20060180 Ver 1_WRC Comments_20060320

~ North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ~
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive lltrector
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Chapin, Permit Coordinator
Asheville Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engneers
M: Ron Linville, Re ~onal Coordinator
FRO ~
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: March 14, 2006
SUBJECT: Laurelmor Development, Laurel Creek, South Fork Laurel Creek, Elk Creek, Horton Branch,
Dugger Creek, Little Dugger Creek, Joes Creek, Tonys Branch (Yadkin River Basin), Watauga
and Wilkes Counties
The applicant is requesting a letter of concurrence from the North Cazolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) to obtain a 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The NCWRC has reviewed information
provided by the applicant and field biologists on our staff are familiar with habitat values of the project area. These
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.) and
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The proposed project is a 6050 acre tract that includes the previously permitted Heavenly Mountain development.
Ginn Clubs and Resorts has provided a preliminary assessment for threatened and endangered species as well as
submitted the 404 Permit request through E'nV Environmental Consulting Services, Inc. The project is to develop a
low density residential resort golf course community. Direct permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters are
indicated occur at ten locations which total 6331 linear feet. Direct permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands
will be 0.678 acres. It appears that this fill will occur primarily to create four impoundments and intermittent stream
French drains. Temporary impacts of 625 linear feet will occur at twenty-five (25) locations for utilities. About
fifty miles of roads are proposed which will include twenty-three (23) bridges. Total imperviousness is indicated to
be 9.5 percent; however, rain gazdens are proposed. Waters in the area are mostly classified as Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW) and trout waters of the State of North Carolina. As indicated during Heavenly Mountain
evaluations, substantial brook, brown and rainbow trout populations are present in this watershed. Smallmouth bass,
redbreast sunfish, brown, brook and rainbow trout are present in Laurel and Elk Creeks. Laurel Creek supports wild
brook and brown trout populations. Elk Creek is NCWRC Designated Public Mountain Trout Water.
Biologists with the NCWRC have reviewed site plans. Several biologists visited the site on February 21, 2006,
Generally, these biologists are satisfied that the project as planned should have less impact on habitat values than
multiple smaller developments although our biologists still have concerns about impacts that can occur during the
development and afterwards. The following non-prioritized comments and recommendations are provided for your
consideration during the permitting and certification process:
Instream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot wide buffer zone must be prohibited during the
brown and brook trout spawning season of October 15 through April 15 to protect the egg and fry
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center • ltatetgn, N~., ~ myy-i «~
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

Laurelmor Development -Page 2 -
March 14, 2006
stages of trout from off-site sedimentation during construction. Trout buffer waivers may be required
from the NC Division of Land Resources.
Z. In order to protect nesting birds, land clearing and forestry should be avoided during May through mid-
July to minimize nest destruction and nestling mortality.
3. Impoundments should be no larger than needed to support the project. Impoundments must have cold
water releases and provide minimum flow releases (equal to or greater than the 7Q10) to preserve and
maintain downstream aquatic habitats. As appropriate, NC Division of Land Resources dam safety
requirements must be satisfactorily resolved. If downstream flows have been reduced previously, the
minimum 7Q10 must be restored.
4. To the extent possible, stormwater management for imperviousness on the site, including public and
private structures and infrastructure) should maintain or closely mimic current runoff and hydrograph
conditions within the watersheds.
5. Impacts to wetlands and streams should be minimized by avoidance and by leaving adequate buffers.
We routinely recommend minimum fifty foot intermittent and hundred foot perennial buffers in
watersheds that do not have federally threatened and endangered species. These buffers should be
doubled for watersheds with threatened and endangered species. Due to the type of development and
the presence of ORW and trout waters, the maximum available buffer zones are recommended.
Buffers must be maintained as undisturbed forested areas set aside as permanently protected
conservation easements. These easements should be conveyed to the Blue Ridge Land Trusts or a
similar entity. Wider buffers are recommended for golf course fairways 23, 24, 31 and 32.
6. To the maximum extent possible, wildlife corridors should be maintained to ensure aquatic and
terrestrial wildlife habitat connectivity.
7. If endangered species are found during construction activities, the animal should be collected by
properly authorized individuals or biologists, who will determine if the animal can be relocated or if
alternate care is required. This request is specific to the bog turtle although not limited to that. species.
8. Impacts to boulder fields, rocky outcrops and mines/caves should be minimized. NCWRC personnel
would like the opportunity to survey existing mine shaft and old house for summer bat use prior to
inundation or destruction and look for additional species or roost sites. If it is possible to build a
smaller lake that avoids the old mine site, this habitat area ought to be preserved and used for
educational and scientific purposes.
9. NCWRC biologist request permanent access to monitor wildlife populations and habitat in the
conservation easement sections. NCWRC biologists would like to work cooperatively with Laurelmor
and Blue Ridge Land Trust in developing habitat management, enhancement, or restoration plans plus
the implementation of those plans. It may be possible to develop an agreement with this agency that
facilitates this strategy. Consultation with NCWRC biologists should occur if wildlife viewing areas
or educational "kiosks" will be constructed near wetlands or aquatic habitats.
10. Public fishing access to Dugger Creek and Laurel Creek should be investigated and provided if
determined to be feasible. Such access was to be provided previously for the Heavenly Mountain site.
A similar arrangement is requested.
11. Prior to building ponds on perennial streams, sampling for potential wild trout populations should be
provided. NCWRC biologists will visit the proposed pond areas with Laurelmor staff. Adequate
access needs to be provided to determine if wild trout are present.
12. NCWRC biologists recommend that Laurelmor hire a naturalist to be the point of contact with natural
resource and regulatory agencies. A small nature center similar to the one on Balsam Mountain

Laurelmor Development -Page 3 -
March 14, 2006
Preserve in Jackson County is recommended for public relations and environmental educational
opportunities.
13. Instead of using culverts, the project should maximize the use of bridges. If any culverts are permitted,
culverts 48 inches diameter or larger should be buried a foot into the streambed. Culverts less than 48
inches diameter should be buried to a depth equal to or greater than 20% their size to allow for aquatic
life passage. These measurements must be based on natural thalweg depths. Where multiple barrel
culverts are permitted, a base flow barrel must be provided as indicted above. Stormwater conveyance
barrels must be placed on the active floodplain bench elevation to receive and convey stormwater.
These elevated barrels must be connected to the active floodplain benches in a manner to maintain a
continuous base flow channel with natural channel dimensions and provide terrestrial wildlife passage.
14. No floodplain fill should be permitted along jurisdictional waters or wetlands. To the maximum extent
possible, floodplains should be maintained as natural undisturbed areas to preserve stormwater storage,
protect stream integrity and offset habitat losses. Please refer to federal Executive Order 11988 for
additional guidance concerning regulated streams.
15. To the maximum extent possible, viewshed issues should be addressed to the satisfaction of the
National Park Service.
16. Utility lines should be placed along the edge of floodplains instead of next to streams to the maximum
extent practicable.
17. Forestry activities should be limited to thane activities required to protect property. Otherwise, forestry
should be conducted by selective cutting instead of clear cutting unless lazger tracts need modification
for wildlife management purposes. Lot limitations and home owner's association rules should,be
provided that preclude indiscriminate removal of trees, especially near or in steep areas and near
jurisdictional waters.
18. A comprehensive stormwater management plan is recommended. to preserve existing hydrograph
conditions to protect area streams from degradation. Imperviousness exceeding six (6) percent without
stormwater management negatively impacts aquatic environments. Fre and post development runoff
and recharge conditions should be retained to the maximum extent practicable. Stormwater controls
outlined by the US Environmental Protection Agency in their Low Impact Development manual (EPA
Document # 841-B-00-002 and 841-B-00-003) may be appropriate. Such measures can significantly
reduce environmental impacts. These measures should include, but not be limited to, off-line
naturalized stormwater ponds or wetlands, avoidance of curb and gutter discharges, minimizing road
building and road widths as well as the provision of rain gazdens, grass swells, bio-retention, pervious
pavement, and the protection of naturally forested drainage ways and floodplains. No stormwater or
othex direct discharges, including golf course drainages, should bypass stream and wetland buffers or
bio-retention devices.
19. Although not indicated, any relocated streams must ensure geomorphic stability and biological
functions by using state-of--the-art natural stream design methodologies. Stability and habitat
monitoring should be provided as routinely required in 404 Permits and 401 Certifications.
20. Soils in the area are believed to be shallow and prone to washouts or possible landslide concerns. The
project should be constructed in small phases to reduce sediment impacts to the water supply
watershed unless alternatives can reduce overall impacts. Stringent sediment and erosion control
activities for sensitive waters should be used to protect downstream aquatic environments. We
recommend that these measures exceed standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) required by the
NC Division of Land Resources. In addition, these practices must adhere to standard Division of
Water Quality's 401 Certification requirements.

Laurelmor Development -Page 4 -
Mazch 14, 2006
21. Buffers along jurisdictional streams should be permanently preserved and protected through enforced
conservation easements. Conservation easements should be placed on all buffers along all
jurisdictional waters and wetlands within the entire development, not just on the golf course.
Permanent conservation easements (includes streams and their buffers) should be provided as intact,
non-fragmented common areas instead of being subdivided into individual lots with deed restrictions.
Substantial Neotropical migration and nesting is known for the area so maintaining contiguous habitats
are essential. Public nature trails may be incorporated into buffers providing they aze located near the
outer edges of the buffer zones and provided they do not exceed widths specified in the Americans
with Disability Act (ADA) and they are constructed of pervious materials.
22. No individual lot fill of jurisdictional waters or wetlands should be allowed. Existing habitats and
geological features should be incorporated into individual lot plans. These features can provide
substantial wildlife habitats.
23. Low Impact Development (LID) techniques are recommended for all development that will be
facilitated or promoted by this core subdivision. Information about LID practices and techniques can
be found at ~~_l~l~~_k~«iY~~ ~yctdc~~top~tl~nt_~n_. It is essential that post development hydrographic
conditions mimic those present in the area prior to development and increased imperviousness. To do
less will exacerbate stormwater issues and increase the intensity and severity of downstream flooding
and stream instability which will lead to increased sediment impacts downstream.
24. The size, location and adequacy of any proposed bio-retention facilities, interceptor drains and
wetlands should be documented and thoroughly evaluated during site planning and permit/certification
approvals by the US Army Corps of Engineers, the NC Division of Land Resources and the NC
Division of Water Quality.
25. If stormwater ponds or wetlands will be required or provided, autochthonous plantings should be used
around them (except for the dam) to offset thermal impacts to waters as well as to mitigate for impacts
to indigenous wildlife species.
26. Due to anticipated modifications of native forests and edge habitats and ongoing concerns throughout
the United States about invasive/exotic species, consultation with NC Department of Agriculture
agents or NCWRC biologists should be provided prior to stocking any ponds or streams with fish or
other aquatic species, including aquatic plants. Due to the presence of wild trout in these basins,
including potential wild brook trout, any fish stocking on the property must be reviewed and approved
by NCWRC biologists. It is illegal to stock in public waters without a permit from NCWRC.
27. Many agricultural and golf course chemicals (e.g. herbicide, pesticide, and fertilizer) are water soluble
easily transported through subsurface flow, and highly toxic to aquatic life. Integrated Pest
Management practices should be fully implemented for golf course maintenance and operations. Bio-
retention or LID methodologies are preferred. Irrigation waters should be recycled to the rnaxirnum
extent possible. The golf course should be designed and managed to meet minimum environmental
protection or certification standards developed. for Audubon International's Cooperative Sanctuary or
the National Wildlife Federation. Additional golf course design and development information may be
obtained from National Wildlife Federation at l~tt~~ _~ ~j ~+ n« I. t~;v or Audubon International at
httF.'`~r~E~t,~n~c[nt~t>~jntl ~~<<tprc>>~,i~~~s 2c5s~~~~1# lua~~.
28. Where flyways must be cleared around or over jurisdictional waters and buffers, removal of riparian
plants should be minimized. Large or tall tree removal should be limited to preserve the integrity of
the riparian buffer zone. Smaller plantings should be maintained as buffers to provide contiguous
relatively undisturbed habitats. Judicious plant removal may be needed; however, buffer zone
management should be a water quality management priority for golf course operations.
29. Project proponents may wish to contact the US Fish and Wildlife Service to discuss funding
opportunities under the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-247). The act

Laurelmor Development -Page 5 -
March 14, 2006
provides grants to Latin America, the Caribbean and the United States for the conservation of
neotropical migratory birds that winter south of the border and summer in North America. The law
encourages habitat protection, education, researching, monitoring, and capacity building to provide for
the long-term protection of neotropical migratory birds.
30. Provisions found in the previously issued permits, certifications and approvals for Heavenly Mountain
should be applied to the Laurelmor development as appropriate.
31. Road de-icing should be accomplished using mechanical equipment rather than chemical treatments to
the maximum extent possible in order to reduce or avoid hannful effects to aquatic habitats. Limited
salting should incorporate sand for roughness or use brine solutions.
Some of the above recommendations may not be directly connected to the 404 Permit or the 401 Certification; we
believe that these activities are prudent and necessary to provide a holistic planning and management approach for
the project due to the diverse habitats which can be affected by both direct and indirect impacts. NCWRC biologists
request that permitting agencies and Laurelmor developers implement as many of these recommendations as
possible. Information about preserving ecosystem integrity during and after development can be found at our
website, Iittp `~;.~~~~ ~~~~~i_ldlitc.c}rs~_`~sT1~ ~ldli(cti~~~icsC elri~r__ c i~<_i~ts.~c~f. In addition, excellent
information about the unportance of protecting headwater streams can be found at htt~io;ea s~~rrachib oz «,`Si~~ c_
5ierr~°~,21),~~b'~~~~.O~ocs~i~~~~~~~;'h~r~R~~;e~-sare[3ar~i~.~i: As needed. NCWRC biologists are available to discuss
these recommendations and help resolve impacts to habitats in the area.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions regarding these
comments, please contact me at 336/769-9453.
Attachment: Audubon North Carolina -Breeding Season Survey of the Bird of the Escarpment Area of Watauga
County, North Carolina
Cc: Cyndi Karoly, DWQ-DWQ-Raleigh
Ec: Daryl Lamb, DWQ-WSRO
Matt Gantt, DLR-WSRO
Becky Fox, USEPA
Bryan Tompkins, USFWS
Randy Woodrow, Watauga County

Breeding Season Survey of the Birds of the Escarpment Area
of Watauga County, North Carolina
Curtis Smalling, Mountain Areas Biologist, Audubon North Carolina, 667 George Moretz Lane, Boone, NC 28607
Breeding bird surveys were conducted during the breeding season of 2003 (May -July).
Point counts of variable circular radius were conducted between 0545 and 1100 am with
days of little or no wind or precipitation. Cloud cover varied on survey dates. A total of
29 permanent points were established in the study area and points were visited 2 to 4
times for a total of 68 individual counts. The elevational range of the study area varied
from 3410 to 1310 feet. The study area is on the steep escarpment of the Blue Ridge
Mountains ranging from Sampson Road in Watauga County on the southern end to just
south of US Highway 421 on the north. Surveys were conducted along roadways that
traverse the escarpment as most property is privately held. These routes included
Sampson Road, Jakes Mountain Road, Elk Creek Road, and Stoney Fork. Very little
public lands exist in the study area. The area is largely unsettled but is being actively
logged and developed in several areas. Additionally, limited agricultural areas at the
bottom edge of the escarpment are represented in the surveys. Deep ravines hold
numerous streams and these are headwaters of the Yadkin River basin. This report
represents a subset of a larger survey effort that extended north to the southern edge of
Doughton State Park.
Results
During the 68 counts, 70 species of birds were encountered. Four of these species
(Osprey, Spotted Sandpiper, Ruby-crowned Kinglet, and White-throated Sparrow) are
late migrants and were excluded from the data analysis. Additionally, Cerulean Warblers
have been detected outside of timed point counts. All species encountered are listed in
Table 1. Data from each point were aggregated to maximum number of each species
seen on a single count and pooled for each point location (n=29). An average of 14.86
(±6.16 STDEV) species of birds were recorded at each point, and an average of
23.10(+11.99STDEV) individual birds were encountered at each point. Most birds
detected were singing males. Each species and their relative abundance are listed in
Table 1.
Using Rappole (1995) as a guide, 73% of the species encountered are classified as
Neotropical migrants. 14% are short distance or altitudinal migrants, and 15% are'
permanent residents. Migratory status used is listed in Table 1.
Another important consideration in the findings of this type of survey is the conservation
status and priority of the species found. Included in Table 1 is a list of the Partners in
Flight (PIF) score for each of the breeding species (Hunter et al, 1999) detected on the
survey. As is stated in the PIF Southern Blue Ridge Bird Conservation Plan, over 155
species nest in the Southern Blue Ridge, of which the study area is a part. 63 species are
identified in the PIF conservation plan as requiring some conservation action or
monitoring. It should be noted that not all PIF priority species are declining in the

2
Southern Blue Ridge. (For a complete discussion of the ranking system see Hunter et al,
1999). Of the 67 presumed breeding species detected in the study area, 29 (43%) are
species of PIF conservation priority. Additionally, one species of Federal Special
Concern (Cerulean Warbler) has been detected during the breeding season in and around
the study area. Five of the species detected are Audubon Watchlist species, as well as
four North Cazolina Natural Heritage Program tracked species. Four endemic sub-
species aze represented in the study area as well (Lee and Browning, unpub.). All
together, 31 species of some level of conservation concern were located during the study
period. All of these conservation rankings are listed in Table 1.
The most commonly occurring species aze listed in Table 2. The number of individuals
of these top species account for 48% of the total number of birds seen.
Conclusions and Recommendations
This area of the escarpment hosts a wide variety of breeding bird species and more will
be detected with further study. This azea also serves as an important stop-over location
for migratory birds in spring and fall as well (Smalling, unpublished data}. Several
species of conservation priority occur here in fairly high numbers compared to other
more fragmented areas of the escarpment. An important feature of this diversity is the
elevational gradient compressed into a relatively small horizontal distance. Many of the
conservation priority species have vazying elevational limits and so conservation efforts
need to take that into consideration and attempt to link a representative gradient from the
top to the bottom of the escarpment. Some species (i.e. Swainson's Wazbler) occur only
at lower elevations and others (Cerulean Warbler) at mid and upper elevations. Also
several generalized recommendations may help alleviate some of the impacts of
development.
1) Maintain high quality habitat in lazge patches if possible. Many priority species
are forest-interior species and need larger unbroken tracts. Fragmentation leads to
higher predation rates from small predators (raccoons, skunks, etc) and higher
rates of nest parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds. These effects are well
documented in the avian literature (Horn, 1984; Rolstad, 1991; Robinson, 1998;
Doherty and Grubb, 2002; George and Dobkins, 2002)
2) Where possible keep the canopy intact above foot, bridle, and service roads, and if
possible on vehicular roads as well. Fragmentation is exacerbated by smaller
openings as well. (See references above, as well as Ortega and Capen, 1999)
3) Maintain high quality water resources by buffering streams and wet azeas with
intact forest where it currently occurs. This also provides connectivity and
migratory stop-over habitats for migrating songbirds (Winker et al, 1992; Gates
and Giffm, 1991)
4) Any land clearing activities should occur outside of the breeding season (May
through mid-July to minimize nest destruction and direct mortality of nestlings.
5) Additional surveys and permanent monitoring points should be established in
2006 to fully inventory the area and quantify populations ofpriority species where

possible. This will provide a baseline to evaluate methods and management
techniques in the future.

4
Table 1(see Appendix A for Status Code explanation)
Migrat
ory PIF
# status Score PIF`
apec~es occ Ana
Red-eyed Vireo 28 64 N 15
American Crow 28 56 P 11
Indigo Bunting 22 37 N 18
Tufted Titmouse 19 37 P 15
Black-throated Green Warbler 19 28 N 21
Carolina Chickadee 18 34 P 17
Northern Cardinal 18 23 P 12
Hooded Warbler 15 25 N 22
American Goldfinch 14 27 N 13
Black and White Warbler 14 17 N 22
Ovenbird 13 15 N 20
Eastern Towhee 12 16 N 18
Carolina Wren 12 19 S 19
Pileated Woodpecker 12 13 P 15
Wood Thrush 11 13 N 24
Acadian Flycatcher 10 14 N 25
Blue Jay 9 12 S 16
Scarlet Tanager 9 11 N 21
Blue-headed Vireo 9 12 N 19
Blue-gray Gnatcatcher 9 9 N 20
Worm-eating Warbler 8 11 N 25
Louisianna Waterthrush 8 9 N 26
Kentucky Warbler 7 8 N 24
Ruby-throated Hummingbird 7 7 N 20
White-breasted Nuthatch 6 6 P 15
Eastern Pheobe 6 6 S 19
Mourning Dove 5 6 N 10
Downy Woodpecker 5 5 P 18
Northern Parula 5 7 N 19
Cedar Waxwing 4 36 N 14
Turkey Vulture 4 6 N 12
Broad-winged Hawk 4 4 N 17
Swainson's Warbler 4 4 N 29
Song Sparrow 3 4 P 12
Black-throated Blue Warbler 3 3 N 26
Chimney Swift 3 9 N 21
Brown-headed Cowbird 3 3 N 11
Pine Warbler 3 4 N 18
Chipping Sparrow 2 4 N 17
American Redstart 2 3 N 15
Barn Swallow 2 2 N 15
Eastern Wood Peewee 2 2 N 22
Criteria n~ KanK
IV
VI
IV
IV
V
IV
V
IV
V
VI
V
V
V
IV
VI
Feder
al
Global NC Status
Rankd Statusd d
Sub- Audubon
species° Watchlistr
Yellow
X
Yellow
Yellow
S36 G4 W2,W5 Red
X
IV

5
Red-bellied Woodpecker 2 2 S 14
Yellow-throated Vireo 2 2 N 23 IV
Common Yellowthroat 2 2 N 16
Tree Swallow 2 2 N 14 S2S3B,S4N G5 W2
American Robin 1 1 N 10
Dark-eyed Junco 1 1 S 15 IV X
Red-winged Blackbird 1 2 N 12
Gray Catbird 1 1 N 19 V
Rose-breasted Grosbeak 1 1 N 21 V S3B G5 1
Northern Flicker 1 1 S 17
Brown Thrasher 1 1 S 19
Chestnut-sided Warbler 1 1 N 22 IV
Field Sparrow 1 1 S 20 V
House Finch 1 1 P 9
Ruffed Grouse 1 1 P 22 Ill X
Yellow-throated Warbler 1 4 N 22 IV
Hairy Woodpecker 1 1 S 14
White-throated Sparrow S
Spotted Sandpiper N 12
Osprey N
Belted Kingfisher 1 1 N 17
Yellow-billed Cuckoo 1 1 N 18
Eastern Kingbird 1 1 N 16
Great-crested Flycatcher 1 1 N 16
Northern Rough-winged
Swallow 1 1 N 17
Veery 1 1 N 19 VI
Ruby-crowned Kinglet 1 N
White-eyed Vireo 1 1 N 20
Cerulean Warbler (outside point
count) N
E 26 II S2B G4 SR FSC Red

Totals f
~
29 4 4 4 1 4
5

6
Table 2
Most Frequently % OF
Encountered Species # occ POINTS
Red-eyed Vireo 28 96.55
American Crow 28 96.55
Indigo Bunting 22 75.86
Tufted Titmouse ~ 19 65.52
Black-throated Green Warbler 19 65.52
Carolina Chickadee 18 62.07
Northern Cardinal 18 62.07
Hooded Warbler 15 51.72
American Goldfinch 14 48.28
Black and White Warbler 14 48.28
Highest relative abundance
species #ind IND/POINT
Red-eyed Vireo 64 2.21
American Crow 56 1.93
Indigo Bunting 37 1.28
Tufted Titmouse 37 1.28
Carolina Chickadee 34 1.17
Black-throated Green Warbler 28 0.97
American Goldfinch 27 0.93
Hooded Warbler 25 0.86
Northern Cardinal 23 0.79
Carolina Wren 19 0.66

7
Escarpment Surveys
Literature Cited
Doherty, P. F., and T. C. Grubb. 2002. Survivorship of permanent resident birds in a
fragmented forested landscape. Ecology 83: 844-857.
Gates, J. Edward, and Neil R. Giffin. 1991. Neotropical migrant birds and edge effects at
a forest-stream ecotone. Wilson Bulletin 103(2): 204-217.
George, T. L., and D. S. Dobkins, editors. 2002. Studies in Avian Biology. Cooper
Ornitholigical Society No. 25. Lawrence Kansas. 220 p.
Horn, John C. 1984. Short-term changes in bird communities after clear-cutting in
western North Carolina. Wilson Buli. 96: 684-689.
Hunter, William C., Robert Katz, David N. Pashley, and Robert P. Ford. 1999. Partners
in Flight southern Blue Ridge conservation plan. Version 1.0. Unpublished.
Lee, David S. and Becky Browning. Unpublished. Conservation concerns related to
avian endemism in the southern Appalachians.
Ortega, Yvette K. and David E. Capen. 1999. Effects of forest roads on habitat quality
for Ovenbirds in a forested landscape. Auk 116: 937-946.
Rappole, John H. 1995. The Ecology of Migrant Birds: A Neotropical Perspective.
Smithsonian Press, Washington, DC.
Robinson, Scott. 1998. Another threat posed by forest fragmentation: reduced food
supply. Auk 115
Rolstad, J. 1991. Consequences of forest fragmentation for the dynamics of bird
populations: conceptual issues and the evidence. Biological Journal of the
Linean Society 42: 149-163.
Winker, Kevin, D. W. Warner, and A. R. Weisbrod. 1992. Migration of woodland birds
at a fragmented inland stopover site. Wilson Bulletin 104(4): 580-598.

Appendix A
aMigratory Status codes taken from Rappole (1995). N= Neotropical migrant S= Short distance
migrant P= Permanent resident
BPIF Score taken from Hunter et al (1999)
BPIF Criteria taken from Hunter et al (1999). Codes as follows:
I. Ste. ecies with total score above 22 with decline and undersampling Hi Priority
II. Moderate Priority species
III. Moderate Watchlist species
IV. Abundant but declining species
V. High percentage of breeding population in southern Appalachians
VI. Federally listed ~ecies not already listed above
VII. Local interest species or high priority in adjoinin sg fates
dState Rank (S Rank) North Carolina ranks are based on The Nature Conservancy's system of
measuring rarity and threat status. This system is widely used by other agencies and
organizations, as the best available scientific and objective assessment of a species' rarity at the
state level. State ranks are assigned by biologists within each Natural Heritage Program.
NUMBER OF
EXTANT
RANK POPULATIONS DESCRIPTION
Sl 1-5 Critically imperiled in North Carolina because of extreme rarity or
because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extirpation
from North Carolina.
S2 6-20 Imperiled in North Carolina because of rarity or because of some factor(s)
making it very vulnerable to extirpation from North Carolina.
S3 21-100 Rare or uncommon in North Carolina.
S4 100-1000 Apparently secure in North Carolina, with many occurrences.
SS 1000+ Demonstrably secure in North Carolina and essentially ineradicable under
present conditions.
SA 1-? Accidental or casual; one to several records for North Carolina, but the
state is outside the normal range of the species.
SH 0? Of historical occurrence in North Carolina, perhaps not having been
verified in the past 20 years, and suspected to be still extant.
SR -- Reported from North Carolina, but without persuasive documentation
which would provide a basis for either accepting or rejecting the report.
SX 0 Apparently extirpated from North Carolina.
SU -- Possibly in peril in North Carolina but status uncertain; need more
information.

9
S? -- Unranked, or rank uncertain.
B 1-? Rank of the breeding population in the state. Used for migratory species
only.
N Rank of the non-breeding population in the state. Used for migratory
1-? species only.
Z_ 1-? Population is not of significant conservation concern. For example, the
status "SZN" indicates that the population in the non-breeding seasons
(generally in migration or in winter) is transitory, without any regular
locales of occurrence whereby the species can be protected. Where a
number is listed with the "B" or "N" modifier, there are definable locales
of occurrence that can be identified for protection.
SP 0 Of probable occurrence in the state, but no records known.
SNR ? State, Not Ranked. This is generally a newly identified
taxon, for which a rank has not yet
been assigned.
NOTE: SNA =State Not-Applicable [for conservation]. This is the new NatureServe rank that
combines a number of previous ranks (in parentheses): SA =accidental, SR =reported, SRF =
reported falsely, SZN =migrant only, and SE =exotic, non-native.
Global Rank. (G Rank) Global ranks are assigned by NatureServe (formerly the science branch
of The Nature Conservancy) staff biologists and contract biologists, based on a consensus of
scientific experts, the individual natural heritage programs, and the Natural Heritage Network.
Global ranks apply to the status of a species throughout its range, and are based on data on the
species' status rangewide. This system is widely used by other agencies and organizations, as the
best available scientific and objective assessment of a species' rarity throughout its range.
NUMBER OF
EXTANT
RANK POPULATIONS DESCRIPTION
G1 1-5 Critically imperiled globally because of extreme rarity or because of some
factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extinction.
G2 6-20 Imperiled globally because of rarity or because of some factor(s) making it
very vulnerable to extinction throughout its range.
G3 21-100 Either very rare and local throughout its range or found locally (even
abundantly at some of its locations) in a restricted range (e.g., a single
physiographic region) or because of other factors making it vulnerable to
extinction throughout its range.
G4 100-1000 Apparently secure globally, though it may be quite rare in parts of its
range, especially at the periphery.
G5 1000+ Demonstrably secure globally, though it may be quite rare in parts of its
range, especially at the periphery.
GH 0? Of historical occurrence throughout its range, i.e., formerly part of the
established biota, with the expectation that it may be rediscovered.

10
NUMBER OF
EXTANT
RANK POPULATIONS DESCRIPTION
GX 0 Believed to be extinct throughout its range (e.g., Passenger Pigeon) with
virtually no likelihood that it will be rediscovered.
GU -- Possibly in peril rangewide, but status uncertain; more information is
needed.
G? -- Unranked, or rank uncertain.
G_Q -- Questionable taxonomic assignment.
TJ -- The rank of a subspecies or variety. As an example, G4T1 would apply to
a subspecies of a species with an overall rank of G4, but the subspecies
warranting a rank of G 1.
GNR ? Global, Not Ranked. This is generally a newly identified taxon, for
which a rank has not yet been assigned.
State Status. Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern species of mammals, birds, reptiles,
amphibians, freshwater fishes, freshwater and terrestrial mollusks, and crustaceans have legal
protection status in North Carolina (Wildlife Resources Commission). In addition to the above
categories, the Natural Heritage Program maintains computer and map files on Significantly Rare
species, as well as species considered Extirpated. Paper files only are maintained for a few of the
above species; these species are indicated by the phrase "not tracking."
STATUS
CODE STATUS DEFINITION
E Endangered "Any native or once-native species of wild animal whose continued
existence as a viable component of the State's fauna is determined by the
Wildlife Resources Commission to be in jeopardy or any species of wild
animal determined to be an'endangered species' pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General
Statutes; 1987).
T Threatened "Any native or once-native species of wild animal which is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all
or a significant portion of its range, or one that is designated as a
threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25
of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes; 1987).
SC Special Concern "Any species of wild animal native or once-native to North Carolina
which is determined by the Wildlife Resources Commission to require
monitoring but which may be taken under regulations adopted under the
provisions of this Article." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General
Statutes; 1987).

11
STATUS
CODE STATUS DEFINITION
P_ Proposed Species has been proposed by a Scientific Council as a status
(Endangered, Threatened, Special Concern, Watch List, or for De-listing)
that is different from the current status, but the status has not yet been
adopted by the General Assembly as law. In the lists of rare species in this
book, these proposed statuses are listed in parentheses below the current
status. Only those proposed statuses that are different from the current
statuses are listed.
SR Significantly Any species which has not been listed by the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Rare Commission as an Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species,
but which exists in the state in small numbers and has been determined by
the N.C. Natural Heritage Program to need monitoring. (This is a N.C.
Natural Heritage Program designation.) Significantly Rare species include
"peripheral" species, whereby North Carolina lies at the periphery of the
species' range (such as Hermit Thrush).
EX Extirpated A species which is no longer believed to occur in the state. (This is a N.C.
Natural Heritage Program designation, though WRC also uses this status;
the NHP list includes those on the WRC list.)
W Watch List Any other species believed to be of conservation concern in the state
because of scarcity, declining populations, threats to populations, or
inadequacy of information to assess its rarity. (This is a N.C. Natural
Heritage Program designation.)
W 1 Species/taxon that is known to be declining in the state, for one reason or
another.
W2 Species/taxon that is rare to uncommon in the state, but is not necessarily
considered to be declining or otherwise in trouble.
W3 Species/taxon that is poorly known in the state, but is not necessarily
considered to be declining or otherwise in trouble; especially true for
many invertebrate groups, as well as secretive, nocturnal, or difficult-to-
survey species.
W4 Species/taxon reported from the state without adequate documentation.
WS Species/taxon with increasing amounts of threats to its habitat, whether or
not populations are known to be declining.

12
Federal Status. This status is designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Federally listed
Endangered and Threatened species are protected under the provisions of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended through the 100th Congress. Unless otherwise noted, definitions are
taken from the Federal Register, Vol. 56, No. 225, November 21, 1991 (50 CFR Part 17).
STATUS
CODE STATUS DEFINITION
LE Endangered A taxon "which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range" (Endangered Species Act, Section 3).
LT Threatened A taxon "which is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range"
(Endangered Species Act, Section 3).
C Candidate Species "for which the Service has sufficient information on their
biological status and threats to propose them as endangered or threatened
under the Endangered Species Act, but for which development of a listing
regulation is precluded by other higher priority listing activities." (U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service, Candidate Conservation Program home page).
"... the Service is discontinuing the designation of Category 2 species as
FSC (Federal) Species candidates in this notice. The Service remains concerned about these
of Concern species, but further biological research and field study are needed to
[also known as resolve the conservation status of these taxa. Many species of concern
Species at Risk] will be found not to warrant listing, either because they are not threatened
or endangered or because they do not qualify as species under the
definition in the [Endangered Species] Act. Others may be found to be in
greater danger of extinction than some present candidate taxa. The
Service is working with the States and other private and public interests to
assess their need for protection under the Act. Such species are the pool
from which future candidates for listing will be drawn." (Federal
Register, February 28, 1996). The Service suggests that such taxa be
considered as "Species of Concern" or "Species at Risk", neither of which
has official status. The N.C. Natural Heritage Program uses "(hederal)
Species of Concern" in this document for those taxa formerly considered
as Category 2.
PE or PT Proposed Species proposed in the Federal Register as a status different from its
current Federal status.
PS Partial Status Full species is not listed as LE or LT, but at least one
taxon/
subspecies is listed as LE or LT.

13
T (S/A) Threatened due "Section 4 (e) of the [Endangered Species] Act authorizes the treatment of
to Similarity of a species (subspecies or population segment) as endangered or threatened
Appearance even though it is not otherwise listed as endangered or threatened if -- (a)
the species so closely resembles in appearance an endangered or
threatened species that enforcement personnel would have substantial
difficulty in differentiating between the listed and unlisted species; (b) the
effect of this substantial difficulty is an additional threat to an endangered
or threatened species; and (c) such treatment of an unlisted species will
substantially facilitate the enforcement and further the policy of the Act."
(Federal Register, November 4, 1997). [The American Alligator is listed
as T (S/A) due to Similarity of Appearance with other rare crocodilians,
and the southern population of the Bog Turtle is listed as T (S/A) due to
Similarity of Appearance with the northern population of the $og Turtle
(which is federally listed as Threatened and which does not occur in North
Carolina).]
XN Nonessential "Section 10 (j) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended,
Experimental provides for the designation of introduced populations of federally listed
Population species as nonessential experimental. This designation allows for greater
flexibility in the management of these populations by local, state, and
Federal agencies. Specifically, the requirement for Federal agencies to
avoid jeopardizing these populations by their actions is eliminated and
allowances for taking the species are broadened." (U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 1995).
D De-listed Species has been proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
de-listing from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.
However, at the present time, the species is still on the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife and is thus protected under the Endangered
Species Act. Because such species still have legal Federal protection, the
NHP will maintain existing records on the species, though new records
might not necessarily be added. If the status becomes law prior to the next
publication of the NHP Rare Animal List, the Program will remove the
Federal designation from its database (and thus the species will no longer
appear on printouts of Federally listed species). NHP may or may not
continue to track the species, depending on its legal State status and other
factors such as overall abundance and range in the state.
eEndemics taken from Lee and Browning (unpublished). These species have been identif ed as a
Southern Appalachian endemic sub-species
(Audubon Watchlist species. Continental concern. Download available at ~t~~i~~i°.audubon.ora.

14
Appendixc B
Scientific Names of Birds Listed
Species Scient~c Name
Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura
Osprey Pandion halieatus
Broad-winged Hawk Buteo laf pterus
Spotted Sandpiper ctitis macularia
fluffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus
Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura
Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
Ruby-throated Hummingbird Archilocus colubris
Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon
Red-bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus
Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens
Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus
Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus
Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus
Eastern Wood Peewee Contopus wens
Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens
Eastern Phoebe Sayornis phoebe
Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus
Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus
White-eyed Vireo Vireo griseus
Yellow-throated Vireo Vireo flavifrons
Blue-headed Vireo Vireo solitarius
Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus
Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata
American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchas
Barn Swallow Hirundo rustics
Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor
Northern Rough-winged Swall ow Ste/gidopteryx serripennis
Carolina Chickadee Poecile carolinensis
Tufted Titmouse Baeolophus bicolor
White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis
Carolina Wren Thyrothorus ludovicianus
Ruby-crowned Kinglet Regulus ca/endula
Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea
Veery Catharus fuscescens
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
American Robin Turdus migratorius
Gray Catbird Dumatella carolinensis
Brown Thrasher Toxostoma rufum
Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum
Northern Parula Parula americans
Chestnut-sided Warbler Dendroica pensylvanica

Black-throated Blue Warbler
Black-throated Green Warbler
Yellow-throated Warbler
Pine Warbler
Cerulean Warbler
Black and White Warbler
American Redstart
Worm-eating Warbler
Swainson's Warbler
Ovenbird
Louisianna Waterthrush
Kentucky Warbler
Common Yellowthroat
Hooded Warbler
Scarlet Tanager
Eastern Towhee
Chipping Sparrow
Field Sparrow
Song Sparrow
White-throated Sparrow
Dark-eyed Junco
Northern Cardinal
Rase-breasted Grosbeak
Indigo Bunting
Red-winged Blackbird
Brown-headed Cowbird
House Finch
American Goldfinch
Dendroica caerulescens
Dendroica virens
Dendroica dominica
Dendroica pinus
Dendroica ceru/ea
Mniotilta varia
Setophaga ruticilla
Helmitheros vermivora
Limnothlypis swainsonii
Seiurus aurocapil/us
Seiurus motacilla
Oporomis formosus
Geothlypis trichas
Wilsonia citrina
Piranga o/icacea
Pipilo erythrophfha/mus
Spizella passerina
Spizella pusilla
Melospiza melodic
Zonotrichia albicollis
Junco hyemalis
Cardinalis cardinalis
Pheucticus ludovicianus
Passerina cyanea
Agelaius phoeniceus
Molothrus ater
Carpodacus mexicanus
Carduelis tristis
15