek. The experience is bestenjoyed by canoe or kayak.

Foremost of the tasks that werebefore me at VIMS was to inventory thetidal wetlands in the Commonwealth asmandated in the Wetlands Act. Thisproved to be most difficult becausefunds were not provided. One mustalso remember that the technology(GIS, GPS, satellite imagery and fastcomputers) did not exist to facilitate thetask. Aerial imagery was secured, al-most always free, from different sourcessuch as USDA, VDOT, and NASA Wal-lops. The Wetlands Act allowed eachcounty and incorporated city or town

2 — VWR

to establish a wetlands board to acton wetland permits. It seemed logical,that each political unit that had or hadthe potential to set up a wetlands boardshould have it’s own wetland inven-tory.

We decided that the marshesshould be mapped on the scale of1:24,000 so that inventory could beused in concert to USGS TopographicMaps. Topo maps also had wetlands,particularly, tidal marshes delineated.The newer the map, the more accuratethe delineation could be. However,

preliminary fieldwork revealed that aground truthing was necessary be-cause many marshes existed that werenot found on the topos. Recent imageryhelped this problem, but up to dateimagery was not always available orwas incomplete for a given politicalunit. When aerial photos were availablethe resolution was often less than de-sirable. With maps, aerial photos, bin-oculars, notebook, and a range finder,we would load a trailer boat with amakeshift wooden observation tower,towed by a well-worn Chevy CarryAll,and strike out to all areas of tidewaterVirginia.

Our first inventory target wasMathews County. At this point in time,I don’t recall why we chose Mathews,but it may be the wetlands board knewthe law mandated an inventory andasked us to do it. If this was the case,the request either impressed us orshook us from our ‘how are we going todo this” attitude to a “get to work”attitude. We were a sight at boat rampsand on the water, often answeringquestions on what we were doing andtrying to ignore stares from watermen.

As technology improved, we wereable to use a Zoom Transfer Scope(ZTS, borrowed from the VIMS Geol-ogy Division…remember we did nothave funds to inventory wetlands) totransfer interpreted wetlands from aerialphotos to topo maps. The ZTS was ahuge, clunky apparatus that weighed aton and displaced floor space of a smalloffice. USGS 7.5 minute topographicmaps were generally reliable, but someof them were somewhat dated and didnot show all wetlands. Once the siteswere traced on field maps, we couldtake them into the field in variousweather conditions without the worryof ruining borrowed imagery. In addi-tion to estimating location, area (acre-age) and configuration of individualmarshes, we estimated coverage ofvegetation types and species. Indica-tor vegetation, a major component oftidal wetlands, is a defining entity indescribing and delineating these estua-rine ecosystems. The Wetlands Actlists species of wetland plants thatoccur in tidal wetlands of Virginia.

A VIMS report titled, Coastal Wet-lands of Virginia by Marvin Wass and

Thomas Wright (1969 Interim Report),based much of their wetland descrip-tions on vegetation communities andindividual plant species. Later, VIMSreports went further and describedtwelve tidal marsh communities, basedprimarily on vegetation changes inregard to differences in salinity andelevation in Local Management of Wet-lands, Environmental Considerations(Marcellus, Dawes and Silberhorn,1973) and Coastal Wetlands of Vir-ginia, Interim Report No.3 (Silberhorn,Dawes and Barnard, 1974). This reportwas the basis for the Wetlands Guide-lines that were promulgated and printedby the Virginia Marine Resources Com-mission and have been revised andreprinted several times since.

The wetlands inventory projectcontinued working in Lancaster Countyafter Mathews County was finished.Mathews and Lancaster counties TidalMarsh Inventory Reports were printedin 1973 and later reprinted in 1983.

Through the 1970’s and continuingto the early 1990’s, other VIMS wetlandpersonnel authored or coauthored vari-ous tidal marsh reports including,George Dawes, Tom Barnard, KenMoore, Walt Priest, Sharon Dewing, ArtHarris, Joe Mizell, Andy Zacherle,Damon Doumlele, and Jim Mercer. Allthe inventory veterans, the adventuresand miss-adventures that we had arefondly remembered.

The wetlands boards, planningcommissions, and interested othersutilized the reports over the years. To-day the reports are archived on theVIMS Library Website, thanks mainlyto Chuck Mc Fadden, Library Director.

Inventory of coastal resources isstill an ongoing process at VIMS asevidenced by the ComprehensiveCoastal Inventory Program, headed byMarcia Berman. Wetlands inventoryhas expanded to watersheds and shore-lines as well. This is all done more effi-ciently and more accurately through theutilization of advanced electronic tech-nology. These tools were not availableto us in the early 1970’s. However, fieldwork (groundtruthing), still remains animportant component of these projects.

Look for recollections on varioustopics in the future issues of the News-letter.

The Virginia Wetlands Report is aquarterly publication of the WetlandsProgram at the Virginia Institute of Ma-rine Science of the College of Williamand Mary. Subscriptions are availablewithout charge upon written request to:Wetlands Program, Virginia Institute ofMarine Science, P.O. Box 1346,Gloucester Pt, VA 23062 USA.Address corrections requested.

Program Director: Dr. Carl HershnerHead, Wetlands Advisory Program: Thomas A. Barnard, Jr.Produced by: VIMS Publication Center

In this Issue:Through the Years inVirginia’s Wetlands: The 1970’s ........ 1Atlantic White Cedar ........................ 3A Summary ofThe EPA Rapid Bioassessmentof Wetland Health Workshop ........... 4Northern Water Snake ....................... 5Shoreline Situation Report Update ... 6Book Review ..................................... 7Calendar of Upcoming Events .......... 8

This report was funded, in part,by the Virginia Institute ofMarine Science and by theVirginia Coastal ResourcesManagement Program of the Depart-ment of Environmental Quality throughGrant #NA97OZ0181-01 of the NationalOceanic and Atmospheric Administration,Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Man-agement, under the Coastal Zone Manage-ment Act, as amended.

The views expressed herein are those of theauthors and do not necessarily reflect theviews of NOAA or any of its subagencies orDEQ.

Printed on recycled paper

VWR — 3

aried & ersatile Wetlands

Atlantic White CedarPam Mason

A tlantic white cedar lumber is light weight, easily worked, rot resis-

tant, resistant to shrinkage and warp-ing, and has a pleasant fragrance.These characteristics promoted theearly, and extensive harvest of the spe-cies and contribute to the continuedimportance as a timber crop today.Commercial harvest ofcedar currently centersaround southern NewJersey, North Carolina andFlorida. However, scien-tific understanding of theunique ecological func-tions of Atlantic whitecedar, including waterquality improvement andhabitat for birds, smallmammals and amphibians,has brought attention tothe importance of thespecies beyond it’s use asa forest product.

Atlantic white cedar,Chamacyparis thyoides,is an evergreen coniferwhich grows to heights of40 to 70 feet. Cedars growin mostly monospecificstands and are foundmainly in the coastal plainfrom southern Maine toFlorida, with some distri-bution along the Gulf Coast. Cedarhabitat is low, flat nontidal wetlands(Silberhorn, 1995). The cedar is classi-fied as an obligate wetland plant.

The largest stands of Atlantic whitecedar found in Virginia, both histori-cally and today, occur in southeasternVirginia in the area of the DismalSwamp. In colonial times, the DismalSwamp Land Company was organizedin the middle 1700’s by prominent landspeculators, including George Wash-ington to make economic use of theSwamp. The Land Company built ca-

nals to transport lumber and promotedrainage. Cedar was the most com-monly harvested timber. While theprimary use for the cedar lumber wasshingles, studs for shipbuilding, hous-ing and fencing were also a commonuse. Companies other than the LandCompany, and individuals, notably

farmers working off season, also partici-pated in the cedar harvesting. As earlyas the 1830’s cedar shortages becameapparent forcing the need to continu-ally locate new stands. The inventionof shingle producing machines furthercontributed to the demise of the cedarpopulation. (Peter, 1979).

The estimated result of centuries ofharvest, hydrologic modification andfire suppression is a reduction in theVirginia population by as much as 98%and a 90% loss in North Carolina. Re-search efforts in Virginia, North Caro-

lina and New Jersey are focused on therestoration of Atlantic White Cedar.Some restoration efforts have met withmoderate success. Investigations con-tinue to look at natural regeneration,seed propagation, and seedling andsteckling (rooted cuttings) planting incombination with deer fencing and

herbicide application inorder to identify effectiverestoration approaches(Kuser and Zimmermann,1995). Other studies arefocused on gaining a bet-ter understanding of theecology of Atlantic whitecedar in order to aid resto-ration efforts (USEPA At-lantic white cedarrestoration project, http://www.cnu.edu/cedar/home.html).

The establishment ofAtlantic white cedar isonly one of many wetlandrestoration efforts under-way in the United Statesand worldwide. It is theprimary goal of these pro-grams to restore ecologicalfunctions, including habi-tat, flood buffering, nutri-ent cycling, etc.

References:Kuser, John and George Zimmermann. 1995.

Restoring Atlantic white-cedar swamps: areview of techniques for propagation andestablishment. http://loki.stockton.edu/~wcedars/treeplnt.html.

Silberhorn, G. 1995. Atlantic white cedar.Technical report: wetland flora. No.95-4.Wetlands Program. Virginia Institute ofMarine Science.

Stewart, Peter. 1979. Man and the swamp:the historical dimension. Pps. 57-73, In:Paul W. Kirk, Jr. (ed.). The Great DismalSwamp. The University Press of Virginia,Charlottesville, VA.

Atlantic White Cedar. Artist: Kent Forrest. From Silberhorn,Common Plants of the Mid-Atlantic Coast. Johns Hopkins

4 — VWR

T he national meeting of the U. S.Environmental Protection Agency’s

Biological Assessment of WetlandsWorkgroup (BAWWG) in partnershipwith the Izaak Walton League ofAmerica, Inc. was held in Orlando,Florida, May 14-16, 2001. The three dayconference entitled “Assessing theHealth of Wetland Life: Policy, Scienceand Practice” provided a full day offocus on each aspect.

Policy speakers ranged from county,tribe and state officials to the head ofEPA’s Wetland Monitoring Strategy,Doreen Vetter. Ms. Vetter explainedthat the objective of BAWWG was toimprove methods and programs to as-sess the biological integrity of wet-lands. Ms. Vetter further explainedEPA’s support of this effort in that thedevelopment of a wetland monitoringprogram is one of the five core elementsof EPA’s comprehensive wetland pro-gram. To this end, EPA plans to fundmonitoring pilot projects at a rate ofone state/region/year and one tribe/region/year, with all states having awetland monitoring strategy by FY02and a program under development byFY06. Additionally, EPA plans to estab-lish two regional monitoringworkgroups per year to provide thestates and tribes with technical guid-ance in defining the elements of a wet-land monitoring program with the focuson biological, physical, and landscapemeasures. EPA’s Wetland ProgramDevelopment Grants will also providesupport to develop training in theseassessment techniques.

The science discussion focused onthe value of bioassessment, the schemefor developing metrics and indices ofbiotic integrity (IBIs), and the impor-tance of incorporating the human dis-turbance gradient into the referencesites. Specific methods for differentbiological assemblages including am-phibians, algae, vascular plants, birds,macroinvertebrates, and fish were dis-

cussed in concurrent sessions. Thesemethods were also distributed to at-tendees in a draft version of EPA’s pub-lication 843-B-00-002 entitled “Methodsfor Evaluating Wetland Condition.”

Dr. Jim Karr of the University ofWashington defined bioassessment asthe process of sampling the organismsof a site and using the character of thesample to evaluate the health of thesystem. The biota of a site can be usedto define 1) a benchmark – a minimallydisturbed site, 2) a guide – evaluationover time to determine the extent ofimprovement, or 3) a goal – to protectpristine biota. As the goal of the CleanWater Act is to protect public interestin water resources, bioassessment pro-vides a method to reach this goal.

Dr. Karr along with NaomiDetenbeck (EPA) and Dr. DeniseWardrop (Penn State University) de-tailed the basic steps in developingIBIs. Step 1 is to decide which of thebiological assemblages will be used inthe assessment. Table 2 in the draftmodule “Introduction to Wetland Bio-logical Assessments” provides a list ofstrengths and weaknesses for each ofthe biological groups to facilitatechoosing ones that are appropriate foryour focus and abilities.

Step 2 is to identify wetlands to beused as reference sites and to classifythem as well as the wetlands of interest.Ms. Detenbeck discussed a variety ofclassification schemes including geo-graphically based systems with fixedboundaries such as watersheds, envi-ronmentally based systems such ashabitat zones, and hydrologic basedsystems such as hydrogeomorphicregions. She emphasized that both thereference and test sites should be clas-sified under the same system and thatan IBI should be developed for eachclass within the system. Dr. Wardropalso recommended that the referencesites included in the IBI developmentshould portray a range along a human

disturbance gradient. The method usedto determine this gradient includesobservation of activities or stressors inproximity of the wetland, applying aweighting factor to these stressors, andcombining this factor with buffer typeand width in calculating a value of dis-turbance.

Step 3 is to select appropriatemetrics or attributes that will be readilyassessed at each site as well as providethe most pertinent information. Candi-date metrics for each biological assem-blage are included in the methodmodules. Several metrics should beevaluated to determine those that pro-vide the most difference between siteswith varying levels of disturbance.This analysis will enable the metricresults to better predict the level ofdisturbance in the test wetland. Anexample of a potentialmacroinvertebrate metric used to pre-dict wetland health includes populationdensity. This metric, however, is not agood indicator of disturbance in thatthere could be a lot of midge larva indi-cating high density but these organ-isms are pollution tolerant. Conversely,percent species that are clingers is agood metric to use because their popu-lation would decrease in response to anincrease in sedimentation caused byhuman disturbance.

Step 4 is to develop and standardizethe rapid sampling protocols. Examplesof such protocols are included in themethod module for each biological as-semblage. These protocols shouldthen be compared to full-scale referencesite evaluations to analyze the predict-ability of the rapid assessments. Thestandard protocols would then be usedto assess the health of wetlands ofinterest.

The BAWWG conference con-cluded with a practice session at theOrlando Easterly Wetlands, which is a

A Summary of The EPA Rapid Bioassessmentof Wetland Health Workshop

Rebecca Jo Thomas

Continued on page 8

VWR — 5

Northern Water SnakeNerodia sipedon sipedon

William Roberts

Wetland Denizens���

O ur wonderful State of Virginia in the summer time; hot sunny

days, cool evenings and plenty ofplaces to swim and cool off! Untilsomeone yells: “WATER MOCCASIN!”The once tranquil scene is immediatelytransformed into pandemonium, drivenby the knowledge that “the last manout of the water might get bitten!”

Sometimes its good to look likesomething else. Various organisms innature have successfully used mimicryas a protection strategy for eons. Mim-icry is a normally successful strategy,unless you happen to beour subject this month,the Northern WaterSnake, Nerodia sipedon.In what might be termedan environmentally baddeal Nerodia. to theuntrained professional,looks just like the watermoccasin and conse-quently ends up in firstplace on a very short listof snakes to be extermi-nated!

The northern watersnake, Nerodia sipedonsipedon is an interestingspecies of nonvenomoussnake found in thecoastal plain of Virginia.A moderate to large size,thick-bodied snake, itmay approach 50-55inches in length. Thereare several other speciesof Nerodia found in thecoastal plain, but thespecies sipedon sipedonis the most common ofthe watersnakes. Whilenot venomous, it is anaggressive snake which

when cornered or threatened will coil inthe familiar rattlesnake fashion andstrike repeatedly at its tormentor. Thebite, while not deadly is quite painfuland will bleed profusely due to theanticoagulant found in the snake’ssaliva.

From a coloration perspective,Nerodia is an extremely variable spe-cies and may be brown, tan, gray orreddish in color. The neck and anteriorbody section typically have darkcrossbands while the remainder of thebody has dark blotches on the top

(dorsal area) and alternating bandsalong the sides. The ventral surface iswhite, yellowish or light gray in colorwith 2 irregular rows of brown or red-dish half-moon-shaped spots fre-quently outlined with dark or blackborders. The variable dorsal colorationsand patterns are especially prominent injuveniles and young adults.

Unfortunately for Nerodia, it re-sembles the venomous water moccasinor cottonmouth, Agkistrodon picivorusat many stages throughout its life cycle.When young, the variable dorsal pat-terns of blotches and bars resemble

those of the water moc-casin. As it grows older,and consequently getslonger and thicker, thesecolorations and patternsso distinctive whenyounger are often ob-scured as the snaketurns dark gray or oftenblack in color. Nerodiaoften appears too similarfor comfort to the ven-omous cottonmouthwater moccasin, whichalso can be very dark incolor as it ages.

Nocturnal in nature,Nerodia spends most ofthe day either warmingitself in the sun whilelying on rocks borderinga body of water or be-neath rocks in the shadeduring the hottest part ofthe day. Nerodia is apredator of fish andsmall amphibians. Re-search has shown thattrout, sunfish, pike, bassand sculpins as well as

Continued on page 8

6 — VWR

G i SGeographicInformationSystem

Marcia R. Berman

Shoreline Situation Report Update

S horeline Situation Reports are being published by the Compre-

hensive Coastal Inventory Program(CCI) at VIMS. This series reportsshoreline conditions for Tidewater lo-calities in Virginia. Maps, imagery, andtables illustrate and quantify conditionsin the immediate riparian zone, the bankinterface, and along the shoreline.Land use, shore stability, bank height,and the location of erosion controlstructures are among a few of the manyattributes surveyed. Global PositioningSystems (GPS) are used in the field tocompute the geographic position ofconditions observed from a shoal draft

boat. Geographic Information Systems(GIS) and image processing systems areused to process, display, and archivethe data.

Publications are being distributed tothe county planning offices, the localplanning district commissions, the Vir-ginia Marine Resources Commission,the Chesapeake Bay Local AssistanceDepartment, the Department of Conser-vation and Recreation, Division of Soiland Water Conservation, and the De-partment of Environmental Quality,Coastal Resources Management Pro-gram. Plans are being made to distrib-ute these documents to local libraries

as well. The GIS data generated foreach locality completed is available onthe VIMS website at www.vims.edu.The following counties are now avail-able:

Essex CountyKing and Queen CountyKing William CountyLancaster CountyMathews CountyMiddlesex CountyCity of Poquoson

Piankatank River Watershed

VIMS Tidal Wetlands WorkshopJuly 18, 2001

Workshop attendees plant a tidal marsh on VIMS’ beach, during the recent workshop.Eighty-four participants attended the annual event.

VWR — 7

— Book Review —Discovering the Unknown Landscape: A History of America=====s Wetlands

By Ann VileisisPublished by Island Press. Washington, D.C. 1997. 433 pp.

US$19.95 (softcover), ISBN: 1-55963-315-8

Review by Tom Barnard

S ince I was reading this book notonly for my own general consump-

tion but also as a reviewer for thisnewsletter, I had promised myself that Iwas going to treat this book differently,that I was going to do more than justbegin reading at Chapter 1, page1. So Ifound myself studying the cover whichbears the Martin Johnson Heade paint-ing of a Florida landscape at sunset andthinking about why the author mighthave chosen the title she did. Who wasAnn Vileisis anyway? I had never heardof her. O K, according to the back covershe was a Yale graduate in Environmen-tal History. A historian.......writing aboutwetlands? I moved gingerly past thetitle page, the dedication, the contentspage and stopped at the preface. Andthere it was, confirming all my fears; adefinition of wetlands...........but fromThe American Heritage Dictionary!Surely only a non-wetlander would usesuch a definition! I made a mental noteof my disappointment, read the Prefaceand moved on to Chapter One.

My initial disappointment howeverturned out to be very short-lived, forChapter One opened not with a historylesson but with the author’s recollec-tion of her early childhood impressionsof the marshes of Long Island Soundand then a college ecology class fieldtrip where a manipulated New Jerseymarsh dispelled many of her precon-ceived ideas about wetlands . I beganto sense that this might not be a purehistorian writing this book after all. Isoon found myself enjoying this well-written book very much, as Ms Vileisishas eloquently combined the geogra-phy, history, ecology and sociologyinvolved with the emergence of thisnew nation, the exploitation of its boun-tiful resources and the role played bywetlands in this “New World” land-scape.

In a very readable writing style sheweaves together a tapestry displayingthe paradoxical attitudes Americanshave had and maintain today towardwetland systems. Attitudes that rangefrom the moral virtues of wetlands asseen by Henry David Thoreau and GeneStratton Porter , to the evil characteriza-tion of swamps by southern politiciansof the mid-nineteenth century whotermed them Apestilential@ or claimedthey Awere prolific of disease and in-flicted a curse.@ Others could only seethe wetlands as standing in the way ofprogress. Agrarianism endured and alllandscapes, not just the wetlands, wereevaluated only in terms of their cultiva-bility. It is very much to the author=scredit that she is able to combine therole of wetlands in the economic devel-opment of this struggling young nationwith a clear understanding of the im-pacts to wetland ecology and howthese impacts then affected all aspectsof American life over time. This is whatmakes the book truly rewarding to any-one with an interest in understandingthe motives, attitudes, perceptions,politics, economics, etc. that have re-sulted in the loss of over half the origi-nal wetland acreage in the continentalUnited States.

Perhaps one of the most disturbingchapters in this very well documentedbook is number nine which deals withthe conflicting roles, policies and atti-tudes in the government agencies. Bythe 1930’s people had begun to see theeffects on the landscape of wetlanddestruction and realized that long-standing attitudes had to change.Franklin Roosevelt’s Civilian Conserva-tion Corps (CCC) was famous for plant-ing a million trees on cutover anderodible areas but was also responsiblefor redraining more than a million and a

half acres of wetlands in the south andditching 248,000 acres of tidal wetlandsin Delaware. The Corps of engineersand the Soil Conservation Service con-tinued to dam, levee and drain wetlandsthat the Fish and wildlife Service wasspending duck stamp money to restore.Even when science eventually demon-strated the natural services and valuesof wetlands, leading to changes in offi-cial policies promoting their protection,the bureaucracy was very slow tochange the ingrained attitudes which inthe past had encouraged wetland drain-age and destruction.

As I read through the final chaptersof this history dealing with the post warboom years, the rise of the environmen-tal movement, the Reagan years, “nonet loss,” the development of wetlandsprotection in state and federal law, etc.,I was amazed at how the author pre-sented the material in a non-judgmentalyet highly engrossing fashion. Notsince the first time I began readingStewart Udall’s The Quiet Crisis have Ienjoyed a book of the environmentalhistory genre as I did this one. I havealready given you many of the reasonswhy you should read this book. Nomatter your attitude toward how ourwetlands have been managed sincecolonial times, this book will help youunderstand why history has played outas it has with this segment of the natu-ral landscape and may well adjust yourperspective toward wetlands conserva-tion. Above all, this book will make youthink about the lessons of history itdescribes and how the nation shouldapproach the use of our remaining wet-land resources. I recommend it highlyfor history buffs but particularly for all“wetlanders.”

8 — VWR

Calendar of Upcoming Events

Oct. 29-Nov. 2, 2001 Wetlands Regulatory Workshop, A closer look at contemporary wetland regulatory issues.Atlantic City, NJ. Contact Ralph Spagnolo (3ES30), USEPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street,Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029. Email: spagnolo.ralph@epa.gov

January 6-9, 2002 Phragmites australis: A Sheep in Wolf’s Clothing? Vineland,NJContact Dr. Michael P. Weinstein, New Jersey Marine Sciences Consortium, Bldg #22,Fort Hancock, NJ 07732. Ph. 732-872-1300, Ext. 21. Email: mweinstein@njmsc.org

VIMS Short Courses:

Sept. 12-14, 2001 Wetland Mitigation/Compensation.Contact Bill Roberts at (804) 684-7395 or email: wlr@vims.edu

Dec. 13&14, 2001 Winter Botany. Contact Bill Roberts - see above.

minnows are part of its diet. Almostevery species of aquatic frog and sala-mander found in Nerodia’s range canend up as a meal. All prey are swal-lowed whole and digested by thesnake’s strong digestive secretions. Inturn, Nerodia is preyed upon by theeastern kingsnake, raccoons, large-mouth bass and snapping turtles. Blueherons have also been known to utilizeNerodia for food.

Biologically speaking, a snake, orserpent, is a limbless reptile with ex-pandable jaws and slender recurvedteeth. Snakes have no ear or ear open-ing, but are able to “hear” by means ofvibrations that are picked up, notthrough the air, but through theground. A snake constantly flicks itstongue to capture small airborne par-ticles that give it a sense of taste andsmell. Its sense of smell is excellent.Snakes don’t have a moveable eyelidand their eyesight is generally verygood. Larger in length and weight, thefemale gives birth to approximately 15-30 live young in August to October.Thenorthern water snake is found in a widevariety of aquatic habitats in Virginia .In the nontidal western part of the stateNerodia is found in lakes, ponds, riversand ditches. Here in the eastern coastalplain it is found in tidal creeks, brackish

and salt water marshes and any low,wet area.

There are several important cluesthat can be used to correctly identifywhether or not the snake you are con-fronting is indeed the harmless north-ern water snake of the venomouscottonmouth water moccasin:

First and foremost, Nerodia is NOTa pit viper (venomous snake) and there-fore does not have a pit or openinglocated between the eye and the nostril.

Second, the eye or pupil of Nerodiais round; the water moccasin has a slit-like pupil.

Third, the head of Nerodia isshaped like that of a worm, it isrounded, somewhat like your thumb;the head of the water moccasin isflared, or triagular-shaped and is flat-tened.

Fourth, when Nerodia is swimming,only its head is out of the water; a wa-ter moccasin swims with its body float-ing on the surface.

Finally, if you see the snake living inbrackish or salt water or in a saltmarshit is probably Nerodia; the water moc-casin does not tolerate brackish or saltwater very well. The cottonmouth watermoccasin is generally not found northof the James River watershed.

Northern Water Snakecontinued from page 5

water reclamation facility, con-structed on a cattle pasture in the1980s. Three stations were set up fordemonstrating the rapid methods ofevaluating vascular plants, benthicmacroinvertebrates and algae assem-blages. These demonstrations showedthe ease and quickness of these typesof evaluations while affirming theirviability in the assessment of wetlandhealth. Although these IBIbioassessment methods are still in thecomment stage they will be available tothe public in the near future. Pleasevisit webpage http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/bawwg for more infor-mation.

A Summary of The EPA RapidBioassessment of Wetland Health Work-shopcontinued from page 4